Severity Outcomes among Adult Patients with Primary Immunodeficiency and COVID-19 Seen in Emergency Departments, United States, April 2020-August 2021.

Primary immunodeficiencies (PIs) are a group of diseases that increase susceptibility to infectious diseases. Few studies have examined the relationship between PI and COVID-19 outcomes. In this study, we used Premier Healthcare Database, which contains information on inpatient discharges, to analyze COVID-19 outcomes among 853 adult PI and 1,197,430 non-PI patients who visited the emergency department. Hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and death had higher odds in PI patients than in non-PI patients (hospitalization aOR: 2.36, 95% CI: 1.87-2.98; ICU admission aOR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.19-1.96; IMV aOR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.15-1.72; death aOR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.08-1.74), and PI patients spent on average 1.91 more days in the hospital than non-PI patients when adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and chronic conditions associated with severe COVID-19. Of the largest four PI groups, selective deficiency of the immunoglobulin G subclass had the highest hospitalization frequency (75.2%). This large study of United States PI patients provides real-world evidence that PI is a risk factor for adverse COVID-19 outcomes.

Relative Effectiveness of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination and Booster Dose Combinations Among 18.9 Million Vaccinated Adults During the Early Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Omicron Period-United States, 1 January 2022 to 31 March 2022.

BACKGROUND: Small sample sizes have limited prior studies' ability to capture severe COVID-19 outcomes, especially among Ad26.COV2.S vaccine recipients. This study of 18.9 million adults aged ≥18 years assessed relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) in three recipient cohorts: (1) primary Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and Ad26.COV2.S booster (2 Ad26.COV2.S), (2) primary Ad26.COV2.S vaccine and mRNA booster (Ad26.COV2.S+mRNA), (3) two doses of primary mRNA vaccine and mRNA booster (3 mRNA). METHODS: We analyzed two de-identified datasets linked using privacy-preserving record linkage (PPRL): insurance claims and retail pharmacy COVID-19 vaccination data. We assessed the presence of COVID-19 diagnosis during January 1-March 31, 2022 in: (1) any claim, (2) outpatient claim, (3) emergency department (ED) claim, (4) inpatient claim, and (5) inpatient claim with intensive care unit (ICU) admission. rVE for each outcome comparing three recipient cohorts (reference: two Ad26.COV2.S doses) was estimated from adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Compared with two Ad26.COV2.S doses, Ad26.COV2.S+mRNA and three mRNA doses were more effective against all COVID-19 outcomes, including 57% (95% CI: 52-62) and 62% (95% CI: 58-65) rVE against an ED visit; 44% (95% CI: 34-52) and 54% (95% CI: 48-59) rVE against hospitalization; and 48% (95% CI: 22-66) and 66% (95% CI: 53-75) rVE against ICU admission, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that Ad26.COV2.S + mRNA doses were as good as three doses of mRNA, and better than two doses of Ad26.COV2.S. Vaccination continues to be an important preventive measure for reducing the public health impact of COVID-19.

Use of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibody Tests by US Infectious Disease Physicians: Results of an Emerging Infections Network Survey, March 2022.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody tests have had limited recommended clinical application during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. To inform clinical practice, an understanding is needed of current perspectives of United States-based infectious disease (ID) physicians on the use, interpretation, and need for SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests. Methods: In March 2022, members of the Emerging Infections Network (EIN), a national network of practicing ID physicians, were surveyed on types of SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays ordered, interpretation of test results, and clinical scenarios for which antibody tests were considered. Results: Of 1867 active EIN members, 747 (40%) responded. Among the 583 who managed or consulted on COVID-19 patients, a majority (434/583 [75%]) had ordered SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests and were comfortable interpreting positive (452/578 [78%]) and negative (405/562 [72%]) results. Antibody tests were used for diagnosing post-COVID-19 conditions (61%), identifying prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (60%), and differentiating prior infection and response to COVID-19 vaccination (37%). Less than a third of respondents had used antibody tests to assess need for additional vaccines or risk stratification. Lack of sufficient evidence for use and nonstandardized assays were among the most common barriers for ordering tests. Respondents indicated that statements from professional societies and government agencies would influence their decision to order SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for clinical decision making. Conclusions: Practicing ID physicians are using SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests, and there is an unmet need for clarifying the appropriate use of these tests in clinical practice. Professional societies and US government agencies can support clinicians in the community through the creation of appropriate guidance.

Tracking COVID-19 in the United States With Surveillance of Aggregate Cases and Deaths.

Early during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) leveraged an existing surveillance system infrastructure to monitor COVID-19 cases and deaths in the United States. Given the time needed to report individual-level (also called line-level) COVID-19 case and death data containing detailed information from individual case reports, CDC designed and implemented a new aggregate case surveillance system to inform emergency response decisions more efficiently, with timelier indicators of emerging areas of concern. We describe the processes implemented by CDC to operationalize this novel, multifaceted aggregate surveillance system for collecting COVID-19 case and death data to track the spread and impact of the SARS-CoV-2 virus at national, state, and county levels. We also review the processes established to acquire, process, and validate the aggregate number of cases and deaths due to COVID-19 in the United States at the county and jurisdiction levels during the pandemic. These processes include time-saving tools and strategies implemented to collect and validate authoritative COVID-19 case and death data from jurisdictions, such as web scraping to automate data collection and algorithms to identify and correct data anomalies. This topical review highlights the need to prepare for future emergencies, such as novel disease outbreaks, by having an event-agnostic aggregate surveillance system infrastructure in place to supplement line-level case reporting for near-real-time situational awareness and timely data.

Pediatric Infection-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence Increases and Seroprevalence by Type of Clinical Care-September 2021-February 2022.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Trends in estimates of US pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced seroprevalence from commercial laboratory specimens may overrepresent children with frequent healthcare needs. We examined seroprevalence trends and compared seroprevalence estimates by testing type and diagnostic coding. METHODS: Cross-sectional convenience samples of residual sera between September 2021 and February 2022 from 52 U.S. jurisdictions were assayed for infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies; monthly seroprevalence estimates were calculated by age group. Multivariate logistic analyses compared seroprevalence estimates for specimens associated with ICD-10 codes and laboratory orders indicating well-child care with estimates for other pediatric specimens. RESULTS: Infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence increased in each age group; from 30% to 68% (1-4 years), 38% to 77% (5-11 years), and 40% to 74% (12-17 years). On multivariate analysis, patients with well-child ICD-10 codes were seropositive more often than other patients aged 1-17 years (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.07); children aged 9-11 years receiving standard lipid screening were seropositive more often than those receiving other laboratory tests (1.05; 1.02-1.08). CONCLUSIONS: Infection-induced seroprevalence more than doubled among children under 12 between September 2021 and February 2022, and increased 85% in adolescents. Differences in seroprevalence by care type did not substantially impact US pediatric seroprevalence estimates.

Estimated SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence trends and relationship to reported case prevalence from a repeated, cross-sectional study in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, United States—October 25, 2020–February 26, 2022

Background Sero-surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can reveal trends and differences in subgroups and capture undetected or unreported infections that are not included in case-based surveillance systems. Methods Cross-sectional, convenience samples of remnant sera from clinical laboratories from 51 U.S. jurisdictions were assayed for infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies biweekly from October 25, 2020, to July 11, 2021, and monthly from September 6, 2021, to February 26, 2022. Test results were analyzed for trends in infection-induced, nucleocapsid-protein seroprevalence using mixed effects models that adjusted for demographic variables and assay type. Findings Analyses of 1,469,792 serum specimens revealed U.S. infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence increased from 8.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 7.9%–8.1%) in November 2020 to 58.2% (CI: 57.4%–58.9%) in February 2022. The U.S. ratio of the change in estimated seroprevalence to the change in reported case prevalence was 2.8 (CI: 2.8–2.9) during winter 2020–2021, 2.3 (CI: 2.0–2.5) during summer 2021, and 3.1 (CI: 3.0–3.3) during winter 2021–2022. Change in seroprevalence to change in case prevalence ratios ranged from 2.6 (CI: 2.3–2.8) to 3.5 (CI: 3.3–3.7) by region in winter 2021–2022. Interpretation Ratios of the change in seroprevalence to the change in case prevalence suggest a high proportion of infections were not detected by case-based surveillance during periods of increased transmission. The largest increases in the seroprevalence to case prevalence ratios coincided with the spread of the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant and with increased accessibility of home testing. Ratios varied by region and season with the highest ratios in the midwestern and southern United States during winter 2021–2022. Our results demonstrate that reported case counts did not fully capture differing underlying infection rates and demonstrate the value of sero-surveillance in understanding the full burden of infection. Levels of infection-induced antibody seroprevalence, particularly spikes during periods of increased transmission, are important to contextualize vaccine effectiveness data as the susceptibility to infection of the U.S. population changes. Funding This work was supported by the 10.13039/100000030Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

Estimated SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence trends and relationship to reported case prevalence from a repeated, cross-sectional study in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, United States-October 25, 2020-February 26, 2022.

Background: Sero-surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can reveal trends and differences in subgroups and capture undetected or unreported infections that are not included in case-based surveillance systems. Methods: Cross-sectional, convenience samples of remnant sera from clinical laboratories from 51 U.S. jurisdictions were assayed for infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies biweekly from October 25, 2020, to July 11, 2021, and monthly from September 6, 2021, to February 26, 2022. Test results were analyzed for trends in infection-induced, nucleocapsid-protein seroprevalence using mixed effects models that adjusted for demographic variables and assay type. Findings: Analyses of 1,469,792 serum specimens revealed U.S. infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence increased from 8.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 7.9%-8.1%) in November 2020 to 58.2% (CI: 57.4%-58.9%) in February 2022. The U.S. ratio of the change in estimated seroprevalence to the change in reported case prevalence was 2.8 (CI: 2.8-2.9) during winter 2020-2021, 2.3 (CI: 2.0-2.5) during summer 2021, and 3.1 (CI: 3.0-3.3) during winter 2021-2022. Change in seroprevalence to change in case prevalence ratios ranged from 2.6 (CI: 2.3-2.8) to 3.5 (CI: 3.3-3.7) by region in winter 2021-2022. Interpretation: Ratios of the change in seroprevalence to the change in case prevalence suggest a high proportion of infections were not detected by case-based surveillance during periods of increased transmission. The largest increases in the seroprevalence to case prevalence ratios coincided with the spread of the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant and with increased accessibility of home testing. Ratios varied by region and season with the highest ratios in the midwestern and southern United States during winter 2021-2022. Our results demonstrate that reported case counts did not fully capture differing underlying infection rates and demonstrate the value of sero-surveillance in understanding the full burden of infection. Levels of infection-induced antibody seroprevalence, particularly spikes during periods of increased transmission, are important to contextualize vaccine effectiveness data as the susceptibility to infection of the U.S. population changes. Funding: This work was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Outpatient Treatment of COVID-19 - United States, January-July 2022.

In December 2021 and early 2022, four medications received emergency use authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration for outpatient treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in patients who are at high risk for progressing to severe disease; these included nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) and molnupiravir (Lagevrio) (both oral antivirals), expanded use of remdesivir (Veklury; an intraveneous antiviral), and bebtelovimab (a monoclonal antibody [mAb]).* Reports have documented disparities in mAb treatment by race and ethnicity (1) and in oral antiviral treatment by zip code-level social vulnerability (2); however, limited data are available on racial and ethnic disparities in oral antiviral treatment.† Using electronic health record (EHR) data from 692,570 COVID-19 patients aged ≥20 years who sought medical care during January-July 2022, treatment with Paxlovid, Lagevrio, Veklury, and mAbs was assessed by race and ethnicity, overall and among high-risk patient groups. During 2022, the percentage of COVID-19 patients seeking medical care who were treated with Paxlovid increased from 0.6% in January to 20.2% in April and 34.3% in July; the other three medications were used less frequently (0.7%-5.0% in July). During April-July 2022, when Paxlovid use was highest, compared with White patients, Black or African American (Black) patients were prescribed Paxlovid 35.8% less often, multiple or other race patients 24.9% less often, American Indian or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (AIAN/NHOPI) patients 23.1% less often, and Asian patients 19.4% less often; Hispanic patients were prescribed Paxlovid 29.9% less often than non-Hispanic patients. Racial and ethnic disparities in Paxlovid treatment were generally somewhat higher among patients at high risk for severe COVID-19, including those aged ≥50 years and those who were immunocompromised. The expansion of programs focused on equitable awareness of and access to outpatient COVID-19 treatments, as well as COVID-19 vaccination, including updated bivalent booster doses, can help protect persons most at risk for severe illness and facilitate equitable health outcomes.

Association of Trends in Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Seroprevalence and State-Issued Nonpharmaceutical Interventions: United States, 1 August 2020 to 30 March 2021.

BACKGROUND: We assess if state-issued nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are associated with reduced rates of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection as measured through anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) seroprevalence, a proxy for cumulative prior infection that distinguishes seropositivity from vaccination. METHODS: Monthly anti-N seroprevalence during 1 August 2020 to 30 March 2021 was estimated using a nationwide blood donor serosurvey. Using multivariable logistic regression models, we measured the association of seropositivity and state-issued, county-specific NPIs for mask mandates, gathering bans, and bar closures. RESULTS: Compared with individuals living in a county with all three NPIs in place, the odds of having anti-N antibodies were 2.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0-2.3) times higher for people living in a county that did not have any of the 3 NPIs, 1.6 (95% CI: 1.5-1.7) times higher for people living in a county that only had a mask mandate and gathering ban policy, and 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3-1.5) times higher for people living in a county that had only a mask mandate. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with studies assessing NPIs relative to COVID-19 incidence and mortality, the presence of NPIs were associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence indicating lower rates of cumulative infections. Multiple NPIs are likely more effective than single NPIs.

Mortality Risk Among Patients Hospitalized Primarily for COVID-19 During the Omicron and Delta Variant Pandemic Periods - United States, April 2020-June 2022.

The risk for COVID-19-associated mortality increases with age, disability, and underlying medical conditions (1). Early in the emergence of the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients was lower than that during previous pandemic peaks (2-5), and some health authorities reported that a substantial proportion of COVID-19 hospitalizations were not primarily for COVID-19-related illness,* which might account for the lower mortality among hospitalized patients. Using a large hospital administrative database, CDC assessed in-hospital mortality risk overall and by demographic and clinical characteristics during the Delta (July-October 2021), early Omicron (January-March 2022), and later Omicron (April-June 2022) variant periods† among patients hospitalized primarily for COVID-19. Model-estimated adjusted mortality risk differences (aMRDs) (measures of absolute risk) and adjusted mortality risk ratios (aMRRs) (measures of relative risk) for in-hospital death were calculated comparing the early and later Omicron periods with the Delta period. Crude mortality risk (cMR) (deaths per 100 patients hospitalized primarily for COVID-19) was lower during the early Omicron (13.1) and later Omicron (4.9) periods than during the Delta (15.1) period (p<0.001). Adjusted mortality risk was lower during the Omicron periods than during the Delta period for patients aged ≥18 years, males and females, all racial and ethnic groups, persons with and without disabilities, and those with one or more underlying medical conditions, as indicated by significant aMRDs and aMRRs (p<0.05). During the later Omicron period, 81.9% of in-hospital deaths occurred among adults aged ≥65 years and 73.4% occurred among persons with three or more underlying medical conditions. Vaccination, early treatment, and appropriate nonpharmaceutical interventions remain important public health priorities for preventing COVID-19 deaths, especially among persons most at risk.

