Genome-wide association study between SARS-CoV-2 single nucleotide polymorphisms and virus copies during infections (preprint)

Variations in viral loads generated during SARS-CoV-2 infections can influence COVID-19 disease progression and the likelihood of onward transmission. However, the host and virus factors that may impact viral loads and infection dynamics are not fully understood. Here, we conducted virus whole genome sequencing and measured viral copies using RT-qPCR from 9,902 SARS-CoV-2 infections over a 2-year period to examine the relative impact of host factors and virus genetic variation on changes in viral copies. We first used statistical regression models to show that host age and SARS-CoV-2 variant significantly impact viral copies, but vaccination status does not. Then, using a genome-wide association study (GWAS) approach, we identified multiple nucleotide substitutions corresponding to amino acid changes in the SARS-CoV-2 genome associated with variations in viral copies. In particular, we analyzed the temporal patterns and found that SNPs associated with higher viral copies were predominantly observed in Omicron BA.2/BA.4/BA.5/XBB infections, whereas those associated with decreased viral copies were mostly observed in infections with Delta and Omicron BA.1 variants. Our work showcases how GWAS can be a useful tool for probing phenotypes related to SNPs in viral genomes, which can be used to characterize emerging variants and monitor therapeutic interventions.

Impact of COVID-19 vaccination on symptoms and immune phenotypes in vaccine-naÏve individuals with Long COVID (preprint)

BackgroundLong COVID contributes to the global burden of disease. Proposed root cause hypotheses include the persistence of SARS-CoV-2 viral reservoir, autoimmunity, and reactivation of latent herpesviruses. Patients have reported various changes in Long COVID symptoms after COVID-19 vaccinations, leaving uncertainty about whether vaccine-induced immune responses may alleviate or worsen disease pathology. MethodsIn this prospective study, we evaluated changes in symptoms and immune responses after COVID-19 vaccination in 16 vaccine-naive individuals with Long COVID. Surveys were administered before vaccination and then at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after receiving the first vaccine dose of the primary series. Simultaneously, SARS-CoV-2-reactive TCR enrichment, SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses, antibody responses to other viral and self-antigens, and circulating cytokines were quantified before vaccination and at 6 and 12 weeks after vaccination. ResultsSelf-report at 12 weeks post-vaccination indicated 10 out of 16 participants had improved health, 3 had no change, 1 had worse health, and 2 reported marginal changes. Significant elevation in SARS-CoV-2-specific TCRs and Spike protein-specific IgG were observed 6 and 12 weeks after vaccination. No changes in reactivities were observed against herpes viruses and self-antigens. Within this dataset, higher baseline sIL-6R was associated with symptom improvement, and the two top features associated with non-improvement were high IFN-{beta} and CNTF, among soluble analytes. ConclusionsOur study showed that in this small sample, vaccination improved the health or resulted in no change to the health of most participants, though few experienced worsening. Vaccination was associated with increased SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein-specific IgG and T cell expansion in most individuals with Long COVID. Symptom improvement was observed in those with baseline elevated sIL-6R, while elevated interferon and neuropeptide levels were associated with a lack of improvement. Plain language summaryThe impact of the COVID-19 vaccine on vaccine-naive individuals suffering from Long COVID is uncertain. This study assessed the experience and immune signatures of 16 unvaccinated participants with Long COVID. A total of 10 participants had improved health status after vaccination, and one person reported only worsening health. As expected, vaccination increased immune cells and antibodies against the viral spike protein. Immune signatures may prove to be predictors of health status after vaccination. However, given the small number of participants, these initial findings need further validation.

SOFA score performs worse than age for predicting mortality in patients with COVID-19 (preprint)

The use of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, originally developed to describe disease morbidity, is commonly used to predict in-hospital mortality. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many protocols for crisis standards of care used the SOFA score to select patients to be deprioritized due to a low likelihood of survival. A prior study found that age outperformed the SOFA score for mortality prediction in patients with COVID-19, but was limited to a small cohort of intensive care unit (ICU) patients and did not address whether their findings were unique to patients with COVID-19. Moreover, it is not known how well these measures perform across races. In this retrospective study, we compare the performance of age and SOFA scores in predicting in-hospital mortality across two cohorts: a cohort of 2,648 consecutive adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 who were admitted to a large academic health system in the northeastern United States over a 4-month period in 2020 and a cohort of 75,601 patients admitted to one of 335 ICUs in the eICU database between 2014 and 2015. Among the COVID-19 cohort, age (area under receiver-operating characteristic curve (AU-ROC) 0.795, 95% CI 0.762, 0.828) had a significantly better discrimination than SOFA score (AU-ROC 0.679, 95% CI 0.638, 0.721) for mortality prediction. Conversely, age (AU-ROC 0.628 95% CI 0.608, 0.628) underperformed compared to SOFA score (AU-ROC 0.735, 95% CI 0.726, 0.745) in non-COVID-19 ICU patients in the eICU database. There was no difference between Black and White COVID-19 patients in performance of either age or SOFA Score. Our findings bring into question the utility of SOFA score-based resource allocation in COVID-19 crisis standards of care.

Rapid emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is associated with an infection advantage over Delta in vaccinated persons (preprint)

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants continues to shape the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. The detection and rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (lineage B.1.1.529) in Botswana and South Africa became a global concern because it contained 15 mutations in the spike protein immunogenic receptor binding domain and was less neutralized by sera derived from vaccinees compared to the previously dominant Delta variant. To investigate if Omicron is more likely than Delta to cause infections in vaccinated persons, we analyzed 37,877 nasal swab PCR tests conducted from 12-26 December 2021 and calculated the test positivity rates for each variant by vaccination status. We found that the positivity rate among unvaccinated persons was higher for Delta (5.2%) than Omicron (4.5%). We found similar results in persons who received a single vaccine dose. Conversely, our results show that Omicron had higher positivity rates than Delta among those who received two doses within five months (Omicron = 4.7% vs. Delta = 2.6%), two doses more than five months ago (4.2% vs. 2.9%), and three vaccine doses (2.2% vs. 0.9%). Our estimates of Omicron positivity rates in persons receiving one or two vaccine doses were not significantly lower than unvaccinated persons but were 49.7% lower after three doses. In comparison, the reduction in Delta positivity rates from unvaccinated to 2 vaccine doses was 45.6-49.6% and to 3 vaccine doses was 83.2%. Despite the higher positivity rates for Omicron in vaccinated persons, we still found that 91.2% of the Omicron infections in our study occurred in persons who were eligible for 1 or more vaccine doses at the time of PCR testing. In conclusion, escape from vaccine-induced immunity likely contributed to the rapid rise in Omicron infections.

Change in COVID-19 risk over time following vaccination with CoronaVac: A test-negative case-control study (preprint)

Objective To estimate the change in odds of covid-19 over time following primary series completion of the inactivated whole virus vaccine, CoronaVac (Sinovac Biotech) in Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Design Test negative case-control study. Setting Community testing for covid-19 in Sao Paulo state, Brazil. Participants Adults aged 18-120 years who were residents of Sao Paulo state, without a previous laboratory-confirmed covid-19 infection, who received two doses of CoronaVac, and underwent reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 from 17 January to 30 September 2021. Main outcome measures RT-PCR-confirmed symptomatic covid-19 and associated hospital admissions and deaths. Cases were pair-matched to test-negative controls by age (in 5-year bands), municipality of residence, healthcare worker (HCW) status, and date of RT-PCR test ({+/-}3 days). Conditional logistic regression was adjusted for sex, number of covid-19-associated comorbidities, race, and previous acute respiratory infection. Results From 137,820 eligible individuals, 37,929 cases with symptomatic covid-19 and 25,756 test-negative controls with covid-19 symptoms were formed into 37,929 matched pairs. Adjusted odds ratios of symptomatic covid-19 increased with time since series completion, and this increase was greater in younger individuals, and among HCWs compared to non-HCWs. Adjusted odds ratios of covid-19 hospitalisation or death were significantly increased from 98 days since series completion, compared to individuals vaccinated 14-41 days previously: 1.40 (95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.79) from 98-125 days, 1.55 (1.16 to 2.07) from 126-153 days, 1.56 (1.12 to 2.18) from 154-181 days, and 2.12 (1.39-3.22) from 182 days. Conclusions In the general population of Sao Paulo state, Brazil, an increase in odds of moderate and severe covid-19 outcomes was observed over time following primary series completion with CoronaVac.

Effectiveness of the ChAdOx1 vaccine in the elderly during SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant transmission in Brazil (preprint)

BackgroundA two-dose regimen of ChAdOx1 coronavirus disease 19 (Covid-19) vaccine with an inter-dose interval of three months has been implemented in many countries with restricted vaccine supply. However, there is limited evidence for the effectiveness of ChAdOx1 by dose in elderly populations in countries with high prevalence of the Gamma variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2). MethodsWe conducted a test-negative case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of ChAdOx1 vaccine in adults aged 60 years or older during a Gamma-variant-associated epidemic in Sao Paulo state, Brazil, between 17 January and 2 July 2021. Cases and matched test-negative controls were individuals, identified from surveillance databases, who experienced an acute respiratory illness and underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing. We used conditional logistic regression to estimate the effectiveness by dose against RT-PCR-confirmed Covid-19, Covid-19 hospitalization, and Covid-19-related death. Results61,164 individuals were selected into matched case-control pairs. Starting [≥]28 days after the first dose, adjusted effectiveness of a single dose of ChAdOx1 was 33.4% (95% CI, 26.4 to 39.7) against Covid-19, 55.1% (95% CI, 46.6 to 62.2) against hospitalization, and 61.8% (95% CI, 48.9 to 71.4) against death. Starting [≥]14 days after the second dose, the adjusted effectiveness of the two-dose schedule was 77.9% (95% CI, 69.2 to 84.2) against Covid-19, 87.6% (95% CI, 78.2 to 92.9) against hospitalization, and 93.6% (95% CI, 81.9 to 97.7) against death. ConclusionsCompletion of the ChAdOx1 vaccine schedule afforded significantly increased protection over a single dose against mild and severe Covid-19 outcomes in elderly individuals during widespread Gamma variant transmission.

Effectiveness of CoronaVac among healthcare workers in the setting of high SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant transmission in Manaus, Brazil: A test-negative case-control study (preprint)

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant, Gamma, emerged in the city of Manaus in late 2020 during a large resurgence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and has spread throughout Brazil. The effectiveness of vaccines in settings with widespread Gamma variant transmission has not been reported. Methods We performed a matched test-negative case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of an inactivated vaccine, CoronaVac, in healthcare workers (HCWs) in Manaus, where the Gamma variant accounted for 86% of genotyped SARS-CoV-2 samples at the peak of its epidemic. We performed an early analysis of effectiveness following administration of at least one vaccine dose and an analysis of effectiveness of the two-dose schedule. The primary outcome was symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Findings For the early at-least-one-dose and two-dose analyses the study population was, respectively, 53,176 and 53,153 HCWs residing in Manaus and aged 18 years or older, with complete information on age, residence, and vaccination status. Among 53,153 HCWs eligible for the two-dose analysis, 47,170 (89%) received at least one dose of CoronaVac and 2,656 individuals (5%) underwent RT-PCR testing from 19 January, 2021 to 13 April, 2021. Of 3,195 RT-PCR tests, 885 (28%) were positive. 393 and 418 case- control pairs were selected for the early and two-dose analyses, respectively, matched on calendar time, age, and neighbourhood. Among those who had received both vaccine doses before the RT-PCR sample collection date, the average time from second dose to sample collection date was 14 days (IQR 7-24). In the early analysis, vaccination with at least one dose was associated with a 0.50-fold reduction (adjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE), 49.6%, 95% CI 11.3 to 71.4) in the odds of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the first dose. However, we estimated low effectiveness (adjusted VE 36.8%, 95% CI -54.9 to 74.2) of the two-dose schedule against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the second dose. A finding that vaccinated individuals were much more likely to be infected than unvaccinated individuals in the period 0-13 days after first dose (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.36-3.27) suggests that unmeasured confounding led to downward bias in the vaccine effectiveness estimate. Interpretation Evidence from this test-negative study of the effectiveness of CoronaVac was mixed, and likely affected by bias in this setting. Administration of at least one vaccine dose showed effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the setting of epidemic Gamma variant transmission. However, the low estimated effectiveness of the two-dose schedule underscores the need to maintain non-pharmaceutical interventions while vaccination campaigns with CoronaVac are being implemented. Funding Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz); Municipal Health Secretary of Manaus Research in Context Evidence before this study We searched PubMed for articles published from inception of the pandemic until April 3, 2021, with no language restrictions, using the search terms “P.1” AND “vaccine” AND “SARS-CoV-2”. Additionally, we searched for “CoronaVac” AND “SARS-CoV-2”. Early studies have found plasma from convalescent COVID-19 patients and sera from vaccinated individuals have reduced neutralisation of the SARS-CoV-2 variant, Gamma or P.1, compared with strains isolated earlier in the pandemic. Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA, Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1, and CoronaVac are the only vaccines for which such data has been published to date. No studies reported effectiveness of any vaccine on reducing the risk of infection or disease among individuals exposed to P.1 or in settings of high P.1 transmission. Added value of this study This study finds that vaccination with CoronaVac was 49.4% (95% CI 13.2 to 71.9) effective at preventing COVID-19 in a setting with likely high prevalence of the Gamma Variant of Concern. However, an analysis of effectiveness by dose was underpowered and failed to find significant effectiveness of the two-dose schedule of CoronaVac (estimated VE 37.1%, 95% CI -53.3 to 74.2). Implications of all the available evidence These findings are suggestive for the effectiveness of CoronaVac in healthcare workers in the setting of widespread P.1 transmission but must be strengthened by observational studies in other settings and populations. Based on this evidence, there is a need to implement sustained non-pharmaceutical interventions even as vaccination campaigns continue.

Accuracy of Computable Phenotyping Approaches for SARS-CoV-2 Infection and COVID-19 Hospitalizations from the Electronic Health Record (preprint)

ABSTRACT Objective Real-world data have been critical for rapid-knowledge generation throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. To ensure high-quality results are delivered to guide clinical decision making and the public health response, as well as characterize the response to interventions, it is essential to establish the accuracy of COVID-19 case definitions derived from administrative data to identify infections and hospitalizations. Methods Electronic Health Record (EHR) data were obtained from the clinical data warehouse of the Yale New Haven Health System (Yale, primary site) and 3 hospital systems of the Mayo Clinic (validation site). Detailed characteristics on demographics, diagnoses, and laboratory results were obtained for all patients with either a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or antigen test or ICD-10 diagnosis of COVID-19 (U07.1) between April 1, 2020 and March 1, 2021. Various computable phenotype definitions were evaluated for their accuracy to identify SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalizations. Results Of the 69,423 individuals with either a diagnosis code or a laboratory diagnosis of a SARS-CoV-2 infection at Yale, 61,023 had a principal or a secondary diagnosis code for COVID-19 and 50,355 had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Among those with a positive laboratory test, 38,506 (76.5%) and 3449 (6.8%) had a principal and secondary diagnosis code of COVID-19, respectively, while 8400 (16.7%) had no COVID-19 diagnosis. Moreover, of the 61,023 patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis code, 19,068 (31.2%) did not have a positive laboratory test for SARS-CoV-2 in the EHR. Of the 20 cases randomly sampled from this latter group for manual review, all had a COVID-19 diagnosis code related to asymptomatic testing with negative subsequent test results. The positive predictive value (precision) and sensitivity (recall) of a COVID-19 diagnosis in the medical record for a documented positive SARS-CoV-2 test were 68.8% and 83.3%, respectively. Among 5,109 patients who were hospitalized with a principal diagnosis of COVID-19, 4843 (94.8%) had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test within the 2 weeks preceding hospital admission or during hospitalization. In addition, 789 hospitalizations had a secondary diagnosis of COVID-19, of which 446 (56.5%) had a principal diagnosis consistent with severe clinical manifestation of COVID-19 (e.g., sepsis or respiratory failure). Compared with the cohort that had a principal diagnosis of COVID-19, those with a secondary diagnosis had a more than 2-fold higher in-hospital mortality rate (13.2% vs 28.0%, P<0.001). In the validation sample at Mayo Clinic, diagnosis codes more consistently identified SARS-CoV-2 infection (precision of 95%) but had lower recall (63.5%) with substantial variation across the 3 Mayo Clinic sites. Similar to Yale, diagnosis codes consistently identified COVID-19 hospitalizations at Mayo, with hospitalizations defined by secondary diagnosis code with 2-fold higher in-hospital mortality compared to those with a primary diagnosis of COVID-19. Conclusions COVID-19 diagnosis codes misclassified the SARS-CoV-2 infection status of many people, with implications for clinical research and epidemiological surveillance. Moreover, the codes had different performance across two academic health systems and identified groups with different risks of mortality. Real-world data from the EHR can be used to in conjunction with diagnosis codes to improve the identification of people infected with SARS-CoV-2.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy is associated with robust inflammatory response at the maternal-fetal interface (preprint)

