Enhanced immune ageing associated with increasing COVID-19 disease severity (preprint)

Background The striking increase in COVID-19 severity in older adults provides a clear example of immunesenescence, the age-related remodelling of the immune system. To better characterise the association between convalescent immunesenescence and acute disease severity, we determined the immune phenotype of COVID-19 survivors and non-infected controls.Results We performed detailed immune phenotyping of peripheral blood mononuclear cells isolated from 103 COVID-19 survivors 3–5 months post recovery who were classified as having had severe (n = 56; age 53.12 ± 11.30 years), moderate (n = 32; age 52.28 ± 11.43 years) or mild (n = 15; age 49.67 ± 7.30 years) disease and compared with age and sex-matched healthy adults (n = 59; age 50.49 ± 10.68 years). We assessed a broad range of immune cell phenotypes to generate a composite score, IMM-AGE, to determine the degree of immune senescence. We found increased immunesenescence features in severe COVID-19 survivors compared to controls including: a reduced frequency and number of naïve CD4 and CD8 T cells (p < 0.0001); increased frequency of EMRA CD4 (p < 0.003) and CD8 T cells (p < 0.001); a higher frequency (p < 0.0001) and absolute numbers (p < 0.001) of CD28− ve CD57+ ve senescent CD4 and CD8 T cells; higher frequency (p < 0.003) and absolute numbers (p < 0.02) of PD-1 expressing exhausted CD8 T cells; a two-fold increase in Th17 polarisation (p < 0.0001); higher frequency of memory B cells (p < 0.001) and increased frequency (p < 0.0001) and numbers (p < 0.001) of CD57+ ve senescent NK cells. As a result, the IMM-AGE score was significantly higher in severe COVID-19 survivors than in controls (p < 0.001). Few differences were seen for those with moderate disease and none for mild disease. Regression analysis revealed the only pre-existing variable influencing the IMM-AGE score was South Asian ethnicity (\(\beta\) = 0.174, p= 0.043), with a major influence being disease severity (\(\beta\) = 0.188, p = 0.01).Conclusions Our analyses reveal a state of enhanced immune ageing in survivors of severe COVID-19 and suggest this could be related to SARS-Cov-2 infection. Our data support the rationale for trials of anti-immune ageing interventions for improving clinical outcomes in these patients with severe disease.

Large scale phenotyping of long COVID inflammation reveals mechanistic subtypes of disease (preprint)

One in ten SARS-CoV-2 infections result in prolonged symptoms termed "long COVID", yet disease phenotypes and mechanisms are poorly understood. We studied the blood proteome of 719 adults, grouped by long COVID symptoms. Elevated markers of monocytic inflammation and complement activation were associated with increased likelihood of all symptoms. Elevated IL1R2, MATN2 and COLEC12 associated with cardiorespiratory symptoms, fatigue, and anxiety/depression, while elevated MATN2 and DPP10 associated with gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, and elevated C1QA was associated with cognitive impairment (the proteome of those with cognitive impairment and GI symptoms being most distinct). Markers of neuroinflammation distinguished cognitive impairment whilst elevated SCG3, indicative of brain-gut axis disturbance, distinguished those with GI symptoms. Women had a higher incidence of long COVID and higher inflammatory markers. Symptoms did not associate with respiratory inflammation or persistent virus in sputum. Thus, persistent inflammation is evident in long COVID, distinct profiles being associated with specific symptoms.

Cohort Profile: Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) (preprint)

Abstract [bullet] PHOSP-COVID is a national UK multi-centre cohort study of patients who were hospitalised for COVID-19 and subsequently discharged. [bullet] PHOSP-COVID was established to investigate the medium- and long-term sequelae of severe COVID-19 requiring hospitalisation, understand the underlying mechanisms of these sequelae, evaluate the medium- and long-term effects of COVID-19 treatments, and to serve as a platform to enable future studies, including clinical trials. [bullet] Data collected covered a wide range of physical measures, biological samples, and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). [bullet] Participants could join the cohort either in Tier 1 only with remote data collection using hospital records, a PROMs app and postal saliva sample for DNA, or in Tier 2 where they were invited to attend two specific research visits for further data collection and biological research sampling. These research visits occurred at five (range 2-7) months and 12 (range 10-14) months post-discharge. Participants could also participate in specific nested studies (Tier 3) at selected sites. [bullet] All participants were asked to consent to further follow-up for 25 years via linkage to their electronic healthcare records and to be re-contacted for further research. [bullet] In total, 7935 participants were recruited from 83 UK sites: 5238 to Tier 1 and 2697 to Tier 2, between August 2020 and March 2022. [bullet] Cohort data are held in a Trusted Research Environment and samples stored in a central biobank. Data and samples can be accessed upon request and subject to approvals.

