Hospitalisation risk for COVID-19 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7: cohort analysis (preprint)

Objective: To evaluate the relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis with SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 (also known as Variant of Concern 202012/01) and the risk of hospitalisation compared to diagnosis with wildtype SARS-CoV-2 variants. Design: Retrospective cohort, analysed using stratified Cox regression. Setting: Community-based SARS-CoV-2 testing in England, individually linked with hospitalisation data. Participants: 839,278 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients, of whom 36,233 had been hospitalised within 14 days, tested between 23rd November 2020 and 31st January 2021 and analysed at a laboratory with an available TaqPath assay that enables assessment of S-gene target failure (SGTF). SGTF is a proxy test for the B.1.1.7 variant. Patient data were stratified by age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, region of residence, and date of positive test. Main outcome measures: Hospitalisation between 1 and 14 days after the first positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Results: 27,710 of 592,409 SGTF patients (4.7%) and 8,523 of 246,869 non-SGTF patients (3.5%) had been hospitalised within 1-14 days. The stratum-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of hospitalisation was 1.52 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.47 to 1.57) for COVID-19 patients infected with SGTF variants, compared to those infected with non-SGTF variants. The effect was modified by age (P<0.001), with HRs of 0.93-1.21 for SGTF compared to non-SGTF patients below age 20 years, 1.29 in those aged 20-29, and 1.45-1.65 in age groups 30 years or older. Conclusions: The results suggest that the risk of hospitalisation is higher for individuals infected with the B.1.1.7 variant compared to wildtype SARS-CoV-2, likely reflecting a more severe disease. The higher severity may be specific to adults above the age of 30.

Characterising long COVID more than 6 months after acute infection in adults; prospective longitudinal cohort study, England (preprint)

Background Most individuals with COVID-19 will recover without sequelae, but some will develop long-term multi-system impairments. The definition, duration, prevalence and symptoms associated with long COVID, however, have not been established. Methods Public Health England (PHE) initiated longitudinal surveillance of clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers for monthly assessment and blood sampling for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in March 2020. Eight months after enrolment, participants completed an online questionnaire including 72 symptoms in the preceding month. Symptomatic mild-to-moderate cases with confirmed COVID-19 were compared with asymptomatic, seronegative controls. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent symptoms associated with long COVID. Findings All 2,147 participants were contacted and 1,671 (77.8%) completed the questionnaire, including 140 (8.4%) cases and 1,160 controls. At a median of 7.5 (IQR 7.1-7.8) months after infection, 20 cases (14.3%) had ongoing (4/140, 2.9%) or episodic (16/140, 11.4%) symptoms. We identified three clusters of symptoms associated with long COVID, those affecting the sensory (ageusia, anosmia, loss of appetite and blurred vision), neurological (forgetfulness, short-term memory loss and confusion/brain fog) and cardiorespiratory (chest tightness/pain, unusual fatigue, breathlessness after minimal exertion/at rest, palpitations) systems. The sensory cluster had the highest association with being a case (aOR 5.25, 95% CI 3.45-8.01). Dermatological, gynaecological, gastrointestinal or mental health symptoms were not significantly different between cases and controls. Interpretation Most persistent symptoms reported following mild COVID-19 were equally common in cases and controls. While all three clusters identified had a strong association with cases, the sensory cluster had the highest specificity and strength of association, and therefore, most likely to be characteristic of long COVID.

Serological surveillance of SARS-CoV-2: trends and humoral response in a cohort of public health workers (preprint)

Background There is considerable debate about the rate of antibody waning after SARS-CoV-2 infection, raising questions around long-term immunity following both natural infection and vaccination. We undertook prospective serosurveillance in a large cohort of healthy adults from the start of the epidemic in England. Methods The serosurveillance cohort included office and laboratory-based staff and healthcare workers in 4 sites in England, who were tested monthly for SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and nucleoprotein IgG between 23rd March and 20th August 2020. Antibody levels from 21 days after a positive test were modelled using mixed effects regression models. Findings In total, 2247 individuals were recruited and 2014 (90%) had 3-5 monthly antibody tests. Overall, 272 (12.1%) of individuals had at least one positive/equivocal spike protein IgG result, with the highest proportion in a hospital site (22%), 14% in London and 2.1% in a rural area. Results were similar for nucleoprotein IgG. Following a positive result, 39/587 (6.6%) tested negative for nucleoprotein IgG and 52/515 (10.1%) for spike protein IgG. Nucleoprotein IgG declined by 6.4% per week (95% CI, 5.5-7.4%; half-life, 75 [95% CI, 66-89] days) and spike protein IgG by 5.8% (95% CI, 5.1-6.6%; half-life, 83 [95% CI, 73-96] days). Conclusions Over the study period SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity was 8-10% overall and up to 21% in clinical healthcare workers. In seropositive individuals, nucleoprotein and spike protein IgG antibodies declined with time after infection and 50% are predicted to fall below the positive test threshold after 6 months.