Pregnant women appear to be at increased risk for severe outcomes associated with COVID-19, but the pathophysiology underlying this increased morbidity and its potential impact on the developing fetus is not well understood. In this study of pregnant women with and without COVID-19, we assessed viral and immune dynamics at the placenta during maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection. Amongst uninfected women, ACE2 was detected by immunohistochemistry in syncytiotrophoblast cells of the normal placenta during early pregnancy but was rarely seen in healthy placentas at full term. Term placentas from women infected with SARS-CoV-2, however, displayed a significant increase in ACE2 levels. Using immortalized cell lines and primary isolated placental cells, we determined the vulnerability of various placental cell types to direct infection by SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. Yet, despite the susceptibility of placental cells to SARS-CoV-2 infection, viral RNA was detected in the placentas of only a subset ([~]13%) of women in this cohort. Through single cell transcriptomic analyses, we found that the maternal-fetal interface of SARS-CoV-2-infected women exhibited markers associated with pregnancy complications, such as preeclampsia, and robust immune responses, including increased activation of placental NK and T cells and increased expression of interferon-related genes. Overall, this study suggests that SARS-CoV-2 is associated with immune activation at the maternal-fetal interface even in the absence of detectable local viral invasion. While this likely represents a protective mechanism shielding the placenta from infection, inflammatory changes in the placenta may also contribute to poor pregnancy outcomes and thus warrant further investigation.

Kinetics of antibody responses dictate COVID-19 outcome (preprint)

Recent studies have provided insights into innate and adaptive immune dynamics in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Yet, the exact feature of antibody responses that governs COVID-19 disease outcomes remain unclear. Here, we analysed humoral immune responses in 209 asymptomatic, mild, moderate and severe COVID-19 patients over time to probe the nature of antibody responses in disease severity and mortality. We observed a correlation between anti-Spike (S) IgG levels, length of hospitalization and clinical parameters associated with worse clinical progression. While high anti-S IgG levels correlated with worse disease severity, such correlation was time-dependent. Deceased patients did not have higher overall humoral response than live discharged patients. However, they mounted a robust, yet delayed response, measured by anti-S, anti-RBD IgG, and neutralizing antibody (NAb) levels, compared to survivors. Delayed seroconversion kinetics correlated with impaired viral control in deceased patients. Finally, while sera from 89% of patients displayed some neutralization capacity during their disease course, NAb generation prior to 14 days of disease onset emerged as a key factor for recovery. These data indicate that COVID-19 mortality does not correlate with the cross-sectional antiviral antibody levels per se, but rather with the delayed kinetics of NAb production.

Sex differences in immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 that underlie disease outcomes (preprint)

A growing body of evidence indicates sex differences in the clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)1-4. However, whether immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 differ between sexes, and whether such differences explain male susceptibility to COVID-19, is currently unknown. In this study, we examined sex differences in viral loads, SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody titers, plasma cytokines, as well as blood cell phenotyping in COVID-19 patients. By focusing our analysis on patients with mild to moderate disease who had not received immunomodulatory medications, our results revealed that male patients had higher plasma levels of innate immune cytokines and chemokines including IL-8, IL-18, and CCL5, along with more robust induction of non-classical monocytes. In contrast, female patients mounted significantly more robust T cell activation than male patients during SARS-CoV-2 infection, which was sustained in old age. Importantly, we found that a poor T cell response negatively correlated with patients age and was predictive of worse disease outcome in male patients, but not in female patients. Conversely, higher innate immune cytokines in female patients associated with worse disease progression, but not in male patients. These findings reveal a possible explanation underlying observed sex biases in COVID-19, and provide important basis for the development of sex-based approach to the treatment and care of men and women with COVID-19.