Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 119: 106813, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1926262

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: APOL1 risk alleles are associated with increased cardiovascular and chronic kidney disease (CKD) risk. It is unknown whether knowledge of APOL1 risk status motivates patients and providers to attain recommended blood pressure (BP) targets to reduce cardiovascular disease. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, pragmatic, randomized controlled clinical trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 6650 individuals with African ancestry and hypertension from 13 health systems. INTERVENTION: APOL1 genotyping with clinical decision support (CDS) results are returned to participants and providers immediately (intervention) or at 6 months (control). A subset of participants are re-randomized to pharmacogenomic testing for relevant antihypertensive medications (pharmacogenomic sub-study). CDS alerts encourage appropriate CKD screening and antihypertensive agent use. OUTCOMES: Blood pressure and surveys are assessed at baseline, 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome is change in systolic BP from enrollment to 3 months in individuals with two APOL1 risk alleles. Secondary outcomes include new diagnoses of CKD, systolic blood pressure at 6 months, diastolic BP, and survey results. The pharmacogenomic sub-study will evaluate the relationship of pharmacogenomic genotype and change in systolic BP between baseline and 3 months. RESULTS: To date, the trial has enrolled 3423 participants. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of patient and provider knowledge of APOL1 genotype on systolic blood pressure has not been well-studied. GUARDD-US addresses whether blood pressure improves when patients and providers have this information. GUARDD-US provides a CDS framework for primary care and specialty clinics to incorporate APOL1 genetic risk and pharmacogenomic prescribing in the electronic health record. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT04191824.


Subject(s)
Hypertension , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic , Black or African American , Antihypertensive Agents , Apolipoprotein L1 , Blood Pressure , Genetic Testing , Humans , Pharmacogenetics
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(9): 1618-1627, 2022 Oct 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1868259

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Delta variant has caused a dramatic resurgence in infections in the United Sates, raising questions regarding potential transmissibility among vaccinated individuals. METHODS: Between October 2020 and July 2021, we sequenced 4439 SARS-CoV-2 full genomes, 23% of all known infections in Alachua County, Florida, including 109 vaccine breakthrough cases. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to evaluate associations between viral RNA burden and patient characteristics. Contact tracing and phylogenetic analysis were used to investigate direct transmissions involving vaccinated individuals. RESULTS: The majority of breakthrough sequences with lineage assignment were classified as Delta variants (74.6%) and occurred, on average, about 3 months (104 ±â€…57.5 days) after full vaccination, at the same time (June-July 2021) of Delta variant exponential spread within the county. Six Delta variant transmission pairs between fully vaccinated individuals were identified through contact tracing, 3 of which were confirmed by phylogenetic analysis. Delta breakthroughs exhibited broad viral RNA copy number values during acute infection (interquartile range, 1.2-8.64 Log copies/mL), on average 38% lower than matched unvaccinated patients (3.29-10.81 Log copies/mL, P < .00001). Nevertheless, 49% to 50% of all breakthroughs, and 56% to 60% of Delta-infected breakthroughs exhibited viral RNA levels above the transmissibility threshold (4 Log copies/mL) irrespective of time after vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Delta infection transmissibility and general viral RNA quantification patterns in vaccinated individuals suggest limited levels of sterilizing immunity that need to be considered by public health policies. In particular, ongoing evaluation of vaccine boosters should specifically address whether extra vaccine doses curb breakthrough contribution to epidemic spread.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Vaccines , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , RNA, Viral/genetics , Phylogeny , Florida/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination
3.
J Med Virol ; 94(7): 3192-3202, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1750405

ABSTRACT

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOC) has raised questions regarding vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection, transmission, and ongoing virus evolution. Twenty-three mildly symptomatic "vaccination breakthrough" infections were identified as early as January 2021 in Alachua County, Florida, among individuals fully vaccinated with either the BNT162b2 (Pfizer) or the Ad26 (Janssen/J&J) vaccines. SARS-CoV-2 genomes were successfully generated for 11 of the vaccine breakthroughs, and 878 individuals in the surrounding area and were included for reference-based phylogenetic investigation. These 11 individuals were characterized by infection with VOCs, but also low-frequency variants present within the surrounding population. Low-frequency mutations were observed, which have been more recently identified as mutations of interest owing to their location within targeted immune epitopes (P812L) and association with increased replicative capacity (L18F). We present these results to posit the nature of the efficacy of vaccines in reducing symptoms as both a blessing and a curse-as vaccination becomes more widespread and self-motivated testing reduced owing to the absence of severe symptoms, we face the challenge of early recognition of novel mutations of potential concern. This case study highlights the critical need for continued testing and monitoring of infection and transmission among individuals regardless of vaccination status.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Phylogeny , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
4.
Front Immunol ; 12: 792448, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1581318

