Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0257051, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1403310

ABSTRACT

It has been widely observed that adult men of all ages are at higher risk of developing serious complications from COVID-19 when compared with women. This study aimed to investigate the association of COVID-19 positivity and severity with estrogen exposure in women, in a population based matched cohort study of female users of the COVID Symptom Study application in the UK. Analyses included 152,637 women for menopausal status, 295,689 women for exogenous estrogen intake in the form of the combined oral contraceptive pill (COCP), and 151,193 menopausal women for hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Data were collected using the COVID Symptom Study in May-June 2020. Analyses investigated associations between predicted or tested COVID-19 status and menopausal status, COCP use, and HRT use, adjusting for age, smoking and BMI, with follow-up age sensitivity analysis, and validation in a subset of participants from the TwinsUK cohort. Menopausal women had higher rates of predicted COVID-19 (P = 0.003). COCP-users had lower rates of predicted COVID-19 (P = 8.03E-05), with reduction in hospital attendance (P = 0.023). Menopausal women using HRT or hormonal therapies did not exhibit consistent associations, including increased rates of predicted COVID-19 (P = 2.22E-05) for HRT users alone. The findings support a protective effect of estrogen exposure on COVID-19, based on positive association between predicted COVID-19 with menopausal status, and negative association with COCP use. HRT use was positively associated with COVID-19, but the results should be considered with caution due to lack of data on HRT type, route of administration, duration of treatment, and potential unaccounted for confounders and comorbidities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Estrogen Replacement Therapy , Estrogens/metabolism , Menopause/metabolism , Adult , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , United Kingdom
2.
Sci Adv ; 7(12)2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1142980

ABSTRACT

As no one symptom can predict disease severity or the need for dedicated medical support in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we asked whether documenting symptom time series over the first few days informs outcome. Unsupervised time series clustering over symptom presentation was performed on data collected from a training dataset of completed cases enlisted early from the COVID Symptom Study Smartphone application, yielding six distinct symptom presentations. Clustering was validated on an independent replication dataset between 1 and 28 May 2020. Using the first 5 days of symptom logging, the ROC-AUC (receiver operating characteristic - area under the curve) of need for respiratory support was 78.8%, substantially outperforming personal characteristics alone (ROC-AUC 69.5%). Such an approach could be used to monitor at-risk patients and predict medical resource requirements days before they are required.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted , Mobile Applications , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
3.
BMC Infect Dis ; 20(1): 783, 2020 Oct 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-883564

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A cost effective and efficient diagnostic tool for COVID-19 as near to the point of care (PoC) as possible would be a game changer in the current pandemic. We tested reverse transcription loop mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), a method which can produce results in under 30 min, alongside standard methods in a real-life clinical setting. METHODS: This prospective service improvement project piloted an RT-LAMP method on nasal and pharyngeal swabs on 21 residents of a high dependency care home, with two index COVID-19 cases, and compared it to multiplex tandem reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). We recorded vital signs of patients to correlate clinical and laboratory information and calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of a single swab using RT-LAMP compared with the current standard, RT-PCR, as per Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) guidelines. RESULTS: The novel method accurately detected 8/10 RT-PCR positive cases and identified a further 3 positive cases. Eight further cases were negative using both methods. Using repeated RT-PCR as a "gold standard", the sensitivity and specificity of a single novel test were 80 and 73% respectively. PPV was 73% and NPV was 83%. Incorporating retesting of low signal RT-LAMP positives improved the specificity to 100%. We also speculate that hypothermia may be a significant early clinical sign of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: RT-LAMP testing for SARS-CoV-2 was found to be promising, fast and to work equivalently to RT-PCR methods. RT-LAMP has the potential to transform COVID-19 detection, bringing rapid and accurate testing to the PoC. RT-LAMP could be deployed in mobile community testing units, care homes and hospitals to detect disease early and prevent spread.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Point-of-Care Systems , Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Preliminary Data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Data Accuracy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/economics , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques/economics , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Polymerase Chain Reaction/economics , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity
4.
medRxiv ; 2020 May 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-829263

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data for frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited and whether personal protective equipment (PPE) mitigates this risk is unknown. We evaluated risk for COVID-19 among frontline HCWs compared to the general community and the influence of PPE. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of the general community, including frontline HCWs, who reported information through the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application beginning on March 24 (United Kingdom, U.K.) and March 29 (United States, U.S.) through April 23, 2020. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to estimate multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of a positive COVID-19 test. FINDINGS: Among 2,035,395 community individuals and 99,795 frontline HCWs, we documented 5,545 incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test over 34,435,272 person-days. Compared with the general community, frontline HCWs had an aHR of 11·6 (95% CI: 10·9 to 12·3) for reporting a positive test. The corresponding aHR was 3·40 (95% CI: 3·37 to 3·43) using an inverse probability weighted Cox model adjusting for the likelihood of receiving a test. A symptom-based classifier of predicted COVID-19 yielded similar risk estimates. Compared with HCWs reporting adequate PPE, the aHRs for reporting a positive test were 1·46 (95% CI: 1·21 to 1·76) for those reporting PPE reuse and 1·31 (95% CI: 1·10 to 1·56) for reporting inadequate PPE. Compared with HCWs reporting adequate PPE who did not care for COVID-19 patients, HCWs caring for patients with documented COVID-19 had aHRs for a positive test of 4·83 (95% CI: 3·99 to 5·85) if they had adequate PPE, 5·06 (95% CI: 3·90 to 6·57) for reused PPE, and 5·91 (95% CI: 4·53 to 7·71) for inadequate PPE. INTERPRETATION: Frontline HCWs had a significantly increased risk of COVID-19 infection, highest among HCWs who reused PPE or had inadequate access to PPE. However, adequate supplies of PPE did not completely mitigate high-risk exposures. FUNDING: Zoe Global Ltd., Wellcome Trust, EPSRC, NIHR, UK Research and Innovation, Alzheimer's Society, NIH, NIOSH, Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness.

5.
Age Ageing ; 50(1): 40-48, 2021 01 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-800076

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Frailty, increased vulnerability to physiological stressors, is associated with adverse outcomes. COVID-19 exhibits a more severe disease course in older, comorbid adults. Awareness of atypical presentations is critical to facilitate early identification. OBJECTIVE: To assess how frailty affects presenting COVID-19 symptoms in older adults. DESIGN: Observational cohort study of hospitalised older patients and self-report data for community-based older adults. SETTING: Admissions to St Thomas' Hospital, London with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Community-based data for older adults using the COVID Symptom Study mobile application. SUBJECTS: Hospital cohort: patients aged 65 and over (n = 322); unscheduled hospital admission between 1 March 2020 and 5 May 2020; COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR of nasopharyngeal swab. Community-based cohort: participants aged 65 and over enrolled in the COVID Symptom Study (n = 535); reported test-positive for COVID-19 from 24 March (application launch) to 8 May 2020. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression analysis performed on age-matched samples from hospital and community-based cohorts to ascertain association of frailty with symptoms of confirmed COVID-19. RESULTS: Hospital cohort: significantly higher prevalence of probable delirium in the frail sample, with no difference in fever or cough. Community-based cohort: significantly higher prevalence of possible delirium in frailer, older adults and fatigue and shortness of breath. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study demonstrating higher prevalence of probable delirium as a COVID-19 symptom in older adults with frailty compared to other older adults. This emphasises need for systematic frailty assessment and screening for delirium in acutely ill older patients in hospital and community settings. Clinicians should suspect COVID-19 in frail adults with delirium.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Delirium , Frailty , Risk Assessment/methods , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/statistics & numerical data , Cohort Studies , Delirium/diagnosis , Delirium/epidemiology , Delirium/etiology , Female , Frail Elderly , Frailty/diagnosis , Frailty/epidemiology , Frailty/etiology , Geriatric Assessment/methods , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , London/epidemiology , Male , Prevalence , Risk Factors
6.
Oncologist ; 26(1)2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-731030

ABSTRACT

Individuals with cancer may be at high risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and adverse outcomes. However, evidence from large population-based studies examining whether cancer and cancer-related therapy exacerbates the risk of COVID-19 infection is still limited. Data were collected from the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application since March 29 through May 8, 2020. Among 23,266 participants with cancer and 1,784,293 without cancer, we documented 10,404 reports of a positive COVID-19 test. Compared with participants without cancer, those living with cancer had a 60% increased risk of a positive COVID-19 test. Among patients with cancer, current treatment with chemotherapy or immunotherapy was associated with a 2.2-fold increased risk of a positive test. The association between cancer and COVID-19 infection was stronger among participants >65 years and males. Future studies are needed to identify subgroups by tumor types and treatment regimens who are particularly at risk for COVID-19 infection and adverse outcomes.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Neoplasms/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/immunology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sex Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
7.
Lancet Public Health ; 5(9): e475-e483, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-706478

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data for front-line health-care workers and risk of COVID-19 are limited. We sought to assess risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers compared with the general community and the effect of personal protective equipment (PPE) on risk. METHODS: We did a prospective, observational cohort study in the UK and the USA of the general community, including front-line health-care workers, using self-reported data from the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application (app) from March 24 (UK) and March 29 (USA) to April 23, 2020. Participants were voluntary users of the app and at first use provided information on demographic factors (including age, sex, race or ethnic background, height and weight, and occupation) and medical history, and subsequently reported any COVID-19 symptoms. We used Cox proportional hazards modelling to estimate multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of our primary outcome, which was a positive COVID-19 test. The COVID Symptom Study app is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04331509. FINDINGS: Among 2 035 395 community individuals and 99 795 front-line health-care workers, we recorded 5545 incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test over 34 435 272 person-days. Compared with the general community, front-line health-care workers were at increased risk for reporting a positive COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 11·61, 95% CI 10·93-12·33). To account for differences in testing frequency between front-line health-care workers and the general community and possible selection bias, an inverse probability-weighted model was used to adjust for the likelihood of receiving a COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 3·40, 95% CI 3·37-3·43). Secondary and post-hoc analyses suggested adequacy of PPE, clinical setting, and ethnic background were also important factors. INTERPRETATION: In the UK and the USA, risk of reporting a positive test for COVID-19 was increased among front-line health-care workers. Health-care systems should ensure adequate availability of PPE and develop additional strategies to protect health-care workers from COVID-19, particularly those from Black, Asian, and minority ethnic backgrounds. Additional follow-up of these observational findings is needed. FUNDING: Zoe Global, Wellcome Trust, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institutes of Health Research, UK Research and Innovation, Alzheimer's Society, National Institutes of Health, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adult , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mobile Applications , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Self Report , United Kingdom/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL