A machine learning approach identifies distinct early-symptom cluster phenotypes which correlate with hospitalization, failure to return to activities, and prolonged COVID-19 symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Accurate COVID-19 prognosis is a critical aspect of acute and long-term clinical management. We identified discrete clusters of early stage-symptoms which may delineate groups with distinct disease severity phenotypes, including risk of developing long-term symptoms and associated inflammatory profiles. METHODS: 1,273 SARS-CoV-2 positive U.S. Military Health System beneficiaries with quantitative symptom scores (FLU-PRO Plus) were included in this analysis. We employed machine-learning approaches to identify symptom clusters and compared risk of hospitalization, long-term symptoms, as well as peak CRP and IL-6 concentrations. RESULTS: We identified three distinct clusters of participants based on their FLU-PRO Plus symptoms: cluster 1 ("Nasal cluster") is highly correlated with reporting runny/stuffy nose and sneezing, cluster 2 ("Sensory cluster") is highly correlated with loss of smell or taste, and cluster 3 ("Respiratory/Systemic cluster") is highly correlated with the respiratory (cough, trouble breathing, among others) and systemic (body aches, chills, among others) domain symptoms. Participants in the Respiratory/Systemic cluster were twice as likely as those in the Nasal cluster to have been hospitalized, and 1.5 times as likely to report that they had not returned-to-activities, which remained significant after controlling for confounding covariates (P < 0.01). Respiratory/Systemic and Sensory clusters were more likely to have symptoms at six-months post-symptom-onset (P = 0.03). We observed higher peak CRP and IL-6 in the Respiratory/Systemic cluster (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We identified early symptom profiles potentially associated with hospitalization, return-to-activities, long-term symptoms, and inflammatory profiles. These findings may assist in patient prognosis, including prediction of long COVID risk.

Understanding 'hybrid immunity': comparison and predictors of humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccines.

BACKGROUND: Comparing humoral responses in SARS-CoV-2 vaccinees, those with SARS-CoV-2 infection, or combinations of vaccine/infection ('hybrid immunity'), may clarify predictors of vaccine immunogenicity. METHODS: We studied 2660 U.S. Military Health System beneficiaries with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection-alone (n = 705), vaccination-alone (n = 932), vaccine-after-infection (n = 869), and vaccine-breakthrough-infection (n = 154). Peak anti-spike-IgG responses through 183 days were compared, with adjustment for vaccine product, demography, and comorbidities. We excluded those with evidence of clinical or sub-clinical SARS-CoV-2 reinfection from all groups. RESULTS: Multivariable regression results indicated vaccine-after-infection anti-spike-IgG responses were higher than infection-alone (p < 0.01), regardless of prior infection severity. An increased time between infection and vaccination was associated with a greater post-vaccination IgG response (p < 0.01). Vaccination-alone elicited a greater IgG response, but more rapid waning of IgG (p < 0.01), compared to infection-alone (p < 0.01). BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccine-receipt was associated with greater IgG responses compared to JNJ-78436735 (p < 0.01), regardless of infection history. Those with vaccine-after-infection or vaccine-breakthrough-infection had a more durable anti-spike-IgG response compared to infection-alone (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine-receipt elicited higher anti-spike-IgG responses than infection-alone, although IgG levels waned faster in those vaccinated (compared to infection-alone). Vaccine-after-infection elicits a greater humoral response compared to vaccine or infection alone; and the timing, but not disease severity, of prior infection predicted these post-vaccination IgG responses. While differences between groups were small in magnitude, these results offer insights into vaccine immunogenicity variations that may help inform vaccination timing strategies.