The effects of sleep disturbance on dyspnoea and impaired lung function following COVID-19 hospitalisation: a prospective multi-centre cohort study (preprint)

Background Sleep disturbance is common following hospitalisation both for COVID-19 and other causes. The clinical associations are poorly understood, despite it altering pathophysiology in other scenarios. We, therefore, investigated whether sleep disturbance is associated with dyspnoea along with relevant mediation pathways. Methods Sleep parameters were assessed in a prospective cohort of patients (n=2,468) hospitalised for COVID-19 in the United Kingdom in 39 centres using both subjective and device-based measures. Results were compared to a matched UK biobank cohort and associations were evaluated using multivariable linear regression. Findings 64% (456/714) of participants reported poor sleep quality; 56% felt their sleep quality had deteriorated for at least 1-year following hospitalisation. Compared to the matched cohort, both sleep regularity (44.5 vs 59.2, p<0.001) and sleep efficiency (85.4% vs 88.5%, p<0.001) were lower whilst sleep period duration was longer (8.25h vs 7.32h, p<0.001). Overall sleep quality (effect estimate 4.2 (3.0-5.5)), deterioration in sleep quality following hospitalisation (effect estimate 3.2 (2.0-4.5)), and sleep regularity (effect estimate 5.9 (3.7-8.1)) were associated with both dyspnoea and impaired lung function (FEV1 and FVC). Depending on the sleep metric, anxiety mediated 13-42% of the effect of sleep disturbance on dyspnoea and muscle weakness mediated 29-43% of this effect. Interpretation Sleep disturbance is associated with dyspnoea, anxiety and muscle weakness following COVID-19 hospitalisation. It could have similar effects for other causes of hospitalisation where sleep disturbance is prevalent.

Comparison Of New and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variant Transmissibility through Active Contact Testing. A comparative cross-sectional household seroprevalence study. (preprint)

Historically SARS-CoV-2 secondary attack rates (SAR) have been based on PCR positivity on screening symptomatic contacts, this misses transmission events and identifies only symptomatic contacts who are PCR positive at the time of sampling. We used serology to detect the relative transmissibility of Alpha Variant of Concern (VOC) to non-VOC SARS-CoV-2 to calculate household secondary attack rates. We identified index patients diagnosed with Alpha and non-VOC SARS-CoV-2 across two London Hospitals between November 2020 and January 2021 during a prolonged and well adhered national lockdown. We completed a household seroprevalence survey and found that 61.8% of non-VOC exposed household contacts were seropositive compared to 82.1% of Alpha exposed household contacts. The odds of infection doubled with exposure to an index diagnosed with Alpha. There was evidence of transmission events in almost all households. Our data strongly support that estimates of SAR should include serological data to improve accuracy and understanding.

Nasal IgA wanes 9 months after hospitalisation with COVID-19 and is not induced by subsequent vaccination. (preprint)

Background Most studies of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 focus on circulating antibody, giving limited insights into mucosal defences that prevent viral replication and onward transmission. We studied nasal and plasma antibody responses one year after hospitalisation for COVID-19, including a period when SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was introduced. Methods Plasma and nasosorption samples were prospectively collected from 446 adults hospitalised for COVID-19 between February 2020 and March 2021 via the ISARIC4C and PHOSP-COVID consortia. IgA and IgG responses to NP and S of ancestral SARS-CoV-2, Delta and Omicron (BA.1) variants were measured by electrochemiluminescence and compared with plasma neutralisation data. Findings Strong and consistent nasal anti-NP and anti-S IgA responses were demonstrated, which remained elevated for nine months. Nasal and plasma anti-S IgG remained elevated for at least 12 months with high plasma neutralising titres against all variants. Of 180 with complete data, 160 were vaccinated between 6 and 12 months; coinciding with rises in nasal and plasma IgA and IgG anti-S titres for all SARS-CoV-2 variants, although the change in nasal IgA was minimal. Samples 12 months after admission showed no association between nasal IgA and plasma IgG responses, indicating that nasal IgA responses are distinct from those in plasma and minimally boosted by vaccination. Interpretation The decline in nasal IgA responses 9 months after infection and minimal impact of subsequent vaccination may explain the lack of long-lasting nasal defence against reinfection and the limited effects of vaccination on transmission. These findings highlight the need to develop vaccines that enhance nasal immunity.

Device-assessed sleep and physical activity in individuals recovering from a hospital admission for COVID-19: a prospective, multicentre study (preprint)

ObjectivesTo describe physical behaviours following hospital admission for COVID-19 including associations with acute illness severity and ongoing symptoms. Methods1077 patients with COVID-19 discharged from hospital between March and November 2020 were recruited. Using a 14-day wear protocol, wrist-worn accelerometers were sent to participants after a five-month follow-up assessment. Acute illness severity was assessed by the WHO clinical progression scale, and the severity of ongoing symptoms was assessed using four previously reported data-driven clinical recovery clusters. Two existing control populations of office workers and type 2 diabetes were comparators. ResultsValid accelerometer data from 253 women and 462 men were included. Women engaged in a mean{+/-}SD of 14.9{+/-}14.7 minutes/day of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), with 725.6{+/-}104.9 minutes/day spent inactive and 7.22{+/-}1.08 hours/day asleep. The values for men were 21.0{+/-}22.3 and 755.5{+/-}102.8 minutes/day and 6.94{+/-}1.14 hours/day, respectively. Over 60% of women and men did not have any days containing a 30-minute bout of MVPA. Variability in sleep timing was approximately 2 hours in men and women. More severe acute illness was associated with lower total activity and MVPA in recovery. The very severe recovery cluster was associated with fewer days/week containing continuous bouts of MVPA, longer sleep duration, and higher variability in sleep timing. Patients post-hospitalisation with COVID-19 had lower levels of physical activity, greater sleep variability, and lower sleep efficiency than a similarly aged cohort of office workers or those with type 2 diabetes. ConclusionsPhysical activity and regulating sleep patterns are potential treatable traits for COVID-19 recovery programmes.

Clinical characteristics with inflammation profiling of Long-COVID and association with one-year recovery following hospitalisation in the UK: a prospective observational study (preprint)

Background There are currently no effective pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for Long-COVID. To identify potential therapeutic targets, we focussed on previously described four recovery clusters five months after hospital discharge, their underlying inflammatory profiles and relationship with clinical outcomes at one year. Methods PHOSP-COVID is a prospective longitudinal cohort study, recruiting adults hospitalised with COVID-19 across the UK. Recovery was assessed using patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs), physical performance, and organ function at five-months and one-year after hospital discharge. Hierarchical logistic regression modelling was performed for patient-perceived recovery at one-year. Cluster analysis was performed using clustering large applications (CLARA) k-medoids approach using clinical outcomes at five-months. Inflammatory protein profiling from plasma at the five-month visit was performed. Findings 2320 participants have been assessed at five months after discharge and 807 participants have completed both five-month and one-year visits. Of these, 35.6% were female, mean age 58.7 (SD 12.5) years, and 27.8% received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The proportion of patients reporting full recovery was unchanged between five months 501/165 (25.6%) and one year 232/804 (28.9%). Factors associated with being less likely to report full recovery at one year were: female sex OR 0.68 (95% CI 0.46-0.99), obesity OR 0.50 (95%CI 0.34-0.74) and IMV OR 0.42 (95%CI 0.23-0.76). Cluster analysis (n=1636) corroborated the previously reported four clusters: very severe, severe, moderate/cognitive, mild relating to the severity of physical, mental health and cognitive impairments at five months in a larger sample. There was elevation of inflammatory mediators of tissue damage and repair in both the very severe and the moderate/cognitive clusters compared to the mild cluster including interleukin-6 which was elevated in both comparisons. Overall, there was a substantial deficit in median (IQR) EQ5D-5L utility index from pre-COVID (retrospective assessment) 0.88 (0.74-1.00), five months 0.74 (0.60-0.88) to one year: 0.74 (0.59-0.88), with minimal improvements across all outcome measures at one-year after discharge in the whole cohort and within each of the four clusters. Interpretation The sequelae of a hospital admission with COVID-19 remain substantial one year after discharge across a range of health domains with the minority in our cohort feeling fully recovered. Patient perceived health-related quality of life remains reduced at one year compared to pre-hospital admission. Systematic inflammation and obesity are potential treatable traits that warrant further investigation in clinical trials.

Estimating the relationship between mobility, non-pharmaceutical interventions, and COVID-19 transmission in Ghana (preprint)

Governments around the world have implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), e.g. physical distancing and travel restrictions, to limit the transmission of COVID-19. While lockdowns and physical distancing have proven effective for reducing COVID-19 transmission, there is still limited understanding of the degree to which these interventions impact disease transmission, and how they are reflected in measures of human behaviour. Further, there is a lack of understanding about how new sources of data can be used to monitor NPIs, where these data have the potential to augment existing disease surveillance and modelling efforts. In this study, we assess the relationship between indicators of human mobility, NPIs, and estimates of Rt, a real-time measure of the intensity of COVID-19 transmission in subnational districts of Ghana using a multilevel generalised linear mixed model. We demonstrate a relationship between reductions in human mobility and decreases in Rt during the early stages of the COVID-19 epidemic in Ghana, and show how reductions in human mobility relate to increasing stringency of NPIs. We demonstrate the utility of combining local disease surveillance data with large scale human mobility data to augment existing surveillance capacity to estimate and monitor the effect of NPI policies.

Transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 in a strictly-Orthodox Jewish community in the UK (preprint)

Some social settings such as households and workplaces, have been identified as high risk for SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Identifying and quantifying the importance of these settings is critical for designing interventions. A tightly-knit religious community in the UK experienced a very large COVID-19 epidemic in 2020, reaching 64.3% seroprevalence within 10 months, and we surveyed this community both for serological status and individual-level attendance at particular settings. Using these data, and a network model of people and places represented as a stochastic graph rewriting system, we estimated the relative contribution of transmission in households, schools and religious institutions to the epidemic, and the relative risk of infection in each of these settings. All congregate settings were important for transmission, with some such as primary schools and places of worship having a higher share of transmission than others. We found that the model needed a higher general-community transmission rate for women (3.3-fold), and lower susceptibility to infection in children to recreate the observed serological data. The precise share of transmission in each place was related to assumptions about the internal structure of those places. Identification of key settings of transmission can allow public health interventions to be targeted at these locations.

Localising Vaccination Services: Qualitative Insights on an Orthodox Jewish Collaboration with Public health during the UK coronavirus Vaccine Programme (preprint)

Ethnic and religious minorities have been disproportionately affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and are less likely to accept coronavirus vaccinations. Orthodox (Haredi) Jewish neighbourhoods in England experienced high incidences of SARS-CoV-2 in 2020-21 and measles outbreaks (2018-19) due to suboptimal childhood vaccination coverage. The objective of our study was to explore how the coronavirus vaccination programme (CVP) was co-delivered between public health services and an Orthodox Jewish health organisation. Methods: included 28 semi-structured interviews conducted virtually with public health professionals, community welfare and religious representatives, and household members. We examined CVP delivery from the perspectives of those involved in organising services and vaccine beneficiaries. Interview data was contextualised within debates of the CVP in Orthodox (Haredi) Jewish print and social media. Thematic analysis generated five considerations: i) Prior immunisation-related collaboration with public health services carved a role for Jewish health organisations to host and promote coronavirus vaccination sessions, distribute appointments, and administer vaccines ii) Public health services maintained responsibility for training, logistics, and maintaining vaccination records; iii) The localised approach to service delivery promoted vaccination in a minority with historically suboptimal levels of coverage; iv) Co-delivery promoted trust in the CVP, though a minority of participants maintained concerns around safety; v) Provision of CVP information and stakeholders’ response to situated (context-specific) challenges and concerns. Drawing on this example of CVP co-delivery, we propose that a localised approach to delivering immunisation programmes could address service provision gaps in ways that involve trusted community organisations. Localisation of vaccination services can include communication or implementation strategies, but both approaches involve consideration of investment, engagement and coordination, which are not cost-neutral. Localising vaccination services in collaboration with welfare groups raises opportunities for the on-going CVP and other immunisation programmes, and constitutes an opportunity for ethnic and religious minorities to collaborate in safeguarding community health.

Post-COVID assessment in a specialist clinical service: a 12-month, single-centre analysis of symptoms and healthcare needs in 1325 individuals. (preprint)

Background. Complications following SARS-CoV-2 infection require simultaneous characterisation and management to plan policy and health system responses. We describe the 12-month experience of the first UK dedicated Post-COVID clinical service to include both hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients. Methods. In a single-centre, observational analysis, we report outcomes for 1325 individuals assessed in the University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Post-COVID service between April 2020 and April 2021. Demography, symptoms, comorbidities, investigations, treatments, functional recovery, specialist referral and rehabilitation were compared by referral route ('post hospitalisation', PH; 'non-hospitalised', NH; and 'post emergency department', PED). Symptoms associated with poor recovery or inability to return to work full-time were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Findings. 1325 individuals were assessed (PH 547 [41.3%], PED 212 [16%], NH 566 [42.7%]. Compared with PH and PED groups, NH were younger (median 44.6 [35.6-52.8] vs 58.3 [47.0-67.7] and 48.5 [39.4-55.7] years), more likely to be female (68.2%, 43.0% and 59.9%), less likely to be from an ethnic minority (30.9%, 52.7% and 41.0%) and seen later after symptom onset (median [IQR]:194 [118-298], 69 [51-111] and 76 [55-128] days) (all p<0.0001). NH patients had similar rates of onward specialist referral as PH and PED groups (18.7%, 16.1% and 18.9%, p=0.452), and were more likely to require support for breathlessness (23.7%, 5.5% and 15.1%, p<0.001) and fatigue (17.8%, 4.8%, 8.0%, p<0.001). Hospitalised patients had higher rates of pulmonary emboli, persistent lung interstitial abnormalities, and other organ impairment. 716 (54.0%) individuals reported <75% of optimal health (median [IQR] 70% [55%-85%]). Overall, less than half of employed individuals felt able to return to work full-time at first assessment. Interpretation. Symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 infection were significant in both post- and non-hospitalised patients, with significant ongoing healthcare needs and utilisation. Trials of interventions and patient-centred pathways for diagnostic and treatment approaches are urgently required.

Physical, cognitive and mental health impacts of COVID-19 following hospitalisation: a multi-centre prospective cohort study (preprint)

Background The impact of COVID-19 on physical and mental health, and employment following hospitalisation is poorly understood. Methods PHOSP-COVID is a multi-centre, UK, observational study of adults discharged from hospital with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 involving an assessment between two- and seven-months later including detailed symptom, physiological and biochemical testing. Multivariable logistic regression was performed for patient-perceived recovery with age, sex, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), co-morbidities, and severity of acute illness as co-variates. Cluster analysis was performed using outcomes for breathlessness, fatigue, mental health, cognition and physical function. Findings We report findings of 1077 patients discharged in 2020, from the assessment undertaken a median 5 [IQR4 to 6] months later: 36% female, mean age 58 [SD 13] years, 69% white ethnicity, 27% mechanical ventilation, and 50% had at least two co-morbidities. At follow-up only 29% felt fully recovered, 20% had a new disability, and 19% experienced a health-related change in occupation. Factors associated with failure to recover were female, middle-age, white ethnicity, two or more co-morbidities, and more severe acute illness. The magnitude of the persistent health burden was substantial and weakly related to acute severity. Four clusters were identified with different severities of mental and physical health impairment: 1) Very severe (17%), 2) Severe (21%), 3) Moderate with cognitive impairment (17%), 4) Mild (46%), with 3%, 7%, 36% and 43% feeling fully recovered, respectively. Persistent systemic inflammation determined by C-reactive protein was related to cluster severity, but not acute illness severity. Interpretation We identified factors related to recovery from a hospital admission with COVID-19 and four different phenotypes relating to the severity of physical, mental, and cognitive health five months later. The implications for clinical care include the potential to stratify care and the need for a pro-active approach with wide-access to COVID-19 holistic clinical services. Funding: UKRI and NIHR

Performance characteristics of five antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 asymptomatic infection: a head-to-head benchmark comparison (preprint)

Background Mass testing for early identification and isolation of infectious COVID-19 individuals, irrespective of concurrent symptoms, is an efficacious strategy to reduce disease transmission. Antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) appear as a potentially suitable tool for mass testing on account of their ease-of-use, fast turnaround time, and low cost. However, benchmark comparisons are scarce, particularly in the context of unexposed asymptomatic individuals. Methods We used nasopharyngeal specimens from unexposed asymptomatic individuals to assess five Ag-RDTs: PanBio ™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid test (Abbott), CLINITEST® Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test (Siemens), SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test (Roche Diagnostics), SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Test Kit (Lepu Medical), and COVID-19 Coronavirus Rapid Antigen Test Cassette (Surescreen). Samples were collected between December 2020-January 2021 during the third wave of the epidemic in Spain. Findings The analysis included 101 specimens with confirmed positive PCR results and 185 with negative PCR. For the overall sample, the performance parameters of Ag-RDTs were as follows: Abbott assay, sensitivity 38·6% (95% CI 29·1–48·8) and specificity 99·5% (97–100%); Siemens, sensitivity 51·5% (41·3–61·6) and specificity 98·4% (95·3–99·6); Roche, sensitivity 43·6% (33·7–53·8) and specificity 96·2% (92·4–98·5); Lepu, sensitivity 45·5% (35·6–55·8) and specificity 89·2% (83·8–93·3%); Surescreen, sensitivity 28·8% (20·2–38·6) and specificity 97·8% (94·5–99·4%). For specimens with cycle threshold (Ct) <30 in RT-qPCR, all Ag-RDT achieved a sensitivity of at least 70%, with Siemens, Roche, and Lepu assays showing sensitivities higher than 80%. In models according to population prevalence, all Ag-RDTs will have a NPV >99% and a PPV<50% at 1% prevalence. Interpretation Two commercial, widely available assays can be used for SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing to achieve sensitivity in specimens with a Ct<30 and specificity of at least 80% and 96%, respectively. Estimated negative and positive predictive values suggests the suitability of Ag-RDTs for mass screenings of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the general population. Funding Blueberry diagnostics, Fundació Institut d’Investigació en Ciències de la Salut Germans Trias i Pujol, and #YoMeCorono.org crowdfunding campaign. Research in context Evidence before this study In December 2020, we searched on PubMed for articles containing the terms “antigen”, “test” (or Ag-RDT), and “SARS-CoV-2” or “COVID-19” either in the title or the abstract. Our search yielded 79 entries corresponding to articles written in English. Of them, 33 were articles presenting the diagnostic performance of qualitative lateral-flow antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT). Four of these articles reported the results of head-to-head comparisons of various Ag-RDTs; in all cases, the number of tests was lower than the recommended for retrospective assessments of diagnostic performance (i.e., minimum of 100 PCR positive and 100 PCR negative). Furthermore, all head-to-head comparisons found in the literature included specimens obtained among individuals with varying disease status (none of which asymptomatic), thus limiting the adequacy of the estimates for an asymptomatic screening strategy. Added value of this study We compared for the first time head-to-head five Ag-RDT using a powered set of fresh respiratory specimens PCR-confirmed positive or negative, collected from unexposed asymptomatic individuals during screening campaigns for early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The sample size was large enough to draw robust conclusions. Our analysis identified four Ag-RDTs (i.e., assays marketed by Abbott, Siemens, Roche, and Surescreen) with specificity higher than 96%. Despite the low sensitivity for the overall sample (range 29% to 51%), the corresponding values for the subset of samples with Ct <30 were higher than 80% for Siemens, Roche, and Lepu assays. The estimated NPV for a screening performed in an area with 1% prevalence would be >99% for all tests, while the PPV would be <50%. Implications of all the available evidence Current data on the diagnostic performance of Ag-RDTs is heterogeneous and precludes benchmark assessments. Furthermore, the screening of asymptomatic populations is currently not considered among the intended uses of Ag-RDT, mostly because of lack of evidence on test performance in samples from unexposed asymptomatic individuals. Our findings add to the current evidence in two ways: first, we provide benchmarking data on Ag-RDTs, assessed head-to-head in a single set of respiratory specimens; second, we provide data on the diagnostic performance of Ag-RDTs in unexposed asymptomatic individuals. Our findings support the idea that Ag-RDTs can be used for mass screening in low prevalence settings and accurately rule out a highly infectious case in such setting.

How did COVID-19 measures impact sexual behaviour and access to STI&HIV services in Panama? Results from a national cross-sectional online survey (preprint)

Objectives To describe changes in sexual behaviours, including virtual sex (sexting and cybersex), and access to STI&HIV testing and care during COVID-19 measures in Panama. Methods We conducted an online cross-sectional survey from August 8 to September 12, 2020, among adults ([≥]18 years) residing in Panama. Participants were recruited through social media. Questions included demographics, access to STI&HIV testing and HIV care and sexual behaviours three months before COVID-19 social distancing measures and during social distancing measures (COVID-19 measures). Logistic regression was used to identify associations between variables and behavioural changes. Results We recruited 960 participants; 526 (54.8%) identified as cis-women, 366 (38.1%) cis-men, and 68 (7.1%) non-binary or another gender; median age was 28y (IQR:23-37y), 531/957 (55.5%) were of mixed-ethnicity (mixed-Indigenous/European/Afro-descendant ancestry). Before COVID-19 measures, virtual sex was reported by 38.5% (181/470) cis-women, 58.4% (184/315) cis-men and 45.0% (27/60) non-binary participants; during COVID-19 measures, virtual sex increased among 17.2% cis-women, 24.7% cis-men and 8.9% non-binary participants. During COVID-19 measures, 230/800 [28.8%] of participants reported decreased casual sex compared to pre-COVID-19 measures. Compared to pre-COVID-19 measures, decreased casual sex were reported more frequently during COVID-19 measures by cis-men compared to cis-women (39.2% versus 22.9%, urban/rural adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.57-3.01); and by Afro-descendant compared to mixed-ethnicity participants (40.0% versus 29.8%, AOR=1.78, 95%CI:1.07-2.94). Compared to no change in virtual sex (16.8%), increase in virtual sex (38.5%, AOR=1.78, 95%CI:1.10-2.88); and decreased virtual sex (86.7%, AOR=16.53, 95%CI:7.74-35.27) were associated with decreased casual sex encounters. During COVID-19 measures, STI&HIV testing could not be obtained by 58.0% (58/100) participants who needed a test, and interrupted HIV care was reported by 53.3% (8/15) HIV-positive participants. Conclusions COVID-19 measures in Panama were associated with a decrease in casual sex among cis-men and Afro-descendant peoples, whilst access to STI&HIV testing and care was seriously disrupted.

Risk factors for mortality of residents in nursing homes with Covid-19: a retrospective cohort study (preprint)

BackgroundNursing homes have shown remarkably high Covid-19 incidence and mortality. We aimed to explore the contribution of structural factors of nursing home facilities and the surrounding district to all-cause and Covid-19-related deaths during a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the risk factors of Covid-19 mortality at the facility level in nursing homes in Catalonia (North-East Spain). The investigated factors included characteristics of the residents (age, gender, comorbidities, and complexity and/or advanced disease), structural features of the nursing home (total number of residents, residents who return home during the pandemic, and capacity for pandemic response, based on an ad hoc score of availability of twelve essential items for implementing preventive measures), and sociodemographic profile of the catchment district (household income, population density, and population incidence of Covid-19). Study endpoints included all-cause death and Covid-19-related death (either PCR-confirmed or clinical suspicion). FindingsThe analysis included 167 nursing homes that provide long-term care to 8,716 residents. Between March 1 and June 1, 2020, 1,629 deaths were reported in these nursing homes; 1,089 (66{square}9%) of them were Covid-19-confirmed. The multivariable regression showed a higher risk of death associated with a higher percentage of complex patients (HR 1{square}09; 95%CI 1{square}05-1{square}12 per 10% increase) or those with advanced diseases (1{square}13; 1{square}07-1{square}19), lower capacity for implementing preventive measures (1{square}08; 1{square}05-1{square}10 per 1-point increase), and districts with a higher incidence of Covid-19 (2{square}98; 2{square}53-3{square}50 per 1000 cases/100,000 population increase). A higher population density of the catchment area was a protective factor (0{square}60; 0{square}50-0{square}72 per log10 people/Km2 increase). InterpretationPresence of residents with complex/advance disease, low capacity for pandemic response and location in areas with high incidence of Covid-19 are risk factors for Covid-19 mortality in nursing homes and may help policymakers to prioritize preventative interventions for pandemic containment. FundingCrowdfunding campaign YoMeCorono (https://www.yomecorono.com/), and Generalitat de Catalunya. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed for studies exploring the management of Covid-19 in long-term care settings. The search was performed on May 1, 2020, and included the keywords "Covid-19", "nursing home", "long term care", and "skilled nursing facility" with no language restriction. In addition to descriptive reports of Covid-19 mortality in the long-term care setting, we found studies providing evidence on the influence of age and comorbidities to mortality at the individual level. Some authors reported comparisons in the incidence and mortality of Covid-19 between facilities and country areas, and suggested the characteristics of each area/facility that may explain differences in mortality. However, we found no published works specifically investigating the contribution of structural features of the facility and sociodemographic characteristics of the area to explaining differences in Covid-19 mortality among long-term care facilities. Added value of this studyThis is the first analysis of risk of mortality at a facility level of residents with Covid-19 in nursing homes. We enrolled up to 167 nursing homes providing long-term care to 8,716 residents and we actively identified risk factors for Covid-19 mortality at the facility level. We found that nursing homes with lower capacity for pandemic response, and located in districts with a higher incidence of Covid-19 had significantly higher risks of Covid-19 mortality. The percentage of complex and/or advanced disease patients was also a risk factor. Implications of all the available evidenceOur findings provide policymakers with critical information to prioritize long-term care facilities at higher risk when deploying preventative interventions to minimize mortality in this setting. The association between mortality within the nursing home and Covid-19 incidence in the catchment area reinforces the importance of preventing the entry of SARS-CoV-2 into facilities. Nursing homes with limited capacity to implement containment measures should be prioritized when deploying preventative interventions for minimizing Covid-19 mortality in long-term care facilities.

Transmission of COVID-19 in 282 clusters in Catalonia, Spain: a cohort study (preprint)

BackgroundThere remains limited data on what variables affect risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and developing symptomatic Covid-19 and in particular the relationship to viral load (VL). We analysed data from linked index cases and their contacts to explore factors associated with transmission of SARS-CoV-2. MethodsPatients were recruited as part of a randomized control trial, conducted between March to April 2020, that aimed to assess if hydroxychloroquine reduced transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Non-hospitalised Covid-19 cases and their contacts were identified through the local surveillance system. VL, measured by quantitative PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab, was assessed at enrollment, at day 14, and whenever the participant reported Covid-19-like symptoms. Risk of transmission, developing symptomatic disease and incubation dynamics were evaluated using regression analysis. FindingsWe identified 314 cases, 282 of which had at least one contact (753 contacts in total). Ninety (33%) of 282 clusters had at least one transmission event. The secondary attack rate was 16% (125/753), with a variation from 12% to 24% for VL of the index case of <106, and >109 copies/mL, respectively (OR per log10 increase in VL 1.3 95%CI 1.1-1.6). Increased risk of transmission was also associated with household contact (OR 2.7; 1.4-5.06) and age of the contact (OR 1.02 per year; 1.01-1.04). The proportion of PCR positive contacts who developed symptomatic Covid-19 was 40.3% (181/449), with a variation from 25% to 60% for VL of the contact <107, and >109 copies/mL (HR log10 increase in VL 1.12; 95% CI 1.05 - 1.2). Time to onset of symptomatic disease decreased from a median of 7 days (IQR 5-10) for individuals with an initial viral load <107 to 6 days (4-8) and 5 days (3-8) for individuals with an initial viral load of 107-109 and >109, respectively. InterpretationViral load of index cases is a leading driver of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The risk of symptomatic Covid-19 is strongly associated with viral load of contacts at baseline and shortens the incubation time in a dose-dependent manner. FundingCrowdfunding campaign YoMeCorono (http://www.yomecorono.com/), and Generalitat de Catalunya. Support for laboratory equipment from Foundation Dormeur. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSIn September 2020, we searched PubMed database for articles reporting on factors influencing transmission and the risk of developing symptomatic disease. Search terms included "Covid-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "transmission", "incubation time", and "risk", with no language restrictions. By 20th September, various authors had reported on retrospective analyses of clusters of index cases and their corresponding contacts, as well as series of patients who developed symptomatic Covid-19 disease after PCR positive result. Besides describing the secondary attack rate, various authors identified risk factors for transmission associated with the place and duration of exposure and the lack of use of personal protective equipment. A single study suggested that symptomatic individuals might be more likely to transmit than asymptomatic cases but we found no clear evidence regarding the influence of viral load of the index case on transmission risk. Similarly, although various retrospective series of patients with positive PCR results had reported incubation times elsewhere, the characteristics of index case and contacts that may influence the risk of developing symptomatic Covid-19 and the time to this event had been barely addressed. Added value of this studyWe analyzed data from a large cluster-randomized clinical trial on post-exposure therapy for Covid-19 that provide new information on SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics. Several design components add value to this dataset. Notably, quantitative PCR was available for the index cases to estimate risk of transmission. Furthermore, quantitative PCR was also performed on asymptomatic contacts at the time of enrollment allowing to investigate the dynamics of symptomatic disease onset among them. We found that the viral load of the index case was the leading determinant of the risk of SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity among contacts. Among contacts who were SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive at baseline, viral load significantly influenced the risk of developing the symptomatic disease in a dose-dependent manner. This influence also became apparent in the incubation time, which shortened with increasing baseline viral loads. Implication of all the available evidenceOur results provide important insights into the knowledge regarding the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and Covid-19 development. The fact that the transmission risk is primarily driven by the viral load of index cases, more than other factors such as their symptoms or age, suggests that all cases should be considered potential transmitters irrespective of their presentation and encourages assessing viral load in cases with a larger number of close contacts. Similarly, our results regarding the risk and expected time to developing symptomatic Covid-19 encourage risk stratification of newly diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infections based on the initial viral load.

Systematic evaluation and external validation of 22 prognostic models among hospitalised adults with COVID-19: An observational cohort study (preprint)

BackgroundThe number of proposed prognostic models for COVID-19, which aim to predict disease outcomes, is growing rapidly. It is not known whether any are suitable for widespread clinical implementation. We addressed this question by independent and systematic evaluation of their performance among hospitalised COVID-19 cases. MethodsWe conducted an observational cohort study to assess candidate prognostic models, identified through a living systematic review. We included consecutive adults admitted to a secondary care hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed community-acquired COVID-19 (1st February to 30th April 2020). We reconstructed candidate models as per their original descriptions and evaluated performance for their original intended outcomes (clinical deterioration or mortality) and time horizons. We assessed discrimination using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and calibration using calibration plots, slopes and calibration-in-the-large. We calculated net benefit compared to the default strategies of treating all and no patients, and against the most discriminating predictor in univariable analyses, based on a limited subset of a priori candidates. ResultsWe tested 22 candidate prognostic models among a cohort of 411 participants, of whom 180 (43.8%) and 115 (28.0%) met the endpoints of clinical deterioration and mortality, respectively. The highest AUROCs were achieved by the NEWS2 score for prediction of deterioration over 24 hours (0.78; 95% CI 0.73-0.83), and a novel model for prediction of deterioration <14 days from admission (0.78; 0.74-0.82). Calibration appeared generally poor for models that used probability outcomes. In univariable analyses, admission oxygen saturation on room air was the strongest predictor of in-hospital deterioration (AUROC 0.76; 0.71-0.81), while age was the strongest predictor of in-hospital mortality (AUROC 0.76; 0.71-0.81). No prognostic model demonstrated consistently higher net benefit than using the most discriminating univariable predictors to stratify treatment, across a range of threshold probabilities. ConclusionsOxygen saturation on room air and patient age are strong predictors of deterioration and mortality among hospitalised adults with COVID-19, respectively. None of the prognostic models evaluated offer incremental value for patient stratification to these univariable predictors.