Distinct immune responses in patients infected with influenza or SARS-CoV-2, and in COVID-19 survivors, characterised by transcriptomic and cellular abundance differences in blood. (preprint)

Background The worldwide pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has claimed millions of lives and has had a profound effect on global life. Understanding the pathogenicity of the virus and the body's response to infection is crucial in improving patient management, prognosis, and therapeutic strategies. To address this, we performed functional transcriptomic profiling to better understand the generic and specific effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods Whole blood RNA sequencing was used to profile a well characterised cohort of patients hospitalised with COVID-19, during the first wave of the pandemic prior to the availability of approved COVID-19 treatments and who went on to survive or die of COVID-19, and patients hospitalised with influenza virus infection between 2017 and 2019. Clinical parameters between patient groups were compared, and several bioinformatic tools were used to assess differences in transcript abundances and cellular composition. Results The analyses revealed contrasting innate and adaptive immune programmes, with transcripts and cell subsets associated with the innate immune response elevated in patients with influenza, and those involved in the adaptive immune response elevated in patients with COVID-19. Topological analysis identified additional gene signatures that differentiated patients with COVID-19 from patients with influenza, including insulin resistance, mitochondrial oxidative stress and interferon signalling. An efficient adaptive immune response was furthermore associated with patient survival, while an inflammatory response predicted death in patients with COVID-19. A potential prognostic signature was found based on a selection of transcript abundances, associated with circulating immunoglobulins, nucleosome assembly, cytokine production and T cell activation, in the blood transcriptome of COVID-19 patients, upon admission to hospital, which can be used to stratify patients likely to survive or die. Conclusions The results identified distinct immunological signatures between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza, prognostic of disease progression and indicative of different targeted therapies. The altered transcript abundances associated with COVID-19 survivors can be used to predict more severe outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Risk factors for persistent abnormality on chest radiographs at 12-weeks post hospitalisation with PCR confirmed COVID-19 (preprint)

BackgroundThe long-term consequences of COVID-19 remain unclear. There is concern a proportion of patients will progress to develop pulmonary fibrosis. We aimed to assess the temporal change in CXR infiltrates in a cohort of patients following hospitalisation for COVID-19.MethodsWe conducted a single-centre prospective cohort study of patients admitted to University Hospital Southampton with confirmed SARS-CoV2 infection between 20th March – 3rd June 2020. Patients were approached for standard-of-care follow-up 12-weeks after hospitalisation. Inpatient and follow-up CXRs were scored by the assessing clinician for extent of pulmonary infiltrates; 0-4 per lung (Nil=0, <25%=1, 25-50%=2, 51-75%=3, >75%=4). Results 101 patients with paired CXRs were included. Demographics: 53% male with a median (IQR) age 53.0 (45-63) years and length of stay 9 (5-17.5) days. The median CXR follow-up interval was 82 (77-86) days with median baseline and follow-up CXR scores of 4.0 (3-5) and 0.0 (0-1) respectively. 32% of patients had persistent CXR abnormality at 12-weeks. In multivariate analysis length of stay (LOS), smoking-status and obesity were identified as independent risk factors for persistent CXR abnormality. Serum LDH was significantly higher at baseline and at follow-up in patients with CXR abnormalities compared to those with resolution. A 5-point composite risk score (1-point each; LOS≥15 days, Level 2/3 admission, LDH>750 U/L, obesity and smoking-status) strongly predicted risk of persistent radiograph abnormality (0.81).ConclusionPersistent CXR abnormality 12-weeks post COVID-19 was common in this cohort. LOS, obesity, increased serum LDH, and smoking-status were risk factors for radiograph abnormality. These findings require further prospective validation.

FebriDx point-of-care test in patients with suspected COVID-19: a pooled diagnostic accuracy study (preprint)

Background: Point-of-care (POC) tests for COVID-19 could relieve pressure on isolation resource, support infection prevention and control, and help commence more timely and appropriate treatment. We aimed to undertake a systematic review and pooled diagnostic test accuracy study of available individual patient data (IPD) to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a commercial POC test (FebriDx) in patients with suspected COVID-19. Methods: A literature search was performed on the 1st of October 2020 to identify studies reporting diagnostic accuracy statistics of the FebriDx POC test versus real time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2. Studies were screened for risk of bias. IPD were sought from studies meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Logistic regression was performed to investigate the study effect on the outcome of the RT-PCR test result in order to determine whether it was appropriate to pool results. Diagnostic accuracy statistics were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: 15 studies were screened, and we included two published studies with 527 hospitalised patients. 523 patients had valid FebriDx results for Myxovirus resistance protein A (MxA), an antiviral host response protein. The FebriDx test produced a pooled sensitivity of 0.920 (95% CI: 0.875-0.950) and specificity of 0.862 (0.819-0.896) compared with RT-PCR, where there was an estimated true COVID-19 prevalence of 0.405 (0.364-0.448) and overall FebriDx test yield was 99.2%. Patients were tested at a median of 4 days [interquartile range: 2:9] after symptom onset. No differences were found in a sub-group analysis of time tested since the onset of symptoms. Conclusions: Based on a large sample of patients from two studies during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the FebriDx POC test had reasonable diagnostic accuracy in a hospital setting with high COVID-19 prevalence, out of influenza season. More research is required to determine how FebriDx would perform in other healthcare settings with higher or lower COVID-19 prevalence, different patient populations, or when other respiratory infections are in circulation.