Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
EuropePMC; 2022.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-331670

ABSTRACT

Objective To determine how the severity of successively dominant SARS-CoV-2 variants has changed over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design Prospective cohort analysis. Setting Community- and hospital- sequenced COVID-19 cases in the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHS GG&C) Health Board (1.2 million people). Participants All sequenced non-nosocomial adult COVID-19 cases in NHS GG&C identified to be infected with the relevant SARS-CoV-2 lineage during the following analysis periods. B.1.177/Alpha analysis: 1st November 2020 - 30th January 2021 (n = 1640). Alpha/Delta analysis: 1st April - 30th June 2021 (n = 5552). AY.4.2 Delta/non-AY.4.2 Delta analysis: 1st July – 31st October 2021 (n = 9613). Non-AY.4.2 Delta/Omicron analysis: 1st – 31st December 2021 (n = 3858). Main outcome measures Admission to hospital, admission to ICU, or death within 28 days of first positive COVID-19 test Results In the B.1.177/Alpha analysis, 300 of 807 (37.2%) B.1.177 cases were recorded as hospitalised or having a more severe outcome, compared to 232 of 833 (27.9%) Alpha cases. After adjusting for the following covariates: age, sex, time of positive test, comorbidities and partial postcode, the cumulative odds ratio was 1.51 (95% central credible interval 1.08-2.11) for Alpha versus B.1.177. In the Alpha/Delta analysis, 113 of 2104 (5.4%) Alpha cases were recorded as hospitalised or having a more severe outcome, compared to 230 of 3448 (6.7%) Delta cases. After adjusting for the above covariates plus number of vaccine doses and reinfection, the cumulative odds ratio was 2.09 (95% central credible interval 1.42-3.08) for Delta versus Alpha. In the non-AY.4.2 Delta/AY.4.2 Delta analysis, 845 of 8644 (9.8%) non-AY.4.2 Delta cases were recorded as hospitalised or having a more severe outcome, compared to 101 of 969 (10.4%) AY.4.2 Delta cases. After adjusting for the previously stated covariates, the cumulative odds ratio was 0.99 (95% central credible interval 0.76-1.27) for AY.4.2 Delta versus non-AY.4.2 Delta. In the non-AY.4.2 Delta/Omicron analysis, 30 of 1164 (2.6%) non-AY.4.2 Delta cases were recorded as hospitalised or having a more severe outcome, compared to 26 of 2694 (1.0%) Omicron cases. After adjusting for the previously listed covariates, the median cumulative odds ratio was 0.49 (95% central credible interval 0.22-1.06) for Omicron versus non-AY.4.2 Delta. Conclusions The direction of change in disease severity between successively emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern was inconsistent. This heterogeneity in virulence between variants, coupled with independent evolutionary emergence, demonstrates that severity associated with future SARS-CoV-2 variants is inherently unpredictable.

2.
EuropePMC;
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-328362

ABSTRACT

Background: This study aimed to determine the sensitivity and specificity of reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) testing of upper respiratory tract samples from hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), compared to the gold standard of a clinical diagnosis. Methods: : </ns3:bold>All RT-PCR testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in NHS Lothian, Scotland, United Kingdom between the 7<ns3:sup>th</ns3:sup> of February and 19<ns3:sup>th</ns3:sup> April 2020 (inclusive) was reviewed, and hospitalised patients were identified. All upper respiratory tract<ns3:bold> </ns3:bold>RT-PCR tests were analysed for each patient to determine the sequence of negative and positive results. For those who were tested twice or more but never received a positive result, case records were reviewed, and a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 allocated based on clinical features, discharge diagnosis, and radiology and haematology results. For those who had a negative RT-PCR test but a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, respiratory samples were retested using a multiplex respiratory panel, a second SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay, and a human RNase P control. Results: : </ns3:bold>Compared to the gold standard of a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, the sensitivity of a single upper respiratory tract RT-PCR for COVID-19 was 82.2% (95% confidence interval 79.0-85.1%).   The sensitivity of two upper respiratory tract RT-PCR tests increased sensitivity to 90.6% (CI 88.0-92.7%). A further 2.2% and 0.9% of patients who received a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 were positive on a third and fourth test;this may be an underestimate of the value of further testing as the majority of patients 93.0% (2999/3226) only had one or two RT-PCR tests. Conclusions: : </ns3:bold>The sensitivity of a single RT-PCR test of upper respiratory tract<ns3:bold> </ns3:bold>samples in hospitalised patients is 82.2%. Sensitivity increases to 90.6% when patients are tested twice.  A proportion of cases with clinically defined COVID-19 never test positive on RT-PCR despite repeat testing.

3.
Wellcome open research ; 5, 2020.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1679256

ABSTRACT

Background: This study aimed to determine the sensitivity and specificity of reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) testing of upper respiratory tract samples from hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), compared to the gold standard of a clinical diagnosis. Methods: All RT-PCR testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in NHS Lothian, Scotland, United Kingdom between the 7 th of February and 19 th April 2020 (inclusive) was reviewed, and hospitalised patients were identified. All upper respiratory tract RT-PCR tests were analysed for each patient to determine the sequence of negative and positive results. For those who were tested twice or more but never received a positive result, case records were reviewed, and a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 allocated based on clinical features, discharge diagnosis, and radiology and haematology results. For those who had a negative RT-PCR test but a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, respiratory samples were retested using a multiplex respiratory panel, a second SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay, and a human RNase P control. Results: Compared to the gold standard of a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, the sensitivity of a single upper respiratory tract RT-PCR for COVID-19 was 82.2% (95% confidence interval 79.0-85.1%).   The sensitivity of two upper respiratory tract RT-PCR tests increased sensitivity to 90.6% (CI 88.0-92.7%). A further 2.2% and 0.9% of patients who received a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 were positive on a third and fourth test;this may be an underestimate of the value of further testing as the majority of patients 93.0% (2999/3226) only had one or two RT-PCR tests. Conclusions: The sensitivity of a single RT-PCR test of upper respiratory tract samples in hospitalised patients is 82.2%. Sensitivity increases to 90.6% when patients are tested twice.  A proportion of cases with clinically defined COVID-19 never test positive on RT-PCR despite repeat testing.

4.
2021.
Preprint in English | Other preprints | ID: ppcovidwho-295699

ABSTRACT

Background The B.1.1.7 (Alpha) SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern was associated with increased transmission relative to other variants present at the time of its emergence and several studies have shown an association between the B.1.1.7 lineage infection and increased 28-day mortality. However, to date none have addressed the impact of infection on severity of illness or the need for oxygen or ventilation. Methods In this prospective clinical cohort sub-study of the COG-UK consortium, 1475 samples from hospitalised and community cases collected between the 1 st November 2020 and 30 th January 2021 were collected. These samples were sequenced in local laboratories and analysed for the presence of B.1.1.7-defining mutations. We prospectively matched sequence data to clinical outcomes as the lineage became dominant in Scotland and modelled the association between B.1.1.7 infection and severe disease using a 4-point scale of maximum severity by 28 days: 1. no support, 2. oxygen, 3. ventilation and 4. death. Additionally, we calculated an estimate of the growth rate of B.1.1.7-associated infections following introduction into Scotland using phylogenetic data. Results B.1.1.7 was responsible for a third wave of SARS-CoV-2 in Scotland, and rapidly replaced the previously dominant second wave lineage B.1.177) due to a significantly higher transmission rate (∼5 fold). Of 1475 patients, 364 were infected with B.1.1.7, 1030 with B.1.177 and 81 with other lineages. Our cumulative generalised linear mixed model analyses found evidence (cumulative odds ratio: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.93) of a positive association between increased clinical severity and lineage (B.1.1.7 versus non-B.1.1.7). Viral load was higher in B.1.1.7 samples than in non-B.1.1.7 samples as measured by cycle threshold (Ct) value (mean Ct change: -2.46, 95% CI: -4.22, -0.70). Conclusions The B.1.1.7 lineage was associated with more severe clinical disease in Scottish patients than co-circulating lineages. Funding COG-UK is supported by funding from the Medical Research Council (MRC) part of UK Research & Innovation (UKRI), the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) and Genome Research Limited, operating as the Wellcome Sanger Institute. Funding was also provided by UKRI through the JUNIPER consortium (grant number MR/V038613/1). Sequencing and bioinformatics support was funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) core award (MC UU 1201412).

7.
Physiol Rev ; 101(1): 303-318, 2021 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1063086

ABSTRACT

There are many unknowns for pregnant women during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Clinical experience of pregnancies complicated with infection by other coronaviruses e.g., Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome, has led to pregnant woman being considered potentially vulnerable to severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. Physiological changes during pregnancy have a significant impact on the immune system, respiratory system, cardiovascular function, and coagulation. These may have positive or negative effects on COVID-19 disease progression. The impact of SARS-CoV-2 in pregnancy remains to be determined, and a concerted, global effort is required to determine the effects on implantation, fetal growth and development, labor, and neonatal health. Asymptomatic infection presents a further challenge regarding service provision, prevention, and management. Besides the direct impacts of the disease, a plethora of indirect consequences of the pandemic adversely affect maternal health, including reduced access to reproductive health services, increased mental health strain, and increased socioeconomic deprivation. In this review, we explore the current knowledge of COVID-19 in pregnancy and highlight areas for further research to minimize its impact for women and their children.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/pathology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Outcome , Risk Factors
10.
Nat Microbiol ; 6(1): 112-122, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-989837

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first diagnosed in Scotland on 1 March 2020. During the first month of the outbreak, 2,641 cases of COVID-19 led to 1,832 hospital admissions, 207 intensive care admissions and 126 deaths. We aimed to identify the source and number of introductions of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) into Scotland using a combined phylogenetic and epidemiological approach. Sequencing of 1,314 SARS-CoV-2 viral genomes from available patient samples enabled us to estimate that SARS-CoV-2 was introduced to Scotland on at least 283 occasions during February and March 2020. Epidemiological analysis confirmed that early introductions of SARS-CoV-2 originated from mainland Europe (the majority from Italy and Spain). We identified subsequent early outbreaks in the community, within healthcare facilities and at an international conference. Community transmission occurred after 2 March, 3 weeks before control measures were introduced. Earlier travel restrictions or quarantine measures, both locally and internationally, would have reduced the number of COVID-19 cases in Scotland. The risk of multiple reintroduction events in future waves of infection remains high in the absence of population immunity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adult , Aged , Europe/epidemiology , Genome, Viral , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Molecular Epidemiology , Phylogeny , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Spain/epidemiology , Travel/statistics & numerical data
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL