Symptoms before and after COVID-19: a population and case-control study using prospective data.

BACKGROUND: Some individuals experience prolonged illness after acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We assessed whether pre-infection symptoms affected post-acute COVID illness duration. METHODS: Survival analysis was performed in adults (n=23 452) with community-managed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection prospectively self-logging data through the ZOE COVID Symptom Study app, at least weekly, from 8 weeks before to 12 weeks after COVID-19 onset, conditioned on presence versus absence of baseline symptoms (4-8 weeks before COVID-19). A case-control study was performed in 1350 individuals with long illness (≥8 weeks, including 906 individuals (67.1%) with illness ≥12 weeks), matched 1:1 (for age, sex, body mass index, testing week, prior infection, vaccination, smoking, index of multiple deprivation) with 1350 individuals with short illness (<4 weeks). Baseline symptoms were compared between the two groups, and against post-COVID symptoms. RESULTS: Individuals reporting baseline symptoms had longer COVID-related symptom duration (median 15 days versus 10 days for individuals without baseline symptoms) with baseline fatigue nearly doubling duration. Two-thirds (910 (67.4%) of 1350) of individuals with long illness were asymptomatic beforehand. However, 440 (32.6%) had baseline symptoms, versus 255 (18.9%) of 1350 individuals with short illness (p<0.0001). Baseline symptoms doubled the odds ratio for long illness (2.14, 95% CI 1.78-2.57). Prior comorbidities were more common in individuals with long versus short illness. In individuals with long illness, baseline symptomatic (versus asymptomatic) individuals were more likely to be female, younger, and have prior comorbidities; and baseline and post-acute symptoms, and symptom burden, correlated strongly. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals experiencing symptoms before COVID-19 had longer illness duration and increased odds of long illness. However, many individuals with long illness were well before SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Glioblastoma and radiotherapy: A multicenter AI study for Survival Predictions from MRI (GRASP study).

BACKGROUND: The aim was to predict survival of glioblastoma at 8 months after radiotherapy (a period allowing for completing a typical course of adjuvant temozolomide), by applying deep learning to the first brain MRI after radiotherapy completion. METHODS: Retrospective and prospective data were collected from 206 consecutive glioblastoma, isocitrate dehydrogenase -wildtype patients diagnosed between March 2014 and February 2022 across 11 UK centers. Models were trained on 158 retrospective patients from 3 centers. Holdout test sets were retrospective (n = 19; internal validation), and prospective (n = 29; external validation from 8 distinct centers). Neural network branches for T2-weighted and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted inputs were concatenated to predict survival. A nonimaging branch (demographics/MGMT/treatment data) was also combined with the imaging model. We investigated the influence of individual MR sequences; nonimaging features; and weighted dense blocks pretrained for abnormality detection. RESULTS: The imaging model outperformed the nonimaging model in all test sets (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, AUC P = .038) and performed similarly to a combined imaging/nonimaging model (P > .05). Imaging, nonimaging, and combined models applied to amalgamated test sets gave AUCs of 0.93, 0.79, and 0.91. Initializing the imaging model with pretrained weights from 10 000s of brain MRIs improved performance considerably (amalgamated test sets without pretraining 0.64; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: A deep learning model using MRI images after radiotherapy reliably and accurately determined survival of glioblastoma. The model serves as a prognostic biomarker identifying patients who will not survive beyond a typical course of adjuvant temozolomide, thereby stratifying patients into those who might require early second-line or clinical trial treatment.

The effects of COVID-19 on cognitive performance in a community-based cohort: a COVID symptom study biobank prospective cohort study.

Background: Cognitive impairment has been reported after many types of infection, including SARS-CoV-2. Whether deficits following SARS-CoV-2 improve over time is unclear. Studies to date have focused on hospitalised individuals with up to a year follow-up. The presence, magnitude, persistence and correlations of effects in community-based cases remain relatively unexplored. Methods: Cognitive performance (working memory, attention, reasoning, motor control) was assessed in a prospective cohort study of participants from the United Kingdom COVID Symptom Study Biobank between July 12, 2021 and August 27, 2021 (Round 1), and between April 28, 2022 and June 21, 2022 (Round 2). Participants, recruited from the COVID Symptom Study smartphone app, comprised individuals with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection and varying symptom duration. Effects of COVID-19 exposures on cognitive accuracy and reaction time scores were estimated using multivariable ordinary least squares linear regression models weighted for inverse probability of participation, adjusting for potential confounders and mediators. The role of ongoing symptoms after COVID-19 infection was examined stratifying for self-perceived recovery. Longitudinal analysis assessed change in cognitive performance between rounds. Findings: 3335 individuals completed Round 1, of whom 1768 also completed Round 2. At Round 1, individuals with previous positive SARS-CoV-2 tests had lower cognitive accuracy (N = 1737, ß = -0.14 standard deviations, SDs, 95% confidence intervals, CI: -0.21, -0.07) than negative controls. Deficits were largest for positive individuals with ≥12 weeks of symptoms (N = 495, ß = -0.22 SDs, 95% CI: -0.35, -0.09). Effects were comparable to hospital presentation during illness (N = 281, ß = -0.31 SDs, 95% CI: -0.44, -0.18), and 10 years age difference (60-70 years vs. 50-60 years, ß = -0.21 SDs, 95% CI: -0.30, -0.13) in the whole study population. Stratification by self-reported recovery revealed that deficits were only detectable in SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals who did not feel recovered from COVID-19, whereas individuals who reported full recovery showed no deficits. Longitudinal analysis showed no evidence of cognitive change over time, suggesting that cognitive deficits for affected individuals persisted at almost 2 years since initial infection. Interpretation: Cognitive deficits following SARS-CoV-2 infection were detectable nearly two years post infection, and largest for individuals with longer symptom durations, ongoing symptoms, and/or more severe infection. However, no such deficits were detected in individuals who reported full recovery from COVID-19. Further work is needed to monitor and develop understanding of recovery mechanisms for those with ongoing symptoms. Funding: Chronic Disease Research Foundation, Wellcome Trust, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Medical Research Council, British Heart Foundation, Alzheimer's Society, European Union, COVID-19 Driver Relief Fund, French National Research Agency.

SARS-CoV-2 infection following booster vaccination: Illness and symptom profile in a prospective, observational community-based case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Booster COVID-19 vaccines have shown efficacy in clinical trials and effectiveness in real-world data against symptomatic and severe illness. However, some people still become infected with SARS-CoV-2 following a third (booster) vaccination. This study describes the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 illness following a third vaccination and assesses the risk of progression to symptomatic disease in SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals with time since vaccination. METHODS: This prospective, community-based, case-control study used data from UK-based, adult (≥18 years) users of the COVID Symptom Study mobile application, self-reporting a first positive COVID-19 test between June 1, 2021 and April 1, 2022. To describe the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 illness following a third vaccination, we selected cases and controls who had received a third and second dose of monovalent vaccination against COVID-19, respectively, and reported a first positive SARS-CoV-2 test at least 7 days after most recent vaccination. Cases and controls were matched (1:1) based on age, sex, BMI, time between first vaccination and infection, and week of testing. We used logistic regression models (adjusted for age, sex, BMI, level of social deprivation and frailty) to analyse associations of disease severity, overall disease duration, and individual symptoms with booster vaccination status. To assess for potential waning of vaccine effectiveness, we compared disease severity, duration, and symptom profiles of individuals testing positive within 3 months of most recent vaccination (reference group) to profiles of individuals infected between 3 and 4, 4-5, and 5-6 months, for both third and second dose. All analyses were stratified by time period, based on the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant at time of infection (Delta: June 1, 2021-27 Nov, 2021; Omicron: 20 Dec, 2021-Apr 1, 2022). FINDINGS: During the study period, 50,162 (Delta period) and 162,041 (Omicron) participants reported a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. During the Delta period, infection following three vaccination doses was associated with lower odds of long COVID (symptoms≥ 4 weeks) (OR=0.83, CI[0.50-1.36], p < 0.0001), hospitalisation (OR=0.55, CI[0.39-0.75], p < 0.0001) and severe symptoms (OR=0.36, CI[0.27-0.49], p < 0.0001), and higher odds of asymptomatic infection (OR=3.45, CI[2.86-4.16], p < 0.0001), compared to infection following only two vaccination doses. During the Omicron period, infection following three vaccination doses was associated with lower odds of severe symptoms (OR=0.48, CI[0.42-0.55], p < 0.0001). During the Delta period, infected individuals were less likely to report almost all individual symptoms after a third vaccination. During the Omicron period, individuals were less likely to report most symptoms after a third vaccination, except for upper respiratory symptoms e.g. sneezing (OR=1.40, CI[1.18-1.35], p < 0.0001), runny nose (OR=1.26, CI[1.18-1.35], p < 0.0001), sore throat (OR=1.17, CI[1.10-1.25], p < 0.0001), and hoarse voice (OR=1.13, CI[1.06-1.21], p < 0.0001), which were more likely to be reported. There was evidence of reduced vaccine effectiveness during both Delta and Omicron periods in those infected more than 3 months after their most recent vaccination, with increased reporting of severe symptoms, long duration illness, and most individual symptoms. INTERPRETATION: This study suggests that a third dose of monovalent vaccine may reduce symptoms, severity and duration of SARS-CoV-2 infection following vaccination. For Omicron variants, the third vaccination appears to reduce overall symptom burden but may increase upper respiratory symptoms, potentially due to immunological priming. There is evidence of waning vaccine effectiveness against progression to symptomatic and severe disease and long COVID after three months. Our findings support ongoing booster vaccination promotion amongst individuals at high risk from COVID-19, to reduce severe symptoms and duration of illness, and health system burden. Disseminating knowledge on expected symptoms following booster vaccination may encourage vaccine uptake.

Scoping Review on the Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Treatment of Pediatric Disorders of Consciousness.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Comprehensive guidelines for the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of disorders of consciousness (DoC) in pediatric patients have not yet been released. We aimed to summarize available evidence for DoC with >14 days duration to support the future development of guidelines for children, adolescents and young adults aged 6 months-18 years. METHODS: This scoping review was reported based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses-extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A systematic search identified records from 4 databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Abstracts received 3 blind reviews. Corresponding full-text articles rated as "in-scope" and reporting data not published in any other retained article (i.e., no double reporting) were identified and assigned to 5 thematic evaluating teams. Full-text articles were reviewed using a double-blind standardized form. Level of evidence was graded, and summative statements were generated. RESULTS: On November 9, 2022, 2,167 documents had been identified; 132 articles were retained, of which 33 (25%) were published over the past 5 years. Overall, 2,161 individuals met the inclusion criteria; female patients were 527 of 1,554 (33.9%) cases included, whose sex was identifiable. Of 132 articles, 57 (43.2%) were single case reports and only 5 (3.8%) clinical trials; the level of evidence was prevalently low (80/132; 60.6%). Most studies included neurobehavioral measures (84/127; 66.1%) and neuroimaging (81/127; 63.8%); 59 (46.5%) were mainly related to diagnosis, 56 (44.1%) to prognosis, and 44 (34.6%) to treatment. Most frequently used neurobehavioral tools included the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised, Coma/Near-Coma Scale, Level of Cognitive Functioning Assessment Scale, and Post-Acute Level of Consciousness scale. EEG, event-related potentials, structural CT, and MRI were the most frequently used instrumental techniques. In 29/53 (54.7%) cases, DoC improvement was observed, which was associated with treatment with amantadine. DISCUSSION: The literature on pediatric DoCs is mainly observational, and clinical details are either inconsistently presented or absent. Conclusions drawn from many studies convey insubstantial evidence and have limited validity and low potential for translation in clinical practice. Despite these limitations, our work summarizes the extant literature and constitutes a base for future guidelines related to the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of pediatric DoC.

Metabolomic and gut microbiome profiles across the spectrum of community-based COVID and non-COVID disease.

Whilst most individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection have relatively mild disease, managed in the community, it was noted early in the pandemic that individuals with cardiovascular risk factors were more likely to experience severe acute disease, requiring hospitalisation. As the pandemic has progressed, increasing concern has also developed over long symptom duration in many individuals after SARS-CoV-2 infection, including among the majority who are managed acutely in the community. Risk factors for long symptom duration, including biological variables, are still poorly defined. Here, we examine post-illness metabolomic profiles, using nuclear magnetic resonance (Nightingale Health Oyj), and gut-microbiome profiles, using shotgun metagenomic sequencing (Illumina Inc), in 2561 community-dwelling participants with SARS-CoV-2. Illness duration ranged from asymptomatic (n = 307) to Post-COVID Syndrome (n = 180), and included participants with prolonged non-COVID-19 illnesses (n = 287). We also assess a pre-established metabolomic biomarker score, previously associated with hospitalisation for both acute pneumonia and severe acute COVID-19 illness, for its association with illness duration. We found an atherogenic-dyslipidaemic metabolic profile, including biomarkers such as fatty acids and cholesterol, was associated with longer duration of illness, both in individuals with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. Greater values of a pre-existing metabolomic biomarker score also associated with longer duration of illness, regardless of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found no association between illness duration and gut microbiome profiles in convalescence. This highlights the potential role of cardiometabolic dysfunction in relation to the experience of long duration symptoms after symptoms of acute infection, both COVID-19 as well as other illnesses.

Profiling post-COVID-19 condition across different variants of SARS-CoV-2: a prospective longitudinal study in unvaccinated wild-type, unvaccinated alpha-variant, and vaccinated delta-variant populations.

BACKGROUND: Self-reported symptom studies rapidly increased understanding of SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic and enabled monitoring of long-term effects of COVID-19 outside hospital settings. Post-COVID-19 condition presents as heterogeneous profiles, which need characterisation to enable personalised patient care. We aimed to describe post-COVID-19 condition profiles by viral variant and vaccination status. METHODS: In this prospective longitudinal cohort study, we analysed data from UK-based adults (aged 18-100 years) who regularly provided health reports via the Covid Symptom Study smartphone app between March 24, 2020, and Dec 8, 2021. We included participants who reported feeling physically normal for at least 30 days before testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 who subsequently developed long COVID (ie, symptoms lasting longer than 28 days from the date of the initial positive test). We separately defined post-COVID-19 condition as symptoms that persisted for at least 84 days after the initial positive test. We did unsupervised clustering analysis of time-series data to identify distinct symptom profiles for vaccinated and unvaccinated people with post-COVID-19 condition after infection with the wild-type, alpha (B.1.1.7), or delta (B.1.617.2 and AY.x) variants of SARS-CoV-2. Clusters were then characterised on the basis of symptom prevalence, duration, demography, and previous comorbidities. We also used an additional testing sample with additional data from the Covid Symptom Study Biobank (collected between October, 2020, and April, 2021) to investigate the effects of the identified symptom clusters of post-COVID-19 condition on the lives of affected people. FINDINGS: We included 9804 people from the COVID Symptom Study with long COVID, 1513 (15%) of whom developed post-COVID-19 condition. Sample sizes were sufficient only for analyses of the unvaccinated wild-type, unvaccinated alpha variant, and vaccinated delta variant groups. We identified distinct profiles of symptoms for post-COVID-19 condition within and across variants: four endotypes were identified for infections due to the wild-type variant (in unvaccinated people), seven for the alpha variant (in unvaccinated people), and five for the delta variant (in vaccinated people). Across all variants, we identified a cardiorespiratory cluster of symptoms, a central neurological cluster, and a multi-organ systemic inflammatory cluster. These three main clusers were confirmed in a testing sample. Gastrointestinal symptoms clustered in no more than two specific phenotypes per viral variant. INTERPRETATION: Our unsupervised analysis identified different profiles of post-COVID-19 condition, characterised by differing symptom combinations, durations, and functional outcomes. Our classification could be useful for understanding the distinct mechanisms of post-COVID-19 condition, as well as for identification of subgroups of individuals who might be at risk of prolonged debilitation. FUNDING: UK Government Department of Health and Social Care, Chronic Disease Research Foundation, The Wellcome Trust, UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, UK Research and Innovation London Medical Imaging & Artificial Intelligence Centre for Value-Based Healthcare, UK National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, British Heart Foundation, UK Alzheimer's Society, and ZOE.

Post-vaccination infection rates and modification of COVID-19 symptoms in vaccinated UK school-aged children and adolescents: A prospective longitudinal cohort study.

Background: We aimed to explore the effectiveness of one-dose BNT162b2 vaccination upon SARS-CoV-2 infection, its effect on COVID-19 presentation, and post-vaccination symptoms in children and adolescents (CA) in the UK during periods of Delta and Omicron variant predominance. Methods: In this prospective longitudinal cohort study, we analysed data from 115,775 CA aged 12-17 years, proxy-reported through the Covid Symptom Study (CSS) smartphone application. We calculated post-vaccination infection risk after one dose of BNT162b2, and described the illness profile of CA with post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to unvaccinated CA, and post-vaccination side-effects. Findings: Between August 5, 2021 and February 14, 2022, 25,971 UK CA aged 12-17 years received one dose of BNT162b2 vaccine. The probability of testing positive for infection diverged soon after vaccination, and was lower in CA with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination reduced proxy-reported infection risk (-80·4% (95% CI -0·82 -0·78) and -53·7% (95% CI -0·62 -0·43) at 14-30 days with Delta and Omicron variants respectively, and -61·5% (95% CI -0·74 -0·44) and -63·7% (95% CI -0·68 -0.59) after 61-90 days). Vaccinated CA who contracted SARS-CoV-2 during the Delta period had milder disease than unvaccinated CA; during the Omicron period this was only evident in children aged 12-15 years. Overall disease profile was similar in both vaccinated and unvaccinated CA. Post-vaccination local side-effects were common, systemic side-effects were uncommon, and both resolved within few days (3 days in most cases). Interpretation: One dose of BNT162b2 vaccine reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for at least 90 days in CA aged 12-17 years. Vaccine protection varied for SARS-CoV-2 variant type (lower for Omicron than Delta variant), and was enhanced by pre-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection. Severity of COVID-19 presentation after vaccination was generally milder, although unvaccinated CA also had generally mild disease. Overall, vaccination was well-tolerated. Funding: UK Government Department of Health and Social Care, Chronic Disease Research Foundation, The Wellcome Trust, UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, UK Research and Innovation London Medical Imaging & Artificial Intelligence Centre for Value Based Healthcare, UK National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, British Heart Foundation and Alzheimer's Society, and ZOE Limited.

COVID-19 due to the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant compared to B.1.1.7 (Alpha) variant of SARS-CoV-2: a prospective observational cohort study.

The Delta (B.1.617.2) variant was the predominant UK circulating SARS-CoV-2 strain between May and December 2021. How Delta infection compares with previous variants is unknown. This prospective observational cohort study assessed symptomatic adults participating in the app-based COVID Symptom Study who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from May 26 to July 1, 2021 (Delta overwhelmingly the predominant circulating UK variant), compared (1:1, age- and sex-matched) with individuals presenting from December 28, 2020 to May 6, 2021 (Alpha (B.1.1.7) the predominant variant). We assessed illness (symptoms, duration, presentation to hospital) during Alpha- and Delta-predominant timeframes; and transmission, reinfection, and vaccine effectiveness during the Delta-predominant period. 3581 individuals (aged 18 to 100 years) from each timeframe were assessed. The seven most frequent symptoms were common to both variants. Within the first 28 days of illness, some symptoms were more common with Delta versus Alpha infection (including fever, sore throat, and headache) and some vice versa (dyspnoea). Symptom burden in the first week was higher with Delta versus Alpha infection; however, the odds of any given symptom lasting ≥ 7 days was either lower or unchanged. Illness duration ≥ 28 days was lower with Delta versus Alpha infection, though unchanged in unvaccinated individuals. Hospitalisation for COVID-19 was unchanged. The Delta variant appeared more (1.49) transmissible than Alpha. Re-infections were low in all UK regions. Vaccination markedly reduced the risk of Delta infection (by 69-84%). We conclude that COVID-19 from Delta or Alpha infections is similar. The Delta variant is more transmissible than Alpha; however, current vaccines showed good efficacy against disease. This research framework can be useful for future comparisons with new emerging variants.

Illness Characteristics of COVID-19 in Children Infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant.

BACKGROUND: The Delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 variant was the predominant UK circulating strain between May and November 2021. We investigated whether COVID-19 from Delta infection differed from infection with previous variants in children. METHODS: Through the prospective COVID Symptom Study, 109,626 UK school-aged children were proxy-reported between 28 December 2020 and 8 July 2021. We selected all symptomatic children who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were proxy-reported at least weekly, within two timeframes: 28 December 2020 to 6 May 2021 (Alpha (B.1.1.7), the main UK circulating variant) and 26 May to 8 July 2021 (Delta, the main UK circulating variant), with all children unvaccinated (as per national policy at the time). We assessed illness profiles (symptom prevalence, duration, and burden), hospital presentation, and presence of long (≥28 day) illness, and calculated odds ratios for symptoms presenting within the first 28 days of illness. RESULTS: 694 (276 younger (5-11 years), 418 older (12-17 years)) symptomatic children tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 with Alpha infection and 706 (227 younger and 479 older) children with Delta infection. Median illness duration was short with either variant (overall cohort: 5 days (IQR 2-9.75) with Alpha, 5 days (IQR 2-9) with Delta). The seven most prevalent symptoms were common to both variants. Symptom burden over the first 28 days was slightly greater with Delta compared with Alpha infection (in younger children, 3 (IQR 2-5) symptoms with Alpha, 4 (IQR 2-7) with Delta; in older children, 5 (IQR 3-8) symptoms with Alpha, 6 (IQR 3-9) with Delta infection ). The odds of presenting several symptoms were higher with Delta than Alpha infection, including headache and fever. Few children presented to hospital, and long illness duration was uncommon, with either variant. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 in UK school-aged children due to SARS-CoV-2 Delta strain B.1.617.2 resembles illness due to the Alpha variant B.1.1.7., with short duration and similar symptom burden.

Symptom prevalence, duration, and risk of hospital admission in individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 during periods of omicron and delta variant dominance: a prospective observational study from the ZOE COVID Study.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern, omicron, appears to be less severe than delta. We aim to quantify the differences in symptom prevalence, risk of hospital admission, and symptom duration among the vaccinated population. METHODS: In this prospective longitudinal observational study, we collected data from participants who were self-reporting test results and symptoms in the ZOE COVID app (previously known as the COVID Symptoms Study App). Eligible participants were aged 16-99 years, based in the UK, with a body-mass index between 15 and 55 kg/m2, had received at least two doses of any SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, were symptomatic, and logged a positive symptomatic PCR or lateral flow result for SARS-CoV-2 during the study period. The primary outcome was the likelihood of developing a given symptom (of the 32 monitored in the app) or hospital admission within 7 days before or after the positive test in participants infected during omicron prevalence compared with those infected during delta prevalence. FINDINGS: Between June 1, 2021, and Jan 17, 2022, we identified 63 002 participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and reported symptoms in the ZOE app. These patients were matched 1:1 for age, sex, and vaccination dose, across two periods (June 1 to Nov 27, 2021, delta prevalent at >70%; n=4990, and Dec 20, 2021, to Jan 17, 2022, omicron prevalent at >70%; n=4990). Loss of smell was less common in participants infected during omicron prevalence than during delta prevalence (16·7% vs 52·7%, odds ratio [OR] 0·17; 95% CI 0·16-0·19, p<0·001). Sore throat was more common during omicron prevalence than during delta prevalence (70·5% vs 60·8%, 1·55; 1·43-1·69, p<0·001). There was a lower rate of hospital admission during omicron prevalence than during delta prevalence (1·9% vs 2·6%, OR 0·75; 95% CI 0·57-0·98, p=0·03). INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of symptoms that characterise an omicron infection differs from those of the delta SARS-CoV-2 variant, apparently with less involvement of the lower respiratory tract and reduced probability of hospital admission. Our data indicate a shorter period of illness and potentially of infectiousness which should impact work-health policies and public health advice. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, ZOE, National Institute for Health Research, Chronic Disease Research Foundation, National Institutes of Health, and Medical Research Council.

Knowledge barriers in a national symptomatic-COVID-19 testing programme.

Symptomatic testing programmes are crucial to the COVID-19 pandemic response. We sought to examine United Kingdom (UK) testing rates amongst individuals with test-qualifying symptoms, and factors associated with not testing. We analysed a cohort of untested symptomatic app users (N = 1,237), nested in the Zoe COVID Symptom Study (Zoe, N = 4,394,948); and symptomatic respondents who wanted, but did not have a test (N = 1,956), drawn from a University of Maryland survey administered to Facebook users (The Global COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey [CTIS], N = 775,746). The proportion tested among individuals with incident test-qualifying symptoms rose from ~20% to ~75% from April to December 2020 in Zoe. Testing was lower with one vs more symptoms (72.9% vs 84.6% p<0.001), or short vs long symptom duration (69.9% vs 85.4% p<0.001). 40.4% of survey respondents did not identify all three test-qualifying symptoms. Symptom identification decreased for every decade older (OR = 0.908 [95% CI 0.883-0.933]). Amongst symptomatic UMD-CTIS respondents who wanted but did not have a test, not knowing where to go was the most cited factor (32.4%); this increased for each decade older (OR = 1.207 [1.129-1.292]) and for every 4-years fewer in education (OR = 0.685 [0.599-0.783]). Despite current UK messaging on COVID-19 testing, there is a knowledge gap about when and where to test, and this may be contributing to the ~25% testing gap. Risk factors, including older age and less education, highlight potential opportunities to tailor public health messages. The testing gap may be ever larger in countries that do not have extensive, free testing, as the UK does.

Risk factors and disease profile of post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK users of the COVID Symptom Study app: a prospective, community-based, nested, case-control study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines show excellent efficacy in clinical trials and effectiveness in real-world data, but some people still become infected with SARS-CoV-2 after vaccination. This study aimed to identify risk factors for post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection and describe the characteristics of post-vaccination illness. METHODS: This prospective, community-based, nested, case-control study used self-reported data (eg, on demographics, geographical location, health risk factors, and COVID-19 test results, symptoms, and vaccinations) from UK-based, adult (≥18 years) users of the COVID Symptom Study mobile phone app. For the risk factor analysis, cases had received a first or second dose of a COVID-19 vaccine between Dec 8, 2020, and July 4, 2021; had either a positive COVID-19 test at least 14 days after their first vaccination (but before their second; cases 1) or a positive test at least 7 days after their second vaccination (cases 2); and had no positive test before vaccination. Two control groups were selected (who also had not tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 before vaccination): users reporting a negative test at least 14 days after their first vaccination but before their second (controls 1) and users reporting a negative test at least 7 days after their second vaccination (controls 2). Controls 1 and controls 2 were matched (1:1) with cases 1 and cases 2, respectively, by the date of the post-vaccination test, health-care worker status, and sex. In the disease profile analysis, we sub-selected participants from cases 1 and cases 2 who had used the app for at least 14 consecutive days after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (cases 3 and cases 4, respectively). Controls 3 and controls 4 were unvaccinated participants reporting a positive SARS-CoV-2 test who had used the app for at least 14 consecutive days after the test, and were matched (1:1) with cases 3 and 4, respectively, by the date of the positive test, health-care worker status, sex, body-mass index (BMI), and age. We used univariate logistic regression models (adjusted for age, BMI, and sex) to analyse the associations between risk factors and post-vaccination infection, and the associations of individual symptoms, overall disease duration, and disease severity with vaccination status. FINDINGS: Between Dec 8, 2020, and July 4, 2021, 1 240 009 COVID Symptom Study app users reported a first vaccine dose, of whom 6030 (0·5%) subsequently tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (cases 1), and 971 504 reported a second dose, of whom 2370 (0·2%) subsequently tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (cases 2). In the risk factor analysis, frailty was associated with post-vaccination infection in older adults (≥60 years) after their first vaccine dose (odds ratio [OR] 1·93, 95% CI 1·50-2·48; p<0·0001), and individuals living in highly deprived areas had increased odds of post-vaccination infection following their first vaccine dose (OR 1·11, 95% CI 1·01-1·23; p=0·039). Individuals without obesity (BMI <30 kg/m2) had lower odds of infection following their first vaccine dose (OR 0·84, 95% CI 0·75-0·94; p=0·0030). For the disease profile analysis, 3825 users from cases 1 were included in cases 3 and 906 users from cases 2 were included in cases 4. Vaccination (compared with no vaccination) was associated with reduced odds of hospitalisation or having more than five symptoms in the first week of illness following the first or second dose, and long-duration (≥28 days) symptoms following the second dose. Almost all symptoms were reported less frequently in infected vaccinated individuals than in infected unvaccinated individuals, and vaccinated participants were more likely to be completely asymptomatic, especially if they were 60 years or older. INTERPRETATION: To minimise SARS-CoV-2 infection, at-risk populations must be targeted in efforts to boost vaccine effectiveness and infection control measures. Our findings might support caution around relaxing physical distancing and other personal protective measures in the post-vaccination era, particularly around frail older adults and individuals living in more deprived areas, even if these individuals are vaccinated, and might have implications for strategies such as booster vaccinations. FUNDING: ZOE, the UK Government Department of Health and Social Care, the Wellcome Trust, the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, UK Research and Innovation London Medical Imaging and Artificial Intelligence Centre for Value Based Healthcare, the UK National Institute for Health Research, the UK Medical Research Council, the British Heart Foundation, and the Alzheimer's Society.

Disentangling post-vaccination symptoms from early COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Identifying and testing individuals likely to have SARS-CoV-2 is critical for infection control, including post-vaccination. Vaccination is a major public health strategy to reduce SARS-CoV-2 infection globally. Some individuals experience systemic symptoms post-vaccination, which overlap with COVID-19 symptoms. This study compared early post-vaccination symptoms in individuals who subsequently tested positive or negative for SARS-CoV-2, using data from the COVID Symptom Study (CSS) app. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study in 1,072,313 UK CSS participants who were asymptomatic when vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) or Oxford-AstraZeneca adenovirus-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) between 8 December 2020 and 17 May 2021, who subsequently reported symptoms within seven days (N=362,770) (other than local symptoms at injection site) and were tested for SARS-CoV-2 (N=14,842), aiming to differentiate vaccination side-effects per se from superimposed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The post-vaccination symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 test results were contemporaneously logged by participants. Demographic and clinical information (including comorbidities) were recorded. Symptom profiles in individuals testing positive were compared with a 1:1 matched population testing negative, including using machine learning and multiple models considering UK testing criteria. FINDINGS: Differentiating post-vaccination side-effects alone from early COVID-19 was challenging, with a sensitivity in identification of individuals testing positive of 0.6 at best. Most of these individuals did not have fever, persistent cough, or anosmia/dysosmia, requisite symptoms for accessing UK testing; and many only had systemic symptoms commonly seen post-vaccination in individuals negative for SARS-CoV-2 (headache, myalgia, and fatigue). INTERPRETATION: Post-vaccination symptoms per se cannot be differentiated from COVID-19 with clinical robustness, either using symptom profiles or machine-derived models. Individuals presenting with systemic symptoms post-vaccination should be tested for SARS-CoV-2 or quarantining, to prevent community spread. FUNDING: UK Government Department of Health and Social Care, Wellcome Trust, UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, UK National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council and British Heart Foundation, Chronic Disease Research Foundation, Zoe Limited.

Volumetric MRI is a promising outcome measure of muscle reinnervation.

The development of outcome measures that can track the recovery of reinnervated muscle would benefit the clinical investigation of new therapies which hope to enhance peripheral nerve repair. The primary objective of this study was to assess the validity of volumetric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) as an outcome measure of muscle reinnervation by testing its reproducibility, responsiveness and relationship with clinical indices of muscular function. Over a 3-year period 25 patients who underwent nerve transfer to reinnervate elbow flexor muscles were assessed using intramuscular electromyography (EMG) and MRI (median post-operative assessment time of 258 days, ranging from 86 days pre-operatively to 1698 days post- operatively). Muscle power (Medical Research Council (MRC) grade) and Stanmore Percentage of Normal Elbow Assessment (SPONEA) assessment was also recorded for all patients. Sub-analysis of peak volitional force (PVF), muscular fatigue and co-contraction was performed in those patients with MRC > 3. The responsiveness of each parameter was compared using Pearson or Spearman correlation. A Hierarchical Gaussian Process (HGP) was implemented to determine the ability of volumetric MRI measurements to predict the recovery of muscular function. Reinnervated muscle volume per unit Body Mass Index (BMI) demonstrated good responsiveness (R2 = 0.73, p < 0.001). Using the temporal and muscle volume per unit BMI data, a HGP model was able to predict MRC grade and SPONEA with a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.73 and 1.7 respectively. Muscle volume per unit BMI demonstrated moderate to good positive correlations with patient reported impairments of reinnervated muscle; co- contraction (R2 = 0.63, p = 0.02) and muscle fatigue (R2 = 0.64, p = 0.04). In summary, volumetric MRI analysis of reinnervated muscle is highly reproducible, responsive to post-operative time and demonstrates correlation with clinical indices of muscle function. This encourages the view that volumetric MRI is a promising outcome measure for muscle reinnervation which will drive advancements in motor recovery therapy.

Accessible data curation and analytics for international-scale citizen science datasets.

The Covid Symptom Study, a smartphone-based surveillance study on COVID-19 symptoms in the population, is an exemplar of big data citizen science. As of May 23rd, 2021, over 5 million participants have collectively logged over 360 million self-assessment reports since its introduction in March 2020. The success of the Covid Symptom Study creates significant technical challenges around effective data curation. The primary issue is scale. The size of the dataset means that it can no longer be readily processed using standard Python-based data analytics software such as Pandas on commodity hardware. Alternative technologies exist but carry a higher technical complexity and are less accessible to many researchers. We present ExeTera, a Python-based open source software package designed to provide Pandas-like data analytics on datasets that approach terabyte scales. We present its design and capabilities, and show how it is a critical component of a data curation pipeline that enables reproducible research across an international research group for the Covid Symptom Study.

Anxiety and depression symptoms after COVID-19 infection: results from the COVID Symptom Study app.

BACKGROUND: Mental health issues have been reported after SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, comparison to prevalence in uninfected individuals and contribution from common risk factors (eg, obesity and comorbidities) have not been examined. We identified how COVID-19 relates to mental health in the large community-based COVID Symptom Study. METHODS: We assessed anxiety and depression symptoms using two validated questionnaires in 413148 individuals between February and April 2021; 26998 had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We adjusted for physical and mental prepandemic comorbidities, body mass index (BMI), age and sex. FINDINGS: Overall, 26.4% of participants met screening criteria for general anxiety and depression. Anxiety and depression were slightly more prevalent in previously SARS-CoV-2-positive (30.4%) vs SARS-CoV-2-negative (26.1%) individuals. This association was small compared with the effect of an unhealthy BMI and the presence of other comorbidities, and not evident in younger participants (≤40 years). Findings were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses. Association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and anxiety and depression was stronger in individuals with recent (<30 days) versus more distant (>120 days) infection, suggesting a short-term effect. INTERPRETATION: A small association was identified between SARS-CoV-2 infection and anxiety and depression symptoms. The proportion meeting criteria for self-reported anxiety and depression disorders is only slightly higher than prepandemic.

Illness duration and symptom profile in symptomatic UK school-aged children tested for SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: In children, SARS-CoV-2 infection is usually asymptomatic or causes a mild illness of short duration. Persistent illness has been reported; however, its prevalence and characteristics are unclear. We aimed to determine illness duration and characteristics in symptomatic UK school-aged children tested for SARS-CoV-2 using data from the COVID Symptom Study, one of the largest UK citizen participatory epidemiological studies to date. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, data from UK school-aged children (age 5-17 years) were reported by an adult proxy. Participants were voluntary, and used a mobile application (app) launched jointly by Zoe Limited and King's College London. Illness duration and symptom prevalence, duration, and burden were analysed for children testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 for whom illness duration could be determined, and were assessed overall and for younger (age 5-11 years) and older (age 12-17 years) groups. Children with longer than 1 week between symptomatic reports on the app were excluded from analysis. Data from symptomatic children testing negative for SARS-CoV-2, matched 1:1 for age, gender, and week of testing, were also assessed. FINDINGS: 258 790 children aged 5-17 years were reported by an adult proxy between March 24, 2020, and Feb 22, 2021, of whom 75 529 had valid test results for SARS-CoV-2. 1734 children (588 younger and 1146 older children) had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result and calculable illness duration within the study timeframe (illness onset between Sept 1, 2020, and Jan 24, 2021). The most common symptoms were headache (1079 [62·2%] of 1734 children), and fatigue (954 [55·0%] of 1734 children). Median illness duration was 6 days (IQR 3-11) versus 3 days (2-7) in children testing negative, and was positively associated with age (Spearman's rank-order rs 0·19, p<0·0001). Median illness duration was longer for older children (7 days, IQR 3-12) than younger children (5 days, 2-9). 77 (4·4%) of 1734 children had illness duration of at least 28 days, more commonly in older than younger children (59 [5·1%] of 1146 older children vs 18 [3·1%] of 588 younger children; p=0·046). The commonest symptoms experienced by these children during the first 4 weeks of illness were fatigue (65 [84·4%] of 77), headache (60 [77·9%] of 77), and anosmia (60 [77·9%] of 77); however, after day 28 the symptom burden was low (median 2 symptoms, IQR 1-4) compared with the first week of illness (median 6 symptoms, 4-8). Only 25 (1·8%) of 1379 children experienced symptoms for at least 56 days. Few children (15 children, 0·9%) in the negatively tested cohort had symptoms for at least 28 days; however, these children experienced greater symptom burden throughout their illness (9 symptoms, IQR 7·7-11·0 vs 8, 6-9) and after day 28 (5 symptoms, IQR 1·5-6·5 vs 2, 1-4) than did children who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. INTERPRETATION: Although COVID-19 in children is usually of short duration with low symptom burden, some children with COVID-19 experience prolonged illness duration. Reassuringly, symptom burden in these children did not increase with time, and most recovered by day 56. Some children who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 also had persistent and burdensome illness. A holistic approach for all children with persistent illness during the pandemic is appropriate. FUNDING: Zoe Limited, UK Government Department of Health and Social Care, Wellcome Trust, UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, UK Research and Innovation London Medical Imaging and Artificial Intelligence Centre for Value Based Healthcare, UK National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, British Heart Foundation, and Alzheimer's Society.

Early detection of COVID-19 in the UK using self-reported symptoms: a large-scale, prospective, epidemiological surveillance study.

BACKGROUND: Self-reported symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic have been used to train artificial intelligence models to identify possible infection foci. To date, these models have only considered the culmination or peak of symptoms, which is not suitable for the early detection of infection. We aimed to estimate the probability of an individual being infected with SARS-CoV-2 on the basis of early self-reported symptoms to enable timely self-isolation and urgent testing. METHODS: In this large-scale, prospective, epidemiological surveillance study, we used prospective, observational, longitudinal, self-reported data from participants in the UK on 19 symptoms over 3 days after symptoms onset and COVID-19 PCR test results extracted from the COVID-19 Symptom Study mobile phone app. We divided the study population into a training set (those who reported symptoms between April 29, 2020, and Oct 15, 2020) and a test set (those who reported symptoms between Oct 16, 2020, and Nov 30, 2020), and used three models to analyse the self-reported symptoms: the UK's National Health Service (NHS) algorithm, logistic regression, and the hierarchical Gaussian process model we designed to account for several important variables (eg, specific COVID-19 symptoms, comorbidities, and clinical information). Model performance to predict COVID-19 positivity was compared in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in the test set. For the hierarchical Gaussian process model, we also evaluated the relevance of symptoms in the early detection of COVID-19 in population subgroups stratified according to occupation, sex, age, and body-mass index. FINDINGS: The training set comprised 182 991 participants and the test set comprised 15 049 participants. When trained on 3 days of self-reported symptoms, the hierarchical Gaussian process model had a higher prediction AUC (0·80 [95% CI 0·80-0·81]) than did the logistic regression model (0·74 [0·74-0·75]) and the NHS algorithm (0·67 [0·67-0·67]). AUCs for all models increased with the number of days of self-reported symptoms, but were still high for the hierarchical Gaussian process model at day 1 (0·73 [95% CI 0·73-0·74]) and day 2 (0·79 [0·78-0·79]). At day 3, the hierarchical Gaussian process model also had a significantly higher sensitivity, but a non-statistically lower specificity, than did the two other models. The hierarchical Gaussian process model also identified different sets of relevant features to detect COVID-19 between younger and older subgroups, and between health-care workers and non-health-care workers. When used during different pandemic periods, the model was robust to changes in populations. INTERPRETATION: Early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection is feasible with our model. Such early detection is crucial to contain the spread of COVID-19 and efficiently allocate medical resources. FUNDING: ZOE, the UK Government Department of Health and Social Care, the Wellcome Trust, the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, the UK National Institute for Health Research, the UK Medical Research Council, the British Heart Foundation, the Alzheimer's Society, the Chronic Disease Research Foundation, and the Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness.