Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 49
Filter
1.
SSM - Mental Health ; : 100231, 2023.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-20244802

ABSTRACT

E-mental health interventions may offer innovative means to increase access to psychological support and improve the mental health of refugees. However, there is limited knowledge about how these innovations can be scaled up and integrated sustainably into routine services. This study examined the scalability of a digital psychological intervention called Step-by-Step (SbS) for refugees in Egypt, Germany, and Sweden. We conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 88) with Syrian refugees, and experts in SbS or mental health among refugees in the three countries. Data collection and analysis were guided by a system innovation perspective. Interviewees identified three contextual factors that influenced scalability of SbS in each country: increasing use of e-health, the COVID-19 pandemic, and political instability. Nine factors lay at the interface between the innovation and potential delivery systems, and these were categorised by culture (ways of thinking), structure (ways of organising), and practice (ways of doing). Factors related to culture included: perceived need and acceptability of the innovation. Acceptability was influenced by mental health stigma and awareness, digital trust, perceived novelty of self-help interventions, and attitudes towards non-specialist (e-helper) support. Factors related to structure included financing, regulations, accessibility, competencies of e-helpers, and quality control. Factors related to practice were barriers in the initial and continued engagement of end-users. Many actors with a potential stake in the integration of SbS across the three countries were identified, with nineteen stakeholders deemed most powerful. Several context-specific integration scenarios were developed, which need to be tested. We conclude that integrating novel e-mental health interventions for refugees into routine services will be a complex task due to the many interrelated factors and actors involved. Multi-stakeholder collaboration, including the involvement of end-users, will be essential.

3.
Am Psychol ; 2023 Apr 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2296781

ABSTRACT

At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, psychological scientists frequently made on-the-record predictions in public media about how individuals and society would change. Such predictions were often made outside these scientists' areas of expertise, with justifications based on intuition, heuristics, and analogical reasoning (Study 1; N = 719 statements). How accurate are these kinds of judgments regarding societal change? In Study 2, we obtained predictions from scientists (N = 717) and lay Americans (N = 394) in Spring 2020 regarding the direction of change for a range of social and psychological phenomena. We compared them to objective data obtained at 6 months and 1 year. To further probe how experience impacts such judgments, 6 months later (Study 3), we obtained retrospective judgments of societal change for the same domains (Nscientists = 270; Nlaypeople = 411). Bayesian analysis suggested greater credibility of the null hypothesis that scientists' judgments were at chance on average for both prospective and retrospective judgments. Moreover, neither domain-general expertise (i.e., judgmental accuracy of scientists compared to laypeople) nor self-identified domain-specific expertise improved accuracy. In a follow-up study on meta-accuracy (Study 4), we show that the public nevertheless expects psychological scientists to make more accurate predictions about individual and societal change compared to most other scientific disciplines, politicians, and nonscientists, and they prefer to follow their recommendations. These findings raise questions about the role psychological scientists could and should play in helping the public and policymakers plan for future events. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

4.
researchsquare; 2023.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-2891786.v1

ABSTRACT

Purpose The primary aim of this study is to define the sonographic diaphragm phenotype of Long COVID rehabilitation outpatients with non-specific dyspnea and fatigue. We analyzed patients referred from a pulmonary post-COVID clinic that were lacking a specific cardiopulmonary diagnosis for their symptoms. Additionally, we report the functional outcomes of subset of patients who completed an outpatient cardiopulmonary physical therapy program.Methods This was a retrospective cohort study (n = 58) of consecutive patients referred for neuromuscular ultrasound assessment of diaphragm muscle using B-mode technique. Patients were recruited from a single academic hospital between February 25, 2021 and November 22, 2022.Results Sonographic abnormalities were identified in 57% (33/58) of patients, and in the vast majority of cases (33/33) was defined by a low diaphragm muscle thickness. Thinner diaphragm muscles are correlated with lower serum creatinine and creatine kinase values, but there was no association with markers of systemic inflammation. Thirty three patients participated in outpatient cardiopulmonary physical therapy that included respiratory muscle training, and 75.8% (25/33) had documented improvement.Conclusion In the outpatient rehabilitation setting, patients with Long COVID display low diaphragm muscle thickness, but intact muscle contractility, with surprising frequency on neuromuscular ultrasound. We speculate this represents a form of disuse atrophy. Also, these patients appear to have a favorable response to cardiopulmonary physical therapy that includes respiratory muscle training.


