Laboratory Interventions to Eliminate Unnecessary Rapid COVID-19 Testing During a Reagent Shortage.

OBJECTIVES: In the fall of 2020, US medical centers were running out of rapid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) tests. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of an intervention to eliminate rapid test misutilization and to quantify the effect of the countermeasures to control rapid test ordering using a test utilization dashboard. METHODS: Interventions were made to preserve a severely limited supply of rapid diagnostic tests based on real-time analysis of a COVID-19 test utilization dashboard. This study is a retrospective observational study evaluating pre- and postintervention rates of appropriate rapid test use, reporting times, and cost/savings of resources used. RESULTS: This study included 14,462 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction tests ordered during the study period. After the intervention, there was a 27.3% decrease in nonconforming rapid tests. Rapid test reporting time from laboratory receipt decreased by 1.47 hours. The number of days of rapid test inventory on hand increased by 39 days. CONCLUSIONS: Performing diagnostic test stewardship, informed by real-time review of a test utilization dashboard, was associated with significantly improved appropriate utilization of rapid diagnostic COVID-19 tests, improved reporting times, implied cost savings, and improved reagent inventory on hand, which facilitated the management of scarce resources during a pandemic.

Distinct Laboratory Test Result Profiles Between SARS-CoV-2 and Seasonable Influenza Infected Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and influenza viruses are contagious respiratory pathogens with similar symptoms but require different treatment and management strategies. This study investigated the differences in laboratory test result profiles between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza infected patients upon presentation to emergency department (ED). METHODS: Laboratory test results and demographic information from 723 influenza positive (2018/1/1 to 2020/3/15) and 1,281 SARS-CoV-2 positive (2020/3/11 to 2020/6/30) ED patients were retrospectively analyzed. The dataset was randomly divided into a training/validation set (2/3) and a test set (1/3) with the same SARS-CoV-2/influenza ratio. Four machine learning models in differentiating the laboratory profiles of RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and influenza positive patients were evaluated. The Shapley Additive Explanations technique was employed to visualize the impact of laboratory tests on the overall differentiation. Furthermore, the model performance was also evaluated in a new test dataset including 519 SARS-CoV-2 ED patients (2020/12/1 to 2021/2/28) and the previous influenza positive patients (2018/1/1 to 2020/3/15). RESULTS: A laboratory test result profile consisting of 15 blood tests, together with patient age, gender, and race can discriminate the two types of viral infections using a random forest (RF) model. The RF model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.90 in the test set. Among the profile of 15 laboratory tests, the serum total calcium level exhibited the greatest contribution to the overall differentiation. Furthermore, the model achieved an AUC of 0.81 in a new test set. CONCLUSION: We developed a laboratory tests-based RF model differentiating SARS-CoV-2 from influenza, which may be useful for the preparedness of overlapping COVID-19 resurgence and future seasonal influenza.

Machine Learning Highlights Downtrending of COVID-19 Patients with a Distinct Laboratory Profile

Background New York City (NYC) experienced an initial surge and gradual decline in the number of SARS-CoV-2-confirmed cases in 2020. A change in the pattern of laboratory test results in COVID-19 patients over this time has not been reported or correlated with patient outcome. Methods We performed a retrospective study of routine laboratory and SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test results from 5,785 patients evaluated in a NYC hospital emergency department from March to June employing machine learning analysis. Results A COVID-19 high-risk laboratory test result profile (COVID19-HRP), consisting of 21 routine blood tests, was identified to characterize the SARS-CoV-2 patients. Approximately half of the SARS-CoV-2 positive patients had the distinct COVID19-HRP that separated them from SARS-CoV-2 negative patients. SARS-CoV-2 patients with the COVID19-HRP had higher SARS-CoV-2 viral loads, determined by cycle threshold values from the RT-PCR, and poorer clinical outcome compared to other positive patients without the COVID12-HRP. Furthermore, the percentage of SARS-CoV-2 patients with the COVID19-HRP has significantly decreased from March/April to May/June. Notably, viral load in the SARS-CoV-2 patients declined, and their laboratory profile became less distinguishable from SARS-CoV-2 negative patients in the later phase. Conclusions Our longitudinal analysis illustrates the temporal change of laboratory test result profile in SARS-CoV-2 patients and the COVID-19 evolvement in a US epicenter. This analysis could become an important tool in COVID-19 population disease severity tracking and prediction. In addition, this analysis may play an important role in prioritizing high-risk patients, assisting in patient triaging and optimizing the usage of resources.

Convalescent plasma for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: an open-label, randomized controlled trial.

The efficacy of convalescent plasma for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Although most randomized controlled trials have shown negative results, uncontrolled studies have suggested that the antibody content could influence patient outcomes. We conducted an open-label, randomized controlled trial of convalescent plasma for adults with COVID-19 receiving oxygen within 12 d of respiratory symptom onset ( NCT04348656 ). Patients were allocated 2:1 to 500 ml of convalescent plasma or standard of care. The composite primary outcome was intubation or death by 30 d. Exploratory analyses of the effect of convalescent plasma antibodies on the primary outcome was assessed by logistic regression. The trial was terminated at 78% of planned enrollment after meeting stopping criteria for futility. In total, 940 patients were randomized, and 921 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Intubation or death occurred in 199/614 (32.4%) patients in the convalescent plasma arm and 86/307 (28.0%) patients in the standard of care arm-relative risk (RR) = 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.43, P = 0.18). Patients in the convalescent plasma arm had more serious adverse events (33.4% versus 26.4%; RR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.02-1.57, P = 0.034). The antibody content significantly modulated the therapeutic effect of convalescent plasma. In multivariate analysis, each standardized log increase in neutralization or antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity independently reduced the potential harmful effect of plasma (odds ratio (OR) = 0.74, 95% CI 0.57-0.95 and OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.87, respectively), whereas IgG against the full transmembrane spike protein increased it (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.14-2.05). Convalescent plasma did not reduce the risk of intubation or death at 30 d in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Transfusion of convalescent plasma with unfavorable antibody profiles could be associated with worse clinical outcomes compared to standard care.

Rapid, robust, and sustainable antibody responses to mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in convalescent COVID-19 individuals.

Longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine antibody response under real-world conditions. This longitudinal study investigated the quantity and quality of SARS-CoV-2 antibody response in 846 specimens from 350 patients, comparing BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals (19 previously diagnosed with COVID-19, termed RecoVax; and 49 never diagnosed, termed NaiveVax) with 122 hospitalized unvaccinated (HospNoVax) and 160 outpatient unvaccinated (OutPtNoVax) COVID-19 patients. NaiveVax experienced delay in generating SARS-CoV-2 total antibodies (TAb) and surrogate neutralizing antibodies (SNAb) after the first vaccine dose (D1) but rapid increase in antibody levels after the second dose (D2). However, these never reached RecoVax's robust levels. In fact, NaiveVax TAb and SNAb levels decreased 4 weeks after D2. For the most part, RecoVax TAb persisted, after reaching maximal levels 2 weeks after D2, but SNAb decreased significantly about 6 months after D1. Although NaiveVax avidity lagged behind that of RecoVax for most of the follow-up periods, NaiveVax did reach similar avidity by about 6 months after D1. These data suggest that 1 vaccine dose elicits maximal antibody response in RecoVax and may be sufficient. Also, despite decreasing levels in TAb and SNAb over time, long-term avidity may be a measure worth evaluating and possibly correlating to vaccine efficacy.

Rotational thromboelastometry in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome owing to coronavirus disease 2019: Is there a viscoelastic fingerprint and a role for predicting thrombosis?

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated rotational thromboelastometry tracings in 44 critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients, to determine whether there is a viscoelastic fingerprint and to test the hypothesis that the diagnosis and prediction of venous thromboembolism would be enhanced by the addition of rotational thromboelastometry testing. RESULTS: Rotational thromboelastometry values reflected an increase in clot strength for the EXTEM, INTEM, and FIBTEM assays beyond the reference range. No hyperfibrinolysis was noted. Fibrinolysis shutdown was present but did not correlate with thrombosis; 32% (14/44) of patients experienced a thrombotic episode. For every 1 mm increase of FIBTEM maximum clot formation, the odds of developing thrombosis increased 20% (95% confidence interval, 0-40%, P = .043), whereas for every 1,000 ng/mL increase in D-dimer, the odds of thrombosis increased by 70% (95% confidence interval, 20%-150%, P = .004), after adjustment for age and sex (AUC 0.96, 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.00). There was a slight but significant improvement in model performance after adding FIBTEM maximum clot formation and EXTEM clot formation time to D-dimer in a multivariable model (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: D-dimer concentrations were more predictive of thrombosis in our patient population than any other parameter. Rotational thromboelastometry confirmed the hypercoagulable state of coronavirus disease 2019 intensive care unit patients. FIBTEM maximum clot formation and EXTEM clot formation time increased the predictability for thrombosis compared with only using D-dimer. Rotational thromboelastometry analysis is most useful in augmenting the information provided by the D-dimer concentration for venous thromboembolism risk assessment when the D-dimer concentration is between 1,625 and 6,900 ng/dL, but the enhancement is modest. Fibrinolysis shutdown did not correlate with thrombosis.

Antibody Responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines Are Detectable in Saliva.

The approved Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines are well known to induce serum antibody responses to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S)-protein. However, their abilities to elicit mucosal immune responses have not been reported. Saliva antibodies represent mucosal responses that may be relevant to how mRNA vaccines prevent oral and nasal SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Here, we describe the outcome of a cross-sectional study on a healthcare worker cohort (WELCOME-NYPH), in which we assessed whether IgM, IgG, and IgA antibodies to the S-protein and its receptor-binding domain (RBD) were present in serum and saliva samples. Anti-S-protein IgG was detected in 14/31 and 66/66 of saliva samples from uninfected participants after vaccine doses-1 and -2, respectively. IgA antibodies to the S-protein were present in 40/66 saliva samples after dose 2. Anti-S-protein IgG was present in every serum sample from recipients of 2 vaccine doses. Vaccine-induced antibodies against the RBD were also frequently present in saliva and sera. These findings may help our understanding of whether and how vaccines may impede SARS-CoV-2 transmission, including to oral cavity target cells.

Convalescent plasma for adults with acute COVID-19 respiratory illness (CONCOR-1): study protocol for an international, multicentre, randomized, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been used for numerous viral diseases including influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome, Middle East respiratory syndrome and Ebola virus; however, evidence to support its use is weak. SARS-CoV-2 is a novel coronavirus responsible for the 2019 global pandemic of COVID-19 community acquired pneumonia. We have undertaken a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: CONCOR-1 is an open-label, multicentre, randomized trial. Inclusion criteria include the following: patients > 16 years, admitted to hospital with COVID-19 infection, receiving supplemental oxygen for respiratory complications of COVID-19, and availability of blood group compatible CCP. Exclusion criteria are : onset of respiratory symptoms more than 12 days prior to randomization, intubated or imminent plan for intubation, and previous severe reactions to plasma. Consenting patients are randomized 2:1 to receive either approximately 500 mL of CCP or standard of care. CCP is collected from donors who have recovered from COVID-19 and who have detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies quantified serologically. The primary outcome is intubation or death at day 30. Secondary outcomes include ventilator-free days, length of stay in intensive care or hospital, transfusion reactions, serious adverse events, and reduction in SARS-CoV-2 viral load. Exploratory analyses include patients who received CCP containing high titre antibodies. A sample size of 1200 patients gives 80% power to detect a 25% relative risk reduction assuming a 30% baseline risk of intubation or death at 30 days (two-sided test; α = 0.05). An interim analysis and sample size re-estimation will be done by an unblinded independent biostatistician after primary outcome data are available for 50% of the target recruitment (n = 600). DISCUSSION: This trial will determine whether CCP will reduce intubation or death non-intubated adults with COVID-19. The trial will also provide information on the role of and thresholds for SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres and neutralization assays for donor qualification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04348656 . Registered on 16 April 2020.

TOP-Plus Is a Versatile Biosensor Platform for Monitoring SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Durability.

