MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416086144 · doi:10.1101/2025.11.07.25339787

Predicting COVID-19 case counts using SARS-CoV-2 genetic diversity from wastewater

2025· preprint· W4416086144 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sana Naderi, Steven Gregory Sutclliffe, Gavin M. Douglas, Sukriye Celikkol Aydin, Inès Levade, Judith Fafard, Lila Naouelle Salhi, Fernando Sanchez-Quete, Sarah J. Reiling, Ju‐Ling Liu, Marc-Denis Rioux, David Dreifuss, Ivan Topolsky, Niko Beerenwinkel, Selena M. Sagan, Stephanie K. Loeb, Peter A. Vanrolleghem, Sarah Dorner, Dominic Frigon, Jiannis Ragoussis, B. Jesse Shapiro

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité du Québec à RimouskiPolytechnique MontréalMcGill Genome CentreInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversity of New BrunswickMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationSampling (signal processing)Genetic diversityPredictive valuePrimer (cosmetics)Viral loadWastewater

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wastewater monitoring is a promising, cost-effective method for pathogen surveillance, particularly when individual patient testing is limited. A typical approach is to estimate viral concentrations using PCR-based quantification of viral nucleic acids. This approach has been successfully used during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic to track, and even predict, waves of infection in a community. Although simple in principle, PCR-based quantification can be noisy and susceptible to false-negatives when mutations interrupt primer binding sites. Here we compare PCR-based quantification to whole-genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 to predict the number of positive COVID-19 cases in a local region. To do so, we calculate a simple population genetic metric as a proxy for population expansion: the number of polymorphic nucleotide sites in the viral genome, referred to as the number of segregating sites. We show that the number of segregating sites is predictive of COVID-19 case counts from up to 5-8 days prior, in 6 out of 10 wastewater sampling locations across the province of Quebec, Canada tracked over a mean period of ∼280 days. By contrast, PCR-based viral concentrations were not significantly predictive at any sampling location in Quebec. In an independent Swiss wastewater dataset sampled over a similar duration, both segregating sites and PCR-based quantification were predictive of future case counts in 5 out of 6 locations. Together, these results suggest that PCR-based approaches may be more sensitive to region-specific differences in sampling frequency and quality, whereas sequencing-based approaches may be more robust leading indicators of infection counts. Importance Wastewater monitoring of pathogens is an increasingly important part of the epidemiological surveillance toolkit. It typically involves quantifying pathogens in wastewater by PCR, an approach that is relatively simple but can be noisy and prone to false-negatives. Here we explore an alternative approach, based on quantifying viral genetic diversity by whole-genome sequencing SARS-CoV-2 from wastewater. Using wastewater samples from Quebec and Switzerland, we show that a simple metric of genetic diversity (which tracks with population expansion and does not require any pre-defined database of viral variants) is predictive of COVID-19 case counts about a week in advance, in a majority of sampled locations. While sequencing may be more costly and labor-intensive than PCR, it provides a robust and informative tool for wastewater-based epidemiology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207