Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 22
Filter
1.
Non-Coding RNA ; 8(3):35, 2022.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1857034

ABSTRACT

Recent advances in gene expression analysis techniques and increased access to technologies such as microarrays, qPCR arrays, and next-generation sequencing, in the last decade, have led to increased awareness of the complexity of the inflammatory responses that lead to pathology. This finding is also the case for rheumatic diseases, importantly and specifically, rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The coincidence in major genetic and epigenetic regulatory events leading to RA's inflammatory state is now well-recognized. Research groups have characterized the gene expression profile of early RA patients and identified a group of miRNAs that is particularly abundant in the early stages of the disease and miRNAs associated with treatment responses. In this perspective, we summarize the current state of RNA-based biomarker discovery and the context of technology adoption/implementation due to the COVID-19 pandemic. These advances have great potential for clinical application and could provide preclinical disease detection, follow-up, treatment targets, and biomarkers for treatment response monitoring.

2.
J Appl Lab Med ; 2021 Nov 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1831206

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Numerous serology assays are available for detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies but are limited in that only one/two target antigen(s) can be tested at a time. Here, we describe a novel multiplex assay that simultaneously detects and quantifies IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 antigens, spike (S), nucleocapsid (N), receptor-binding domain (RBD), and N-terminal domain (NTD) in a single well. METHODS: Sensitivity was determined using samples (n = 124) from confirmed SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive individuals. Pre-pandemic (n = 100) and non-COVID respiratory infection positive samples (n = 100) were used to evaluate specificity. Samples were analyzed using COVID-19 IgG multiplex serology assay from Meso Scale Discovery (MSD) and using commercial platforms from Abbott, EUROIMMUN, and Siemens. RESULTS: At > 14 days post-PCR, MSD assay displayed >98.0% sensitivity (S: 100%, 95% CI, 98.0%-100.0%; N: 98.0%, 95% CI, 97.2%-98.9%; RBD: 94.1%, 95% CI, 92.6%-95.6%; NTD: 98.0%, 95% CI, 97.2%-98.9%) and 99% specificity (95% CI, 99.3%-99.7%) for antibodies to all four antigens. Parallel assessment of antibodies to more than one antigen improved the sensitivity to 100% (95% CI, 98.0%-100.0%) while maintaining 98% (95% CI, 97.6%-98.4%) specificity regardless of the combinations used. When AU/mL concentrations of IgG antibodies from the MSD assay were compared against the corresponding IgG signals acquired from the single target commercial assays, the following correlations were observed: Abbott (vs MSD N, R2=0.73), Siemens (vs MSD RBD, R2=0.92), and EUROIMMUN (vs MSD S, R2=0.82). CONCLUSION: MSD assay offers an accurate and a comprehensive assessment of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with higher sensitivity and equivalent specificity compared to the commercial IgG serology assays.

4.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-315819

ABSTRACT

Research exploring the development and outcome of COVID-19 infections has led to the need to find better diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. This cross-sectional study used targeted metabolomics to identify potential COVID-19 biomarkers that predicted the course of the illness by assessing 110 endogenous plasma metabolites from individuals admitted to a local hospital for diagnosis/treatment. Patients were classified into four groups (≈ 40 each) according to standard polymerase chain reaction (PCR) COVID-19 testing and disease course: PCR-/controls (i.e., non-COVID controls), PCR+/not-hospitalized, PCR+/hospitalized, and PCR+/intubated. Blood samples were collected within 2 days of admission/PCR testing. Metabolite concentration data, demographic data and clinical data were used to propose biomarkers and develop optimal regression models for the diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC;95%CI) was used to assess each models’ predictive value. A panel that included the kynurenine: tryptophan ratio, LysoPC a C26:0, and pyruvic acid discriminated non-COVID controls from PCR+/not-hospitalized (AUC = 0.947;95%CI 0.931–0.962). A second panel consisting of C10:2, butyric acid, and pyruvic acid distinguished PCR+/not-hospitalized from PCR+/hospitalized and PCR+/intubated (AUC = 0.975;95%CI 0.968–0.983). Only LysoPC a C28:0 differentiated PCR+/hospitalized from PCR+/intubated patients (AUC = 0.770;95%CI 0.736–0.803). If additional studies with targeted metabolomics confirm the diagnostic value of these plasma biomarkers, such panels could eventually be of clinical use in medical practice.

5.
EuropePMC;
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-327202

ABSTRACT

Measuring the neutralizing potential of SARS-CoV-2 antigens-exposed sera informs on effective humoral immunity. This is relevant to 1-monitor levels of protection within an asymptomatic population, 2-evaluate the efficacy of existing and novel vaccines against emerging variants, 3-test prospective therapeutic monoclonal neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) and, overall, to contribute to understand SARS-CoV-2 immunity. However, the gold-standard method to titer NAbs is a functional assay of virus-mediated infection, which requires biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) facilities. As these facilities are insufficient in Latin American countries, including Mexico, scant information has been obtained about NAb in these countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. An alternative solution to acquire NAb information locally is to use non-replicative viral particles that display the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) protein on their surface, and deliver a reporter gene into target cells upon transduction. Here we present the development of a NAb-measuring assay based on Nanoluc-mediated luminescence measurements from SARS-CoV-2 S-pseudotyped lentiviral particle-infected cells. We applied the optimized assay in a BSL-2 facility to measure NAbs in 15 pre-pandemic, 18 COVID-19 convalescent and 32 BNT162b2 vaccinated serum samples, which evidenced the assay with 100% sensitivity, 86.6% specificity and 96% accuracy. The assay highlighted heterogeneity in neutralization curves which are relevant in discussing neutralization potency dynamics. Overall, this is the first report of a BSL-2 safe functional assay to measure SARS-CoV-2 in Mexico and a cornerstone methodology necessary to measure NAb with a functional assay in the context of limited resources settings.

7.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-296756

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered the development of numerous diagnostic tools to monitor infection and to determine immune response. Although assays to measure binding antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are widely available, more specific tests measuring neutralization activities of antibodies are immediately needed to quantify the extent and duration of protection that results from infection or vaccination. We previously developed a ‘Serological Assay based on a Tri-part split-NanoLuc® (SATiN)’ to detect antibodies that bind to the spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2. Herein, we expand on our previous work and describe a reconfigured version of the SATiN assay that can measure neutralization activity of antibodies directly from convalescent or vaccinated sera. The sensitivity is comparable to cell-based pseudovirus neutralization assays but with significantly shorter preparation and assay run time. As the assay is modular, we further demonstrate that Neutralization SATiN (Neu-SATiN) enables rapid assessment of the effectiveness of vaccines and level of protection against existing SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and can therefore be readily adapted for emerging variants.

8.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 11(12)2021 Nov 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1542447

ABSTRACT

Differences in clinical manifestations, immune response, metabolic alterations, and outcomes (including disease severity and mortality) between men and women with COVID-19 have been reported since the pandemic outbreak, making it necessary to implement sex-specific biomarkers for disease diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to identify sex-associated differences in COVID-19 patients by means of a genetic algorithm (GALGO) and machine learning, employing support vector machine (SVM) and logistic regression (LR) for the data analysis. Both algorithms identified kynurenine and hemoglobin as the most important variables to distinguish between men and women with COVID-19. LR and SVM identified C10:1, cough, and lysoPC a 14:0 to discriminate between men with COVID-19 from men without, with LR being the best model. In the case of women with COVID-19 vs. women without, SVM had a higher performance, and both models identified a higher number of variables, including 10:2, lysoPC a C26:0, lysoPC a C28:0, alpha-ketoglutaric acid, lactic acid, cough, fever, anosmia, and dysgeusia. Our results demonstrate that differences in sexes have implications in the diagnosis and outcome of the disease. Further, genetic and machine learning algorithms are useful tools to predict sex-associated differences in COVID-19.

