Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Lancet Digit Health ; 2022 May 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1852294

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, known as long COVID, have severely affected recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic for patients and society alike. Long COVID is characterised by evolving, heterogeneous symptoms, making it challenging to derive an unambiguous definition. Studies of electronic health records are a crucial element of the US National Institutes of Health's RECOVER Initiative, which is addressing the urgent need to understand long COVID, identify treatments, and accurately identify who has it-the latter is the aim of this study. METHODS: Using the National COVID Cohort Collaborative's (N3C) electronic health record repository, we developed XGBoost machine learning models to identify potential patients with long COVID. We defined our base population (n=1 793 604) as any non-deceased adult patient (age ≥18 years) with either an International Classification of Diseases-10-Clinical Modification COVID-19 diagnosis code (U07.1) from an inpatient or emergency visit, or a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or antigen test, and for whom at least 90 days have passed since COVID-19 index date. We examined demographics, health-care utilisation, diagnoses, and medications for 97 995 adults with COVID-19. We used data on these features and 597 patients from a long COVID clinic to train three machine learning models to identify potential long COVID among all patients with COVID-19, patients hospitalised with COVID-19, and patients who had COVID-19 but were not hospitalised. Feature importance was determined via Shapley values. We further validated the models on data from a fourth site. FINDINGS: Our models identified, with high accuracy, patients who potentially have long COVID, achieving areas under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0·92 (all patients), 0·90 (hospitalised), and 0·85 (non-hospitalised). Important features, as defined by Shapley values, include rate of health-care utilisation, patient age, dyspnoea, and other diagnosis and medication information available within the electronic health record. INTERPRETATION: Patients identified by our models as potentially having long COVID can be interpreted as patients warranting care at a specialty clinic for long COVID, which is an essential proxy for long COVID diagnosis as its definition continues to evolve. We also achieve the urgent goal of identifying potential long COVID in patients for clinical trials. As more data sources are identified, our models can be retrained and tuned based on the needs of individual studies. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences through the RECOVER Initiative.

2.
Virol J ; 19(1): 84, 2022 05 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1846850

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to reduce pain, fever, and inflammation but have been associated with complications in community-acquired pneumonia. Observations shortly after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 suggested that ibuprofen was associated with an increased risk of adverse events in COVID-19 patients, but subsequent observational studies failed to demonstrate increased risk and in one case showed reduced risk associated with NSAID use. METHODS: A 38-center retrospective cohort study was performed that leveraged the harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record data of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative. A propensity-matched cohort of 19,746 COVID-19 inpatients was constructed by matching cases (treated with NSAIDs at the time of admission) and 19,746 controls (not treated) from 857,061 patients with COVID-19 available for analysis. The primary outcome of interest was COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients, which was classified as: moderate, severe, or mortality/hospice. Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury (AKI), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), invasive ventilation, and all-cause mortality at any time following COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS: Logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased COVID-19 severity (OR: 0.57 95% CI: 0.53-0.61). Analysis of secondary outcomes using logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (OR 0.51 95% CI: 0.47-0.56), invasive ventilation (OR: 0.59 95% CI: 0.55-0.64), AKI (OR: 0.67 95% CI: 0.63-0.72), or ECMO (OR: 0.51 95% CI: 0.36-0.7). In contrast, the odds ratios indicate reduced risk of these outcomes, but our quantitative bias analysis showed E-values of between 1.9 and 3.3 for these associations, indicating that comparatively weak or moderate confounder associations could explain away the observed associations. CONCLUSIONS: Study interpretation is limited by the observational design. Recording of NSAID use may have been incomplete. Our study demonstrates that NSAID use is not associated with increased COVID-19 severity, all-cause mortality, invasive ventilation, AKI, or ECMO in COVID-19 inpatients. A conservative interpretation in light of the quantitative bias analysis is that there is no evidence that NSAID use is associated with risk of increased severity or the other measured outcomes. Our results confirm and extend analogous findings in previous observational studies using a large cohort of patients drawn from 38 centers in a nationally representative multicenter database.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury , COVID-19 , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/adverse effects , COVID-19 Testing , Cohort Studies , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies
3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(2): e2143151, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1669321

ABSTRACT

Importance: Understanding of SARS-CoV-2 infection in US children has been limited by the lack of large, multicenter studies with granular data. Objective: To examine the characteristics, changes over time, outcomes, and severity risk factors of children with SARS-CoV-2 within the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C). Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective cohort study of encounters with end dates before September 24, 2021, was conducted at 56 N3C facilities throughout the US. Participants included children younger than 19 years at initial SARS-CoV-2 testing. Main Outcomes and Measures: Case incidence and severity over time, demographic and comorbidity severity risk factors, vital sign and laboratory trajectories, clinical outcomes, and acute COVID-19 vs multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), and Delta vs pre-Delta variant differences for children with SARS-CoV-2. Results: A total of 1 068 410 children were tested for SARS-CoV-2 and 167 262 test results (15.6%) were positive (82 882 [49.6%] girls; median age, 11.9 [IQR, 6.0-16.1] years). Among the 10 245 children (6.1%) who were hospitalized, 1423 (13.9%) met the criteria for severe disease: mechanical ventilation (796 [7.8%]), vasopressor-inotropic support (868 [8.5%]), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (42 [0.4%]), or death (131 [1.3%]). Male sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.37; 95% CI, 1.21-1.56), Black/African American race (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.06-1.47), obesity (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01-1.41), and several pediatric complex chronic condition (PCCC) subcategories were associated with higher severity disease. Vital signs and many laboratory test values from the day of admission were predictive of peak disease severity. Variables associated with increased odds for MIS-C vs acute COVID-19 included male sex (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.33-1.90), Black/African American race (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.17-1.77), younger than 12 years (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.51-2.18), obesity (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.40-2.22), and not having a pediatric complex chronic condition (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65-0.80). The children with MIS-C had a more inflammatory laboratory profile and severe clinical phenotype, with higher rates of invasive ventilation (117 of 707 [16.5%] vs 514 of 8241 [6.2%]; P < .001) and need for vasoactive-inotropic support (191 of 707 [27.0%] vs 426 of 8241 [5.2%]; P < .001) compared with those who had acute COVID-19. Comparing children during the Delta vs pre-Delta eras, there was no significant change in hospitalization rate (1738 [6.0%] vs 8507 [6.2%]; P = .18) and lower odds for severe disease (179 [10.3%] vs 1242 [14.6%]) (decreased by a factor of 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.79; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of US children with SARS-CoV-2, there were observed differences in demographic characteristics, preexisting comorbidities, and initial vital sign and laboratory values between severity subgroups. Taken together, these results suggest that early identification of children likely to progress to severe disease could be achieved using readily available data elements from the day of admission. Further work is needed to translate this knowledge into improved outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Adolescent , Age Distribution , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/virology , Child , Child, Preschool , Comorbidity , Disease Progression , Early Diagnosis , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/diagnosis , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/epidemiology , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/therapy , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/virology , United States/epidemiology , Vital Signs
4.
EBioMedicine ; 74: 103722, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1536517

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Numerous publications describe the clinical manifestations of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC or "long COVID"), but they are difficult to integrate because of heterogeneous methods and the lack of a standard for denoting the many phenotypic manifestations. Patient-led studies are of particular importance for understanding the natural history of COVID-19, but integration is hampered because they often use different terms to describe the same symptom or condition. This significant disparity in patient versus clinical characterization motivated the proposed ontological approach to specifying manifestations, which will improve capture and integration of future long COVID studies. METHODS: The Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) is a widely used standard for exchange and analysis of phenotypic abnormalities in human disease but has not yet been applied to the analysis of COVID-19. FUNDING: We identified 303 articles published before April 29, 2021, curated 59 relevant manuscripts that described clinical manifestations in 81 cohorts three weeks or more following acute COVID-19, and mapped 287 unique clinical findings to HPO terms. We present layperson synonyms and definitions that can be used to link patient self-report questionnaires to standard medical terminology. Long COVID clinical manifestations are not assessed consistently across studies, and most manifestations have been reported with a wide range of synonyms by different authors. Across at least 10 cohorts, authors reported 31 unique clinical features corresponding to HPO terms; the most commonly reported feature was Fatigue (median 45.1%) and the least commonly reported was Nausea (median 3.9%), but the reported percentages varied widely between studies. INTERPRETATION: Translating long COVID manifestations into computable HPO terms will improve analysis, data capture, and classification of long COVID patients. If researchers, clinicians, and patients share a common language, then studies can be compared/pooled more effectively. Furthermore, mapping lay terminology to HPO will help patients assist clinicians and researchers in creating phenotypic characterizations that are computationally accessible, thereby improving the stratification, diagnosis, and treatment of long COVID. FUNDING: U24TR002306; UL1TR001439; P30AG024832; GBMF4552; R01HG010067; UL1TR002535; K23HL128909; UL1TR002389; K99GM145411.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
5.
J Am Med Inform Assoc ; 29(4): 609-618, 2022 03 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1443051

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: In response to COVID-19, the informatics community united to aggregate as much clinical data as possible to characterize this new disease and reduce its impact through collaborative analytics. The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is now the largest publicly available HIPAA limited dataset in US history with over 6.4 million patients and is a testament to a partnership of over 100 organizations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a pipeline for ingesting, harmonizing, and centralizing data from 56 contributing data partners using 4 federated Common Data Models. N3C data quality (DQ) review involves both automated and manual procedures. In the process, several DQ heuristics were discovered in our centralized context, both within the pipeline and during downstream project-based analysis. Feedback to the sites led to many local and centralized DQ improvements. RESULTS: Beyond well-recognized DQ findings, we discovered 15 heuristics relating to source Common Data Model conformance, demographics, COVID tests, conditions, encounters, measurements, observations, coding completeness, and fitness for use. Of 56 sites, 37 sites (66%) demonstrated issues through these heuristics. These 37 sites demonstrated improvement after receiving feedback. DISCUSSION: We encountered site-to-site differences in DQ which would have been challenging to discover using federated checks alone. We have demonstrated that centralized DQ benchmarking reveals unique opportunities for DQ improvement that will support improved research analytics locally and in aggregate. CONCLUSION: By combining rapid, continual assessment of DQ with a large volume of multisite data, it is possible to support more nuanced scientific questions with the scale and rigor that they require.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Data Accuracy , Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act , Humans , United States
7.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(7): e2116901, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1306627

ABSTRACT

Importance: The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is a centralized, harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record repository that is the largest, most representative COVID-19 cohort to date. This multicenter data set can support robust evidence-based development of predictive and diagnostic tools and inform clinical care and policy. Objectives: To evaluate COVID-19 severity and risk factors over time and assess the use of machine learning to predict clinical severity. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a retrospective cohort study of 1 926 526 US adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection (polymerase chain reaction >99% or antigen <1%) and adult patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection who served as controls from 34 medical centers nationwide between January 1, 2020, and December 7, 2020, patients were stratified using a World Health Organization COVID-19 severity scale and demographic characteristics. Differences between groups over time were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Random forest and XGBoost models were used to predict severe clinical course (death, discharge to hospice, invasive ventilatory support, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient demographic characteristics and COVID-19 severity using the World Health Organization COVID-19 severity scale and differences between groups over time using multivariable logistic regression. Results: The cohort included 174 568 adults who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (mean [SD] age, 44.4 [18.6] years; 53.2% female) and 1 133 848 adult controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (mean [SD] age, 49.5 [19.2] years; 57.1% female). Of the 174 568 adults with SARS-CoV-2, 32 472 (18.6%) were hospitalized, and 6565 (20.2%) of those had a severe clinical course (invasive ventilatory support, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, death, or discharge to hospice). Of the hospitalized patients, mortality was 11.6% overall and decreased from 16.4% in March to April 2020 to 8.6% in September to October 2020 (P = .002 for monthly trend). Using 64 inputs available on the first hospital day, this study predicted a severe clinical course using random forest and XGBoost models (area under the receiver operating curve = 0.87 for both) that were stable over time. The factor most strongly associated with clinical severity was pH; this result was consistent across machine learning methods. In a separate multivariable logistic regression model built for inference, age (odds ratio [OR], 1.03 per year; 95% CI, 1.03-1.04), male sex (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.51-1.69), liver disease (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.08-1.34), dementia (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.13-1.41), African American (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.20) and Asian (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.57) race, and obesity (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.27-1.46) were independently associated with higher clinical severity. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that COVID-19 mortality decreased over time during 2020 and that patient demographic characteristics and comorbidities were associated with higher clinical severity. The machine learning models accurately predicted ultimate clinical severity using commonly collected clinical data from the first 24 hours of a hospital admission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Databases, Factual , Forecasting , Hospitalization , Models, Biological , Severity of Illness Index , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/ethnology , COVID-19/mortality , Comorbidity , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Female , Humans , Hydrogen-Ion Concentration , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL