Facilitating Safe Discharge Through Predicting Disease Progression in Moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Prospective Cohort Study to Develop and Validate a Clinical Prediction Model in Resource-Limited Settings.

BACKGROUND: In locations where few people have received coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, health systems remain vulnerable to surges in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. Tools to identify patients suitable for community-based management are urgently needed. METHODS: We prospectively recruited adults presenting to 2 hospitals in India with moderate symptoms of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 to develop and validate a clinical prediction model to rule out progression to supplemental oxygen requirement. The primary outcome was defined as any of the following: SpO2 < 94%; respiratory rate > 30 BPM; SpO2/FiO2 < 400; or death. We specified a priori that each model would contain three clinical parameters (age, sex, and SpO2) and 1 of 7 shortlisted biochemical biomarkers measurable using commercially available rapid tests (C-reactive protein [CRP], D-dimer, interleukin 6 [IL-6], neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR], procalcitonin [PCT], soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cell-1 [sTREM-1], or soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor [suPAR]), to ensure the models would be suitable for resource-limited settings. We evaluated discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of the models in a held-out temporal external validation cohort. RESULTS: In total, 426 participants were recruited, of whom 89 (21.0%) met the primary outcome; 257 participants comprised the development cohort, and 166 comprised the validation cohort. The 3 models containing NLR, suPAR, or IL-6 demonstrated promising discrimination (c-statistics: 0.72-0.74) and calibration (calibration slopes: 1.01-1.05) in the validation cohort and provided greater utility than a model containing the clinical parameters alone. CONCLUSIONS: We present 3 clinical prediction models that could help clinicians identify patients with moderate COVID-19 suitable for community-based management. The models are readily implementable and of particular relevance for locations with limited resources.

The role and diagnostic accuracy of serology for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The role and performance of various serological tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19 are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of seven commercially available serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by testing COVID-19 cases and controls. METHODS: Adult patients with fever for > 5 days, admitted to a tertiary-care teaching hospital in South India, were enrolled prospectively between June and December 2020. SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR confirmed patients were classified as cases, and patients with febrile illness with laboratory-confirmed alternative diagnosis and healthy participants were controls. All participants were tested with SCoV-2 Detect™ IgM ELISA kit and SCoV-2 Detect™ IgG ELISA kit (InBios International, Seattle, USA) (Inbios), SARS-CoV-2 Total and SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc., Tarrytown, USA) (Siemens), Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 (Roche Diagnostics, Rotkreuz, Switzerland) (Roche), Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Abbott Diagnostics, IL, USA) (Abbott), and Liaison® SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG (DiaSorinS.p.A., Saluggia, Italy) (Liaison). The sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV), and accuracies were compared. RESULTS: There were 303 participants: 153 cases and 150 controls. ELISA detecting anti-S protein antibody was more sensitive (88.9% for IgG and 86.3% for IgM) than the CLIAs (82.4% for total antibodies and 76.5-85.6% for IgG). Among CLIAs, Roche IgG was most sensitive (85.6%) followed by Abbott (83%) and Liaison (83%). Abbot had the best PPV (88.8%) and was more specific (89.3%) than Liaison (82%) and Roche (82%). Siemens IgG was less sensitive (76.5%) than Siemens Total (82.4%). The specificity of all the serological assays was modest (75-90%). Antibody test positivity increased with the duration of illness reaching 90% after 10 days of illness. When cases were compared against pre-pandemic controls, the IgG gave excellent specificity (98-100%). For seroprevalence studies, InBios IgG had the best accuracy (90.8%) with 88.9% sensitivity and 97.6% specificity. CONCLUSION: The serological assays are important adjuncts for the diagnosis of COVID-19 in patients with persistent symptoms, especially in the second week of illness. The value of serological diagnostic tests is limited in the first week of illness and they provide additional value in seroprevalence studies. The diagnostic accuracy of the ELISA and CLIA platforms were comparable.

Community seroprevalence and risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection in different subpopulations in Vellore, India, and their implications for future prevention.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to inform public health policy decisions through the assessment of IgG antibody seroprevalence in the population and the risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: The seroprevalence of IgG antibodies among different subpopulations at the end of the first and second waves of the pandemic was estimated. Various risk factors associated with seropositivity, including sociodemography, IgG antibodies against endemic human coronavirus, and vaccination status, were also assessed. RESULTS: For all 2433 consenting participants, the overall estimated seroprevalences at the end of first and second waves were 28.5% (95% CI 22.3-33.7%) and 71.5% (95% CI 62.8-80.5%), respectively. The accrual of IgG positivity was heterogeneous, with the highest seroprevalences found in urban slum populations (75.1%). Vaccine uptake varied among the subpopulations, with low rates (< 10%) among rural and urban slum residents. The majority of seropositive individuals (75%) were asymptomatic. Residence in urban slums (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.57-2.6; p < 0.001), middle socioeconomic status (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.17-2.67; p = 0.007), presence of diabetes (OR 1.721, 95% CI 1.148-2.581; p = 0.009), and hypertension (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.16-2.64; p = 0.008) were associated with seropositivity in multivariable analyses. CONCLUSION: Although considerable population immunity has been reached, with more than two-thirds seropositive, improved vaccination strategies among unreached subpopulations and high-risk individuals are suggested for better preparedness in future.