9.
J Appl Lab Med ; 2021 Nov 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506496

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Numerous serology assays are available for detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies but are limited in that only one/two target antigen(s) can be tested at a time. Here, we describe a novel multiplex assay that simultaneously detects and quantifies IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 antigens, spike (S), nucleocapsid (N), receptor-binding domain (RBD), and N-terminal domain (NTD) in a single well. METHODS: Sensitivity was determined using samples (n = 124) from confirmed SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive individuals. Pre-pandemic (n = 100) and non-COVID respiratory infection positive samples (n = 100) were used to evaluate specificity. Samples were analyzed using COVID-19 IgG multiplex serology assay from Meso Scale Discovery (MSD) and using commercial platforms from Abbott, EUROIMMUN, and Siemens. RESULTS: At > 14 days post-PCR, MSD assay displayed >98.0% sensitivity (S: 100%, 95% CI, 98.0%-100.0%; N: 98.0%, 95% CI, 97.2%-98.9%; RBD: 94.1%, 95% CI, 92.6%-95.6%; NTD: 98.0%, 95% CI, 97.2%-98.9%) and 99% specificity (95% CI, 99.3%-99.7%) for antibodies to all four antigens. Parallel assessment of antibodies to more than one antigen improved the sensitivity to 100% (95% CI, 98.0%-100.0%) while maintaining 98% (95% CI, 97.6%-98.4%) specificity regardless of the combinations used. When AU/mL concentrations of IgG antibodies from the MSD assay were compared against the corresponding IgG signals acquired from the single target commercial assays, the following correlations were observed: Abbott (vs MSD N, R2=0.73), Siemens (vs MSD RBD, R2=0.92), and EUROIMMUN (vs MSD S, R2=0.82). CONCLUSION: MSD assay offers an accurate and a comprehensive assessment of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with higher sensitivity and equivalent specificity compared to the commercial IgG serology assays.

10.
Arch Pathol Lab Med ; 145(10): 1212-1220, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1444461

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT.­: Emerging evidence shows correlation between the presence of neutralization antibodies (nAbs) and protective immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Currently available commercial serology assays lack the ability to specifically identify nAbs. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-based nAb assay (GenScript cPass neutralization antibody assay) has recently received emergency use authorization from the Food and Drug Administration. OBJECTIVE.­: To evaluate the performance characteristics of this assay and compare and correlate it with the commercial assays that detect SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG). DESIGN.­: Specimens from SARS-COV-2 infected patients (n = 124), healthy donors obtained prepandemic (n = 100), and patients with non-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) respiratory infections (n = 92) were analyzed using this assay. Samples with residual volume were also tested on 3 commercial serology platforms (Abbott, Euroimmun, Siemens). Twenty-eight randomly selected specimens from patients with COVID-19 and 10 healthy controls were subjected to a plaque reduction neutralization test. RESULTS.­: The cPass assay exhibited 96.1% (95% CI, 94.9%-97.3%) sensitivity (at >14 days post-positive PCR), 100% (95% CI, 98.0%-100.0%) specificity, and zero cross-reactivity for the presence of non-COVID-19 respiratory infections. When compared with the plaque reduction assay, 97.4% (95% CI, 96.2%-98.5%) qualitative agreement and a positive correlation (R2 = 0.76) was observed. Comparison of IgG signals from each of the commercial assays with the nAb results from plaque reduction neutralization test/cPass assays displayed greater than 94.7% qualitative agreement and correlations with R2 = 0.43/0.68 (Abbott), R2 = 0.57/0.85 (Euroimmun), and R2 = 0.39/0.63 (Siemens), respectively. CONCLUSIONS.­: The combined data support the use of cPass assay for accurate detection of the nAb response. Positive IgG results from commercial assays associated reasonably with nAbs presence and can serve as a substitute.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methods , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Child , Child, Preschool , Cohort Studies , Epidemics/prevention & control , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Middle Aged , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Young Adult
12.
Virol J ; 18(1): 1, 2021 01 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388776

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Virus neutralization by antibodies is an important prognostic factor in many viral diseases. To easily and rapidly measure titers of neutralizing antibodies in serum or plasma, we developed pseudovirion particles composed of the spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 incorporated onto murine leukemia virus capsids and a modified minimal murine leukemia virus genome encoding firefly luciferase. This assay design is intended for use in laboratories with biocontainment level 2 and therefore circumvents the need for the biocontainment level 3 that would be required for replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 virus. To validate the pseudovirion assay, we set up comparisons with other available antibody tests including those from Abbott, Euroimmun and Siemens, using archived, known samples. RESULTS: 11 out of 12 SARS-CoV-2-infected patient serum samples showed neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2-spike pseudotyped MLV viruses, with neutralizing titers-50 (NT50) that ranged from 1:25 to 1:1,417. Five historical samples from patients hospitalized for severe influenza infection in 2016 tested negative in the neutralization assay (NT50 < 25). Three serum samples with high neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2/MLV pseudoviruses showed no detectable neutralizing activity (NT50 < 25) against SARS-CoV-1/MLV pseudovirions. We also compared the semiquantitative Siemens SARS-CoV-2 IgG test, which measures binding of IgG to recombinantly expressed receptor binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein with the neutralization titers obtained in the pseudovirion assay and the results show high concordance between the two tests (R2 = 0.9344). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 spike/MLV pseudovirions provide a practical means of assessing neutralizing activity of antibodies in serum or plasma from infected patients under laboratory conditions consistent with biocontainment level 2. This assay offers promise also in evaluating immunogenicity of spike glycoprotein-based candidate vaccines in the near future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , Leukemia/immunology , Neutralization Tests/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Virion/immunology , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/immunology , Animals , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , HEK293 Cells , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Mice
13.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(11): 2786-2794, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1381376

ABSTRACT

We aimed to generate an unbiased estimate of the incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in 4 urban counties in Utah, USA. We used a multistage sampling design to randomly select community-representative participants >12 years of age. During May 4-June 30, 2020, we collected serum samples and survey responses from 8,108 persons belonging to 5,125 households. We used a qualitative chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG in serum samples. We estimated the overall seroprevalence to be 0.8%. The estimated seroprevalence-to-case count ratio was 2.5, corresponding to a detection fraction of 40%. Only 0.2% of participants from whom we collected nasopharyngeal swab samples had SARS-CoV-2-positive reverse transcription PCR results. SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence during the study was low, and prevalence of PCR-positive cases was even lower. The comparatively high SARS-CoV-2 detection rate (40%) demonstrates the effectiveness of Utah's testing strategy and public health response.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Humans , Probability , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Utah/epidemiology
14.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0256784, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1378138

ABSTRACT

Viral sepsis has been proposed as an accurate term to describe all multisystemic dysregulations and clinical findings in severe and critically ill COVID-19 patients. The adoption of this term may help the implementation of more accurate strategies of early diagnosis, prognosis, and in-hospital treatment. We accurately quantified 110 metabolites using targeted metabolomics, and 13 cytokines/chemokines in plasma samples of 121 COVID-19 patients with different levels of severity, and 37 non-COVID-19 individuals. Analyses revealed an integrated host-dependent dysregulation of inflammatory cytokines, neutrophil activation chemokines, glycolysis, mitochondrial metabolism, amino acid metabolism, polyamine synthesis, and lipid metabolism typical of sepsis processes distinctive of a mild disease. Dysregulated metabolites and cytokines/chemokines showed differential correlation patterns in mild and critically ill patients, indicating a crosstalk between metabolism and hyperinflammation. Using multivariate analysis, powerful models for diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19 induced sepsis were generated, as well as for mortality prediction among septic patients. A metabolite panel made of kynurenine/tryptophan ratio, IL-6, LysoPC a C18:2, and phenylalanine discriminated non-COVID-19 from sepsis patients with an area under the curve (AUC (95%CI)) of 0.991 (0.986-0.995), with sensitivity of 0.978 (0.963-0.992) and specificity of 0.920 (0.890-0.949). The panel that included C10:2, IL-6, NLR, and C5 discriminated mild patients from sepsis patients with an AUC (95%CI) of 0.965 (0.952-0.977), with sensitivity of 0.993(0.984-1.000) and specificity of 0.851 (0.815-0.887). The panel with citric acid, LysoPC a C28:1, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and kynurenine/tryptophan ratio discriminated severe patients from sepsis patients with an AUC (95%CI) of 0.829 (0.800-0.858), with sensitivity of 0.738 (0.695-0.781) and specificity of 0.781 (0.735-0.827). Septic patients who survived were different from those that did not survive with a model consisting of hippuric acid, along with the presence of Type II diabetes, with an AUC (95%CI) of 0.831 (0.788-0.874), with sensitivity of 0.765 (0.697-0.832) and specificity of 0.817 (0.770-0.865).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , Metabolomics , Sepsis/diagnosis , Adult , Area Under Curve , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Chemokines/blood , Cytokines/blood , Female , Humans , Kynurenine/blood , Lymphocytes/cytology , Male , Middle Aged , Neutrophils/cytology , ROC Curve , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Sepsis/etiology , Severity of Illness Index , Tryptophan/blood
15.
Roeker, Lindsey E.; Scarfo, Lydia, Chatzikonstantinou, Thomas, Abrisqueta, Pau, Eyre, Toby A.; Cordoba, Raul, Muntañola Prat, Ana, Villacampa, Guillermo, Leslie, Lori A.; Koropsak, Michael, Quaresmini, Giulia, Allan, John N.; Furman, Richard R.; Bhavsar, Erica B.; Pagel, John M.; Hernandez-Rivas, Jose Angel, Patel, Krish, Motta, Marina, Bailey, Neil, Miras, Fatima, Lamanna, Nicole, Alonso, Rosalia, Osorio-Prendes, Santiago, Vitale, Candida, Kamdar, Manali, Baltasar, Patricia, Österborg, Anders, Hanson, Lotta, Baile, Mónica, Rodríguez-Hernández, Ines, Valenciano, Susana, Popov, Viola Maria, Barez Garcia, Abelardo, Alfayate, Ana, Oliveira, Ana C.; Eichhorst, Barbara, Quaglia, Francesca M.; Reda, Gianluigi, Lopez Jimenez, Javier, Varettoni, Marzia, Marchetti, Monia, Romero, Pilar, Riaza Grau, Rosalía, Munir, Talha, Zabalza, Amaya, Janssens, Ann, Niemann, Carsten U.; Perini, Guilherme Fleury, Delgado, Julio, Yanez San Segundo, Lucrecia, Gómez Roncero, Ma Isabel, Wilson, Matthew, Patten, Piers, Marasca, Roberto, Iyengar, Sunil, Seddon, Amanda, Torres, Ana, Ferrari, Angela, Cuéllar-García, Carolina, Wojenski, Daniel, El-Sharkawi, Dima, Itchaki, Gilad, Parry, Helen, Mateos-Mazón, Juan José, Martinez-Calle, Nicolas, Ma, Shuo, Naya, Daniel, Van Der Spek, Ellen, Seymour, Erlene K.; Gimeno Vázquez, Eva, Rigolin, Gian Matteo, Mauro, Francesca Romana, Walter, Harriet S.; Labrador, Jorge, De Paoli, Lorenzo, Laurenti, Luca, Ruiz, Elena, Levin, Mark-David, Šimkovič, Martin, Špaček, Martin, Andreu, Rafa, Walewska, Renata, Perez-Gonzalez, Sonia, Sundaram, Suchitra, Wiestner, Adrian, Cuesta, Amalia, Broom, Angus, Kater, Arnon P.; Muiña, Begoña, Velasquez, César A.; Ujjani, Chaitra S.; Seri, Cristina, Antic, Darko, Bron, Dominique, Vandenberghe, Elisabeth, Chong, Elise A.; Lista, Enrico, García, Fiz Campoy, Del Poeta, Giovanni, Ahn, Inhye, Pu, Jeffrey J.; Brown, Jennifer R.; Soler Campos, Juan Alfonso, Malerba, Lara, Trentin, Livio, Orsucci, Lorella, Farina, Lucia, Villalon, Lucia, Vidal, Maria Jesus, Sanchez, Maria Jose, Terol, Maria Jose, De Paolis, Maria Rosaria, Gentile, Massimo, Davids, Matthew S.; Shadman, Mazyar, Yassin, Mohamed A.; Foglietta, Myriam, Jaksic, Ozren, Sportoletti, Paolo, Barr, Paul M.; Ramos, Rafael, Santiago, Raquel, Ruchlemer, Rosa, Kersting, Sabina, Huntington, Scott F.; Herold, Tobias, Herishanu, Yair, Thompson, Meghan C.; Lebowitz, Sonia, Ryan, Christine, Jacobs, Ryan W.; Portell, Craig A.; Isaac, Krista, Rambaldi, Alessandro, Nabhan, Chadi, Brander, Danielle M.; Montserrat, Emili, Rossi, Giuseppe, Garcia-Marco, Jose A.; Coscia, Marta, Malakhov, Nikita, Fernandez-Escalada, Noemi, Skånland, Sigrid Strand, Coombs, Callie C.; Ghione, Paola, Schuster, Stephen J.; Foà, Robin, Cuneo, Antonio, Bosch, Francesc, Stamatopoulos, Kostas, Ghia, Paolo, Mato, Anthony R.; Patel, Meera.
Blood ; 136(Supplement 1):45-49, 2020.
Article in English | PMC | ID: covidwho-1338959

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Patients (pts) with CLL may be at particular risk of severe COVID-19 given advanced age and immune dysregulation. Two large series with limited follow-up have reported outcomes for pts with CLL and COVID-19 (Scarfò, et al. Leukemia 2020;Mato, et al. Blood 2020). To provide maximal clarity on outcomes for pts with CLL and COVID-19, we partnered in a worldwide effort to describe the clinical experience and validate predictors of survival, including potential treatment effects.Methods: This international collaboration represents a partnership between investigators at 141 centers. Data are presented in two cohorts. Cohort 1 (Co1) includes pts captured through efforts by European Research Initiative on CLL (ERIC), Italian CAMPUS CLL Program, and Grupo Español de Leucemia Linfática Crónica. The validation cohort, Cohort 2 (Co2), includes pts from US (66%), UK (23%), EU (7%), and other countries (4%). There is no overlap in cases between cohorts.CLL pts were included if COVID-19 was diagnosed by PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 and they required inpatient hospitalization. Data were collected retrospectively 2/2020 - 5/2020 using standardized case report forms. Baseline characteristics, preexisting comorbidities (including cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS) score ≥6 vs. <6), CLL treatment history, details regarding COVID-19 course, management, and therapy, and vital status were collected.The primary endpoint of this study was to estimate the case fatality rate (CFR), defined as the proportion of pts who died among all pts hospitalized with COVID-19. Chi-squared test was used to compare frequencies;univariable and multivariable analyses utilized Cox regression. Predictors of inferior OS in both Co1 and Co2 were included in multivariable analyses. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) from time of COVID-19 diagnosis (dx).Results: 411 hospitalized, COVID-19 positive CLL pts were analyzed (Co1 n=281, Co2 n=130). Table 1 describes baseline characteristics. At COVID-19 dx, median age was 72 in Co1 (range 37-94) and 68 in Co2 (range 41-98);31% (Co1) and 45% (Co2) had CIRS ≥6. In Co1, 48% were treatment-naïve and 26% were receiving CLL-directed therapy at COVID-19 dx (66% BTKi ± anti-CD20, 19% Venetoclax ± anti-CD20, 9.6% chemo/chemoimmunotherapy (CIT), 1.4% PI3Ki, 4% other). In Co2, 36% were never treated and 49% were receiving CLL-directed therapy (65% BTKi ± anti-CD20, 19% Venetoclax ± anti-CD20, 9.4% multi-novel agent combinations, 1.6% CIT, 1.6% PI3Ki, 1.6% anti-CD20 monotherapy, 1.6% other). Most pts receiving CLL-directed therapy had it held at COVID-19 diagnosis (93% in Co1 and 81% in Co2).Frequency of most COVID-19 symptoms/laboratory abnormalities were similar in the two cohorts including fever (88% in both), lymphocytosis (ALC ≥30 x 109/L;27% vs. 21%), and lymphocytopenia (ALC <1.0 x 109/L;18% vs. 28%), while others varied between Co1 and Co2 (p<0.0001), including cough (61% vs. 93%), dyspnea (60% vs. 84%), fatigue (13% vs. 77%).Median follow-up was 24 days (range 2-86) in Co1 and 17 days (1-43) in Co2. CFRs were similar in Co1 and Co2, 30% and 34% (p=0.45). 54% and 43% were discharged while 16% and 23% remained admitted at last follow-up in Co1 and Co2, respectively. The proportion of pts requiring supplemental oxygen was similar (89% vs. 92%) while rate of ICU admission was higher in Co2 (20% vs. 48%, p<0.0001). Figure 1 depicts OS in each cohort. Univariable analyses demonstrated that age and CIRS ≥6 significantly predicted inferior OS in both cohorts, while only age remained an independent predictor of inferior OS in multivariable analyses (Table 2). Prior treatment for CLL (vs. observation) predicted inferior OS in Co1 but not Co2.Conclusions : In the largest cancer dx-specific cohort reported, pts with CLL hospitalized for COVID-19 had a CFR of 30-34%. Advanced patient age at COVID-19 diagnosis was an independent predictor of OS in two large cohorts. This CFR will serve as a benchmark for mortality for future outcomes studies, including thera eutic interventions for COVID-19 in this population. The effect of CLL treatment on OS was inconsistent across cohorts;COVID-19 may be severe regardless of treatment status. While there were no significant differences in distribution of current lines of therapy between cohorts, prior chemo exposure was more common in Co1 vs. Co2, which may account for difference in OS. Extended follow-up will be presented.

16.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 14732, 2021 07 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317815

ABSTRACT

Research exploring the development and outcome of COVID-19 infections has led to the need to find better diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. This cross-sectional study used targeted metabolomics to identify potential COVID-19 biomarkers that predicted the course of the illness by assessing 110 endogenous plasma metabolites from individuals admitted to a local hospital for diagnosis/treatment. Patients were classified into four groups (≈ 40 each) according to standard polymerase chain reaction (PCR) COVID-19 testing and disease course: PCR-/controls (i.e., non-COVID controls), PCR+/not-hospitalized, PCR+/hospitalized, and PCR+/intubated. Blood samples were collected within 2 days of admission/PCR testing. Metabolite concentration data, demographic data and clinical data were used to propose biomarkers and develop optimal regression models for the diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC; 95% CI) was used to assess each models' predictive value. A panel that included the kynurenine: tryptophan ratio, lysoPC a C26:0, and pyruvic acid discriminated non-COVID controls from PCR+/not-hospitalized (AUC = 0.947; 95% CI 0.931-0.962). A second panel consisting of C10:2, butyric acid, and pyruvic acid distinguished PCR+/not-hospitalized from PCR+/hospitalized and PCR+/intubated (AUC = 0.975; 95% CI 0.968-0.983). Only lysoPC a C28:0 differentiated PCR+/hospitalized from PCR+/intubated patients (AUC = 0.770; 95% CI 0.736-0.803). If additional studies with targeted metabolomics confirm the diagnostic value of these plasma biomarkers, such panels could eventually be of clinical use in medical practice.


Subject(s)
Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , Metabolomics , Adult , COVID-19 Testing , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Theoretical , ROC Curve
17.
Healthcare (Basel) ; 9(7)2021 Jul 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1314618

ABSTRACT

(1) Background: Latin America has been harshly hit by SARS-CoV-2, but reporting from this region is still incomplete. This study aimed at identifying and comparing clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 at different stages of disease severity. (2) Methods: Cross-sectional multicentric study. Individuals with nasopharyngeal PCR were categorized into four groups: (1) negative, (2) positive, not hospitalized, (3) positive, hospitalized with/without supplementary oxygen, and (4) positive, intubated. Clinical and laboratory data were compared, using group 1 as the reference. Multivariate multinomial logistic regression was used to compare adjusted odds ratios. (3) Results: Nine variables remained in the model, explaining 76% of the variability. Men had increased odds, from 1.90 (95%CI 0.87-4.15) in the comparison of 2 vs. 1, to 3.66 (1.12-11.9) in 4 vs. 1. Diabetes and obesity were strong predictors. For diabetes, the odds for groups 2, 3, and 4 were 1.56 (0.29-8.16), 12.8 (2.50-65.8), and 16.1 (2.87-90.2); for obesity, these were 0.79 (0.31-2.05), 3.38 (1.04-10.9), and 4.10 (1.16-14.4), respectively. Fever, myalgia/arthralgia, cough, dyspnea, and neutrophilia were associated with the more severe COVID-19 group. Anosmia/dysgeusia were more likely to occur in group 2 (25.5; 2.51-259). (4) Conclusion: The results point to relevant differences in clinical and laboratory features of COVID-19 by level of severity that can be used in medical practice.

18.
PLoS One ; 15(10): e0240783, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-874204

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Understanding and monitoring the demographics of SARS-CoV-2 infection can inform strategies for prevention. Surveillance monitoring has suggested that the age distribution of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 has changed since the pandemic began, but no formal analysis has been performed. METHODS: Retrospective review of SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing results from a national reference laboratory was performed. Result distributions by age and positivity were compared between early period (March-April 2020) and late periods (June-July 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, a sub-analysis compared changing age distributions between inpatients and outpatients. RESULTS: There were 277,601 test results of which 19320 (7.0%) were positive. The median age of infected people declined over time (p < 0.0005). In March-April, the median age of positive people was 40.8 years (Interquartile range (IQR): 29.0-54.1). In June-July, the median age of positive people was 35.8 years (IQR: 24.0-50.2). The positivity rate of patients under 50 increased from 6.0 to 10.6 percent and the positivity rate for those over 50 decreased from 6.3 to 5.0 percent between the early and late periods. The trend was only observed for outpatient populations. CONCLUSIONS: We confirm that there is a trend toward decreasing age among persons with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, but that these trends seem to be specific to the outpatient population. Overall, this suggests that observed age-related trends are driven by changes in testing patterns rather than true changes in the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This calls for caution in interpretation of routine surveillance data until testing patterns stabilize.


Subject(s)
Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Epidemiological Monitoring , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Child, Preschool , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Humans , Infant , Middle Aged , Pandemics , United States
19.
J Appl Lab Med ; 6(3): 614-624, 2021 Apr 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-873015

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As serologic assays for SARS-CoV-2 become more widely utilized, it is important to understand their performance characteristics and correlation with neutralizing antibodies. We evaluated 3 commonly used SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays (Abbott, DiaSorin, and EUROIMMUN) for clinical sensitivity, specificity, and correlation with neutralizing antibodies, and then compared antibody kinetics during the acute phase of infection. METHODS: Three panels of samples were tested on every assay. Sensitivity was assessed using a panel of 35 specimens serially collected from 7 patients with RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19. Specificity was determined using 100 sera samples collected in 2018 from healthy individuals prior to the outbreak. Analytical specificity was determined using a panel of 37 samples from individuals with respiratory illnesses other than COVID-19. RESULTS: Clinical sensitivity was 91.43% (95% CI 76.94-98.20%) for Abbott, and 88.57% (95% CI 73.26-96.80%) for both DiaSorin and EUROIMMUN. Clinical specificity was 99.00% (95% CI 94.55-99.97%) for Abbott and DiaSorin and 94.00% (95% CI 87.40-97.77%) for EUROIMMUN. The IgG assays demonstrated good qualitative agreement (minimum of 94%) and good correlation between the quantitative result for each combination of assays (r2 ≥ 0.90). The neutralizing antibody response did not necessarily follow the same temporal kinetics as the IgG response and did not necessarily correlate with IgG values. CONCLUSION: The 3 IgG antibody assays demonstrated comparable performance characteristics. Importantly, a qualitative positive IgG result obtained with any of the assays was associated with the presence of neutralizing antibodies; however, neutralizing antibody concentrations did not correlate well with signal to cutoff ratios.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , Child , Child, Preschool , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Female , High-Throughput Screening Assays , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Male , Middle Aged , Sensitivity and Specificity , Young Adult
20.
bioRxiv ; 2020 Sep 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-808493

ABSTRACT

Antibody neutralization is an important prognostic factor in many viral diseases. To easily and rapidly measure titers of neutralizing antibodies in serum or plasma, we developed pseudovirion particles composed of the spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 incorporated onto murine leukemia virus capsids and a modified minimal MLV genome encoding firefly luciferase. These pseudovirions provide a practical means of assessing immune responses under laboratory conditions consistent with biocontainment level 2.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL