Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
3.
Open forum infectious diseases ; 8(Suppl 1):293-293, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1563806

ABSTRACT

Background While pediatric cases of COVID-19 are at low risk for adverse events, schoolchildren should be considered for surveillance as they can become infected at school and serve as sources of household or community transmission. Our team assessed the feasibility of young children self-collecting SARS-CoV-2 samples for surveillance testing in an educational setting. Methods Students at a K-8 school were tested weekly for SARS-CoV-2 from September 2020 - June 2021. Error rates were collected from September 2020 - January 2021. Clinical staff provided all students with instructions for anterior nares specimen self-collection and then observed them to ensure proper technique. Instructions included holding the sterile swab while making sure not to touch the tip, inserting the swab into their nostril until they start to feel resistance, and rubbing the swab in four circles before repeating the process in their other nostril. An independent observer timed random sample self-collections from April - June 2021. Results 2,590 samples were collected from 209 students during the study period when data on error rates were collected. Errors occurred in 3.3% of all student encounters (n=87). Error rates over time are shown in Figure 1, with the highest rate occurring on the first day of testing (n=20/197, 10.2%) and the lowest in January 2021 (n=1/202, 0.5%). 2,574 visits for sample self-collection occurred during the study period when independent timing data was collected (April - June 2021). Of those visits, 7.5% (n=193) were timed. The average duration of each visit was 70 seconds. Figure 1. Swab Error Rates Over Time Conclusion Pediatric self-collected lower nasal swabs are a viable and easily tolerated specimen collection method for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in school settings, as evidenced by the low error rate and short time window of sample self-collection during testing. School administrators should expect errors to drop quickly after implementing testing. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

4.
Open forum infectious diseases ; 8(Suppl 1):S302-S302, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1563805

ABSTRACT

Background In order to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic, public health officials have recommended self-isolation, self-quarantine of exposed household contacts (HHC), and mask use to limit viral spread within households and communities. While household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is common, risk factors for HHC transmission are poorly understood. Methods In this prospective cohort study, we enrolled 37 households with at least one reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-confirmed (RT-PCR) COVID-19 index case from March 2020 - March 2021, in order to calculate secondary attack rates (SAR) and define risk factors for secondary infections. Participants were tested daily for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, using self-collected lower nasal samples. Households were followed until all members tested negative for seven consecutive days. We collected demographics, medical conditions, relationship to index case, and socioeconomic indicators. Subgroup data analysis was conducted and stratified by positivity status. Results Of 99 enrolled participants, 37 were index cases and 62 were household contacts (HHC), of whom 25 HHC were infected (40.3%). Secondary attack rate (SAR) was highest among adults caring for a parent (n=4/4, 100%) and parents of index cases (5/10, 50%). Households whose income came from service work had greater risk of transmission compared to households whose primary income was technology (n=5/7;71.4% vs 3/8;37.5% respectively). Pediatric contacts were at lower risk of infection when compared to adult contacts (n=5/18, 27.8% vs n=20/44, 45.5% respectively). Conclusion This study suggests that household transmission represents a key source of community-based infection of SARS-CoV-2. Allocating resources for education/training regarding prevention among infected individuals and their close contacts will be critical for control of future outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Oct 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493770

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Based on interim analyses and modelling data, lower doses of bamlanivimab and etesevimab together (700mg/1400mg) were investigated to determine optimal dose and expand availability of treatment. METHODS: This Phase 3 portion of the BLAZE-1 trial characterized the effect of bamlanivimab with etesevimab on overall patient clinical status and virologic outcomes in ambulatory patients ≥12 years old, with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, and ≥1 risk factor for progressing to severe COVID-19 and/or hospitalization. Bamlanivimab and etesevimab together (700mg/1400mg) or placebo were infused intravenously within 3 days of patients' first positive COVID-19 test. RESULTS: 769 patients were infused (median age [range]; 56.0 years [12, 93], 30.3% of patients ≥65 years of age and median duration of symptoms; 4 days). By day 29, 4/511 patients (0.8%) in the antibody treatment group had a COVID-19-related hospitalization or any-cause death, as compared with 15/258 patients (5.8%) in the placebo group (Δ[95% CI]=-5.0 [-8.0, -2.1], p<0.001). No deaths occurred in the bamlanivimab and etesevimab group compared with 4 deaths (all COVID-19-related) in the placebo group. Patients receiving antibody treatment had a greater mean reduction in viral load from baseline to Day 7 (Δ[95% CI]=-0.99 [-1.33, -0.66], p<0.0001) compared with those receiving placebo. Persistently high viral load at Day 7 correlated with COVID-19-related hospitalization or any-cause death by Day 29 in all BLAZE-1 cohorts investigated. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the use of bamlanivimab and etesevimab (700mg/1400mg) for ambulatory patients at high risk for severe COVID-19. Evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants will require continued monitoring to determine the applicability of this treatment.

6.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(9): e2125524, 2021 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1414844

ABSTRACT

Importance: As of May 2021, more than 32 million cases of COVID-19 have been confirmed in the United States, resulting in more than 615 000 deaths. Anaphylactic reactions associated with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been reported. Objective: To characterize the immunologic mechanisms underlying allergic reactions to these vaccines. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case series included 22 patients with suspected allergic reactions to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines between December 18, 2020, and January 27, 2021, at a large regional health care network. Participants were individuals who received at least 1 of the following International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision anaphylaxis codes: T78.2XXA, T80.52XA, T78.2XXD, or E949.9, with documentation of COVID-19 vaccination. Suspected allergy cases were identified and invited for follow-up allergy testing. Exposures: FDA-authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Allergic reactions were graded using standard definitions, including Brighton criteria. Skin prick testing was conducted to polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate 80 (P80). Histamine (1 mg/mL) and filtered saline (negative control) were used for internal validation. Basophil activation testing after stimulation for 30 minutes at 37 °C was also conducted. Concentrations of immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgE antibodies to PEG were obtained to determine possible mechanisms. Results: Of 22 patients (20 [91%] women; mean [SD] age, 40.9 [10.3] years; 15 [68%] with clinical allergy history), 17 (77%) met Brighton anaphylaxis criteria. All reactions fully resolved. Of patients who underwent skin prick tests, 0 of 11 tested positive to PEG, 0 of 11 tested positive to P80, and 1 of 10 (10%) tested positive to the same brand of mRNA vaccine used to vaccinate that individual. Among these same participants, 10 of 11 (91%) had positive basophil activation test results to PEG and 11 of 11 (100%) had positive basophil activation test results to their administered mRNA vaccine. No PEG IgE was detected; instead, PEG IgG was found in tested individuals who had an allergy to the vaccine. Conclusions and Relevance: Based on this case series, women and those with a history of allergic reactions appear at have an elevated risk of mRNA vaccine allergy. Immunological testing suggests non-IgE-mediated immune responses to PEG may be responsible in most individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/diagnosis , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , United States/epidemiology , United States Food and Drug Administration/organization & administration , United States Food and Drug Administration/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/adverse effects
7.
J Exp Med ; 218(8)2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1269483

ABSTRACT

Our understanding of protective versus pathological immune responses to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is limited by inadequate profiling of patients at the extremes of the disease severity spectrum. Here, we performed multi-omic single-cell immune profiling of 64 COVID-19 patients across the full range of disease severity, from outpatients with mild disease to fatal cases. Our transcriptomic, epigenomic, and proteomic analyses revealed widespread dysfunction of peripheral innate immunity in severe and fatal COVID-19, including prominent hyperactivation signatures in neutrophils and NK cells. We also identified chromatin accessibility changes at NF-κB binding sites within cytokine gene loci as a potential mechanism for the striking lack of pro-inflammatory cytokine production observed in monocytes in severe and fatal COVID-19. We further demonstrated that emergency myelopoiesis is a prominent feature of fatal COVID-19. Collectively, our results reveal disease severity-associated immune phenotypes in COVID-19 and identify pathogenesis-associated pathways that are potential targets for therapeutic intervention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/immunology , Immunity, Innate/physiology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/genetics , COVID-19/mortality , Case-Control Studies , Cytokines/genetics , Epigenesis, Genetic , Female , Hematopoiesis , Humans , Killer Cells, Natural/pathology , Killer Cells, Natural/virology , Male , Middle Aged , Monocytes/pathology , Monocytes/virology , NF-kappa B/metabolism , Neutrophils/pathology , Neutrophils/virology , Proteomics , Severity of Illness Index , Single-Cell Analysis
8.
Allergy ; 2021 Jun 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1255322

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether asthma and its allergic phenotype are risk factors for hospitalization or severe disease from SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: All patients over 28 days old testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March 1 and September 30, 2020, were retrospectively identified and characterized through electronic analysis at Stanford. A sub-cohort was followed prospectively to evaluate long-term COVID-19 symptoms. RESULTS: 168,190 patients underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing, and 6,976 (4.15%) tested positive. In a multivariate analysis, asthma was not an independent risk factor for hospitalization (OR 1.12 [95% CI 0.86, 1.45], p = .40). Among SARS-CoV-2-positive asthmatics, allergic asthma lowered the risk of hospitalization and had a protective effect compared with non-allergic asthma (OR 0.52 [0.28, 0.91], p = .026); there was no association between baseline medication use as characterized by GINA and hospitalization risk. Patients with severe COVID-19 disease had lower eosinophil levels during hospitalization compared with patients with mild or asymptomatic disease, independent of asthma status (p = .0014). In a patient sub-cohort followed longitudinally, asthmatics and non-asthmatics had similar time to resolution of COVID-19 symptoms, particularly lower respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma is not a risk factor for more severe COVID-19 disease. Allergic asthmatics were half as likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with non-allergic asthmatics. Lower levels of eosinophil counts (allergic biomarkers) were associated with a more severe COVID-19 disease trajectory. Recovery was similar among asthmatics and non-asthmatics with over 50% of patients reporting ongoing lower respiratory symptoms 3 months post-infection.

9.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 May 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216637

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The determinants of COVID-19 disease severity and extrapulmonary complications (EPCs) are poorly understood. We characterized relationships between SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and disease severity, clinical deterioration, and specific EPCs. METHODS: We used quantitative (qPCR) and digital (dPCR) PCR to quantify SARS-CoV-2 RNA from plasma in 191 patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with COVID-19. We recorded patient symptoms, laboratory markers, and clinical outcomes, with a focus on oxygen requirements over time. We collected longitudinal plasma samples from a subset of patients. We characterized the role of RNAemia in predicting clinical severity and EPCs using elastic net regression. RESULTS: 23.0% (44/191) of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients had viral RNA detected in plasma by dPCR, compared to 1.4% (2/147) by qPCR. Most patients with serial measurements had undetectable RNAemia within 10 days of symptom onset, reached maximum clinical severity within 16 days, and symptom resolution within 33 days. Initially RNAaemic patients were more likely to manifest severe disease (OR 6.72 [95% CI, 2.45 - 19.79]), worsening of disease severity (OR 2.43 [95% CI, 1.07 - 5.38]), and EPCs (OR 2.81 [95% CI, 1.26 - 6.36]). RNA load correlated with maximum severity (r = 0.47 [95% CI, 0.20 - 0.67]). CONCLUSIONS: dPCR is more sensitive than qPCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia, which is a robust predictor of eventual COVID-19 severity and oxygen requirements, as well as EPCs. Since many COVID-19 therapies are initiated on the basis of oxygen requirements, RNAemia on presentation might serve to direct early initiation of appropriate therapies for the patients most likely to deteriorate.

10.
Prehosp Emerg Care ; : 1-10, 2021 May 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1165151

ABSTRACT

Objective: Firefighter first responders and other emergency medical services (EMS) personnel have been among the highest risk healthcare workers for illness during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We sought to determine the rate of seropositivity for SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies and of acute asymptomatic infection among firefighter first responders in a single county with early exposure in the pandemic. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of clinically active firefighters cross-trained as paramedics or EMTs in the fire departments of Santa Clara County, California. Firefighters without current symptoms were tested between June and August 2020. Our primary outcomes were rates of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody seropositivity and SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR swab positivity for acute infection. We report cumulative incidence, participant characteristics with frequencies and proportions, and proportion positive and associated relative risk (with 95% confidence intervals). Results: We enrolled 983 out of 1339 eligible participants (response rate: 73.4%). Twenty-five participants (2.54%, 95% CI 1.65-3.73) tested positive for IgG antibodies and 9 (0.92%, 95% CI 0.42-1.73) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Our cumulative incidence, inclusive of self-reported prior positive PCR tests, was 34 (3.46%, 95% CI 2.41-4.80). Conclusion: In a county with one of the earliest outbreaks in the United States, the seroprevalence among firefighter first responders was lower than that reported by other studies of frontline health care workers, while the cumulative incidence remained higher than that seen in the surrounding community.

11.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(9): 1053-1059, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-989631

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the magnitude of unidentified coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in our healthcare personnel (HCP) early in the COVID-19 pandemic, and we evaluated risk factors for infection to identify areas for improvement in infection control practice in a northern California academic medical center. METHODS: We reviewed anti-severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG serologic test results and self-reported risk factors for seropositivity among 10,449 asymptomatic HCP who underwent voluntary serology testing between April 20 and May 20, 2020. RESULTS: In total, 136 employees (1.3%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG. This included 41 individuals (30.1%) who had previously tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) between March 13 and April 16, 2020. In multivariable analysis, employees of Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-3.46) and those working in environmental services, food services, or patient transport (OR, 4.81; 95% CI, 2.08-10.30) were at increased risk for seropositivity compared to other groups. Employees reporting a household contact with COVID-19 were also at higher risk for seropositivity (OR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.47-6.44), but those with a work, exposure alone were not (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.58-2.47). Importantly, one-third of seropositive individuals reported no prior symptoms, no suspected exposures, and no prior positive RT-PCR test. CONCLUSION: In this study, SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among HCP early in the northern California epidemic appeared to be quite low and was more likely attributable to community rather than occupational exposure.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , California/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...