Psychometric evaluation of the Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC): results from a cross-sectional study and a phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC) is a 30-item patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure scored by body system composites to assess signs/symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In addition to cross-sectional and longitudinal psychometric evaluations, qualitative exit interviews were conducted to support the content validity of the SIC. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, adults diagnosed with COVID-19 in the United States completed the web-based SIC and additional PRO measures. A subset was invited to participate in phone-based exit interviews. Longitudinal psychometric properties were assessed in ENSEMBLE2, a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of the Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine. Psychometric properties evaluated included structure, scoring, reliability, construct validity, discriminating ability, responsiveness, and meaningful change thresholds of SIC items and composite scores. RESULTS: In the cross-sectional study, 152 participants completed the SIC (mean age, 51.0 ± 18.6 years) and 20 completed follow-up interviews. Fatigue (77.6%), feeling unwell (65.8%), and cough (60.5%) were symptoms most frequently reported. SIC inter-item correlations were all positive and mostly moderate (r ≥ 0.3) and statistically significant. SIC items and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS-29) scores correlated as hypothesized (all r ≥ 0.32). Internal consistency reliabilities of all SIC composite scores were satisfactory (Cronbach's alpha, 0.69-0.91). SIC composite scores correlated moderately (r = 0.30-0.49) to strongly (r ≥ 0.50) with PROMIS-29 scores and Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS) ratings (all P < 0.01). A variety of signs/symptoms were cited in exit interviews, and participants considered the SIC straightforward, comprehensive, and easy to use. From ENSEMBLE2, 183 participants with laboratory-confirmed moderate to severe/critical COVID-19 were included (51.5 ± 14.8 years). Strong test-retest reliabilities were observed for most SIC composite scores (intraclass correlations ≥ 0.60). Statistically significant differences across PGIS severity levels were found for all but 1 composite score, supporting known-groups validity. All SIC composite scores demonstrated responsiveness based on changes in PGIS. CONCLUSIONS: The psychometric evaluations provided strong evidence for the reliability and validity of the SIC for measuring COVID-19 symptoms, supporting its use in vaccine and treatment trials. In exit interviews, participants described a broad range of signs/symptoms consistent with previous research, further supporting the content validity and format of the SIC.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a serious disease that continues to evolve globally. Researchers developed the Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC), a 30-item questionnaire designed for patients to report signs and symptoms of COVID-19. In this study, the researchers formally analyzed how well the SIC measures the patient experience with COVID-19, using survey and clinical trial data as well as telephone interviews. Adults with COVID-19 and at least 2 bothersome symptoms completed the web-based survey, and some of these individuals also participated in in-depth interviews. Participants in a clinical trial for a COVID-19 vaccine also completed the SIC measure. The SIC was compared with other commonly used questionnaires that evaluate patient experience. The most commonly reported symptoms of COVID-19 were fatigue, feeling unwell, cough, weakness, and headache. The items for individual symptoms (e.g., "cough") and combined scores for body systems (e.g., "respiratory system") performed well in statistical analyses. Participants found the SIC to be straightforward, comprehensive, and easy to use. The SIC may prove useful in the future for vaccine and treatment trials for COVID-19.

The impacts of physical activity on psychological and behavioral problems, and changes in physical activity, sleep and quality of life during the COVID-19 pandemic in preschoolers, children, and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly affected the level of physical activity (PA). However, little is known about its effect on health outcomes. Methods: Articles without language restrictions published from the database inception through March 16, 2022, were retrieved using the CINAHL Complete, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, PubMed, and PsycINFO databases. High-quality articles assessing the effect of PA on psychological and behavioral problems. Additionally, PA, QoL, and/or sleep problems before and during the pandemic were included. Articles without data regarding PA or involving non-general populations were excluded. The PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines were followed. Data quality of the selected articles was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and GRADE approach. Data were pooled using a random-effects model and sensitivity analysis if heterogenicity was high (I 2 ≥ 50%). The relationship between PA and psychological and behavioral problems; and changes in PA, QoL, and sleeping patterns before and during the pandemic in preschoolers, children, and adolescents were investigated. A meta-analysis was conducted; odds ratios (ORs), mean differences (MD), and standardized MDs (SMDs) were calculated. Results: Thirty-four articles involving 66,857 participants were included. The results showed an overall significant protective effect between PA and psychological and/or behavioral problems (OR = 0.677; 95% CI = 0.630, 0.728; p-value <0.001; I 2 = 59.79%). This relationship was also significant in the subgroup analysis of children (OR = 0.690; 95% CI = 0.632, 0.752; p-value <0.001; I 2 = 58.93%) and adolescents (OR = 0.650; 95% CI = 0.570, 0.741; p-value <0.001; I 2 = 60.85%); however, no data on the relationship in preschoolers were collected. In addition, the overall time spent on PA significantly decreased by 23.2 min per day during the COVID-19 pandemic (95% CI = -13.5, -32.9; p-value <0.001; I 2 = 99.82%). Moreover, the results showed an overall significant decrease in QoL (SMD = -0.894, 95% CI = -1.180, -0.609, p-value <0.001, I 2 = 96.64%). However, there was no significant difference in sleep duration during the COVID-19 pandemic (MD = 0.01 h per day, 95% CI = -0.027, 0.225; p-value = 0.125; I 2 = 98.48%). Conclusion: During the pandemic, less PA was contributed to poor QoL and sleep quality. However, increases in PA are associated with reduced occurrences of psychological and behavioral problems. Implementing recovery plans to address the health effect of the pandemic is essential.

Efficacy and Safety of an Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF Protein Vaccine in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) can cause serious lower respiratory tract disease in older adults, but no licensed RSV vaccine currently exists. An adenovirus serotype 26 RSV vector encoding a prefusion F (preF) protein (Ad26.RSV.preF) in combination with RSV preF protein was previously shown to elicit humoral and cellular immunogenicity. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b, proof-of-concept trial to evaluate the efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of an Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein vaccine. Adults who were 65 years of age or older were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive vaccine or placebo. The primary end point was the first occurrence of RSV-mediated lower respiratory tract disease that met one of three case definitions: three or more symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection (definition 1), two or more symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection (definition 2), and either two or more symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection or one or more symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection plus at least one systemic symptom (definition 3). RESULTS: Overall, 5782 participants were enrolled and received an injection. RSV-mediated lower respiratory tract disease meeting case definitions 1, 2, and 3 occurred in 6, 10, and 13 vaccine recipients and in 30, 40, and 43 placebo recipients, respectively. Vaccine efficacy was 80.0% (94.2% confidence interval [CI], 52.2 to 92.9), 75.0% (94.2% CI, 50.1 to 88.5), and 69.8% (94.2% CI, 43.7 to 84.7) for case definitions 1, 2, and 3, respectively. After vaccination, RSV A2 neutralizing antibody titers increased by a factor of 12.1 from baseline to day 15, a finding consistent with other immunogenicity measures. Percentages of participants with solicited local and systemic adverse events were higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (local, 37.9% vs. 8.4%; systemic, 41.4% vs. 16.4%); most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. The frequency of serious adverse events was similar in the vaccine group and the placebo group (4.6% and 4.7%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In adults 65 years of age or older, Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein vaccine was immunogenic and prevented RSV-mediated lower respiratory tract disease. (Funded by Janssen Vaccines and Prevention; CYPRESS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03982199.).

Development of patient- and observer-reported outcome measures to assess COVID-19 signs and symptoms in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC) is a 30-item patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate the presence and severity of COVID-19 signs/symptoms in adults. This study expanded the context of use of the adult SIC among adolescents aged 12-17 years and supported a pediatric adaptation (the Pediatric SIC [PedSIC]) for caregiver assessment of signs/symptoms in children aged < 12 years. METHODS: Draft versions of the PedSIC and reference materials containing sign/symptom definitions for adolescents, based on an assessment of the reading level of SIC items by a professional linguist, were developed to facilitate accurate completion of the SIC by adolescents and observer-report (PedSIC) by caregivers. For adolescents, reference materials were intended to provide definitions for selected signs/symptoms identified to have a higher reading level. Iterative rounds of cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted from November 2020 to January 2021 to evaluate adolescent understanding of the SIC reference materials and inform refinement of the PedSIC for caregivers of children too young to reliably self-report. Participants were identified via databases of individuals who previously expressed interest in participating in qualitative research and were then screened for eligibility. Recruitment quotas were established to improve sample diversity. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics were used to assess qualitative and demographic data, respectively. RESULTS: Nine healthy adolescents (mean [SD, range] age, 14 [1.76, 12-17] years, 56% female, 22% non-White; round 1, n = 6; round 2, n = 3) and 17 caregivers (mean [SD, range] age, 34 [6.28, 26-41] years, 59% female, 35% non-White; round 1, n = 9; round 2, n = 8) were interviewed. Adolescents understood the majority of signs/symptoms (22 of the 30 SIC items) without assistance or use of the reference materials during the cognitive debriefing interview. Definitions were added to the reference materials for 5 additional items, and clarifications provided to existing definitions for 3 items. Seven observer-report (PedSIC) items were modified following feedback from caregivers of healthy young children. Reference materials (similar to those for adolescent use) were developed to support caregiver understanding of the intent of the PedSIC items collecting input from children ages ≥ 5- < 12 years. CONCLUSIONS: Results support using the SIC, PedSIC, and their associated reference materials to evaluate the presence and severity of COVID-19 signs/symptoms in adolescents and children aged < 12 years via caregiver-supported report, respectively.

Development of a novel patient-reported outcome measure to assess signs and symptoms of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Given the urgent need for vaccines and treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC), a comprehensive, patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure of signs and symptoms associated with COVID-19, was developed in full alignment with current US regulatory guidance to support evaluations of vaccines and treatments in development. METHODS: An initial version of the SIC was developed to address concepts identified through a targeted literature review and consultation with experts in infectious diseases and clinicians routinely managing COVID-19 in a hospital setting. A qualitative study was conducted in sites in the United States among 31 participants aged ≥ 18 years who were English-speaking and willing and able to provide informed consent and a self-reported history by telephone or online method. The measure was refined based on additional feedback from the clinicians and three iterative rounds of combined concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews conducted with patients, caregivers, and healthy volunteers. RESULTS: Among 39 scientific articles identified in the literature review, 35 COVID-19 signs and symptoms were reported and confirmed during interviews with clinicians, patients, and caregivers. Patients and healthy participants suggested changes for refining the draft SIC to ensure consistent interpretation and endorsed both the 24-h recall period and use of an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) for capturing change in symptom severity. The final version of the SIC captures the daily presence or absence of 30 symptoms and a rating of severity for 25 of the 30 symptoms using an NRS for those symptoms reported as present. CONCLUSIONS: The SIC comprehensively addresses observations described in the literature, by clinicians, and by patients, and captures patients' experiences with COVID-19 in a manner that minimizes complexity and facilitates completion for both patients and healthy volunteers. This measure is thus appropriate for use in clinical trials of both therapeutics and vaccines for COVID-19.

Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling-Guided Dose Management of Oral Anticoagulants when Initiating Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir (Paxlovid) for COVID-19 Treatment.

Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with cardiovascular diseases who are at higher risk of progressing to critical illness should be treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid). Ritonavir, the booster in nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, modulates multiple drug metabolizing enzymes and transporters, complicating its use in real-world clinics. We aimed to apply physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling to simulate the complex drug-drug interactions (DDIs) of ritonavir with two anticoagulants, rivaroxaban and racemic warfarin, to address this important clinical conundrum. Simulations were implemented within Simcyp Simulator. Compound and population models were adopted from Simcyp and our previous studies. Upon verification and validation of the PBPK model of ritonavir, prospective DDI simulations with the anticoagulants were performed in both the general population (20-65 years) and geriatric subjects (65-85 years) with or without moderate renal impairment. Elevated rivaroxaban concentrations were simulated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment, where the impact was more profound among geriatric subjects with renal impairment. The overexposure of rivaroxaban was restored to normal range on day 4 post-discontinuation of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, corroborating with the recovery of enzyme activity. A lower 10 mg daily dose of rivaroxaban could effectively maintain acceptable systemic exposure of rivaroxaban during nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment. Treatment of ritonavir marginally declined simulated S-warfarin concentrations, but substantially elevated that of R-warfarin, resulting in a decrease in the international normalized ratio (INR). As INR only recovered 2 weeks post-nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment, a longer surveillance INR for warfarin becomes important. Our PBPK-guided simulations evaluated clinically important yet untested DDIs and supports clinical studies to ensure proper anticoagulation management of patients with COVID-19 with chronic coagulative abnormalities when initiating nirmatrelvir/ritonavir therapy.

Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modelling to Investigate Baricitinib and Tofacitinib Dosing Recommendations for COVID-19 in Geriatrics.

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors baricitinib and tofacitinib are recommended by the US National Institutes of Health as immunomodulatory drugs for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment. In addition, baricitinib has recently received Emergency Use Authorization from the US Food and Drug Administration, although the instruction provided dosing information only for adults. Geriatrics with organ dysfunction are one of the most vulnerable cohorts when combating the pandemic. The aim of the present work was to evaluate current dosing strategies of baricitinib and tofacitinib for potential COVID-19 treatment for White and Chinese geriatric patients with chronic renal impairment. An established physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling framework for age-dependent simulations was utilized. PBPK drug models adopted from literature were first verified. Several population models representing different age groups, ethnicities, and stages of renal impairment were used for prospective simulations. Notwithstanding the increase in systemic exposure of both drugs resulting from renal dysfunction was more pronounced for geriatrics than general White populations, our simulations confirmed their current dosage adjustments based on renal functions are broadly adequate. The exception being White older subjects with mild renal impairment where current recommendation of 4 mg baricitinib yielded a 2.31-fold increase in systemic exposure, and reduction to 2 mg could mitigate the potential risk to an acceptable 1.15-fold. Comparable relationships between systemic exposure and renal dysfunction were observed for both drugs in the Chinese population. In summary, PBPK modeling of both JAK inhibitors supports the rational and prudent dose adjustments of these COVID-19 therapeutics among adult patients of different age groups and renal functions.

Student nurses' ethical views on responses to the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak.

BACKGROUND: Fifteen years have passed since the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome in Hong Kong. At that time, there were reports of heroic acts among professionals who cared for these patients, whose bravery and professionalism were highly praised. However, there are concerns about changes in new generation of nursing professionals. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the attitude of nursing students, should they be faced with severe acute respiratory syndrome patients during their future work. RESEARCH DESIGN: A questionnaire survey was carried out to examine the attitude among final-year nursing students to three ethical areas, namely, duty of care, resource allocation, and collateral damage. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: This study was carried out in accordance with the requirements and recommendations of the Central Research and Ethics Committee, School of Health Sciences at Caritas Institute of Higher Education. FINDINGS: Complete responses from 102 subjects were analyzed. The overwhelming majority (96.1%) did not agree to participate in the intubation of severe acute respiratory syndrome patients if protective measures, that is, N95 mask and gown, were not available. If there were insufficient N95 masks for all the medical, nursing, and allied health workers in the hospital (resource allocation), 37.3% felt that the distribution of N95 masks should be by casting lot, while the rest disagreed. When asked about collateral damage, more than three-quarters (77.5%) said that severe acute respiratory syndrome patients should be admitted to intensive care unit. There was sex difference in nursing students' attitude toward severe acute respiratory syndrome care during pregnancy and influence of age in understanding intensive care unit care for these patients. Interestingly, 94.1% felt that there should be a separate intensive care unit for severe acute respiratory syndrome patients. CONCLUSION: As infection control practice and isolation facilities improved over the years, relevant knowledge and nursing ethical issues related to infectious diseases should become part of nursing education and training programs, especially in preparation for outbreaks of infectious diseases or distress.