Persistent COVID-19 Symptoms at 6 Months After Onset and the Role of Vaccination Before or After SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Importance: Understanding the factors associated with post-COVID conditions is important for prevention. Objective: To identify characteristics associated with persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms and to describe post-COVID-19 medical encounters. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from the Epidemiology, Immunology, and Clinical Characteristics of Emerging Infectious Diseases With Pandemic Potential (EPICC) study implemented in the US military health system (MHS); MHS beneficiaries aged 18 years or older who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from February 28, 2020, through December 31, 2021, were analyzed, with 1-year follow-up. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes analyzed included survey-reported symptoms through 6 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnosis categories reported in medical records 6 months following SARS-CoV-2 infection vs 3 months before infection. Results: More than half of the 1832 participants in these analyses were aged 18 to 44 years (1226 [66.9%]; mean [SD] age, 40.5 [13.7] years), were male (1118 [61.0%]), were unvaccinated at the time of their infection (1413 [77.1%]), and had no comorbidities (1290 [70.4%]). A total of 728 participants (39.7%) had illness that lasted 28 days or longer (28-89 days: 364 [19.9%]; ≥90 days: 364 [19.9%]). Participants who were unvaccinated prior to infection (risk ratio [RR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.04-1.85), reported moderate (RR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.47-2.22) or severe (RR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.80-2.81) initial illnesses, had more hospitalized days (RR per each day of hospitalization, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03), and had a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 5 or greater (RR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.01-2.37) were more likely to report 28 or more days of symptoms. Among unvaccinated participants, postinfection vaccination was associated with a 41% lower risk of reporting symptoms at 6 months (RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40-0.89). Participants had higher risk of pulmonary (RR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.40-2.84), diabetes (RR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.00-2.13), neurological (RR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.02-1.64), and mental health-related medical encounters (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.01-1.62) at 6 months after symptom onset than at baseline (before SARS-CoV-2 infection). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, more severe acute illness, a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and being unvaccinated were associated with a higher risk of reporting COVID-19 symptoms lasting 28 days or more. Participants with COVID-19 were more likely to seek medical care for diabetes, pulmonary, neurological, and mental health-related illness for at least 6 months after onset compared with their pre-COVID baseline health care use patterns. These findings may inform the risk-benefit ratio of COVID-19 vaccination policy.

Distinct blood inflammatory biomarker clusters stratify host phenotypes during the middle phase of COVID-19.

The associations between clinical phenotypes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the host inflammatory response during the transition from peak illness to convalescence are not yet well understood. Blood plasma samples were collected from 129 adult SARS-CoV-2 positive inpatient and outpatient participants between April 2020 and January 2021, in a multi-center prospective cohort study at 8 military hospitals across the United States. Plasma inflammatory protein biomarkers were measured in samples from 15 to 28 days post symptom onset. Topological Data Analysis (TDA) was used to identify patterns of inflammation, and associations with peak severity (outpatient, hospitalized, ICU admission or death), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and body mass index (BMI) were evaluated using logistic regression. The study population (n = 129, 33.3% female, median 41.3 years of age) included 77 outpatient, 31 inpatient, 16 ICU-level, and 5 fatal cases. Three distinct inflammatory biomarker clusters were identified and were associated with significant differences in peak disease severity (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001), BMI (p < 0.001), and CCI (p = 0.001). Host-biomarker profiles stratified a heterogeneous population of COVID-19 patients during the transition from peak illness to convalescence, and these distinct inflammatory patterns were associated with comorbid disease and severe illness due to COVID-19.

Temporal Improvements in COVID-19 Outcomes for Hospitalized Adults: A Post Hoc Observational Study of Remdesivir Group Participants in the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 standard of care (SOC) evolved rapidly during 2020 and 2021, but its cumulative effect over time is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether recovery and mortality improved as SOC evolved, using data from ACTT (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial). DESIGN: ACTT is a series of phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated COVID-19 therapeutics from February 2020 through May 2021. ACTT-1 compared remdesivir plus SOC to placebo plus SOC, and in ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, remdesivir plus SOC was the control group. This post hoc analysis compared recovery and mortality between these comparable sequential cohorts of patients who received remdesivir plus SOC, adjusting for baseline characteristics with propensity score weighting. The analysis was repeated for participants in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4 who received remdesivir plus dexamethasone plus SOC. Trends in SOC that could explain outcome improvements were analyzed. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04280705 [ACTT-1], NCT04401579 [ACTT-2], NCT04492475 [ACTT-3], and NCT04640168 [ACTT-4]). SETTING: 94 hospitals in 10 countries (86% U.S. participants). PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: SOC. MEASUREMENTS: 28-day mortality and recovery. RESULTS: Although outcomes were better in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were close to 1 (HR for recovery, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.17]; HR for mortality, 0.90 [CI, 0.56 to 1.40]). Comparable patients were less likely to be intubated in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1 (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.53 to 0.97]), and hydroxychloroquine use decreased. Outcomes improved from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3 (HR for recovery, 1.43 [CI, 1.24 to 1.64]; HR for mortality, 0.45 [CI, 0.21 to 0.97]). Potential explanatory factors (SOC trends, case surges, and variant trends) were similar between ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, except for increased dexamethasone use (11% to 77%). Outcomes were similar in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4. Antibiotic use decreased gradually across all stages. LIMITATION: Unmeasured confounding. CONCLUSION: Changes in patient composition explained improved outcomes from ACTT-1 to ACTT-2 but not from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3, suggesting improved SOC. These results support excluding nonconcurrent controls from analysis of platform trials in rapidly changing therapeutic areas. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Antigenic cartography of well-characterized human sera shows SARS-CoV-2 neutralization differences based on infection and vaccination history.