ABSTRACT

Both severe SARS-CoV-2 infections and bacterial sepsis exhibit an immunological dyscrasia and propensity for secondary infections. The nature of the immunological dyscrasias for these differing etiologies and their time course remain unclear. In this study, thirty hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with ten critically ill patients with bacterial sepsis over 21 days, as well as ten healthy control subjects. Blood was sampled between days 1 and 21 after admission for targeted plasma biomarker analysis, cellular phenotyping, and leukocyte functional analysis via enzyme-linked immunospot assay. We found that circulating inflammatory markers were significantly higher early after bacterial sepsis compared with SARS-CoV-2. Both cohorts exhibited profound immune suppression through 21 days (suppressed HLA-DR expression, reduced mononuclear cell IFN-gamma production), and expanded numbers of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs). In addition, MDSC expansion and ex vivo production of IFN-gamma and TNF-alpha were resolving over time in bacterial sepsis, whereas in SARS-CoV-2, immunosuppression and inflammation were accelerating. Despite less severe initial physiologic derangement, SARS-CoV-2 patients had similar incidence of secondary infections (23% vs 30%) as bacterial sepsis patients. Finally, COVID patients who developed secondary bacterial infections exhibited profound immunosuppression evident by elevated sPD-L1 and depressed HLA-DR. Although both bacterial sepsis and SARS-CoV-2 are associated with inflammation and immune suppression, their immune dyscrasia temporal patterns and clinical outcomes are different. SARS-CoV-2 patients had less severe early inflammation and organ dysfunction but had persistent inflammation and immunosuppression and suffered worse clinical outcomes, especially when SARS-CoV-2 infection was followed by secondary bacterial infection.


Subject(s)
Bacterial Infections/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Immune Tolerance/immunology , Sepsis/immunology , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
5.
J Clin Lab Anal ; 35(9): e23888, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1293191

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Hologic Aptima™ TMA SARS-CoV-2 assay was employed to test pooled nasopharyngeal (NP) samples to evaluate the performance of pooled sample testing and characterize variables influencing results. METHODS: Results on 1033 previously tested NP samples were retrieved to characterize the relative light units (RLU) of SARS-CoV-2-positive samples in the tested population. The pooling strategy of combining 10 SARS-CoV-2 samples into one pool (10/1) was used in this study. The results were compared with neat sample testing using the same Aptima™ TMA SARS-CoV-2 assay and also the CDC RT-PCR and the Cepheid SARS-CoV-2 assays. RESULTS: The Aptima assay compares favorably with both CDC RT-PCR and the Cepheid SARS-CoV-2 assays. Once samples are pooled 10 to 1 as in our experiments, the resulting signal strength of the assay suffers. A divide opens between pools assembled from strong-positive versus only weak-positive samples. Pools of the former can be reliably detected with positive percent agreement (PPA) of 95.2%, while pools of the latter are frequently misclassified as negative with PPA of 40%. When the weak-positive samples with kRLU value lower than 1012 constitute 3.4% of the total sample profile, the assay PPA approaches 93.4% suggesting that 10/1 pooled sample testing by the Aptima assay is an effective screening tool for SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: Performing pooled testing, one should monitor the weak positives with kRLU lower than 1012 or quantification cycle (Cq) value higher than 35 on an ongoing basis and adjust pooling approaches to avoid reporting false negatives.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Nasopharynx/virology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Testing/instrumentation , False Negative Reactions , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Reproducibility of Results , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
6.
Acad Pathol ; 8: 23742895211020485, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1282229

ABSTRACT

The global rise of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic resulted in an exponentially increasing demand for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 testing, which resulted in shortage of reagents worldwide. This shortage has been further worsened by screening of asymptomatic populations such as returning employees, students, and so on, as part of plans to reopen the economy. To optimize the utilization of testing reagents and human resources, pool testing of populations with low prevalence has emerged as a promising strategy. Although pooling is an effective solution to reduce the number of reagents used for testing, the process of pooling samples together and tracking them throughout the entire workflow is challenging. To be effective, samples must be tracked into each pool, pool-tested and reported individually. In this article, we address these challenges using robotics and informatics.

7.
JAMIA Open ; 3(4): 523-529, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-965930

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019, first reported in China in late 2019, has quickly spread across the world. The outbreak was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020. Here, we describe our initial efforts at the University of Florida Health for processing of large numbers of tests, streamlining data collection, and reporting data for optimizing testing capabilities and superior clinical management. Specifically, we discuss clinical and pathology informatics workflows and informatics instruments which we designed to meet the unique challenges of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. We hope these results benefit institutions preparing to implement SARS-CoV-2 testing.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL