Medical appointments and provision of medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Mainz, Germany.

Previous evidence suggested that non-COVID-19-related medical care was reduced during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, but it remained unclear whether or to which extent this effect lasted beyond the first wave, or existed in a longer time frame. Here, we consider questionnaire data of the Gutenberg-COVID-19 study together with pre-pandemic baseline data of the Gutenberg Health Study concerning the region around Mainz, Germany, to study the effects of the pandemic on the provision of medical care until April 2021. We observed that the proportion of cancelled medical appointments was low and that the fraction of participants with a medical appointment as an indicator for the number of appointments being made was in line with pre-pandemic levels. Appointments were more likely cancelled by the patient (rather than the provider), and more likely cancelled by medical specialists such as dentists or ophthalmologists (rather than GPs). In conclusion, we found some evidence that, at least with regard to realized appointments, the medical system and the provision of medical care were not harmed by the COVID-19 pandemic on a longer time scale.

The burdens of poverty during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background Individuals living at-risk-of-poverty have an increased risk of poor mental health. The pandemic and its societal impacts might have negative effects especially on this group widening the gap between rich and poor and also exacerbate gender gaps, which in turn might impact social cohesion. Aim The objective of this longitudinal study was to determine if people living at-risk-of-poverty were more vulnerable to economic and psychosocial impacts of the pandemic and showed poorer mental health. Moreover, gender differences were analyzed. Method We drew data from a sample of N = 10,250 respondents of two time points (T1 starting from October 2020, T2 starting from March 2021) of the Gutenberg COVID-19 Study. We tested for differences between people living at-risk-of-poverty and more affluent respondents regarding economic impacts, psychosocial stressors, as well as depressiveness, anxiety and loneliness, by comparing mean and distributional differences. To test for significant discrepancy, we opted for chi-square- and t-tests. Results The analysis sample compromised N = 8,100 individuals of which 4,2% could be classified as living at-risk-of-poverty. 23% of respondents living at-risk-of-poverty had a decrease in income since the beginning of the pandemic–twice as many as those not living at-risk-of-poverty, who reported more often an increase in income. Less affluent individuals reported a decrease in working hours, while more affluent people reported an increase. Between our survey time points, we found a significant decrease in these economic impacts. Gender differences for economic changes were only found for more affluent women who worked more hours with no change in income. Less affluent respondents were more impacted by psychosocial stressors, depressiveness, anxiety, and loneliness. Gender differences were found particularly with regard to care responsibilities. Discussion Our results indicate a widening in the gap between the rich and the poor at the beginning of the pandemic. Gender differences concerning economic changes affect more affluent women, but women in both income groups are more burdened by care responsibilities, which might indicate a heightened resurgence of gender role in times of crisis. This increase in inequality might have impacted social cohesion.

Protective behavior and SARS-CoV-2 infection risk in the population – Results from the Gutenberg COVID-19 study

Background During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, preventive measures like physical distancing, wearing face masks, and hand hygiene have been widely applied to mitigate viral transmission. Beyond increasing vaccination coverage, preventive measures remain urgently needed. The aim of the present project was to assess the effect of protective behavior on SARS-CoV-2 infection risk in the population. Methods Data of the Gutenberg COVID-19 Study (GCS), a prospective cohort study with a representative population-based sample, were analyzed. SARS-CoV-2 infections were identified by sequential sampling of biomaterial, which was analyzed by RT-qPCR and two antibody immunoassays. Self-reported COVID-19 test results were additionally considered. Information on protective behavior including physical distancing, wearing face masks, and hand hygiene was collected via serial questionnaire-based assessments. To estimate adjusted prevalence ratios and hazard ratios, robust Poisson regression and Cox regression were applied. Results In total, 10,250 participants were enrolled (median age 56.9 [43.3/68.6] years, 50.8% females). Adherence to preventive measures was moderate for physical distancing (48.3%), while the use of face masks (91.5%) and the frequency of handwashing (75.0%) were high. Physical distancing appeared to be a protective factor with respect to SARS-CoV-2 infection risk independent of sociodemographic characteristics and individual pandemic-related behavior (prevalence ratio [PR] = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62–0.96). A protective association between wearing face masks and SARS-CoV-2 transmission was identified (PR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.55–0.96). However, the protective effect declined after controlling for potential confounding factors (PR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.68–1.36). For handwashing, this investigation did not find a beneficial impact. The adherence to protective behavior was not affected by previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or immunization against COVID-19. Conclusion The present study suggests primarily a preventive impact of physical distancing of 1.5 m, but also of wearing face masks on SARS-CoV-2 infections, supporting their widespread implementation. The proper fit and use of face masks are crucial for effectively mitigating the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the population. Supplementary information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-14310-6.

Correction: Anti-prothrombin autoantibodies enriched after infection with SARS-CoV-2 and influenced by strength of antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 proteins.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1010118.].

Anti-prothrombin autoantibodies enriched after infection with SARS-CoV-2 and influenced by strength of antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 proteins.

Antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL), assumed to cause antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), are notorious for their heterogeneity in targeting phospholipids and phospholipid-binding proteins. The persistent presence of Lupus anticoagulant and/or aPL against cardiolipin and/or ß2-glycoprotein I have been shown to be independent risk factors for vascular thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity in APS. aPL production is thought to be triggered by-among other factors-viral infections, though infection-associated aPL have mostly been considered non-pathogenic. Recently, the potential pathogenicity of infection-associated aPL has gained momentum since an increasing number of patients infected with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been described with coagulation abnormalities and hyperinflammation, together with the presence of aPL. Here, we present data from a multicentric, mixed-severity study including three cohorts of individuals who contracted SARS-CoV-2 as well as non-infected blood donors. We simultaneously measured 10 different criteria and non-criteria aPL (IgM and IgG) by using a line immunoassay. Further, IgG antibody response against three SARS-CoV-2 proteins was investigated using tripartite automated blood immunoassay technology. Our analyses revealed that selected non-criteria aPL were enriched concomitant to or after an infection with SARS-CoV-2. Linear mixed-effects models suggest an association of aPL with prothrombin (PT). The strength of the antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 was further influenced by SARS-CoV-2 disease severity and sex of the individuals. In conclusion, our study is the first to report an association between disease severity, anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoreactivity, and aPL against PT in patients with SARS-CoV-2.

COVID-19 as a Potential Trigger for Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura and Reason for an Unusual Treatment: A Case Report.

Immune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP) is a rare autoimmune disorder characterized by severely reduced activity of the von Willebrand factor (VWF)-cleaving protease ADAMTS13 (a disintegrin and metalloproteinase with a thrombospondin type 1 motif, member 13) due to autoantibodies. This leads to the development of pathogenic multimers of VWF, causing a thrombotic microangiopathy with decreased number of platelets, hemolysis, and life-threatening tissue ischemia of mostly brain, heart, and kidneys. Standard treatment of iTTP involves daily plasma exchange to remove ultra large multimers of VWF, inhibitors, substituting ADAMTS13, and the accompaniment of an immunosuppressive treatment with steroids. Recently, caplacizumab was approved for iTTP. Caplacizumab is a nanobody binding the A1 domain of VWF, blocking its interaction with glycoprotein Ib-IX-V platelet receptor and therefore preventing platelet aggregation. VWF activities may serve as therapeutic drug monitoring of caplacizumab, whereas ADAMTS13 activities may be used for biomarkers to guide caplacizumab treatment modalities and overall treatment duration. Additional immunosuppressive treatment by inhibiting autoantibody formation (e.g., the use of Rituximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody directed against the B-cell antigen CD20) is a further treatment option. Infections are well-known causes for an acute episode for patients with iTTP. The novel SARS-CoV-2 virus is mainly associated with acute respiratory distress as well as diffuse endothelial inflammation and increased coagulopathy. However, little is known about an infection with SARS-CoV-2 virus triggering iTTP relapses. We herein report the case of an acute iTTP episode accompanying a SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Pathogenic lipid-binding antiphospholipid antibodies are associated with severity of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19)-associated coagulopathy is a hallmark of disease severity and poor prognosis. The key manifestations of this prothrombotic syndrome-microvascular thrombosis, stroke, and venous and pulmonary clots-are also observed in severe and catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome. Antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) are detectable in COVID-19 patients, but their association with the clinical course of COVID-19 remains unproven. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the presence and relevance of lipid-binding aPL in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Two cohorts of 53 and 121 patients from a single center hospitalized for PCR-proven severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 infection were analyzed for the presence of aPL and clinical severity of COVID-19. RESULTS: We here demonstrate that lipid-binding aPL are common in COVID-19. COVID-19 patients with lipid-binding aPL have higher median concentrations of C-reactive protein and D-dimer, and are more likely to have a critical clinical course and fatal outcome. Lipid-binding aPL isolated from COVID-19 patients target the recently described cell surface complex of lysobisphosphatidic acid (LBPA) with the protein C receptor (EPCR) to induce prothrombotic and inflammatory responses in monocytes and endothelial cells. We show that B1a cells producing lipid-reactive aPL of the IgG isotype circulate in the blood of COVID-19 patients. In vivo, COVID-19 aPL accelerate thrombus formation in an experimental mouse model dependent on the recently delineated signaling pathway involving EPCR-LBPA. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients rapidly expand B1a cells secreting pathogenic lipid-binding aPL with broad thrombotic and inflammatory effects. The association with markers of inflammation and coagulation, clinical severity, and mortality suggests a causal role of aPL in COVID-19-associated coagulopathy.

Evaluation of a laboratory-based high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay for non-COVID-19 patient screening at hospital admission.

Several rapid antigen tests (RATs) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 were evaluated recently. However, reliable performance data for laboratory-based, high-throughput antigen tests are lacking. Therefore and in response to a short-term shortage of PCR reagents, we evaluated DiaSorin's LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 antigen test in comparison to RT-qPCR, and concerning the application of screening non-COVID-19 patients on hospital admission. Applying the manufacturer-recommended cut-off of 200 arbitrary units (AU/mL) the specificity of the LIAISON Test was 100%, the overall analytical sensitivity 40.2%. Lowering the cut-off to 100 AU/mL increased the sensitivity to 49.7% and decreased the specificity to 98.3%. Confining the analysis to samples with an RT-qPCR result < 25 Ct resulted in a sensitivity of 91.2%. The quality of the LIAISON test is very similar to that of good RATs described in the literature with the advantage of high throughput and the disadvantage of relatively long analysis time. It passes the WHO quality criteria for rapid antigen tests and is characterized by particularly high specificity. The LIAISON test can therefore be used for the same applications as recommended for RATs by the WHO. Due to limited sensitivity, the LIAISON test should only be used for screening, if PCR-based assays are not available.

No Evidence for Classic Thrombotic Microangiopathy in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) triggers systemic infection with involvement of the respiratory tract. There are some patients developing haemostatic abnormalities during their infection with a considerably increased risk of death. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 85) with SARS-CoV-2 infection attending the University Medical Center, Mainz, from 3 March to 15 May 2020 were retrospectively included in this study. Data regarding demography, clinical features, treatment and laboratory parameters were analyzed. Twenty patients were excluded for assessment of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) and thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) due to lack of laboratory data. RESULTS: COVID-19 patients (n = 65) were investigated, 19 with uncomplicated, 29 with complicated, and 17 with critical course; nine (13.8%) died. Seven patients showed overt DIC according to the ISTH criteria. The fibrinogen levels dropped significantly in these patients, although not below 100 mg/dl. Hallmarks of TMA, such as thrombocytopenia and microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia, were not detected in any of our COVID-19 patients. ADAMTS13 activity was mildly to moderately reduced in 4/22 patients, all having strongly elevated procalcitonin levels. CONCLUSION: DIC occurred in 7/65 COVID-19 patients but fibrinogen and platelet consumption were compensated in almost all. ADAMTS13 assays excluded TTP and hallmarks of classic TMA were absent in all investigated patients. We hypothesize that the lacking erythrocyte fragmentation and only mild platelet consumption in severe COVID-19 are due to a microangiopathy predominantly localized to the alveolar microcirculation with a low blood pressure gradient.