Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Early 2020 among Rhode Island Pregnancies.

OBJECTIVE: Limited data are available on the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays and data collected during pregnancy vary widely. The objective of this study was to estimate the seroprevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in pregnant individuals in Rhode Island and to evaluate whether the prevalence differed by month of collection, age, county of residence, or economic status as estimated by zip code. METHODS: Pre-pandemic (2019) and early pandemic (2020) serum samples, collected for prenatal screening between 15 and 22 weeks of gestation, were analyzed utilizing two SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) automated assays that targeted the viral nucleocapsid (anti-N) or spike (anti-S) receptor binding domain proteins. RESULTS: Among 756 pre-pandemic samples, one anti-S IgG and 13 anti-N IgG were identified. No samples were positive for both. Among 787 pandemic specimens, 16 (2.03%) were positive for both anti-N IgG and anti-S IgG. When stratified by month of collection, there was a significant increase in seropositivity rate (p=0.023). Seropositivity rates were associated with lower income levels (p=0.08) but this was not statistically significant. No trend by maternal age was found (p=0.70). CONCLUSIONS: When a positive result was defined as both anti-N IgG and anti-S IgG, false positives were unlikely. Based on this methodology, serology could be utilized to monitor infection trends during pregnancy.

Developing Treatment Guidelines During a Pandemic Health Crisis: Lessons Learned From COVID-19.

The development of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines began in March 2020 in response to a request from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Within 4 days of the request, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel was established and the first meeting took place (virtually-as did subsequent meetings). The Panel comprises 57 individuals representing 6 governmental agencies, 11 professional societies, and 33 medical centers, plus 2 community members, who have worked together to create and frequently update the guidelines on the basis of evidence from the most recent clinical studies available. The initial version of the guidelines was completed within 2 weeks and posted online on 21 April 2020. Initially, sparse evidence was available to guide COVID-19 treatment recommendations. However, treatment data rapidly accrued based on results from clinical studies that used various study designs and evaluated different therapeutic agents and approaches. Data have continued to evolve at a rapid pace, leading to 24 revisions and updates of the guidelines in the first year. This process has provided important lessons for responding to an unprecedented public health emergency: Providers and stakeholders are eager to access credible, current treatment guidelines; governmental agencies, professional societies, and health care leaders can work together effectively and expeditiously; panelists from various disciplines, including biostatistics, are important for quickly developing well-informed recommendations; well-powered randomized clinical trials continue to provide the most compelling evidence to guide treatment recommendations; treatment recommendations need to be developed in a confidential setting free from external pressures; development of a user-friendly, web-based format for communicating with health care providers requires substantial administrative support; and frequent updates are necessary as clinical evidence rapidly emerges.