Differences in COVID-19 testing and adverse outcomes by race, ethnicity, sex, and health system setting in a large diverse US cohort.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic disparities during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic led to differences in COVID-19 testing and adverse outcomes. We examine differences in testing and adverse outcomes by race/ethnicity and sex across a geographically diverse and system-based COVID-19 cohort collaboration. METHODS: Observational study among adults (≥18 years) within six US cohorts from March 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020 using data from electronic health record and patient reporting. Race/ethnicity and sex as risk factors were primary exposures, with health system type (integrated health system, academic health system, or interval cohort) as secondary. Proportions measured SARS-CoV-2 testing and positivity; attributed hospitalization and death related to COVID-19. Relative risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals quantified associations between exposures and main outcomes. RESULTS: 5,958,908 patients were included. Hispanic patients had the highest proportions of SARS-CoV-2 testing (16%) and positivity (18%), while Asian/Pacific Islander patients had the lowest portions tested (11%) and White patients had the lowest positivity rates (5%). Men had a lower likelihood of testing (RR = 0.90 [0.89-0.90]) and a higher positivity risk (RR = 1.16 [1.14-1.18]) compared to women. Black patients were more likely to have COVID-19-related hospitalizations (RR = 1.36 [1.28-1.44]) and death (RR = 1.17 [1.03-1.32]) compared with White patients. Men were more likely to be hospitalized (RR = 1.30 [1.16-1.22]) or die (RR = 1.70 [1.53-1.89]) compared to women. These racial/ethnic and sex differences were reflected in both health system types. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports evidence of disparities by race/ethnicity and sex during the COVID-19 pandemic that persisted even in healthcare settings with reduced barriers to accessing care. Further research is needed to understand and prevent the drivers that resulted in higher burdens of morbidity among certain Black patients and men.

SARS-CoV-2 Testing and Positivity Among Persons With and Without HIV in 6 US Cohorts.

BACKGROUND: It is not definitively known if persons with HIV (PWH) are more likely to be SARS-CoV-2 tested or test positive than persons without HIV (PWoH). We describe SARS-CoV-2 testing and positivity in 6 large geographically and demographically diverse cohorts of PWH and PWoH in the United States. SETTING: The Corona Infectious Virus Epidemiology Team comprises 5 clinical cohorts within a health system (Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA; Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States, Rockville, MD; University of North Carolina Health, Chapel Hill, NC; Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN; and Veterans Aging Cohort Study) and 1 interval cohort (Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study/Women's Interagency HIV Study Combined Cohort Study). METHODS: We calculated the proportion of patients SARS-CoV-2 tested and the test positivity proportion by HIV status from March 1 to December 31, 2020. RESULTS: The cohorts ranged in size from 1675 to 31,304 PWH and 1430 to 3,742,604 PWoH. The proportion of PWH who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 (19.6%-40.5% across sites) was significantly higher than PWoH (14.8%-29.4%) in the clinical cohorts. However, among those tested, the proportion of patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests was comparable by HIV status; the difference in proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positivity ranged from 4.7% lower to 1.4% higher. CONCLUSIONS: Although PWH had higher testing proportions compared with PWoH, we did not find evidence of increased positivity in 6 large, diverse populations across the United States. Ongoing monitoring of testing, positivity, and COVID-19-related outcomes in PWH are needed, given availability, response, and durability of COVID-19 vaccines; emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants; and latest therapeutic options.

Short-term binge drinking, marijuana, and recreational drug use trajectories in a prospective cohort of people living with HIV at the start of COVID-19 mitigation efforts in the United States.

BACKGROUND: At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, HIV experts suggested that an increase in mental health diagnoses and substance use among people living with HIV (PLHIV) may be an unintended consequence of COVID-19 mitigation efforts (e.g., limiting social contact). We evaluated short-term trajectories in binge drinking, marijuana, and recreational drug use in a prospective cohort of PLHIV. METHODS: Data (N = 2121 PLHIV) consist of survey responses on substance use behaviors from two pre-COVID-19 (October 2018-September 2019) and one COVID-19-era (April 2020-September 2020) timepoints within the MACS/WIHS Combined Cohort Study (MWCCS). We conducted group-based trajectory models, triangulated with generalized linear mixed models, to assess changes in binge drinking, daily marijuana use, and recreational drug use at the start of the pandemic. Controlling for age and race/ethnicity, we tested whether trajectories differed by sex and early-pandemic depressive symptoms, loneliness, and social support. RESULTS: Group-based trajectory models yielded two trajectory groups for binge drinking (none vs. any), marijuana (none/infrequent vs. daily), and recreational drug use (none vs. any). Binge drinking and recreational drug use decreased at the beginning of the pandemic. Generalized linear mixed model supported these trends. Consistent with prior research, male sex and having depressive symptoms early pandemic were positively associated with each substance use outcomes. Social support was inversely associated with recreational drug use. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to hypotheses, problematic substance use behaviors decreased from pre-pandemic to the post-pandemic follow-up in our sample of PLHIV. Ongoing surveillance is needed to assess whether this pattern persists as the pandemic continues.

Prevalence of COVID-19-Related Social Disruptions and Effects on Psychosocial Health in a Mixed-Serostatus Cohort of Men and Women.

OBJECTIVES: This study describes prevention behavior and psychosocial health among people living with HIV (PLHIV) and HIV-negative people during the early wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the United States. We assessed differences by HIV status and associations between social disruption and psychosocial health. DESIGN: A cross-sectional telephone/videoconference administered survey of 3411 PLHIV and HIV-negative participants in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study/WIHS Combined Cohort Study (MWCCS). METHODS: An instrument combining new and validated measures was developed to assess COVID-19 prevention efforts, social disruptions (loss of employment, childcare, health insurance, and financial supports), experiences of abuse, and psychosocial health. Interviews were performed between April and June 2020. Associations between social disruptions and psychosocial health were explored using multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for sociodemographics and HIV status. RESULTS: Almost all (97.4%) participants reported COVID-19 prevention behavior; 40.1% participants reported social disruptions, and 34.3% reported health care appointment disruption. Men living with HIV were more likely than HIV-negative men to experience social disruptions (40.6% vs. 32.9%; P < 0.01), whereas HIV-negative women were more likely than women with HIV to experience social disruptions (51.1% vs. 39.8%, P < 0.001). Participants who experienced ≥2 social disruptions had significantly higher odds of depression symptoms [aOR = 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.12 to 1.56], anxiety (aOR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.17 to 2.27), and social support dissatisfaction (aOR = 1.81; 95% CI: 1.26 to 2.60). CONCLUSIONS: This study builds on emerging literature demonstrating the psychosocial health impact related to the COVID-19 pandemic by providing context specific to PLHIV. The ongoing pandemic requires structural and social interventions to decrease social disruption and address psychosocial health needs among the most vulnerable populations.

Priority COVID-19 Vaccination for Patients with Cancer while Vaccine Supply Is Limited.

Published series on COVID-19 support the notion that patients with cancer are a particularly vulnerable population. There is a confluence of risk factors between cancer and COVID-19, and cancer care and treatments increase exposure to the virus and may dampen natural immune responses. The available evidence supports the conclusion that patients with cancer, in particular with hematologic malignancies, should be considered among the very high-risk groups for priority COVID-19 vaccination.

How Did We Get a COVID-19 Vaccine in Less Than 1 Year?

The successful development of COVID-19 vaccines within an unprecedented short time needs to be followed by rapid vaccine uptake, in particular, in high-risk populations such as patients with cancer. It is important for the scientific research community and cancer physicians to convey the knowledge behind the COVID-19 vaccine development and contribute to build the required trust on their use.

Disparities in Cancer Prevention in the COVID-19 Era.

Screening for cancer is a proven and recommended approach to prevent deaths from cancer; screening can locate precursor lesions and/or cancer at early stages when it is potentially curable. Racial and ethnic minorities and other medically underserved populations exhibit lower uptake of cancer screening than nonminorities in the United States. The COVID-19 pandemic, which disproportionately affected minority communities, has curtailed preventive services including cancer screening to preserve personal protective equipment and prevent spread of infection. While there is evidence for a rebound from the pandemic-driven reduction in cancer screening nationally, the return may not be even across all populations, with minority population screening that was already behind becoming further behind as a result of the community ravages from COVID-19. Fear of contracting COVID-19, limited access to safety-net clinics, and personal factors like, financial, employment, and transportation issues are concerns that are intensified in medically underserved communities. Prolonged delays in cancer screening will increase cancer in the overall population from pre-COVID-19 trajectories, and elevate the cancer disparity in minority populations. Knowing the overall benefit of cancer screening versus the risk of acquiring COVID-19, utilizing at-home screening tests and keeping the COVID-19-induced delay in screening to a minimum might slow the growth of disparity.

COVID-19 symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 infection among people living with HIV in the US: the MACS/WIHS combined cohort study.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection among People Living With HIV (PLWH) is not well-described. OBJECTIVE: To study COVID-19 symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 PCR-based swab testing among participants of the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS) and Women's Interagency HIV Study (WIHS). METHODS: A telephone survey was collected April-June 30, 2020. Symptom and testing prevalence were explored. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 positivity. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 3411 participants, including 2078 (61%) PLWH and 1333 HIV-seronegative (SN) participants from across the US. Thirteen percent (n = 441) were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection (13.4% of PLWH vs 12.2% of SN). Among those tested, positivity was higher in PLWH than SN (11.2% vs 6.1%, p = 0.08). Reasons for not being tested included testing not being available (30% of participants) and not knowing where to get tested (16% of participants). Most symptoms reported since January 2020 were similar in PLWH and SN, including headache (23% vs. 24%), myalgias (19% vs 18%), shortness of breath (14% vs 13%), chills (12% vs 10%), fever (6% vs 6%) and loss of taste or smell (6% vs 7%). Among PLWH who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 DNA, the most common symptoms were headache (71%), myalgia (68%), cough (68%) and chills (65%). In multivariable analysis among those tested, the odds of SARS-CoV-2 positivity were higher among PLWH than SN (aOR = 2.22 95%CI = 01.01-4.85, p = 0.046) and among those living with others versus living alone (aOR = 2.95 95%CI = 1.18-7.40). CONCLUSION: Prevalence and type of COVID-19 symptoms were similar in PLWH and SN. SARS-CoV-2 infection may be elevated among PLWH.