The rapid emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants challenges vaccination strategies. Here, we collected 201 serum samples from persons with a single infection or multiple vaccine exposures, or both. We measured their neutralization titers against 15 natural variants and 7 variants with engineered spike mutations and analyzed antigenic diversity. Antigenic maps of primary infection sera showed that Omicron sublineages BA.2, BA.4/BA.5, and BA.2.12.1 are distinct from BA.1 and more similar to Beta/Gamma/Mu variants. Three mRNA COVID-19 vaccinations increased neutralization of BA.1 more than BA.4/BA.5 or BA.2.12.1. BA.1 post-vaccination infection elicited higher neutralization titers to all variants than three vaccinations alone, although with less neutralization to BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5. Those with BA.1 infection after two or three vaccinations had similar neutralization titer magnitude and antigenic recognition. Accounting for antigenic differences among variants when interpreting neutralization titers can aid the understanding of complex patterns in humoral immunity that informs the selection of future COVID-19 vaccine strains.

Uses of Procalcitonin as a Biomarker in Critical Care Medicine.

Procalcitonin is a commonly used biomarker for infection and severity in the intensive care unit. Although relatively specific for bacterial, as opposed to viral, infections, serum procalcitonin levels also correlate with disease severity and thus cannot reliably distinguish between bacterial and nonbacterial infections in the setting of critical illness, particularly in cases of severe influenza and coronavirus disease-2019. Baseline procalcitonin levels are insufficiently discriminative to permit the withholding of antibiotics in patients with critical illness and suspected sepsis. Trends in procalcitonin levels over time, however, give us the opportunity to individualize the duration of antibiotics without negative impacts on mortality.

An Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Reactogenicity: Variation by Type, Dose, and History, Severity, and Recency of Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Background: There is limited information on the functional consequences of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine side effects. To support patient counseling and public health messaging, we describe the risk and correlates of COVID-19 vaccine side effects sufficient to prevent work or usual activities and/or lead to medical care ("severe" side effects). Methods: The EPICC study is a longitudinal cohort study of Military Healthcare System beneficiaries including active duty service members, dependents, and retirees. We studied 2789 adults who were vaccinated between December 2020 and December 2021. Results: Severe side effects were most common with the Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson and Johnson) vaccine, followed by mRNA-1273 (Moderna) then BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech). Severe side effects were more common after the second than first dose (11% vs 4%; P < .001). First (but not second) dose side effects were more common in those with vs without prior severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (9% vs 2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.84; 95% CI, 3.8-9.1), particularly if the prior illness was severe or critical (13% vs 2%; aOR, 10.57; 95% CI, 5.5-20.1) or resulted in inpatient care (17% vs 2%; aOR, 19.3; 95% CI, 5.1-72.5). Side effects were more common in women than men but not otherwise related to demographic factors. Conclusions: Vaccine side effects sufficient to prevent usual activities were more common after the second than first dose and varied by vaccine type. First dose side effects were more likely in those with a history of COVID-19-particularly if that prior illness was severe or associated with inpatient care. These findings may assist clinicians and patients by providing a real-world evaluation of the likelihood of experiencing impactful postvaccine symptoms.

COVID-19 Patient-Reported Symptoms Using FLU-PRO Plus in a Cohort Study: Associations With Infecting Genotype, Vaccine History, and Return to Health.

Background: Patient-reported outcomes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are an important measure of the full burden of coronavirus disease (COVID). Here, we examine how (1) infecting genotype and COVID-19 vaccination correlate with inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) Plus score, including by symptom domains, and (2) FLU-PRO Plus scores predict return to usual activities and health. Methods: The epidemiology, immunology, and clinical characteristics of pandemic infectious diseases (EPICC) study was implemented to describe the short- and long-term consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a longitudinal, observational cohort. Multivariable linear regression models were run with FLU-PRO Plus scores as the outcome variable, and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models evaluated effects of FLU-PRO Plus scores on return to usual health or activities. Results: Among the 764 participants included in this analysis, 63% were 18-44 years old, 40% were female, and 51% were White. Being fully vaccinated was associated with lower total scores (ß = -0.39; 95% CI, -0.57 to -0.21). The Delta variant was associated with higher total scores (ß = 0.25; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.45). Participants with higher FLU-PRO Plus scores were less likely to report returning to usual health and activities (health: hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.57; activities: HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.67). Fully vaccinated participants were more likely to report returning to usual activities (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.48). Conclusions: Full SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is associated with decreased severity of patient-reported symptoms across multiple domains, which in turn is likely to be associated with earlier return to usual activities. In addition, infection with the Delta variant was associated with higher FLU-PRO Plus scores than previous variants, even after controlling for vaccination status.