Subject(s)
Dyspnea , Atrophy , Inflammation , Fatigue
5.
Med (New York, NY) ; 2023.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2272796

ABSTRACT

Background Both infection and vaccination, alone or in combination, generate antibody and T cell responses against SARS-CoV-2. However, the maintenance of such responses – and hence protection from disease – requires careful characterisation. In a large prospective study of UK healthcare workers (Protective immunity from T cells in Healthcare workers (PITCH), within the larger SARS-CoV-2 immunity & reinfection evaluation (SIREN) study) we previously observed that prior infection impacted strongly on subsequent cellular and humoral immunity induced after long and short dosing intervals of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccination. Methods Here, we report longer follow up of 684 HCWs in this cohort over 6-9 months following two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD1222 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) vaccination and up to 6 months following a subsequent mRNA booster vaccination. Findings We make three observations: Firstly, the dynamics of humoral and cellular responses differ;binding and neutralising antibodies declined whereas T and memory B cell responses were maintained after the second vaccine dose. Secondly, vaccine boosting restored IgG levels, broadened neutralising activity against variants of concern including omicron BA.1, BA.2 and BA.5, and boosted T cell responses above the 6-month level post dose 2. Thirdly, prior infection maintained its impact driving larger and broader T cell responses compared with never-infected people – a feature maintained until 6 months after the third dose. Conclusions Broadly cross-reactive T cell responses are well maintained over time – especially in those with combined vaccine and infection-induced immunity ("hybrid” immunity) – and may contribute to continued protection against severe disease. Funding Department for Health and Social Care, Medical Research Council Graphical abstract Moore et al. studied antibody and cellular responses to COVID-19 vaccines before and after dose 3. Antibody responses waned, but T cell responses were well maintained. T cells recognised Omicron variants better and for longer than antibodies. Differences due to vaccine regimen and previous infection evened out over time.

6.
Immunity ; 2023.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2260017

ABSTRACT

T cells are a critical component of the response to SARS-CoV-2, but their kinetics after infection and vaccination are insufficiently understood. Using "spheromer” peptide-MHC multimer reagents, we analyzed healthy subjects receiving two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine. Vaccination resulted in robust Spike-specific T cell responses for the dominant CD4+ (HLA-DRB1∗15:01/S191) and CD8+ (HLA-A∗02/S691) T cell epitopes. Antigen-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses were asynchronous, with the peak CD4+ T cell responses occurring one week post the second vaccination (boost), whereas CD8+ T cells peaked two weeks later. These peripheral T cell responses were elevated compared to COVID-19 patients. We also found that prior SARS-CoV-2 infection resulted in decreased CD8+ T cell activation and expansion, suggesting that prior infection can influence the T cell response to vaccination. Graphical Our understanding of T cell responses in COVID-19 and vaccination is incomplete. Gao et al. examine SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses to infection and vaccination, revealing disparate kinetics between CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Furthermore, compared to vaccination alone, circulating CD8+ T cells are attenuated during infection and in subsequent vaccination.

7.
Immunity ; 56(4): 864-878.e4, 2023 04 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2260018

ABSTRACT

T cells are a critical component of the response to SARS-CoV-2, but their kinetics after infection and vaccination are insufficiently understood. Using "spheromer" peptide-MHC multimer reagents, we analyzed healthy subjects receiving two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine. Vaccination resulted in robust spike-specific T cell responses for the dominant CD4+ (HLA-DRB1∗15:01/S191) and CD8+ (HLA-A∗02/S691) T cell epitopes. Antigen-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses were asynchronous, with the peak CD4+ T cell responses occurring 1 week post the second vaccination (boost), whereas CD8+ T cells peaked 2 weeks later. These peripheral T cell responses were elevated compared with COVID-19 patients. We also found that previous SARS-CoV-2 infection resulted in decreased CD8+ T cell activation and expansion, suggesting that previous infection can influence the T cell response to vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes , BNT162 Vaccine , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Antibodies, Viral
8.
Med ; 4(3): 191-215.e9, 2023 03 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2243466

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Both infection and vaccination, alone or in combination, generate antibody and T cell responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, the maintenance of such responses-and hence protection from disease-requires careful characterization. In a large prospective study of UK healthcare workers (HCWs) (Protective Immunity from T Cells in Healthcare Workers [PITCH], within the larger SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation [SIREN] study), we previously observed that prior infection strongly affected subsequent cellular and humoral immunity induced after long and short dosing intervals of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccination. METHODS: Here, we report longer follow-up of 684 HCWs in this cohort over 6-9 months following two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD1222 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) vaccination and up to 6 months following a subsequent mRNA booster vaccination. FINDINGS: We make three observations: first, the dynamics of humoral and cellular responses differ; binding and neutralizing antibodies declined, whereas T and memory B cell responses were maintained after the second vaccine dose. Second, vaccine boosting restored immunoglobulin (Ig) G levels; broadened neutralizing activity against variants of concern, including Omicron BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5; and boosted T cell responses above the 6-month level after dose 2. Third, prior infection maintained its impact driving larger and broader T cell responses compared with never-infected people, a feature maintained until 6 months after the third dose. CONCLUSIONS: Broadly cross-reactive T cell responses are well maintained over time-especially in those with combined vaccine and infection-induced immunity ("hybrid" immunity)-and may contribute to continued protection against severe disease. FUNDING: Department for Health and Social Care, Medical Research Council.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , BNT162 Vaccine , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Health Personnel , Immunity, Humoral
9.
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry ; 2023 Feb 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2241489

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare psychiatric emergencies and self-harm at emergency departments (EDs) 1 year into the pandemic, to early pandemic and pre-pandemic, and to examine the changes in the characteristics of self-harm presentations. METHOD: This retrospective cohort study expanded on the Pandemic-Related Emergency Psychiatric Presentations (PREP-kids) study. Routine record data in March to April of 2019, 2020, and 2021 from 62 EDs in 25 countries were included. ED presentations made by children and adolescents for any mental health reasons were analyzed. RESULTS: Altogether, 8,174 psychiatric presentations were recorded (63.5% female; mean [SD] age, 14.3 [2.6] years), 3,742 of which were self-harm presentations. Rate of psychiatric ED presentations in March to April 2021 was twice as high as in March to April 2020 (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.93; 95% CI, 1.60-2.33), and 50% higher than in March to April 2019 (IRR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.25-1.81). Rate of self-harm presentations doubled between March to April 2020 and March to April 2021 (IRR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.68-2.34), and was overall 1.7 times higher than in March to April 2019 (IRR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.44-2.00). Comparing self-harm characteristics in March to April 2021 with March to April 2019, self-harm contributed to a higher proportion of all psychiatric presentations (odds ratio [OR], 1.30; 95% CI, 1.05-1.62), whereas female representation in self-harm presentations doubled (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.45-2.72) and follow-up appointments were offered 4 times as often (OR, 4.46; 95% CI, 2.32-8.58). CONCLUSION: Increased pediatric ED visits for both self-harm and psychiatric reasons were observed, suggesting potential deterioration in child mental health. Self-harm in girls possibly increased and needs to be prioritized. Clinical services should continue using follow-up appointments to support discharge from EDs. DIVERSITY & INCLUSION STATEMENT: One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science. We actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our author group. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we also actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our reference list. The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location and/or community where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work.

11.
JCO Oncol Pract ; : OP2200471, 2022 Nov 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2234916

ABSTRACT

This is the second Cancer Morbidity, Mortality, and Improvement Rounds, a series of articles intended to explore the unique safety risks experienced by oncology patients through the lens of quality improvement, systems and human factors engineering, and cognitive psychology. This case describes the care of a patient who was diagnosed with locally advanced lung cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic; it highlights how gaps in communication and care coordination caused the patient to receive care that did not reflect the consensus of his multidisciplinary team. The discussion highlights the importance of multidisciplinary care, particularly for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, discusses factors that led to communication gaps, and examines how we should assign accountability across dispersed health care systems.Cancer Morbidity, Mortality, and Improvement Rounds is a series of articles intended to explore the unique safety risks experienced by oncology patients through the lens of quality improvement, systems and human factors engineering, and cognitive psychology. For purposes of clarity, each case focuses on a single theme, although, as is true for all medical incidents, there are almost always multiple, overlapping, contributing factors. The quality improvement paradigm used here, which focuses on root cause analyses and opportunities to improve care delivery systems, was previously outlined in this journal.

12.
medrxiv; 2023.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2023.02.16.23285748

ABSTRACT

T cell correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination ('vaccine breakthrough') are incompletely defined, especially the specific contributions of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. We studied 279 volunteers in the Protective Immunity from T Cells in Healthcare Workers (PITCH) UK study, including 32 cases (with SARS-CoV-2 positive testing after two vaccine doses during the Delta-dominant era) and 247 controls (no positive test nor anti-nucleocapsid seroconversion during this period). 28 days after second vaccination, before all breakthroughs occurred, cases had lower ancestral S- and RBD-specific immunoglobulin G titres and S1- and S2-specific T cell interferon gamma (IFN{gamma}) responses compared with controls. In a subset of matched cases and controls, cases had lower CD4+ and CD8+ IFN{gamma} and tumour necrosis factor responses to Delta S peptides with reduced CD8+ responses to Delta versus ancestral peptides compared with controls. Our findings support a protective role for T cells against Delta breakthrough infection.


Subject(s)
Necrosis , Breakthrough Pain , COVID-19
13.
Lupus ; 32(4): 571-579, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2195009

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine if SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination has an impact on the clinical course of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: Puerto Ricans with SLE who received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were studied. Demographic parameters, clinical manifestations, disease activity (per Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI), disease damage (per Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index), emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and pharmacologic therapy were determined. Baseline variables (prior to vaccination) were compared between patients with and without exacerbation after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Among those with exacerbation, clinical outcomes were determined up to 1 year after vaccination. RESULTS: Of the entire cohort (n = 247), 14 (5.7%) had post-vaccination exacerbations. Photosensitivity, oral ulcers, anti-Ro antibodies, higher SLEDAI score, and corticosteroids exposure were associated with post-vaccination flares. Among those with post-vaccination flares, 10 (71.4%) had major organ involvement. No significant differences were observed for mean SLEDAI scores, emergency room visits, hospitalizations, disease damage, and exposure to immunosuppressive drugs before and after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. At 12 months of follow-up, all patients were fully controlled without evidence of active disease. CONCLUSION: In our group of SLE patients, 5.7% had a disease flare after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Most had exacerbations involving major organs/systems. Mucocutaneous manifestations, anti-Ro antibodies, disease activity, and corticosteroids were associated with flares. Awareness of these factors and the possibility of a major lupus flare after vaccination with COVD-19 vaccines is critical to provide timely and effective therapy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic , Humans , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Disease Progression , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic/complications , Puerto Rico , RNA, Messenger , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Symptom Flare Up , Vaccination/adverse effects
14.
Evol Hum Behav ; 43(6): 527-535, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2061168

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic caused drastic social changes for many people, including separation from friends and coworkers, enforced close contact with family, and reductions in mobility. Here we assess the extent to which people's evolutionarily-relevant basic motivations and goals-fundamental social motives such as Affiliation and Kin Care-might have been affected. To address this question, we gathered data on fundamental social motives in 42 countries (N = 15,915) across two waves, including 19 countries (N = 10,907) for which data were gathered both before and during the pandemic (pre-pandemic wave: 32 countries, N = 8998; 3302 male, 5585 female; M age  = 24.43, SD = 7.91; mid-pandemic wave: 29 countries, N = 6917; 2249 male, 4218 female; M age  = 28.59, SD = 11.31). Samples include data collected online (e.g., Prolific, MTurk), at universities, and via community sampling. We found that Disease Avoidance motivation was substantially higher during the pandemic, and that most of the other fundamental social motives showed small, yet significant, differences across waves. Most sensibly, concern with caring for one's children was higher during the pandemic, and concerns with Mate Seeking and Status were lower. Earlier findings showing the prioritization of family motives over mating motives (and even over Disease Avoidance motives) were replicated during the pandemic. Finally, well-being remained positively associated with family-related motives and negatively associated with mating motives during the pandemic, as in the pre-pandemic samples. Our results provide further evidence for the robust primacy of family-related motivations even during this unique disruption of social life.

15.
Sci Data ; 9(1): 499, 2022 08 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1991647

ABSTRACT

How does psychology vary across human societies? The fundamental social motives framework adopts an evolutionary approach to capture the broad range of human social goals within a taxonomy of ancestrally recurring threats and opportunities. These motives-self-protection, disease avoidance, affiliation, status, mate acquisition, mate retention, and kin care-are high in fitness relevance and everyday salience, yet understudied cross-culturally. Here, we gathered data on these motives in 42 countries (N = 15,915) in two cross-sectional waves, including 19 countries (N = 10,907) for which data were gathered in both waves. Wave 1 was collected from mid-2016 through late 2019 (32 countries, N = 8,998; 3,302 male, 5,585 female; Mage = 24.43, SD = 7.91). Wave 2 was collected from April through November 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic (29 countries, N = 6,917; 2,249 male, 4,218 female; Mage = 28.59, SD = 11.31). These data can be used to assess differences and similarities in people's fundamental social motives both across and within cultures, at different time points, and in relation to other commonly studied cultural indicators and outcomes.

16.
Arch Womens Ment Health ; 25(5): 943-956, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1990651

ABSTRACT

Our primary objective was to document COVID-19 induced changes to perinatal care across the USA and examine the implication of these changes for maternal mental health. We performed an observational cross-sectional study with convenience sampling using direct patient reports from 1918 postpartum and 3868 pregnant individuals collected between April 2020 and December 2020 from 10 states across the USA. We leverage a subgroup of these participants who gave birth prior to March 2020 to estimate the pre-pandemic prevalence of specific birthing practices as a comparison. Our primary analyses describe the prevalence and timing of perinatal care changes, compare perinatal care changes depending on when and where individuals gave birth, and assess the linkage between perinatal care alterations and maternal anxiety and depressive symptoms. Seventy-eight percent of pregnant participants and 63% of postpartum participants reported at least one change to their perinatal care between March and August 2020. However, the prevalence and nature of specific perinatal care changes occurred unevenly over time and across geographic locations. The separation of infants and mothers immediately after birth and the cancelation of prenatal visits were associated with worsened depression and anxiety symptoms in mothers after controlling for sociodemographic factors, mental health history, number of pregnancy complications, and general stress about the COVID-19 pandemic. Our analyses reveal widespread changes to perinatal care across the US that fluctuated depending on where and when individuals gave birth. Disruptions to perinatal care may also exacerbate mental health concerns, so focused treatments that can mitigate the negative psychiatric sequelae of interrupted care are warranted.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/etiology , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Mental Health , Pandemics , Perinatal Care , Pregnancy
17.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 203(3): 390-391, 2021 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1383573
18.
JCI Insight ; 7(13)2022 07 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1932894

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUNDProlonged symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection are well documented. However, which factors influence development of long-term symptoms, how symptoms vary across ethnic groups, and whether long-term symptoms correlate with biomarkers are points that remain elusive.METHODSAdult SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription PCR-positive (RT-PCR-positive) patients were recruited at Stanford from March 2020 to February 2021. Study participants were seen for in-person visits at diagnosis and every 1-3 months for up to 1 year after diagnosis; they completed symptom surveys and underwent blood draws and nasal swab collections at each visit.RESULTSOur cohort (n = 617) ranged from asymptomatic to critical COVID-19 infections. In total, 40% of participants reported at least 1 symptom associated with COVID-19 six months after diagnosis. Median time from diagnosis to first resolution of all symptoms was 44 days; median time from diagnosis to sustained symptom resolution with no recurring symptoms for 1 month or longer was 214 days. Anti-nucleocapsid IgG level in the first week after positive RT-PCR test and history of lung disease were associated with time to sustained symptom resolution. COVID-19 disease severity, ethnicity, age, sex, and remdesivir use did not affect time to sustained symptom resolution.CONCLUSIONWe found that all disease severities had a similar risk of developing post-COVID-19 syndrome in an ethnically diverse population. Comorbid lung disease and lower levels of initial IgG response to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen were associated with longer symptom duration.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04373148.FUNDINGNIH UL1TR003142 CTSA grant, NIH U54CA260517 grant, NIEHS R21 ES03304901, Sean N Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University, Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Sunshine Foundation, Crown Foundation, and Parker Foundation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , SARS-CoV-2 , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
19.
- IMPACC group; Al Ozonoff; Joanna Schaenman; Naresh Doni Jayavelu; Carly E. Milliren; Carolyn S. Calfee; Charles B. Cairns; Monica Kraft; Lindsey R. Baden; Albert C. Shaw; Florian Krammer; Harm Van Bakel; Denise Esserman; Shanshan Liu; Ana Fernandez Sesma; Viviana Simon; David A. Hafler; Ruth R. Montgomery; Steven H. Kleinstein; Ofer Levy; Christian Bime; Elias K. Haddad; David J. Erle; Bali Pulendran; Kari C. Nadeau; Mark M. Davis; Catherine L. Hough; William B. Messer; Nelson I. Agudelo Higuita; Jordan P. Metcalf; Mark A. Atkinson; Scott C. Brakenridge; David B. Corry; Farrah Kheradmand; Lauren I. R. Ehrlich; Esther Melamed; Grace A. McComsey; Rafick Sekaly; Joann Diray-Arce; Bjoern Peters; Alison D. Augustine; Elaine F. Reed; Kerry McEnaney; Brenda Barton; Claudia Lentucci; Mehmet Saluvan; Ana C. Chang; Annmarie Hoch; Marisa Albert; Tanzia Shaheen; Alvin Kho; Sanya Thomas; Jing Chen; Maimouna D. Murphy; Mitchell Cooney; Scott Presnell; Leying Guan; Jeremy Gygi; Shrikant Pawar; Anderson Brito; Zain Khalil; James A. Overton; Randi Vita; Kerstin Westendorf; Cole Maguire; Slim Fourati; Ramin Salehi-Rad; Aleksandra Leligdowicz; Michael Matthay; Jonathan Singer; Kirsten N. Kangelaris; Carolyn M. Hendrickson; Matthew F. Krummel; Charles R. Langelier; Prescott G. Woodruff; Debra L. Powell; James N. Kim; Brent Simmons; I.Michael Goonewardene; Cecilia M. Smith; Mark Martens; Jarrod Mosier; Hiroki Kimura; Amy Sherman; Stephen Walsh; Nicolas Issa; Charles Dela Cruz; Shelli Farhadian; Akiko Iwasaki; Albert I. Ko; Evan J. Anderson; Aneesh Mehta; Jonathan E. Sevransky; Sharon Chinthrajah; Neera Ahuja; Angela Rogers; Maja Artandi; Sarah A.R. Siegel; Zhengchun Lu; Douglas A. Drevets; Brent R. Brown; Matthew L. Anderson; Faheem W. Guirgis; Rama V. Thyagarajan; Justin Rousseau; Dennis Wylie; Johanna Busch; Saurin Gandhi; Todd A. Triplett; George Yendewa; Olivia Giddings; Tatyana Vaysman; Bernard Khor; Adeeb Rahman; Daniel Stadlbauer; Jayeeta Dutta; Hui Xie; Seunghee Kim-Schulze; Ana Silvia Gonzalez-Reiche; Adriana van de Guchte; Holden T. Maecker; Keith Farrugia; Zenab Khan; Joanna Schaenman; Elaine F. Reed; Ramin Salehi-Rad; David Elashoff; Jenny Brook; Estefania Ramires-Sanchez; Megan Llamas; Adreanne Rivera; Claudia Perdomo; Dawn C. Ward; Clara E. Magyar; Jennifer Fulcher; Yumiko Abe-Jones; Saurabh Asthana; Alexander Beagle; Sharvari Bhide; Sidney A. Carrillo; Suzanna Chak; Rajani Ghale; Ana Gonzales; Alejandra Jauregui; Norman Jones; Tasha Lea; Deanna Lee; Raphael Lota; Jeff Milush; Viet Nguyen; Logan Pierce; Priya Prasad; Arjun Rao; Bushra Samad; Cole Shaw; Austin Sigman; Pratik Sinha; Alyssa Ward; Andrew - Willmore; Jenny Zhan; Sadeed Rashid; Nicklaus Rodriguez; Kevin Tang; Luz Torres Altamirano; Legna Betancourt; Cindy Curiel; Nicole Sutter; Maria Tercero Paz; Gayelan Tietje-Ulrich; Carolyn Leroux; Jennifer Connors; Mariana Bernui; Michele Kutzler; Carolyn Edwards; Edward Lee; Edward Lin; Brett Croen; Nicholas Semenza; Brandon Rogowski; Nataliya Melnyk; Kyra Woloszczuk; Gina Cusimano; Matthew Bell; Sara Furukawa; Renee McLin; Pamela Marrero; Julie Sheidy; George P. Tegos; Crystal Nagle; Nathan Mege; Kristen Ulring; Vicki Seyfert-Margolis; Michelle Conway; Dave Francisco; Allyson Molzahn; Heidi Erickson; Connie Cathleen Wilson; Ron Schunk; Trina Hughes; Bianca Sierra; Kinga K. Smolen; Michael Desjardins; Simon van Haren; Xhoi Mitre; Jessica Cauley; Xiofang Li; Alexandra Tong; Bethany Evans; Christina Montesano; Jose Humberto Licona; Jonathan Krauss; Jun Bai Park Chang; Natalie Izaguirre; Omkar Chaudhary; Andreas Coppi; John Fournier; Subhasis Mohanty; M. Catherine Muenker; Allison Nelson; Khadir Raddassi; Michael Rainone; William Ruff; Syim Salahuddin; Wade L. Schulz; Pavithra Vijayakumar; Haowei Wang; Elsio Wunder Jr.; H. Patrick Young; Yujiao Zhao; Miti Saksena; Deena Altman; Erna Kojic; Komal Srivastava; Lily Q. Eaker; Maria Carolina Bermudez; Katherine F. Beach; Levy A. Sominsky; Arman Azad; Juan Manuel Carreno; Gagandeep Singh; Ariel Raskin; Johnstone Tcheou; Dominika Bielak; Hisaaki Kawabata; Lubbertus CF Mulder; Giulio Kleiner; Laurel Bristow; Laila Hussaini; Kieffer Hellmeister; Hady Samaha; Andrew Cheng; Christine Spainhour; Erin M. Scherer; Brandi Johnson; Amer Bechnak; Caroline R. Ciric; Lauren Hewitt; Bernadine Panganiban; Chistopher Huerta; Jacob Usher; Erin Carter; Nina Mcnair; Susan Pereira Ribeiro; Alexandra S. Lee; Evan Do; Andrea Fernandes; Monali Manohar; Thomas Hagan; Catherine Blish; Hena Naz Din; Jonasel Roque; Samuel S. Yang; Amanda E. Brunton; Peter E. Sullivan; Matthew Strnad; Zoe L. Lyski; Felicity J. Coulter; John L. Booth; Lauren A. Sinko; Lyle Moldawer; Brittany Borrensen; Brittney Roth-Manning; Li-Zhen Song; Ebony Nelson; Megan Lewis-Smith; Jacob Smith; Pablo Guaman Tipan; Nadia Siles; Sam Bazzi; Janelle Geltman; Kerin Hurley; Giovanni Gabriele; Scott Sieg; Matthew C. Altman; Patrice M. Becker; Nadine Rouphael.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.07.02.22273396

ABSTRACT

Background: Better understanding of the association between characteristics of patients hospital-ized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and outcome is needed to further improve upon patient management. Methods: Immunophenotyping Assessment in a COVID-19 Cohort (IMPACC) is a prospective, observational study of 1,164 patients from 20 hospitals across the United States. Disease severi-ty was assessed using a 7-point ordinal scale based on degree of respiratory illness. Patients were prospectively surveyed for 1 year after discharge for post-acute sequalae of COVID-19 (PASC) through quarterly surveys. Demographics, comorbidities, radiographic findings, clinical laboratory values, SARS-CoV-2 PCR and serology were captured over a 28-day period. Multi-variable logistic regression was performed. Findings: The median age was 59 years (interquartile range [IQR] 20); 711 (61%) were men; overall mortality was 14%, and 228 (20%) required invasive mechanical ventilation. Unsuper-vised clustering of ordinal score over time revealed distinct disease course trajectories. Risk fac-tors associated with prolonged hospitalization or death by day 28 included age [≥] 65 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% CI 1.28-3.17), Hispanic ethnicity (OR, 1.71; 95% CI 1.13-2.57), elevated baseline creatinine (OR 2.80; 95% CI 1.63- 4.80) or troponin (OR 1.89; 95% 1.03-3.47), baseline lymphopenia (OR 2.19; 95% CI 1.61-2.97), presence of infiltrate by chest imaging (OR 3.16; 95% CI 1.96-5.10), and high SARS-CoV2 viral load (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.17-2.00). Fatal cases had the lowest ratio of SARS-CoV-2 antibody to viral load levels compared to other trajectories over time (p=0.001). 589 survivors (51%) completed at least one survey at follow-up with 305 (52%) hav-ing at least one symptom consistent with PASC, most commonly dyspnea (56% among symp-tomatic patients). Female sex was the only associated risk factor for PASC. Interpretation: Integration of PCR cycle threshold, and antibody values with demographics, comorbidities, and laboratory/radiographic findings identified risk factors for 28-day outcome severity, though only female sex was associated with PASC. Longitudinal clinical phenotyping offers important insights, and provides a framework for immunophenotyping for acute and long COVID-19. Funding: NIH


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Lymphopenia , Dyspnea , Respiratory Insufficiency
20.
Br J Haematol ; 198(4): 668-679, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874397

ABSTRACT

Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients remain at high risk of adverse outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and emerging variants. The optimal prophylactic vaccine strategy for this cohort is not defined. T cell-mediated immunity is a critical component of graft-versus-tumour effect and in determining vaccine immunogenicity. Using validated anti-spike (S) immunoglobulin G (IgG) and S-specific interferon-gamma enzyme-linked immunospot (IFNγ-ELIspot) assays we analysed response to a two-dose vaccination schedule (either BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1) in 33 HSCT recipients at ≤2 years from transplant, alongside vaccine-matched healthy controls (HCs). After two vaccines, infection-naïve HSCT recipients had a significantly lower rate of seroconversion compared to infection-naïve HCs (25/32 HSCT vs. 39/39 HCs no responders) and had lower S-specific T-cell responses. The HSCT recipients who received BNT162b2 had a higher rate of seroconversion compared to ChAdOx1 (89% vs. 74%) and significantly higher anti-S IgG titres (p = 0.022). S-specific T-cell responses were seen after one vaccine in HCs and HSCT recipients. However, two vaccines enhanced S-specific T-cell responses in HCs but not in the majority of HSCT recipients. These data demonstrate limited immunogenicity of two-dose vaccination strategies in HSCT recipients, bolstering evidence of the need for additional boosters and/or alternative prophylactic measures in this group.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Age Factors , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , BNT162 Vaccine/immunology , BNT162 Vaccine/therapeutic use , Bone Marrow Transplantation/adverse effects , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19 Vaccines/pharmacology , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/immunology , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/therapeutic use , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects , Humans , Immunity, Cellular/drug effects , Immunity, Cellular/immunology , Immunity, Humoral/drug effects , Immunity, Humoral/immunology , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Seroconversion , Transplantation, Homologous/adverse effects , Vaccination/adverse effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL