Electronic Nose Development and Preliminary Human Breath Testing for Rapid, Non-Invasive COVID-19 Detection.

We adapted an existing, spaceflight-proven, robust "electronic nose" (E-Nose) that uses an array of electrical resistivity-based nanosensors mimicking aspects of mammalian olfaction to conduct on-site, rapid screening for COVID-19 infection by measuring the pattern of sensor responses to volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled human breath. We built and tested multiple copies of a hand-held prototype E-Nose sensor system, composed of 64 chemically sensitive nanomaterial sensing elements tailored to COVID-19 VOC detection; data acquisition electronics; a smart tablet with software (App) for sensor control, data acquisition and display; and a sampling fixture to capture exhaled breath samples and deliver them to the sensor array inside the E-Nose. The sensing elements detect the combination of VOCs typical in breath at parts-per-billion (ppb) levels, with repeatability of 0.02% and reproducibility of 1.2%; the measurement electronics in the E-Nose provide measurement accuracy and signal-to-noise ratios comparable to benchtop instrumentation. Preliminary clinical testing at Stanford Medicine with 63 participants, their COVID-19-positive or COVID-19-negative status determined by concomitant RT-PCR, discriminated between these two categories of human breath with a 79% correct identification rate using "leave-one-out" training-and-analysis methods. Analyzing the E-Nose response in conjunction with body temperature and other non-invasive symptom screening using advanced machine learning methods, with a much larger database of responses from a wider swath of the population, is expected to provide more accurate on-the-spot answers. Additional clinical testing, design refinement, and a mass manufacturing approach are the main steps toward deploying this technology to rapidly screen for active infection in clinics and hospitals, public and commercial venues, or at home.

External validation of the 4C Mortality Score for hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in the RECOVER network.

OBJECTIVES: Estimating mortality risk in hospitalised SARS-CoV-2+ patients may help with choosing level of care and discussions with patients. The Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium Mortality Score (4C Score) is a promising COVID-19 mortality risk model. We examined the association of risk factors with 30-day mortality in hospitalised, full-code SARS-CoV-2+ patients and investigated the discrimination and calibration of the 4C Score. This was a retrospective cohort study of SARS-CoV-2+ hospitalised patients within the RECOVER (REgistry of suspected COVID-19 in EmeRgency care) network. SETTING: 99 emergency departments (EDs) across the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Patients ≥18 years old, positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the ED, and hospitalised. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Death within 30 days of the index visit. We performed logistic regression analysis, reporting multivariable risk ratios (MVRRs) and calculated the area under the ROC curve (AUROC) and mean prediction error for the original 4C Score and after dropping the C reactive protein (CRP) component. RESULTS: Of 6802 hospitalised patients with COVID-19, 1149 (16.9%) died within 30 days. The 30-day mortality was increased with age 80+ years (MVRR=5.79, 95% CI 4.23 to 7.34); male sex (MVRR=1.17, 1.05 to 1.28); and nursing home/assisted living facility residence (MVRR=1.29, 1.1 to 1.48). The 4C Score had comparable discrimination in the RECOVER dataset compared with the original 4C validation dataset (AUROC: RECOVER 0.786 (95% CI 0.773 to 0.799), 4C validation 0.763 (95% CI 0.757 to 0.769). Score-specific mortalities in our sample were lower than in the 4C validation sample (mean prediction error 6.0%). Dropping the CRP component from the 4C Score did not substantially affect discrimination and 4C risk estimates were now close (mean prediction error 0.7%). CONCLUSIONS: We independently validated 4C Score as predicting risk of 30-day mortality in hospitalised SARS-CoV-2+ patients. We recommend dropping the CRP component of the score and using our recalibrated mortality risk estimates.

Feasibility of Specimen Self-collection in Young Children Undergoing SARS-CoV-2 Surveillance for In-Person Learning.

Importance: There is an urgent need to assess the feasibility of COVID-19 surveillance measures in educational settings. Objective: To assess whether young children can feasibly self-collect SARS-CoV-2 samples for surveillance testing over the course of an academic year. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective pilot cohort study was conducted from September 10, 2020, to June 10, 2021, at a K-8 school in San Mateo County, California. The research consisted of quantitative data collection efforts: (1) demographic data collected, (2) student sample self-collection error rates, and (3) student sample self-collection time durations. Students were enrolled in a hybrid learning model, a teaching model in which students were taught in person and online, with students having the option to attend virtually as needed. Data were collected under waiver of consent from students participating in weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing. Main Outcomes and Measures: Errors over time for self-collection of nasal swabs such as contaminated swabs and inadequate or shallow swabbing; time taken for sample collection. Results: Of 296 participants, 148 (50.0%) were boys and 148 (50.0%) were girls. A total of 87 participants (29.2%) identified as Asian; 2 (0.6%), Black or African American; 13 (4.4%), Hispanic/Latinx; 103 (34.6%), non-Hispanic White; 87 (29.2%), multiracial; and 6 (2.0%), other. The median school grade was fourth grade. From September 2020 to March 2021, a total of 4203 samples were obtained from 221 students on a weekly basis, while data on error rates were collected. Errors occurred in 2.7% (n = 107; 95% CI, 2.2%-3.2%) of student encounters, with the highest rate occurring on the first day of testing (20 [10.2%]). There was an overall decrease in error rates over time. From April to June 2021, a total of 2021 samples were obtained from 296 students on a weekly basis while data on encounter lengths were collected. Between April and June 2021, 193 encounters were timed. The mean duration of each encounter was 70 seconds (95% CI, 66.4-73.7 seconds). Conclusions and Relevance: Mastery of self-collected lower nasal swabs is possible for children 5 years and older. Testing duration can be condensed once students gain proficiency in testing procedures. Scalability for larger schools is possible if consideration is given to the resource-intensive nature of the testing and the setting's weather patterns.

Multicenter Study of Outcomes Among Persons With HIV Who Presented to US Emergency Departments With Suspected SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to characterize patients with HIV with suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). SETTING: Multicenter registry of patients from 116 emergency departments in 27 US states. METHODS: Planned secondary analysis of patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2, with (n = 415) and without (n = 25,306) HIV. Descriptive statistics were used to compare patient information and clinical characteristics by SARS-CoV-2 and HIV status. Unadjusted and multivariable models were used to explore factors associated with death, intubation, and hospital length of stay. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate survival by SARS-CoV-2 and HIV infection status. RESULTS: Patients with both SARS-CoV-2 and HIV and patients with SARS-CoV-2 but without HIV had similar admission rates (62.7% versus 58.6%, P = 0.24), hospitalization characteristics [eg, rates of admission to the intensive care unit from the emergency department (5.0% versus 6.3%, P = 0.45) and intubation (10% versus 13.3%, P = 0.17)], and rates of death (13.9% versus 15.1%, P = 0.65). They also had a similar cumulative risk of death (log-rank P = 0.72). However, patients with both HIV and SARS-CoV-2 infections compared with patients with HIV but without SAR-CoV-2 had worsened outcomes, including increased mortality (13.9% versus 5.1%, P < 0.01, log-rank P < 0.0001) and their deaths occurred sooner (median 11.5 versus 34 days, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among emergency department patients with HIV, clinical outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection are not worse when compared with patients without HIV, but SARS-CoV-2 infection increased the risk of death in patients with HIV.