Baricitinib versus dexamethasone for adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (ACTT-4): a randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib and dexamethasone have randomised trials supporting their use for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. We assessed the combination of baricitinib plus remdesivir versus dexamethasone plus remdesivir in preventing progression to mechanical ventilation or death in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial, patients were enrolled at 67 trial sites in the USA (60 sites), South Korea (two sites), Mexico (two sites), Singapore (two sites), and Japan (one site). Hospitalised adults (≥18 years) with COVID-19 who required supplemental oxygen administered by low-flow (≤15 L/min), high-flow (>15 L/min), or non-invasive mechanical ventilation modalities who met the study eligibility criteria (male or non-pregnant female adults ≥18 years old with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection) were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either baricitinib, remdesivir, and placebo, or dexamethasone, remdesivir, and placebo using a permuted block design. Randomisation was stratified by study site and baseline ordinal score at enrolment. All patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (or matching oral placebo) for a maximum of 14 days or dexamethasone (or matching intravenous placebo) for a maximum of 10 days. The primary outcome was the difference in mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 between the two treatment groups in the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in the as-treated population, comprising all participants who received one dose of the study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04640168. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2020, and April 13, 2021, 1047 patients were assessed for eligibility. 1010 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 516 (51%) to baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo and 494 (49%) to dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo. The mean age of the patients was 58·3 years (SD 14·0) and 590 (58%) of 1010 patients were male. 588 (58%) of 1010 patients were White, 188 (19%) were Black, 70 (7%) were Asian, and 18 (2%) were American Indian or Alaska Native. 347 (34%) of 1010 patients were Hispanic or Latino. Mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 was similar between the study groups (Kaplan-Meier estimates of 87·0% [95% CI 83·7 to 89·6] in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 87·6% [84·2 to 90·3] in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group; risk difference 0·6 [95% CI -3·6 to 4·8]; p=0·91). The odds ratio for improved status in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group compared with the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group was 1·01 (95% CI 0·80 to 1·27). At least one adverse event occurred in 149 (30%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 179 (37%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·5% [1·6 to 13·3]; p=0·014). 21 (4%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group had at least one treatment-related adverse event versus 49 (10%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 6·0% [2·8 to 9·3]; p=0·00041). Severe or life-threatening grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 143 (28%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 174 (36%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·7% [1·8 to 13·4]; p=0·012). INTERPRETATION: In hospitalised patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen by low-flow, high-flow, or non-invasive ventilation, baricitinib plus remdesivir and dexamethasone plus remdesivir resulted in similar mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29, but dexamethasone was associated with significantly more adverse events, treatment-related adverse events, and severe or life-threatening adverse events. A more individually tailored choice of immunomodulation now appears possible, where side-effect profile, ease of administration, cost, and patient comorbidities can all be considered. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Management Principles for the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory During the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) Pandemic.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly contagious pathogen resulting in the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic with direct impact on cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) operations. Initially, major challenges in limiting the spread of aerosolized pathogens existed until protocols were implemented to limit infectivity to staff and patients. COVID-19 increases the risk of myocardial infarctions and cardiogenic shock requiring acute management in the CCL. In this review, we specify best practices in the CCL for the management of infected patients in the preprocedure, intraprocedure, and postprocedure environments harmonizing available evidence, recommendations from international heart associations, and consensus opinion.

Anatomical Site, Viral Ribonucleic Acid Abundance, and Time of Sampling Correlate With Molecular Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 During Infection.

BACKGROUND: Nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs are the standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. If less invasive alternatives to NP swabs (eg, oropharyngeal [OP] or nasal swabs [NS]) are comparably sensitive, the use of these techniques may be preferable in terms of comfort, convenience, and safety. METHODS: This study compared the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in swab samples collected on the same day among participants with at least one positive PCR test. RESULTS: Overall, 755 participants had at least one set of paired swabs. Concordance between NP and other swab types was 75% (NS), 72% (OP), 54% (rectal swabs [RS]), and 78% (NS/OP combined). Kappa values were moderate for the NS, OP, and NS/OP comparisons (0.50, 0.45, and 0.54, respectively). Highest sensitivity relative to NP (0.87) was observed with a combination of NS/OP tests (positive if either NS or OP was positive). Sensitivity of the non-NP swab types was highest in the first week postsymptom onset and decreased thereafter. Similarly, virus RNA quantity was highest in the NP swabs as compared with NS, OP, and RS within two weeks postsymptom onset. OP and NS performance decreased as virus RNA quantity decreased. No differences were noted between NS specimens collected at home or in clinic. CONCLUSIONS: NP swabs detected more SARS-CoV-2 cases than non-NP swabs, and the sensitivity of the non-NP swabs decreased with time postsymptom onset. While other swabs may be simpler to collect, NP swabs present the best chance of detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA, which is essential for clinical care as well as genomic surveillance.

PICU in the MICU: How Adult ICUs Can Support Pediatric Care in Public Health Emergencies.

Initial waves of the COVID-19 pandemic have largely spared children. With the advent of vaccination in many older age groups and the spread of the highly contagious Delta variant, however, children now represent a growing percentage of COVID-19 cases. PICU capacity is far less than that of adult ICUs. Adult ICUs may need to support pediatric care, much as PICUs provided adult care earlier in the pandemic. Critically ill children selected for care in adult settings should be at least 12 years of age and ideally have conditions common in children and adults alike (eg, community-acquired sepsis, trauma). Children with complex, pediatric-specific disorders are best served in PICUs and are not recommended for transfer. The goal of such transfers is to maintain critical capacity for those children in greatest need of the PICU's unique abilities, therefore preserving systems of care for all children.

COVID-19 Outcomes Among US Military Health System Beneficiaries Include Complications Across Multiple Organ Systems and Substantial Functional Impairment.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated clinical outcomes, functional burden, and complications 1 month after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection in a prospective US Military Health System (MHS) cohort of active duty, retiree, and dependent populations using serial patient-reported outcome surveys and electronic medical record (EMR) review. METHODS: MHS beneficiaries presenting at 9 sites across the United States with a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test, a COVID-19-like illness, or a high-risk SARS-CoV-2 exposure were eligible for enrollment. Medical history and clinical outcomes were collected through structured interviews and International Classification of Diseases-based EMR review. Risk factors associated with hospitalization were determined by multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 1202 participants were enrolled. There were 1070 laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases and 132 SARS-CoV-2-negative participants. In the first month post-symptom onset among the SARS-CoV-2-positive cases, there were 212 hospitalizations, 80% requiring oxygen, 20 ICU admissions, and 10 deaths. Risk factors for COVID-19-associated hospitalization included race (increased for Asian, Black, and Hispanic compared with non-Hispanic White), age (age 45-64 and 65+ compared with <45), and obesity (BMI≥30 compared with BMI<30). Over 2% of survey respondents reported the need for supplemental oxygen, and 31% had not returned to normal daily activities at 1 month post-symptom onset. CONCLUSIONS: Older age, reporting Asian, Black, or Hispanic race/ethnicity, and obesity are associated with SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization. A proportion of acute SARS-CoV-2 infections require long-term oxygen therapy; the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on short-term functional status was substantial. A significant number of MHS beneficiaries had not yet returned to normal activities by 1 month.

Durability of SARS-CoV-2-Specific T-Cell Responses at 12 Months Postinfection.

BACKGROUND: Characterizing the longevity and quality of cellular immune responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) enhances understanding of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) immunity that influences clinical outcomes. Prior studies suggest SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells are present in peripheral blood 10 months after infection. Analysis of the function, durability, and diversity of cellular response long after natural infection, over a range of ages and disease phenotypes, is needed to identify preventative and therapeutic interventions. METHODS: We identified participants in our multisite longitudinal, prospective cohort study 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection representing a range of disease severity. We investigated function, phenotypes, and frequency of T cells specific for SARS-CoV-2 using intracellular cytokine staining and spectral flow cytometry, and compared magnitude of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies and T cells were detected 12 months postinfection. Severe acute illness was associated with higher frequencies of SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4 T cells and antibodies at 12 months. In contrast, polyfunctional and cytotoxic T cells responsive to SARS-CoV-2 were identified in participants over a wide spectrum of disease severity. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 infection induces polyfunctional memory T cells detectable at 12 months postinfection, with higher frequency noted in those who experienced severe disease.

