Association of renalase with clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Renalase is a secreted flavoprotein with anti-inflammatory and pro-cell survival properties. COVID-19 is associated with disordered inflammation and apoptosis. We hypothesized that blood renalase levels would correspond to severe COVID-19 and survival. In this retrospective cohort study, clinicopathologic data and blood samples were collected from hospitalized COVID-19 subjects (March-June 2020) at a single institution tertiary hospital. Plasma renalase and cytokine levels were measured and clinical data abstracted from health records. Of 3,450 COVID-19 patients, 458 patients were enrolled. Patients were excluded if <18 years, or opted out of research. The primary composite outcome was intubation or death within 180 days. Secondary outcomes included mortality alone, intensive care unit admission, use of vasopressors, and CPR. Enrolled patients had mean age 64 years (SD±17), were 53% males, and 48% non-whites. Mean renalase levels was 14,108·4 ng/ml (SD±8,137 ng/ml). Compared to patients with high renalase, those with low renalase (< 8,922 ng/ml) were more likely to present with hypoxia, increased ICU admission (54% vs. 33%, p < 0.001), and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (10% vs. 4%, p = 0·023). In Cox proportional hazard model, every 1000 ng/ml increase in renalase decreased the risk of death or intubation by 5% (HR 0·95; 95% CI 0·91-0·98) and increased survival alone by 6% (HR 0·95; CI 0·90-0·98), after adjusting for socio-demographics, initial disease severity, comorbidities and inflammation. Patients with high renalase-low IL-6 levels had the best survival compared to other groups (p = 0·04). Renalase was independently associated with reduced intubation and mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Future studies should assess the pathophysiological relevance of renalase in COVID-19 disease.

Longitudinal Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Antinucleocapsid and Antispike-1-RBD Antibody Testing Following PCR-Detected SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 serologic assays are becoming increasingly available and may serve as a diagnostic aid in a multitude of settings relating to past infection status. However, there is limited literature detailing the longitudinal performance of EUA-cleared serologic assays in US populations, particularly in cohorts with a remote history of PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (e.g., >2 months). METHODS: We evaluated the diagnostic sensitivities and specificities of the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 (anti-N) and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (anti-S1-RBD) assays, using 174 residual clinical samples up to 267 days post-PCR diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 154) and a subset of samples obtained prior to the COVID-19 pandemic as negative controls (n = 20). RESULTS: The calculated diagnostic sensitivities for the anti-N and anti-S1-RBD assays were 89% and 93%, respectively. Of the 154 samples in the SARS-CoV-2-positive cohort, there were 6 discrepant results between the anti-N and anti-S1-RBD assays, 5 of which were specimens collected ≥200 days post-PCR positivity and only had detectable levels of anti-S1-RBD antibodies. When only considering specimens collected ≥100 days post-PCR positivity (n = 41), the sensitivities for the anti-N and anti-S1-RBD assays were 85% and 98%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The anti-S1-RBD assay demonstrated superior sensitivity at time points more remote to the PCR detection date, with 6 more specimens from the SARS-CoV-2-positive cohort detected, 5 of which were collected more than 200 days post-PCR positivity. While analytical differences and reagent lot-to-lot variability are possible, this may indicate that, in some instances, anti-S1-RBD antibodies may persist longer in vivo and may be a better target for detecting remote SARS-CoV-2 infection.