ABSTRACT
Background COVID-19 is associated with long-term pulmonary symptoms and may result in chronic pulmonary impairment. The optimal procedures to prevent, identify, monitor, and treat these pulmonary sequelae are elusive. Research question To characterize the kinetics of pulmonary recovery, risk factors and constellations of clinical features linked to persisting radiological lung findings after COVID-19. Study design and methods A longitudinal, prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study including COVID-19 patients (n = 108). Longitudinal pulmonary imaging and functional readouts, symptom prevalence, clinical and laboratory parameters were collected during acute COVID-19 and at 60-, 100- and 180-days follow-up visits. Recovery kinetics and risk factors were investigated by logistic regression. Classification of clinical features and study participants was accomplished by k-means clustering, the k-nearest neighbors (kNN), and naive Bayes algorithms. Results At the six-month follow-up, 51.9% of participants reported persistent symptoms with physical performance impairment (27.8%) and dyspnea (24.1%) being the most frequent. Structural lung abnormalities were still present in 45.4% of the collective, ranging from 12% in the outpatients to 78% in the subjects treated at the ICU during acute infection. The strongest risk factors of persisting lung findings were elevated interleukin-6 (IL6) and C-reactive protein (CRP) during recovery and hospitalization during acute COVID-19. Clustering analysis revealed association of the lung lesions with increased anti-S1/S2 antibody, IL6, CRP, and D-dimer levels at the early follow-up suggesting non-resolving inflammation as a mechanism of the perturbed recovery. Finally, we demonstrate the robustness of risk class assignment and prediction of individual risk of delayed lung recovery employing clustering and machine learning algorithms. Interpretation Severity of acute infection, and systemic inflammation is strongly linked to persistent post-COVID-19 lung abnormality. Automated screening of multi-parameter health record data may assist the identification of patients at risk of delayed pulmonary recovery and optimize COVID-19 follow-up management. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04416100
Subject(s)
Lung Diseases , Dyspnea , White Coat Hypertension , COVID-19 , InflammationABSTRACT
ObjectivesSevere Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections cause Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and induce a specific antibody response. Serological assays detecting IgG against the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike (S) protein are useful to monitor the immune response after infection or vaccination. The objective of our study was to evaluate the clinical performance of the Siemens SARS-CoV-2 IgG (sCOVG) assay. MethodsSensitivity and specificity of the Siemens sCOVG test were evaluated on 178 patients with SARS-CoV-2-infection and 160 pre-pandemic samples in comparison with its predecessor test COV2G. Furthermore, correlation with virus neutralization titers was investigated on 134 samples of convalescent COVID-19 patients. ResultsSpecificity of the sCOVG test was 99.4% and sensitivity was 90.5% (COV2G assay 78.7%; p<0.0001). S1-RBD antibody levels showed a good correlation with virus neutralization titers (r=0.843; p<0.0001) and an overall qualitative agreement of 98.5%. Finally, median S1-RBD IgG levels increase with age and were significantly higher in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (median levels general ward: 25.7 U/ml; intensive care: 59.5 U/ml) than in outpatients (3.8 U/ml; p<0.0001). ConclusionsPerformance characteristics of the sCOVG assay have been improved compared to the predecessor test COV2G. Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 S1-RBD IgG levels could be used as a surrogate for virus neutralization capacity. Further harmonization of antibody quantification might assist to monitor the humoral immune response after COVID-19 disease or vaccination.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Antibody tests are essential tools to investigate humoral immunity following SARS-CoV-2 infection. While first-generation antibody tests have primarily provided qualitative results with low specificity, accurate seroprevalence studies and tracking of antibody levels over time require highly specific, sensitive and quantitative test setups. Here, we describe two quantitative ELISA antibody tests based on the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain and the nucleocapsid protein. Comparative expression in bacterial, insect, mammalian and plant-based platforms enabled the identification of new antigen designs with superior quality and high suitability as diagnostic reagents. Both tests scored excellently in clinical validations with multi-centric specificity and sensitivity cohorts and showed unprecedented correlation with SARS-CoV-2 neutralization titers. Orthogonal testing increased assay specificity to 99.8%, thereby enabling robust serodiagnosis in low-prevalence settings. The inclusion of a calibrator permits accurate quantitative monitoring of antibody concentrations in samples collected at different time points during the acute and convalescent phase of COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
ObjectivesSerological tests detect antibodies against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the ongoing coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Independent external clinical validation of performance characteristics is of paramount importance. MethodsFour fully automated assays, Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2, Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG, Siemens SARS-CoV-2 total (COV2T) and SARS-CoV-2 IgG (COV2G) were evaluated using 350 pre-pandemic samples and 700 samples from 245 COVID-19 patients (158 hospitalized, 87 outpatients). ResultsAll tests showed very high diagnostic specificity. Sensitivities in samples collected at least 14 days after disease onset were slightly lower than manufacturers claims for Roche (93.04%), Abbott (90.83%), and Siemens COV2T (90.26%), and distinctly lower for Siemens COV2G (78.76%). Concordantly negative results were enriched for immunocompromised patients. ROC curve analyses suggest a lowering of the cut-off index for the Siemens COV2G assay. Finally, the combination of two anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays is feasible when considering borderline reactive results. ConclusionsThorough on-site evaluation of commercially available serologic tests for detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 remains imperative for laboratories. The potentially impaired sensitivity of the Siemens COV2G necessitates a switch to the companys newly filed SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay (sCOVG) for follow-up studies. A combination of tests could be considered in clinical practice.