Multi-Modal Point-of-Care Diagnostics for COVID-19 Based on Acoustics and Symptoms.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to invent alternative respiratory health diagnosis methodologies which provide improvement with respect to time, cost, physical distancing and detection performance. In this context, identifying acoustic bio-markers of respiratory diseases has received renewed interest. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we aim to design COVID-19 diagnostics based on analyzing the acoustics and symptoms data. Towards this, the data is composed of cough, breathing, and speech signals, and health symptoms record, collected using a web-application over a period of twenty months. METHODS: We investigate the use of time-frequency features for acoustic signals and binary features for encoding different health symptoms. We experiment with use of classifiers like logistic regression, support vector machines and long-short term memory (LSTM) network models on the acoustic data, while decision tree models are proposed for the symptoms data. RESULTS: We show that a multi-modal integration of inference from different acoustic signal categories and symptoms achieves an area-under-curve (AUC) of 96.3%, a statistically significant improvement when compared against any individual modality ([Formula: see text]). Experimentation with different feature representations suggests that the mel-spectrogram acoustic features performs relatively better across the three kinds of acoustic signals. Further, a score analysis with data recorded from newer SARS-CoV-2 variants highlights the generalization ability of the proposed diagnostic approach for COVID-19 detection. CONCLUSION: The proposed method shows a promising direction for COVID-19 detection using a multi-modal dataset, while generalizing to new COVID variants.

Increased Moxifloxacin Dosing Among Patients With Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis With Low-Level Resistance to Moxifloxacin Did Not Improve Treatment Outcomes in a Tertiary Care Center in Mumbai, India.

BACKGROUND: Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) strains resistant to isoniazid and rifampin (multidrug-resistant tuberculosis [MDR-TB]) are increasingly reported worldwide, requiring renewed focus on the nuances of drug resistance. Patients with low-level moxifloxacin resistance may benefit from higher doses, but limited clinical data on this strategy are available. METHODS: We conducted a 5-year observational cohort study of MDR-TB patients at a tertiary care center in India. Participants with Mtb isolates resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, and moxifloxacin (at the 0.5 µg/mL threshold) were analyzed according to receipt of high-dose moxifloxacin (600 mg daily) as part of a susceptibility-guided treatment regimen. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models assessed the relationship between high-dose moxifloxacin and unfavorable treatment outcomes. RESULTS: Of 354 participants with MDR-TB resistant to moxifloxacin, 291 (82.2%) received high-dose moxifloxacin. The majority experienced good treatment outcomes (200 [56.5%]), which was similar between groups (56.7% vs 54.0%, P = .74). Unfavorable outcomes were associated with greater extent of radiographic disease, lower initial body mass index, and concurrent treatment with fewer drugs with confirmed phenotypic susceptibility. Treatment with high-dose moxifloxacin was not associated with improved outcomes in either unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR], 1.2 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .6-2.4]) or adjusted (HR, 0.8 [95% CI, .5-1.4]) models but was associated with joint pain (HR, 3.2 [95% CI, 1.2-8.8]). CONCLUSIONS: In a large observational cohort, adding high-dose (600 mg) moxifloxacin to a drug susceptibility test-based treatment regimen for MDR-TB was associated with increased treatment-associated side effects without improving overall outcomes and should be avoided for empiric treatment of moxifloxacin-resistant MDR-TB.

Salmeterol-Fluticasone: The Role Revisited.