Post-COVID-19 Symptoms and Conditions Among Children and Adolescents - United States, March 1, 2020-January 31, 2022.

Post-COVID-19 (post-COVID) symptoms and conditions* are new, recurring, or ongoing health problems that occur 4 or more weeks after infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19). Previous studies have characterized and estimated the incidence of post-COVID conditions among adults (1,2), but data among children and adolescents are limited (3-8). Using a large medical claims database, CDC assessed nine potential post-COVID signs and symptoms (symptoms) and 15 potential post-COVID conditions among 781,419 U.S. children and adolescents aged 0-17 years with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (patients with COVID-19) compared with 2,344,257 U.S. children and adolescents without recognized COVID-19 (patients without COVID-19) during March 1, 2020-January 31, 2022. The analysis identified several symptoms and conditions with elevated adjusted hazard ratios among patients with COVID-19 (compared with those without). The highest hazard ratios were recorded for acute pulmonary embolism (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 2.01), myocarditis and cardiomyopathy (1.99), venous thromboembolic event (1.87), acute and unspecified renal failure (1.32), and type 1 diabetes (1.23), all of which were rare or uncommon in this study population. Conversely, symptoms and conditions that were most common in this study population had lower aHRs (near or below 1.0). Patients with COVID-19 were less likely than were patients without to experience respiratory signs and symptoms, symptoms of mental conditions, muscle disorders, neurological conditions, anxiety and fear-related disorders, mood disorders, and sleeping disorders. COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination for all eligible children and adolescents, are critical to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent illness, including post-COVID symptoms and conditions (9).

SARS-CoV-2 Convalescent Sera Binding and Neutralizing Antibody Concentrations Compared with COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Estimates against Symptomatic Infection.

Previous COVID-19 vaccine efficacy (VE) studies have estimated neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations that correlate with protection from symptomatic infection; how these estimates compare to those generated in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is unclear. Here, we assessed quantitative neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations using standardized SARS-CoV-2 assays on 3,067 serum specimens collected during 27 July 2020 to 27 August 2020 from COVID-19-unvaccinated persons with detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations were severalfold lower in the unvaccinated study population compared to published concentrations at 28 days postvaccination. In this convenience sample, ~88% of neutralizing and ~63 to 86% of binding antibody concentrations met or exceeded concentrations associated with 70% COVID-19 VE against symptomatic infection; ~30% of neutralizing and 1 to 14% of binding antibody concentrations met or exceeded concentrations associated with 90% COVID-19 VE. Our study not only supports observations of infection-induced immunity and current recommendations for vaccination postinfection to maximize protection against COVID-19, but also provides a large data set of pre-COVID-19 vaccination anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations that will serve as an important comparator in the current setting of vaccine-induced and hybrid immunity. As new SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge and displace circulating virus strains, we recommend that standardized binding antibody assays that include spike protein-based antigens be utilized to estimate antibody concentrations correlated with protection from COVID-19. These estimates will be helpful in informing public health guidance, such as the need for additional COVID-19 vaccine booster doses to prevent symptomatic infection. IMPORTANCE Although COVID-19 vaccine efficacy (VE) studies have estimated antibody concentrations that correlate with protection from COVID-19, how these estimates compare to those generated in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is unclear. We assessed quantitative neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations using standardized assays on serum specimens collected from COVID-19-unvaccinated persons with detectable antibodies. We found that most unvaccinated persons with qualitative antibody evidence of prior infection had quantitative antibody concentrations that met or exceeded concentrations associated with 70% VE against COVID-19. However, only a small proportion had antibody concentrations that met or exceeded concentrations associated with 90% VE, suggesting that persons with prior COVID-19 would benefit from vaccination to maximize protective antibody concentrations against COVID-19.

Social Vulnerability and Rurality Associated With Higher Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection-Induced Seroprevalence: A Nationwide Blood Donor Study-United States, July 2020-June 2021.

BACKGROUND: Most studies on health disparities during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic focused on reported cases and deaths, which are influenced by testing availability and access to care. This study aimed to examine severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody seroprevalence in the United States and its associations with race/ethnicity, rurality, and social vulnerability over time. METHODS: This repeated cross-sectional study used data from blood donations in 50 states and Washington, DC, from July 2020 through June 2021. Donor zip codes were matched to counties and linked with Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and urban-rural classification. SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalences induced by infection and infection-vaccination combined were estimated. Association of infection-induced seropositivity with demographics, rurality, SVI, and its 4 themes were quantified using multivariate regression models. RESULTS: Weighted seroprevalence differed significantly by race/ethnicity and rurality, and increased with increasing social vulnerability. During the study period, infection-induced seroprevalence increased from 1.6% to 27.2% and 3.7% to 20.0% in rural and urban counties, respectively, while rural counties had lower combined infection- and vaccination-induced seroprevalence (80.0% vs 88.1%) in June 2021. Infection-induced seropositivity was associated with being Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and living in rural or more socially vulnerable counties, after adjusting for demographic and geographic covariates. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrated increasing SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the United States across all geographic, demographic, and social sectors. The study illustrated disparities by race-ethnicity, rurality, and social vulnerability. The findings identified areas for targeted vaccination strategies and can inform efforts to reduce inequities and prepare for future outbreaks.

Seroprevalence of Infection-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies - United States, September 2021-February 2022.

In December 2021, the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, became predominant in the United States. Subsequently, national COVID-19 case rates peaked at their highest recorded levels.* Traditional methods of disease surveillance do not capture all COVID-19 cases because some are asymptomatic, not diagnosed, or not reported; therefore, the proportion of the population with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (i.e., seroprevalence) can improve understanding of population-level incidence of COVID-19. This report uses data from CDC's national commercial laboratory seroprevalence study and the 2018 American Community Survey to examine U.S. trends in infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence during September 2021-February 2022, by age group.

Association Between Caseload Surge and COVID-19 Survival in 558 U.S. Hospitals, March to August 2020.

BACKGROUND: Several U.S. hospitals had surges in COVID-19 caseload, but their effect on COVID-19 survival rates remains unclear, especially independent of temporal changes in survival. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between hospitals' severity-weighted COVID-19 caseload and COVID-19 mortality risk and identify effect modifiers of this relationship. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04688372). SETTING: 558 U.S. hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database. PARTICIPANTS: Adult COVID-19-coded inpatients admitted from March to August 2020 with discharge dispositions by October 2020. MEASUREMENTS: Each hospital-month was stratified by percentile rank on a surge index (a severity-weighted measure of COVID-19 caseload relative to pre-COVID-19 bed capacity). The effect of surge index on risk-adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of in-hospital mortality or discharge to hospice was calculated using hierarchical modeling; interaction by surge attributes was assessed. RESULTS: Of 144 116 inpatients with COVID-19 at 558 U.S. hospitals, 78 144 (54.2%) were admitted to hospitals in the top surge index decile. Overall, 25 344 (17.6%) died; crude COVID-19 mortality decreased over time across all surge index strata. However, compared with nonsurging (<50th surge index percentile) hospital-months, aORs in the 50th to 75th, 75th to 90th, 90th to 95th, 95th to 99th, and greater than 99th percentiles were 1.11 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.23), 1.24 (CI, 1.12 to 1.38), 1.42 (CI, 1.27 to 1.60), 1.59 (CI, 1.41 to 1.80), and 2.00 (CI, 1.69 to 2.38), respectively. The surge index was associated with mortality across ward, intensive care unit, and intubated patients. The surge-mortality relationship was stronger in June to August than in March to May (slope difference, 0.10 [CI, 0.033 to 0.16]) despite greater corticosteroid use and more judicious intubation during later and higher-surging months. Nearly 1 in 4 COVID-19 deaths (5868 [CI, 3584 to 8171]; 23.2%) was potentially attributable to hospitals strained by surging caseload. LIMITATION: Residual confounding. CONCLUSION: Despite improvements in COVID-19 survival between March and August 2020, surges in hospital COVID-19 caseload remained detrimental to survival and potentially eroded benefits gained from emerging treatments. Bolstering preventive measures and supporting surging hospitals will save many lives. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the National Cancer Institute.

Cardiac Complications After SARS-CoV-2 Infection and mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination - PCORnet, United States, January 2021-January 2022.

Cardiac complications, particularly myocarditis and pericarditis, have been associated with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infection (1-3) and mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (2-5). Multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS) is a rare but serious complication of SARS-CoV-2 infection with frequent cardiac involvement (6). Using electronic health record (EHR) data from 40 U.S. health care systems during January 1, 2021-January 31, 2022, investigators calculated incidences of cardiac outcomes (myocarditis; myocarditis or pericarditis; and myocarditis, pericarditis, or MIS) among persons aged ≥5 years who had SARS-CoV-2 infection, stratified by sex (male or female) and age group (5-11, 12-17, 18-29, and ≥30 years). Incidences of myocarditis and myocarditis or pericarditis were calculated after first, second, unspecified, or any (first, second, or unspecified) dose of mRNA COVID-19 (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) vaccines, stratified by sex and age group. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated to compare risk for cardiac outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection to that after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. The incidence of cardiac outcomes after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was highest for males aged 12-17 years after the second vaccine dose; however, within this demographic group, the risk for cardiac outcomes was 1.8-5.6 times as high after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after the second vaccine dose. The risk for cardiac outcomes was likewise significantly higher after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after first, second, or unspecified dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination for all other groups by sex and age (RR 2.2-115.2). These findings support continued use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among all eligible persons aged ≥5 years.

Prevalence of Select New Symptoms and Conditions Among Persons Aged Younger Than 20 Years and 20 Years or Older at 31 to 150 Days After Testing Positive or Negative for SARS-CoV-2.

Importance: New symptoms and conditions can develop following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Whether they occur more frequently among persons with SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with those without is unclear. Objective: To compare the prevalence of new diagnoses of select symptoms and conditions between 31 and 150 days after testing among persons who tested positive vs negative for SARS-CoV-2. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed aggregated electronic health record data from 40 health care systems, including 338 024 persons younger than 20 years and 1 790 886 persons aged 20 years or older who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 during March to December 2020 and who had medical encounters between 31 and 150 days after testing. Main Outcomes and Measures: International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to capture new symptoms and conditions that were recorded 31 to 150 days after a SARS-CoV-2 test but absent in the 18 months to 7 days prior to testing. The prevalence of new symptoms and conditions was compared between persons with positive and negative SARS-CoV-2 tests stratified by age (20 years or older and young than 20 years) and care setting (nonhospitalized, hospitalized, or hospitalized and ventilated). Results: A total of 168 701 persons aged 20 years or older and 26 665 younger than 20 years tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 1 622 185 persons aged 20 years or older and 311 359 younger than 20 years tested negative. Shortness of breath was more common among persons with a positive vs negative test result among hospitalized patients (≥20 years: prevalence ratio [PR], 1.89 [99% CI, 1.79-2.01]; <20 years: PR, 1.72 [99% CI, 1.17-2.51]). Shortness of breath was also more common among nonhospitalized patients aged 20 years or older with a positive vs negative test result (PR, 1.09 [99% CI, 1.05-1.13]). Among hospitalized persons aged 20 years or older, the prevalence of new fatigue (PR, 1.35 [99% CI, 1.27-1.44]) and type 2 diabetes (PR, 2.03 [99% CI, 1.87-2.19]) was higher among those with a positive vs a negative test result. Among hospitalized persons younger than 20 years, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes (PR, 2.14 [99% CI, 1.13-4.06]) was higher among those with a positive vs a negative test result; however, the prevalence difference was less than 1%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, among persons hospitalized after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, diagnoses of certain symptoms and conditions were higher than among those with a negative test result. Health care professionals should be aware of symptoms and conditions that may develop after SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly among those hospitalized after diagnosis.

Estimation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalization Costs From a Large Electronic Administrative Discharge Database, March 2020-July 2021.

BACKGROUND: Information on the costs of inpatient care for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is very limited. This study estimates the per-patient cost of inpatient care for adult COVID-19 patients seen at >800 US hospitals. METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with ≥1 hospitalization during March 2020-July 2021 with a COVID-19 diagnosis code in a large electronic administrative discharge database were included. We used validated costs when reported; otherwise, costs were calculated using charges multiplied by cost-to-charge ratios. We estimated costs of inpatient care per patient overall and by severity indicator, age, sex, underlying medical conditions, and acute complications of COVID-19 using a generalized linear model with log link function and gamma distribution. RESULTS: The overall cost among 654673 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 was $16.2 billion. Estimated per-patient hospitalization cost was $24 826. Among surviving patients, estimated per-patient cost was $13 090 without intensive care unit (ICU) admission or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), $21 222 with ICU admission alone, and $59 742 with IMV. Estimated per-patient cost among patients who died was $27 017. Adjusted cost differential was higher among patients with certain underlying conditions (eg, chronic kidney disease [$12 391], liver disease [$8878], cerebrovascular disease [$7267], and obesity [$5933]) and acute complications (eg, acute respiratory distress syndrome [$43 912], pneumothorax [$25 240], and intracranial hemorrhage [$22 280]). CONCLUSIONS: The cost of inpatient care for COVID-19 patients was substantial through the first 17 months of the pandemic. These estimates can be used to inform policy makers and planners and cost-effectiveness analysis of public health interventions to alleviate the burden of COVID-19.

Risk for Newly Diagnosed Diabetes >30 Days After SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Persons Aged <18 Years - United States, March 1, 2020-June 28, 2021.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected people with diabetes, who are at increased risk of severe COVID-19.* Increases in the number of type 1 diabetes diagnoses (1,2) and increased frequency and severity of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) at the time of diabetes diagnosis (3) have been reported in European pediatric populations during the COVID-19 pandemic. In adults, diabetes might be a long-term consequence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (4-7). To evaluate the risk for any new diabetes diagnosis (type 1, type 2, or other diabetes) >30 days† after acute infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), CDC estimated diabetes incidence among patients aged <18 years (patients) with diagnosed COVID-19 from retrospective cohorts constructed using IQVIA health care claims data from March 1, 2020, through February 26, 2021, and compared it with incidence among patients matched by age and sex 1) who did not receive a COVID-19 diagnosis during the pandemic, or 2) who received a prepandemic non-COVID-19 acute respiratory infection (ARI) diagnosis. Analyses were replicated using a second data source (HealthVerity; March 1, 2020-June 28, 2021) that included patients who had any health care encounter possibly related to COVID-19. Among these patients, diabetes incidence was significantly higher among those with COVID-19 than among those 1) without COVID-19 in both databases (IQVIA: hazard ratio [HR] = 2.66, 95% CI = 1.98-3.56; HealthVerity: HR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.20-1.44) and 2) with non-COVID-19 ARI in the prepandemic period (IQVIA, HR = 2.16, 95% CI = 1.64-2.86). The observed increased risk for diabetes among persons aged <18 years who had COVID-19 highlights the importance of COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination, for all eligible persons in this age group,§ in addition to chronic disease prevention and management. The mechanism of how SARS-CoV-2 might lead to incident diabetes is likely complex and could differ by type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Monitoring for long-term consequences, including signs of new diabetes, following SARS-CoV-2 infection is important in this age group.