Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Wellcome Open Research ; 6(34), 2021.
Article in English | CAB Abstracts | ID: covidwho-1780279

ABSTRACT

Background: Household overcrowding is associated with increased risk of infectious diseases across contexts and countries. Limited data exist linking household overcrowding and risk of COVID-19. We used data collected from the Virus Watch cohort to examine the association between overcrowded households and SARS-CoV-2.

2.
Wellcome Open Research ; 6(16), 2021.
Article in English | CAB Abstracts | ID: covidwho-1780277

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Increased transmissibility of B.1.1.7 variant of concern (VOC) in the UK may explain its rapid emergence and global spread. We analysed data from putative household infector - infectee pairs in the Virus Watch Community cohort study to assess the serial interval of COVID-19 and whether this was affected by emergence of the B.1.1.7 variant.

3.
Lancet Healthy Longevity ; 2(6):E362-E370, 2021.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1312141

ABSTRACT

Background SARS-CoV-2 infection represents a major challenge for long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and many residents and staff are seropositive following persistent outbreaks. We aimed to investigate the association between the SARS-CoV-2 antibody status at baseline and subsequent infection in this population. Methods We did a prospective cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infection in staff (aged <65 years) and residents (aged >65 years) at 100 LTCFs in England between Oct 1, 2020, and Feb 1, 2021. Blood samples were collected between June and November, 2020, at baseline, and 2 and 4 months thereafter and tested for IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid and spike proteins. PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 was done weekly in staff and monthly in residents. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of a PCR-positive test by baseline antibody status, adjusted for age and sex, and stratified by LTCF. Findings 682 residents from 86 LCTFs and 1429 staff members from 97 LTCFs met study inclusion criteria. At baseline, IgG antibodies to nucleocapsid were detected in 226 (33%) of 682 residents and 408 (29%) of 1429 staff members. 93 (20%) of 456 residents who were antibody-negative at baseline had a PCR-positive test (infection rate 0.054 per month at risk) compared with four (2%) of 226 residents who were antibody-positive at baseline (0.007 per month at risk). 111 (11%) of 1021 staff members who were antibody-negative at baseline had PCR-positive tests (0.042 per month at risk) compared with ten (2%) of 408 staff members who were antibody-positive staff at baseline (0.009 per month at risk). The risk of PCR-positive infection was higher for residents who were antibody-negative at baseline than residents who were antibody-positive at baseline (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.44, p=0.0006), and the risk of a PCR-positive infection was also higher for staff who were antibody-negative at baseline compared with staff who were antibody-positive at baseline (aHR 0.39, 0.19-0.82;p=0.012). 12 of 14 reinfected participants had available data on symptoms, and 11 of these participants were symptomatic. Antibody titres to spike and nucleocapsid proteins were comparable in PCR-positive and PCR-negative cases. Interpretation The presence of IgG antibodies to nucleocapsid protein was associated with substantially reduced risk of reinfection in staff and residents for up to 10 months after primary infection. Copyright (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

4.
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) ; 33(3): e180-e191, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-932980

ABSTRACT

Much of routine cancer care has been disrupted due to the perceived susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients. Here, we systematically review the current evidence base pertaining to the prevalence, presentation and outcome of COVID-19 in cancer patients, in order to inform policy and practice going forwards. A keyword-structured systematic search was conducted on Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase and MedRxiv databases for studies reporting primary data on COVID-19 in cancer patients. Studies were critically appraised using the NIH National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute's quality assessment tool set. The pooled prevalence of cancer as a co-morbidity in patients with COVID-19 and pooled in-hospital mortality risk of COVID-19 in cancer patients were derived by random-effects meta-analyses. In total, 110 studies from 10 countries were included. The pooled prevalence of cancer as a co-morbidity in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was 2.6% (95% confidence interval 1.8%, 3.5%, I2: 92.0%). Specifically, 1.7% (95% confidence interval 1.3%, 2.3%, I2: 57.6.%) in China and 5.6% (95% confidence interval 4.5%, 6.7%, I2: 82.3%) in Western countries. Patients most commonly presented with non-specific symptoms of fever, dyspnoea and chest tightness in addition to decreased arterial oxygen saturation, ground glass opacities on computer tomography and non-specific changes in inflammatory markers. The pooled in-hospital mortality risk among patients with COVID-19 and cancer was 14.1% (95% confidence interval 9.1%, 19.8%, I2: 52.3%). We identified impeding questions that need to be answered to provide the foundation for an iterative review of the developing evidence base, and inform policy and practice going forwards. Analyses of the available data corroborate an unfavourable outcome of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and cancer. Our findings encourage future studies to report detailed social, demographic and clinical characteristics of cancer patients, including performance status, primary cancer type and stage, as well as a history of anti-cancer therapeutic interventions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/pathology , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/virology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , Prevalence , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL