Temporal association of pre-pandemic perceived social support with psychological resilience and mental well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic among people with a history of injection drug use.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on whether modifiable social factors foster psychological resilience and mental well-being among people who use drugs following Big Events. We examined the temporal association of pre-pandemic perceived social support with psychological resilience and negative mental health symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic among people with a history of injection drug use. METHODS: Between June and September 2020, we conducted a telephone survey among 545 participants in the AIDS Linked to the IntraVenous Experience (ALIVE) study: a community-based cohort of adults with a history of injection drug use. Leveraging data from study visits in 2018-early 2020, associations of pre-pandemic perceived social support with psychological resilience scores (range=1-5) and the probability of negative mental health symptoms during the pandemic were assessed using multivariable linear and modified Poisson regression models, respectively. RESULTS: Participants' median age was 58 years, 38.2% were female, 83.3% identified as Black, and 30.3% were living with HIV. During the pandemic, 14.5% had low (<3) resilience scores, 36.1% experienced anxiety, and 35.8% reported increased loneliness. Compared to participants in the lowest tertile of pre-pandemic social support, participants in the highest tertile had higher mean resilience scores (ß = 0.27 [95% CI = 0.12, 0.43]), a lower probability of anxiety (prevalence ratio [PR] = 0.71 [95% CI = 0.52, 0.96]), and a lower probability of increased loneliness (PR = 0.62 [95% CI = 0.45, 0.84]). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-pandemic perceived social support was associated with greater psychological resilience and generally better mental well-being during the pandemic. Interventions that improve social support may foster psychological resilience and protect the mental well-being of people who use drugs, especially during periods of social disruption.

Curating the Evidence About COVID-19 for Frontline Public Health and Clinical Care: The Novel Coronavirus Research Compendium.

The public health crisis created by the COVID-19 pandemic has spurred a deluge of scientific research aimed at informing the public health and medical response to the pandemic. However, early in the pandemic, those working in frontline public health and clinical care had insufficient time to parse the rapidly evolving evidence and use it for decision-making. Academics in public health and medicine were well-placed to translate the evidence for use by frontline clinicians and public health practitioners. The Novel Coronavirus Research Compendium (NCRC), a group of >60 faculty and trainees across the United States, formed in March 2020 with the goal to quickly triage and review the large volume of preprints and peer-reviewed publications on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 and summarize the most important, novel evidence to inform pandemic response. From April 6 through December 31, 2020, NCRC teams screened 54 192 peer-reviewed articles and preprints, of which 527 were selected for review and uploaded to the NCRC website for public consumption. Most articles were peer-reviewed publications (n = 395, 75.0%), published in 102 journals; 25.1% (n = 132) of articles reviewed were preprints. The NCRC is a successful model of how academics translate scientific knowledge for practitioners and help build capacity for this work among students. This approach could be used for health problems beyond COVID-19, but the effort is resource intensive and may not be sustainable in the long term.

ABO blood group and SARS-CoV-2 antibody response in a convalescent donor population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: ABO blood group may affect risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or severity of COVID-19. We sought to determine whether IgG, IgA and neutralizing antibody (nAb) to SARS-CoV-2 vary by ABO blood group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among eligible convalescent plasma donors, ABO blood group was determined via agglutination of reagent A1 and B cells, IgA and IgG were quantified using the Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA, and nAb titres were quantified using a microneutralization assay. Differences in titre distribution were examined by ABO blood group using non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) of high nAb titre (≥1:160) were estimated by blood group using multivariable modified Poisson regression models that adjusted for age, sex, hospitalization status and time since SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. RESULTS: Of the 202 potential donors, 65 (32%) were blood group A, 39 (19%) were group B, 13 (6%) were group AB, and 85 (42%) were group O. Distribution of nAb titres significantly differed by ABO blood group, whereas there were no significant differences in anti-spike IgA or anti-spike IgG titres by ABO blood group. There were significantly more individuals with high nAb titre (≥1:160) among those with blood group B, compared with group O (aPR = 1·9 [95%CI = 1·1-3·3], P = 0·029). Fewer individuals had a high nAb titre among those with blood group A, compared with group B (aPR = 0·6 [95%CI = 0·4-1·0], P = 0·053). CONCLUSION: Eligible CCP donors with blood group B may have relatively higher neutralizing antibody titres. Additional studies evaluating ABO blood groups and antibody titres that incorporate COVID-19 severity are needed.

Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers.

Oral fluid (hereafter saliva) offers a non-invasive sampling method for detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. However, data comparing performance of salivary tests against commercially-available serologic and neutralizing antibody (nAb) assays are lacking. This study compared the performance of a laboratory-developed multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay targeting antibodies to nucleocapsid (N), receptor binding domain (RBD) and spike (S) antigens to three commercially-available SARS-CoV-2 serologic enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) (Ortho Vitros, Euroimmun, and BioRad) and nAb. Paired saliva and plasma samples were collected from 101 eligible COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donors >14 days since PCR+ confirmed diagnosis. Concordance was evaluated using positive (PPA) and negative (NPA) percent agreement, and Cohen's kappa coefficient. The range between salivary and plasma EIAs for SARS-CoV-2-specific N was PPA: 54.4-92.1% and NPA: 69.2-91.7%, for RBD was PPA: 89.9-100% and NPA: 50.0-84.6%, and for S was PPA: 50.6-96.6% and NPA: 50.0-100%. Compared to a plasma nAb assay, the multiplex salivary assay PPA ranged from 62.3% (N) and 98.6% (RBD) and NPA ranged from 18.8% (RBD) to 96.9% (S). Combinations of N, RBD, and S and a summary algorithmic index of all three (N/RBD/S) in saliva produced ranges of PPA: 87.6-98.9% and NPA: 50-91.7% with the three EIAs and ranges of PPA: 88.4-98.6% and NPA: 21.9-34.4% with the nAb assay. A multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay demonstrated variable, but comparable performance to three commercially-available plasma EIAs and a nAb assay, and may be a viable alternative to assist in monitoring population-based seroprevalence and vaccine antibody response.

Demographic and clinical correlates of acute and convalescent SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients of a U.S. emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Departments (EDs) have served as critical surveillance sites for infectious diseases. We sought to determine the prevalence and temporal trends of acute (by PCR) and convalescent (by antibody [Ab]) SARS-CoV-2 infection during the earliest phase of the pandemic among patients in an urban ED in Baltimore City. METHODS: We tested remnant blood samples from 3255 unique ED patients, collected between March 16th and May 31st 2020 for SARS-CoV-2 Ab. PCR for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection from nasopharyngeal swabs was obtained on any patients based on clinical suspicion. Hospital records were abstracted and factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection were assessed. RESULTS: Of 3255 ED patients, 8.2% (95%CI: 7.3%, 9.2%) individuals had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection; 155 PCR+, 78 Ab+, and 35 who were both PCR+ and Ab+. Prevalence of disease increased throughout the study period, ranging from 3.2% (95%CI: 1.8%, 5.2%) PCR+ and 0.6% (95%CI: 0.1%, 1.8%) Ab+ in March, to 6.2% (95%CI: 5.1%, 7.4%) PCR+ and 4.2% (95%CI: 3.3%, 5.3%) Ab+ in May. The highest SARS-CoV-2 prevalence was found in Hispanic individuals who made up 8.4% (95%CI: 7.4%, 9.4%) of individuals screened, but 35% (95%CI: 29%, 41%) of infections (PCR and/or Ab+). Demographic and clinical factors independently associated with acute infection included Hispanic ethnicity, loss of smell or taste, subjective fever, cough, muscle ache and fever. Factors independently associated with convalescent infection were Hispanic ethnicity and low oxygen saturation. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of COVID-19 in Baltimore City increased dramatically over the 11-week study period and was disproportionately higher among Hispanic individuals. ED-based surveillance methods are important for identifying both acute and convalescent SARS-CoV-2 infections and provides important information regarding demographic and clinical correlates of disease in the local community.

SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cell responses in convalescent COVID-19 individuals.

Characterization of the T cell response in individuals who recover from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is critical to understanding its contribution to protective immunity. A multiplexed peptide-MHC tetramer approach was used to screen 408 SARS-CoV-2 candidate epitopes for CD8+ T cell recognition in a cross-sectional sample of 30 coronavirus disease 2019 convalescent individuals. T cells were evaluated using a 28-marker phenotypic panel, and findings were modelled against time from diagnosis and from humoral and inflammatory responses. There were 132 SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cell responses detected across 6 different HLAs, corresponding to 52 unique epitope reactivities. CD8+ T cell responses were detected in almost all convalescent individuals and were directed against several structural and nonstructural target epitopes from the entire SARS-CoV-2 proteome. A unique phenotype for SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells was observed that was distinct from other common virus-specific T cells detected in the same cross-sectional sample and characterized by early differentiation kinetics. Modelling demonstrated a coordinated and dynamic immune response characterized by a decrease in inflammation, increase in neutralizing antibody titer, and differentiation of a specific CD8+ T cell response. Overall, T cells exhibited distinct differentiation into stem cell and transitional memory states (subsets), which may be key to developing durable protection.

Cytokine and Chemokine Levels in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Convalescent Plasma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) is primarily ascribed as a source of neutralizing anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. However, the composition of other immune components in CCP and their potential roles remain largely unexplored. This study aimed to describe the composition and concentrations of plasma cytokines and chemokines in eligible CCP donors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 20 prepandemic healthy blood donors without SARS-CoV-2 infection and 140 eligible CCP donors with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Electrochemiluminescence detection-based multiplexed sandwich immunoassays were used to quantify plasma cytokine and chemokine concentrations (n = 35 analytes). A SARS-CoV-2 microneutralization assay was also performed. Differences in the percentage of detection and distribution of cytokine and chemokine concentrations were examined by categorical groups using Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, respectively. RESULTS: Among CCP donors (n = 140), the median time since molecular diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 was 44 days (interquartile range = 38-50) and 9% (n = 12) were hospitalized due to COVID-19. Compared with healthy blood donor controls, CCP donors had significantly higher plasma levels of interferon (IFN)-γ, interleukin (IL)-10, IL-15, IL-21, and macrophage-inflammatory protein-1, but lower levels of IL-1RA, IL-8, IL-16, and vascular endothelial growth factor-A (P < .0014). The distributions of plasma levels of IL-8, IL-15, and IFN-inducible protein-10 were significantly higher among CCP donors with high (≥160) versus low (<40) anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody titers (P < .0014). The median levels of IL-6 were significantly higher among CCP donors who were hospitalized versus nonhospitalized (P < .0014). CONCLUSIONS: Heterogeneity in cytokine and chemokine composition of CCP suggests there is a different inflammatory state among the CCP donors compared with SARS-CoV-2 naive, healthy blood donors.

SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Avidity Responses in COVID-19 Patients and Convalescent Plasma Donors.

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma therapy is a leading treatment for conferring temporary immunity to COVID-19-susceptible individuals or for use as post-exposure prophylaxis. However, not all recovered patients develop adequate antibody titers for donation and the relationship between avidity and neutralizing titers is currently not well understood. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid IgG titers and avidity were measured in a longitudinal cohort of COVID-19 hospitalized patients (n = 16 individuals) and a cross-sectional sample of convalescent plasma donors (n = 130). Epidemiologic correlates of avidity were examined in donors by linear regression. The association of avidity and a high neutralizing titer (NT) were also assessed in donors using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: Antibody avidity increased over duration of infection and remained elevated. In convalescent plasma donors, higher levels of anti-spike avidity were associated with older age, male sex, and hospitalization. Higher NTs had a stronger positive correlation with anti-spike IgG avidity (Spearman ρ = 0.386; P < .001) than with anti-nucleocapsid IgG avidity (Spearman ρ = 0.211; P = .026). Increasing levels of anti-spike IgG avidity were associated with high NT (≥160) (adjusted prevalence ratio = 1.58 [95% confidence interval = 1.19-2.12]), independent of age, sex, and hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 antibody avidity correlated with duration of infection and higher neutralizing titers, suggesting a potential alternative screening parameter for identifying optimal convalescent plasma donors.

Comparative Performance of Five Commercially Available Serologic Assays To Detect Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and Identify Individuals with High Neutralizing Titers.

Accurate serological assays to detect antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are needed to characterize the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and identify potential candidates for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) donation. This study compared the performances of commercial enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) with respect to detection of IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and neutralizing antibodies (nAbs). The diagnostic accuracy of five commercially available EIAs (Abbott, Euroimmun, EDI, ImmunoDiagnostics, and Roche) for detection of IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was evaluated using cross-sectional samples from potential CCP donors who had prior molecular confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 214) and samples from prepandemic emergency department patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 1,099). Of the 214 potential CCP donors, all were sampled >14 days since symptom onset and only a minority (n = 16 [7.5%]) had been hospitalized due to COVID-19; 140 potential CCP donors were tested by all five EIAs and a microneutralization assay. Performed according to the protocols of the manufacturers to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, the sensitivity of each EIA ranged from 76.4% to 93.9%, and the specificity of each EIA ranged from 87.0% to 99.6%. Using a nAb titer cutoff value of ≥160 as the reference representing a positive test result (n = 140 CCP donors), the empirical area under the receiver operating curve for each EIA ranged from 0.66 (Roche) to 0.90 (Euroimmun). Commercial EIAs with high diagnostic accuracy to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies did not necessarily have high diagnostic accuracy to detect high nAb titers. Some but not all commercial EIAs may be useful in the identification of individuals with high nAb titers among convalescent individuals.