BACKGROUND: Low initial severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody titers dropping to undetectable levels within months after infection have raised concerns about long-term immunity. Both the antibody levels and the avidity of the antibody-antigen interaction should be examined to understand the quality of the antibody response. METHODS: A testing-on-a-probe "plus" panel (TOP-Plus) was developed to include a newly developed avidity assay built into the previously described SARS-CoV-2 TOP assays that measured total antibody (TAb), surrogate neutralizing antibody (SNAb), IgM, and IgG on a versatile biosensor platform. TAb and SNAb levels were compared with avidity in previously infected individuals at 1.3 and 6.2 months after infection in paired samples from 80 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Sera from individuals vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 were also evaluated for antibody avidity. RESULTS: The newly designed avidity assay in this TOP panel correlated well with a reference Bio-Layer Interferometry avidity assay (r = 0.88). The imprecision of the TOP avidity assay was <10%. Although TAb and neutralization activity (by SNAb) decreased between 1.3 and 6.2 months after infection, the antibody avidity increased significantly (P < 0.0001). Antibody avidity in 10 SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated individuals (median: 28 days after vaccination) was comparable to the measured antibody avidity in infected individuals (median: 26 days after infection). CONCLUSIONS: This highly precise and versatile TOP-Plus panel with the ability to measure SARS-CoV-2 TAb, SNAb, IgG, and IgM antibody levels and avidity of individual sera on one sensor can become a valuable asset in monitoring not only patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 but also the status of individuals' COVID-19 vaccination response.

Postconvalescent SARS-CoV-2 IgG and Neutralizing Antibodies are Elevated in Individuals with Poor Metabolic Health.

PURPOSE: Comorbidities making up metabolic syndrome (MetS), such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and chronic cardiovascular disease can lead to increased risk of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) with a higher morbidity and mortality. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are higher in severely or critically ill COVID-19 patients, but studies have not focused on levels in convalescent patients with MetS, which this study aimed to assess. METHODS: This retrospective study focused on adult convalescent outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 positive serology during the COVID-19 pandemic at NewYork Presbyterian/Weill Cornell. Data collected for descriptive and correlative analysis included SARS-COV-2 immunoglobin G (IgG) levels and history of MetS comorbidities from April 17, 2020 to May 20, 2020. Additional data, including SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels, body mass index (BMI), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and lipid levels were collected and analyzed for a second cohort from May 21, 2020 to June 21, 2020. SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies were measured in a subset of the study cohort. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels were significantly higher in convalescent individuals with MetS comorbidities. When adjusted for age, sex, race, and time duration from symptom onset to testing, increased SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels remained significantly associated with obesity (P < 0.0001). SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels were significantly higher in patients with HbA1c ≥6.5% compared to those with HbA1c <5.7% (P = 0.0197) and remained significant on multivariable analysis (P = 0.0104). A positive correlation was noted between BMI and antibody levels [95% confidence interval: 0.37 (0.20-0.52) P < 0.0001]. Neutralizing antibody titers were higher in COVID-19 individuals with BMI ≥ 30 (P = 0.0055). CONCLUSION: Postconvalescent SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralizing antibodies are elevated in obese patients, and a positive correlation exists between BMI and antibody levels.

Association of Age With SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Response.

Importance: Accumulating evidence suggests that children infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are more likely to manifest mild symptoms and are at a lower risk of developing severe respiratory disease compared with adults. It remains unknown how the immune response in children differs from that of adolescents and adults. Objective: To investigate the association of age with the quantity and quality of SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used 31 426 SARS-CoV-2 antibody test results from pediatric and adult patients. Data were collected from a New York City hospital from April 9 to August 31, 2020. The semiquantitative immunoglobin (Ig) G levels were compared between 85 pediatric and 3648 adult patients. Further analysis of SARS-CoV-2 antibody profiles was performed on sera from 126 patients aged 1 to 24 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: SARS-CoV-2 antibody positivity rates and IgG levels were evaluated in patients from a wide range of age groups (1-102 years). SARS-CoV-2 IgG level, total antibody (TAb) level, surrogate neutralizing antibody (SNAb) activity, and antibody binding avidity were compared between children (aged 1-10 years), adolescents (aged 11-18 years), and young adults (aged 19-24 years). Results: Among 31 426 antibody test results (19 797 [63.0%] female patients), with 1194 pediatric patients (mean [SD] age, 11.0 [5.3] years) and 30 232 adult patients (mean [SD] age, 49.2 [17.1] years), the seroprevalence in the pediatric (197 [16.5%; 95% CI, 14.4%-18.7%]) and adult (5630 [18.6%; 95% CI, 18.2%-19.1%]) patient populations was similar. The SARS-CoV-2 IgG level showed a negative correlation with age in the pediatric population (r = -0.45, P < .001) and a moderate but positive correlation with age in adults (r = 0.24, P < .001). Patients aged 19 to 30 years exhibited the lowest IgG levels (eg, aged 25-30 years vs 1-10 years: 99 [44-180] relative fluorescence units [RFU] vs 443 [188-851] RFU). In the subset cohort aged 1 to 24 years, IgG, TAb, SNAb and avidity were negatively correlated with age (eg, IgG: r = -0.51; P < .001). Children exhibited higher median (IQR) IgG levels, TAb levels, and SNAb activity compared with adolescents (eg, IgG levels: 473 [233-656] RFU vs 191 [82-349] RFU; P < .001) and young adults (eg, IgG levels: 473 [233-656] RFU vs 85 [38-150] RFU; P < .001). Adolescents also exhibited higher median (IQR) TAb levels, IgG levels, and SNAb activity than young adults (eg, TAb levels: 961 [290-2074] RFU vs 370 [125-697]; P = .006). In addition, children had higher antibody binding avidity compared with young adults, but the difference was not significant. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this study suggest that SARS-CoV-2 viral specific antibody response profiles are distinct in different age groups. Age-targeted strategies for disease screening and management as well as vaccine development may be warranted.

Testing-on-a-probe biosensors reveal association of early SARS-CoV-2 total antibodies and surrogate neutralizing antibodies with mortality in COVID-19 patients.

The association of mortality with the early humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 infection within the first few days after onset of symptoms (DAOS) has not been thoroughly investigated partly due to a lack of sufficiently sensitive antibody testing methods. Here we report two sensitive and automated testing-on-a-probe (TOP) biosensor assays for SARS-CoV-2 viral specific total antibodies (TAb) and surrogate neutralizing antibodies (SNAb), which are suitable for clinical use. The TOP assays employ an RBD-coated quartz probe using a Cy5-Streptavidin-polysacharide conjugate to improve sensitivity and minimize interference. Disposable cartridges containing pre-dispensed reagents require no liquid manipulation or fluidics during testing. The TOP-TAb assay exhibited higher sensitivity in the 0-7 DAOS window than a widely used FDA-EUA assay. The rapid and automated TOP-SNAb correlated well with two well-established SARS-CoV-2 virus neutralization tests. The clinical utility of the TOP assays was demonstrated by evaluating early antibody responses in 120 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive adult hospitalized patients. Higher TAb and SNAb positivity rates and more robust antibody responses at patient's initial hospital presentation were seen in inpatients who survived COVID-19 than those who died in the hospital. Survival analysis using the Cox Proportional Hazards Model showed that patients who had negative TAb and/or SNAb at initial hospital presentation were at a higher risk of in-hospital mortality. Furthermore, TAb and SNAb levels at presentation were inversely associated with SARS-CoV-2 viral load based on concurrent RT-PCR testing. Overall, the sensitive and automated TAb and SNAb assays allow the detection of early SARS-CoV-2 antibodies which associate with mortality.

Blood component utilization in COVID-19 patients in New York City: Transfusions do not follow the curve.

BACKGROUND: Blood suppliers and transfusion services have worked diligently to maintain an adequate blood supply during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our experience has shown that some COVID-19 inpatients require transfusion support; understanding this need is critical to blood product inventory management. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Hospital-wide and COVID-19 specific inpatient blood product utilization data were collected retrospectively for our network's two tertiary academic medical centers over a 9-week period (March 1, 2020-May 2, 2020), when most inpatients had COVID-19. Utilization data were merged with a COVID-19 patient database to investigate clinical demographic characteristics of transfused COVID-19 inpatients relative to non-transfused ones. RESULTS: Overall, 11 041 COVID-19 patients were admitted and 364 received blood product transfusions for an overall transfusion rate of 3.3%. COVID-19 patients received 1746 blood components in total, the majority of which were red blood cells. COVID-19 patients' weekly transfusion rate increased as the pandemic progressed, possibly reflecting their increased severity of illness. Transfusion was significantly associated with several indicators of severe disease, including mortality, intubation, thrombosis, longer hospital admission, lower hemoglobin and platelet nadirs, and longer prothrombin and activated partial thromboplastin times. As the pandemic progressed, institutional adherence to transfusion guidelines improved for RBC transfusions compared to prior year trends but did not improve for platelets or plasma. CONCLUSION: There is a need to closely monitor the blood product inventory and demand throughout the COVID-19 pandemic as patients' transfusion needs may increase over time. Daily or weekly trending of patients' clinical status and laboratory values may assist blood banks in inventory management.

SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load Predicts Mortality in Patients with and without Cancer Who Are Hospitalized with COVID-19.

Patients with cancer may be at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the role of viral load on this risk is unknown. We measured SARS-CoV-2 viral load using cycle threshold (CT) values from reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction assays applied to nasopharyngeal swab specimens in 100 patients with cancer and 2,914 without cancer who were admitted to three New York City hospitals. Overall, the in-hospital mortality rate was 38.8% among patients with a high viral load, 24.1% among patients with a medium viral load, and 15.3% among patients with a low viral load (p < 0.001). Similar findings were observed in patients with cancer (high, 45.2% mortality; medium, 28.0%; low, 12.1%; p = 0.008). Patients with hematologic malignancies had higher median viral loads (CT = 25.0) than patients without cancer (CT = 29.2; p = 0.0039). SARS-CoV-2 viral load results may offer vital prognostic information for patients with and without cancer who are hospitalized with COVID-19.

Routine Laboratory Blood Tests Predict SARS-CoV-2 Infection Using Machine Learning.

BACKGROUND: Accurate diagnostic strategies to identify SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals rapidly for management of patient care and protection of health care personnel are urgently needed. The predominant diagnostic test is viral RNA detection by RT-PCR from nasopharyngeal swabs specimens, however the results are not promptly obtainable in all patient care locations. Routine laboratory testing, in contrast, is readily available with a turn-around time (TAT) usually within 1-2 hours. METHOD: We developed a machine learning model incorporating patient demographic features (age, sex, race) with 27 routine laboratory tests to predict an individual's SARS-CoV-2 infection status. Laboratory testing results obtained within 2 days before the release of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR result were used to train a gradient boosting decision tree (GBDT) model from 3,356 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tested patients (1,402 positive and 1,954 negative) evaluated at a metropolitan hospital. RESULTS: The model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.854 (95% CI: 0.829-0.878). Application of this model to an independent patient dataset from a separate hospital resulted in a comparable AUC (0.838), validating the generalization of its use. Moreover, our model predicted initial SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positivity in 66% individuals whose RT-PCR result changed from negative to positive within 2 days. CONCLUSION: This model employing routine laboratory test results offers opportunities for early and rapid identification of high-risk SARS-CoV-2 infected patients before their RT-PCR results are available. It may play an important role in assisting the identification of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients in areas where RT-PCR testing is not accessible due to financial or supply constraints.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody characterization in emergency department, hospitalized and convalescent patients by two semi-quantitative immunoassays.

BACKGROUND: In the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, there is an urgent need for comprehensive performance evaluation and clinical utility assessment of serological assays to understand the immune response to SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: IgM/IgG and total antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were measured by a cyclic enhanced fluorescence assay (CEFA) and a microsphere immunoassay (MIA), respectively. Independent performance evaluation included imprecision, reproducibility, specificity and cross-reactivity (CEFA n = 320, MIA n = 364). Clinical utility was evaluated by both methods in 87 patients at initial emergency department visit, 28 during subsequent hospitalizations (106 serial samples), and 145 convalescent patients. Totally 916 patients and 994 samples were evaluated. RESULTS: Agreement of CEFA and MIA was 90.4%-94.5% (Kappa: 0.81-0.89) in 302 samples. CEFA and MIA detected SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in 26.2% and 26.3%, respectively, of ED patients. Detection rates increased over time reaching 100% after 21 days post-symptom onset. Longitudinal antibody kinetic changes by CEFA and MIA measurements correlated well and exhibited three types of seroconversion. Convalescent sera showed a wide range of antibody levels. CONCLUSION: Rigorously validated CEFA and MIA assays are reliable for detecting antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and show promising clinical utility when evaluating immune response in hospitalized and convalescent patients, but are not useful for early screening at patient's initial ED visit.