Performance of the inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome Plus (FLU-PRO Plus) Instrument in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: The inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome Plus (FLU-PRO Plus) is a patient-reported outcome data collection instrument assessing symptoms of viral respiratory tract infections across 8 body systems. This study evaluated the measurement properties of FLU-PRO Plus in a study enrolling individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Data from a prospective cohort study (EPICC) in US Military Health System beneficiaries evaluated for COVID-19 was utilized. Adults with symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with FLU-PRO Plus survey information within 1 week of symptom onset were included. Reliability of FLU-PRO Plus was estimated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC; 2 days' reproducibility). Known-groups validity was assessed using patient global assessment (PGA) of disease severity. Patient report of return to usual health was used to assess responsiveness (day 1-6/7). RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-six SARS-CoV-2-positive participants were included in the analysis. Reliability among those who reported no change in their symptoms from one day to the next was high for most domains (ICC range, 0.68-0.94 for day 1 to day 2). Construct validity was demonstrated by moderate to high correlation between the PGA rating of disease severity and domain and total scores (eg, total scores correlation: 0.69 [influenza-like illness severity], 0.69 [interference in daily activities], and -0.58 [physical health]). In addition, FLU-PRO Plus demonstrated good known-groups validity, with increasing domain and total scores observed with increasing severity ratings. CONCLUSIONS: FLU-PRO Plus performs well in measuring signs and symptoms in SARS-CoV-2 infection with excellent construct validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness to change. Standardized data collection instruments facilitate meta-analyses, vaccine effectiveness studies, and other COVID-19 research activities.

Predictive Value of an Age-Based Modification of the National Early Warning System in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Early recognition of high-risk patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may improve outcomes. Although many predictive scoring systems exist, their complexity may limit utility in COVID-19. We assessed the prognostic performance of the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and an age-based modification (NEWS+age) among hospitalized COVID-19 patients enrolled in a prospective, multicenter US Military Health System (MHS) observational cohort study. METHODS: Hospitalized adults with confirmed COVID-19 not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation at admission and with a baseline NEWS were included. We analyzed each scoring system's ability to predict key clinical outcomes, including progression to invasive ventilation or death, stratified by baseline severity (low [0-3], medium [4-6], and high [≥7]). RESULTS: Among 184 included participants, those with low baseline NEWS had significantly shorter hospitalizations (P < .01) and lower maximum illness severity (P < .001). Most (80.2%) of low NEWS vs 15.8% of high NEWS participants required no or at most low-flow oxygen supplementation. Low NEWS (≤3) had a negative predictive value of 97.2% for progression to invasive ventilation or death; a high NEWS (≥7) had high specificity (93.1%) but low positive predictive value (42.1%) for such progression. NEWS+age performed similarly to NEWS at predicting invasive ventilation or death (NEWS+age: area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUROC], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.65-0.73; NEWS: AUROC, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.66-0.75). CONCLUSIONS: NEWS and NEWS+age showed similar test characteristics in an MHS COVID-19 cohort. Notably, low baseline scores had an excellent negative predictive value. Given their easy applicability, these scoring systems may be useful in resource-limited settings to identify COVID-19 patients who are unlikely to progress to critical illness.

Clinical, Immunological, and Virological SARS-CoV-2 Phenotypes in Obese and Nonobese Military Health System Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: The mechanisms underlying the association between obesity and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity remain unclear. After verifying that obesity was a correlate of severe COVID-19 in US Military Health System (MHS) beneficiaries, we compared immunological and virological phenotypes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in both obese and nonobese participants. METHODS: COVID-19-infected MHS beneficiaries were enrolled, and anthropometric, clinical, and demographic data were collected. We compared the SARS-CoV-2 peak IgG humoral response and reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction viral load in obese and nonobese patients, stratified by hospitalization, utilizing logistic regression models. RESULTS: Data from 511 COVID-19 patients were analyzed, among whom 24% were obese and 14% severely obese. Obesity was independently associated with hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-3.18) and need for oxygen therapy (aOR, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.61-7.11). In outpatients, severely obese had a log10 (1.89) higher nucleocapsid (N1) genome equivalents (GE)/reaction and log10 (2.62) higher N2 GE/reaction than nonobese (P = 0.03 and P < .001, respectively). We noted a correlation between body mass index and peak anti-spike protein IgG in inpatients and outpatients (coefficient = 5.48, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Obesity is a strong correlate of COVID-19 severity in MHS beneficiaries. These findings offer new pathophysiological insights into the relationship between obesity and COVID-19 severity.