Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 18(2): e0281365, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2244661

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As diagnostic tests for COVID-19 were broadly deployed under Emergency Use Authorization, there emerged a need to understand the real-world utilization and performance of serological testing across the United States. METHODS: Six health systems contributed electronic health records and/or claims data, jointly developed a master protocol, and used it to execute the analysis in parallel. We used descriptive statistics to examine demographic, clinical, and geographic characteristics of serology testing among patients with RNA positive for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Across datasets, we observed 930,669 individuals with positive RNA for SARS-CoV-2. Of these, 35,806 (4%) were serotested within 90 days; 15% of which occurred <14 days from the RNA positive test. The proportion of people with a history of cardiovascular disease, obesity, chronic lung, or kidney disease; or presenting with shortness of breath or pneumonia appeared higher among those serotested compared to those who were not. Even in a population of people with active infection, race/ethnicity data were largely missing (>30%) in some datasets-limiting our ability to examine differences in serological testing by race. In datasets where race/ethnicity information was available, we observed a greater distribution of White individuals among those serotested; however, the time between RNA and serology tests appeared shorter in Black compared to White individuals. Test manufacturer data was available in half of the datasets contributing to the analysis. CONCLUSION: Our results inform the underlying context of serotesting during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic and differences observed between claims and EHR data sources-a critical first step to understanding the real-world accuracy of serological tests. Incomplete reporting of race/ethnicity data and a limited ability to link test manufacturer data, lab results, and clinical data challenge the ability to assess the real-world performance of SARS-CoV-2 tests in different contexts and the overall U.S. response to current and future disease pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , United States/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , RNA , Pandemics , COVID-19 Testing
2.
PLoS One ; 18(2): e0279956, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2234943

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Real-world performance of COVID-19 diagnostic tests under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) must be assessed. We describe overall trends in the performance of serology tests in the context of real-world implementation. METHODS: Six health systems estimated the odds of seropositivity and positive percent agreement (PPA) of serology test among people with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection by molecular test. In each dataset, we present the odds ratio and PPA, overall and by key clinical, demographic, and practice parameters. RESULTS: A total of 15,615 people were observed to have at least one serology test 14-90 days after a positive molecular test for SARS-CoV-2. We observed higher PPA in Hispanic (PPA range: 79-96%) compared to non-Hispanic (60-89%) patients; in those presenting with at least one COVID-19 related symptom (69-93%) as compared to no such symptoms (63-91%); and in inpatient (70-97%) and emergency department (93-99%) compared to outpatient (63-92%) settings across datasets. PPA was highest in those with diabetes (75-94%) and kidney disease (83-95%); and lowest in those with auto-immune conditions or who are immunocompromised (56-93%). The odds ratios (OR) for seropositivity were higher in Hispanics compared to non-Hispanics (OR range: 2.59-3.86), patients with diabetes (1.49-1.56), and obesity (1.63-2.23); and lower in those with immunocompromised or autoimmune conditions (0.25-0.70), as compared to those without those comorbidities. In a subset of three datasets with robust information on serology test name, seven tests were used, two of which were used in multiple settings and met the EUA requirement of PPA ≥87%. Tests performed similarly across datasets. CONCLUSION: Although the EUA requirement was not consistently met, more investigation is needed to understand how serology and molecular tests are used, including indication and protocol fidelity. Improved data interoperability of test and clinical/demographic data are needed to enable rapid assessment of the real-world performance of in vitro diagnostic tests.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , United States/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Serologic Tests
3.
PLoS One ; 16(3): e0248128, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1575679

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic remains a significant global threat. However, despite urgent need, there remains uncertainty surrounding best practices for pharmaceutical interventions to treat COVID-19. In particular, conflicting evidence has emerged surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, alone or in combination, for COVID-19. The COVID-19 Evidence Accelerator convened by the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA, in collaboration with Friends of Cancer Research, assembled experts from the health systems research, regulatory science, data science, and epidemiology to participate in a large parallel analysis of different data sets to further explore the effectiveness of these treatments. METHODS: Electronic health record (EHR) and claims data were extracted from seven separate databases. Parallel analyses were undertaken on data extracted from each source. Each analysis examined time to mortality in hospitalized patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and the two in combination as compared to patients not treated with either drug. Cox proportional hazards models were used, and propensity score methods were undertaken to adjust for confounding. Frequencies of adverse events in each treatment group were also examined. RESULTS: Neither hydroxychloroquine nor azithromycin, alone or in combination, were significantly associated with time to mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. No treatment groups appeared to have an elevated risk of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Administration of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and their combination appeared to have no effect on time to mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Continued research is needed to clarify best practices surrounding treatment of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pandemics/prevention & control , Data Management/methods , Drug Therapy, Combination/methods , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects
4.
CMAJ ; 193(11): E389-E398, 2021 Mar 15.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1154095

ABSTRACT

CONTEXTE: De nombreuses études sur les complications de la maladie à coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) ont reposé sur des séries de cas et de petites cohortes qui ne permettaient pas d'établir un lien causal avec la COVID-19 ni d'estimer les risques dans les différents milieux de soins. Nous avons voulu étudier toutes les complications possibles de la COVID-19 afin de confirmer les complications précédemment déclarées et d'identifier de potentielles complications encore inconnues. MÉTHODES: À partir des données sur les demandes de remboursement de frais médicaux aux États-Unis, nous avons comparé la fréquence de tous les codes de diagnostic de la Classification internationale des maladies, 10 e révision, modification clinique (CIM-10-MC) enregistrés avant et après le déclenchement de la pandémie de COVID-19 dans un modèle d'auto-appariement pré- et post-exposition. Nous avons inclus les patients ayant reçu un diagnostic de COVID-19 entre le 1er mars 2020 et le 30 avril 2020, et calculé les estimations de risque et les rapports de cotes (RC) pour le lien avec la COVID-19 de chaque code de diagnostic de la CIM-10-MC. RÉSULTATS: Sur les 1724 codes de diagnostic de la CIM-10-MC attribués à 70 288 patients atteints de COVID-19, 69 étaient significativement liés à la COVID-19. Les diagnostics étroitement liés à la COVID-19 et comportant un risque absolu élevé comprenaient la pneumonie virale (RC 177,63; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % 147,19­214,37; risque absolu 27,6 %), l'insuffisance respiratoire (RC 11,36; IC à 95 % 10,74­12,02; risque absolu 22,6 %), l'insuffisance rénale aiguë (RC 3,50; IC à 95 % 3,34­3,68; risque absolu 11,8 %) et la sepsie (RC 4,23; IC à 95 % 4,01­4,46; risque absolu 10,4 %). Les diagnostics étroitement liés à la COVID-19, mais comportant un risque absolu faible comprenaient la myocardite (RC 8,17; IC à 95 % 3,58­18,62; risque absolu 0,1 %), la coagulation intravasculaire disséminée (RC 11,83; IC à 95 % 5,26­26,62; risque absolu 0,1 %) et le pneumothorax (RC 3,38; IC à 95 % 2,68­4,26; risque absolu 0,4 %). INTERPRÉTATION: Nous avons confirmé et établi les estimations du risque de plusieurs complications de la COVID-19. Ces résultats pourraient orienter le pronostic, les décisions thérapeutiques et les conseils aux patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/etiology , Renal Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Risk Assessment/methods , Thrombosis/etiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Incidence , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Prognosis , Renal Insufficiency/epidemiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Thrombosis/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
5.
JAMA Intern Med ; 181(5): 672-679, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1098863

ABSTRACT

Importance: Understanding the effect of serum antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on susceptibility to infection is important for identifying at-risk populations and could have implications for vaccine deployment. Objective: The study purpose was to evaluate evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection based on diagnostic nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) among patients with positive vs negative test results for antibodies in an observational descriptive cohort study of clinical laboratory and linked claims data. Design, Setting, and Participants: The study created cohorts from a deidentified data set composed of commercial laboratory tests, medical and pharmacy claims, electronic health records, and hospital chargemaster data. Patients were categorized as antibody-positive or antibody-negative according to their first SARS-CoV-2 antibody test in the database. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points were post-index diagnostic NAAT results, with infection defined as a positive diagnostic test post-index, measured in 30-day intervals (0-30, 31-60, 61-90, >90 days). Additional measures included demographic, geographic, and clinical characteristics at the time of the index antibody test, including recorded signs and symptoms or prior evidence of coronavirus 2019 (COVID) diagnoses or positive NAAT results and recorded comorbidities. Results: The cohort included 3 257 478 unique patients with an index antibody test; 56% were female with a median (SD) age of 48 (20) years. Of these, 2 876 773 (88.3%) had a negative index antibody result, and 378 606 (11.6%) had a positive index antibody result. Patients with a negative antibody test result were older than those with a positive result (mean age 48 vs 44 years). Of index-positive patients, 18.4% converted to seronegative over the follow-up period. During the follow-up periods, the ratio (95% CI) of positive NAAT results among individuals who had a positive antibody test at index vs those with a negative antibody test at index was 2.85 (95% CI, 2.73-2.97) at 0 to 30 days, 0.67 (95% CI, 0.6-0.74) at 31 to 60 days, 0.29 (95% CI, 0.24-0.35) at 61 to 90 days, and 0.10 (95% CI, 0.05-0.19) at more than 90 days. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, patients with positive antibody test results were initially more likely to have positive NAAT results, consistent with prolonged RNA shedding, but became markedly less likely to have positive NAAT results over time, suggesting that seropositivity is associated with protection from infection. The duration of protection is unknown, and protection may wane over time.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19 , Disease Susceptibility , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Age Factors , Antibodies, Viral/isolation & purification , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19 Serological Testing/statistics & numerical data , Correlation of Data , Disease Susceptibility/diagnosis , Disease Susceptibility/epidemiology , Disease Susceptibility/immunology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Symptom Assessment/methods , Symptom Assessment/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Virus Shedding/immunology
6.
CMAJ ; 193(1): E10-E18, 2021 01 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1021693

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many studies reporting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) complications have involved case series or small cohorts that could not establish a causal association with COVID-19 or provide risk estimates in different care settings. We sought to study all possible complications of COVID-19 to confirm previously reported complications and to identify potential complications not yet known. METHODS: Using United States health claims data, we compared the frequency of all International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) diagnosis codes occurring before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in an exposure-crossover design. We included patients who received a diagnosis of COVID-19 between Mar. 1, 2020, and Apr. 30, 2020, and computed risk estimates and odds ratios (ORs) of association with COVID-19 for every ICD-10-CM diagnosis code. RESULTS: Among 70 288 patients with COVID-19, 69 of 1724 analyzed ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes were significantly associated with COVID-19. Disorders showing both strong association with COVID-19 and high absolute risk included viral pneumonia (OR 177.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 147.19-214.37, absolute risk 27.6%), respiratory failure (OR 11.36, 95% CI 10.74-12.02, absolute risk 22.6%), acute kidney failure (OR 3.50, 95% CI 3.34-3.68, absolute risk 11.8%) and sepsis (OR 4.23, 95% CI 4.01-4.46, absolute risk 10.4%). Disorders showing strong associations with COVID-19 but low absolute risk included myocarditis (OR 8.17, 95% CI 3.58-18.62, absolute risk 0.1%), disseminated intravascular coagulation (OR 11.83, 95% CI 5.26-26.62, absolute risk 0.1%) and pneumothorax (OR 3.38, 95% CI 2.68-4.26, absolute risk 0.4%). INTERPRETATION: We confirmed and provided risk estimates for numerous complications of COVID-19. These results may guide prognosis, treatment decisions and patient counselling.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/complications , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Risk Assessment/methods , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Over Studies , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/etiology , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL