Ghafari · Nature 2024 · Prospective community surveillance cohort study · n=?

Prevalence of persistent SARS-CoV-2 in a large community surveillance study.

Cited 154 times in the scientific literature.

Level 3 - non-randomized controlled study

Prospective longitudinal community surveillance cohort study tracking viral shedding and sequencing.

PubMed 38383783 · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07029-4 · record verified 2026-08-28

What was done

Using viral sequencing and PCR data from a large national infection survey, researchers identified individuals with high-titre SARS-CoV-2 RNA persisting for extended periods. They characterized viral load kinetics, evaluated viral genome evolution for selection pressures, and examined the association between persistent infection and self-reported post-acute sequelae (long COVID).

What was found

The study identified 381 individuals with high-titre viral RNA persisting for at least 30 days and 54 individuals persisting for at least 60 days. The authors estimated that 0.1% to 0.5% of SARS-CoV-2 infections become persistent, lasting 60 days or longer with typically rebounding high viral loads. Individuals with persistent infection had more than 50% higher odds of self-reporting long COVID compared to those without persistent infection. Viral sequencing revealed that some individuals accumulated multiple amino acid substitutions (including variant-defining mutations and monoclonal antibody target sites), while others showed no consensus sequence changes over prolonged periods.

Why it matters

This study provides community-level prevalence estimates for persistent SARS-CoV-2 infections, showing that viral persistence occurs in the general population outside of severe hospital settings, links to long COVID symptoms, and can serve as a reservoir for viral evolution and immune-escape mutations.

Limits

The total survey sample size is not stated in the abstract. Viral replication could not be definitively distinguished from non-replicating RNA persistence in all participants. Long COVID outcomes relied on self-report rather than clinical diagnostic evaluation.

Cited by