Apart from the individual diseases, some patients also show overlapping manifestations of asthma and COPD. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of COPD is often delayed due to inaccessibility to spirometry; the prevalence of the asthma COPD overlap phenotype is rather high given the exposure to biomass smoke. Furthermore, the rates of exacerbations are twice as high compared to the patients with either of the diseases. A treatment strategy that would reduce the risk of exacerbations would contribute immensely to the management of such patients. Evidence of eosinophilia (marker of inflammation) in patients with asthma, asthma COPD overlap phenotype or COPD alone should prompt treatment with a combination of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/ long-acting ß-agonists (LABA); several studies have shown improvement in the airflow limitation and reduction in the rate of exacerbations with salmeterol-fluticasone combination (SFC). Considering the association of COPD and cardiovascular diseases (CVD), it is critical to determine the cardiovascular safety of the LABA in such patients. Salmeterol is a highly selective partial b-2 agonist; the TORCH study and the studies comparing formoterol and salmeterol infer that there is no increased risk of new cardiovascular adverse events either with Salmeterol or SFC. Furthermore, the combination may provide certain degree of cardio-protection. Since COPD per se increases the risk of CVD, the cardio-safety of salmeterol outweighs its onset of action. SFC has well substantiated benefits in patients with asthma, COPD and high-risk patients such as those with an overlap of COPD and asthma symptoms, patients with elevated eosinophils and pre-existing CVD. An advisory board was hence conducted, which discussed the role of combination of salmeterol and fluticasone (SFC) not only in asthma and COPD but also in asthma COPD overlap phenotype. Based on the panel's clinical experience and the expertise derived thereof, the propositions regarding the place of SFC therapy in patients with stable and uncontrolled asthma, asthma COPD overlap phenotype and COPD has been put forth.

Increased frequency of pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum in COVID-19 patients admitted in the ICU: A multicentre study from Mumbai, India.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the incidence of pneumothorax in COVID-19 patients as well as the impact of the same on patient outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of the medical records at three large tertiary care hospitals in Mumbai was performed to identify patients hospitalised with COVID-19 from March 2020 to October 2020. The presence of pneumothorax and/or pneumomediastinum was noted when chest radiographs or CT scans were performed. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients who developed air leak were recorded. RESULTS: 4,906 patients with COVID-19 were admitted, with 1,324 (27%) having severe COVID-19 disease. The overall incidence of pneumothorax and/or pneumomediastinum in patients with severe disease was 3.2% (42/1,324). Eighteen patients had pneumothorax, 16 had pneumomediastinum and 8 patients had both. Fourteen patients (33.3%) developed this complication breathing spontaneously, 28 patients (66.6%) developed it during mechanical ventilation. Overall mortality in this cohort was 74%, compared with 17% in the COVID-19 patients without pneumothorax (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that air leaks occur with a higher frequency in patients with COVID-19 than in other ICU patients. When present, such air leaks contributed to poor outcomes with almost 74% mortality rates in these patients.

Long COVID: "And the fire rages on".

With the increasing cohort of COVID-19 survivors worldwide, we now realize the proportionate rise in post-COVID-19 syndrome. In this review article, we try to define, summarize, and classify this syndrome systematically. This would help clinicians to identify and manage this condition more efficiently. We propose a tool kit that might be useful in recording follow-up data of COVID-19 survivors.

Reinfection in COVID-19: A scoping review.

Reinfections in COVID-19 are being reported all around the world and are a cause for concern, considering that a lot of our assumptions and modeling (including vaccination) related to the disease have relied on long-term immunity. We were one of the first groups to report a series of 4 healthcare workers to have been reinfected. This review article reports a scoping review of the available literature on reinfections, with a discussion of the implications of reinfections.

Clinical, Serological, Whole Genome Sequence Analyses to Confirm SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection in Patients From Mumbai, India.

Background: SARS-CoV-2 infection may not provide long lasting post-infection immunity. While hundreds of reinfections have reported only a few have been confirmed. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) of the viral isolates from the different episodes is mandatory to establish reinfection. Methods: Nasopharyngeal (NP), oropharyngeal (OP) and whole blood (WB) samples were collected from paired samples of four individuals who were suspected of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection based on distinct clinical episodes and RT-PCR tests. Details from their case record files and investigations were documented. RNA was extracted from the NP and OP samples and subjected to WGS, and the nucleotide and amino acid sequences were subjected to genome and protein-based functional annotation analyses. Serial serology was performed for Anti-N IgG, Anti- S1 RBD IgG, and sVNT (surrogate virus neutralizing test). Findings: Three patients were more symptomatic with lower Ct values and longer duration of illness. Seroconversion was detected soon after the second episode in three patients. WGS generated a genome coverage ranging from 80.07 to 99.7%. Phylogenetic analysis revealed sequences belonged to G, GR and "Other" clades. A total of 42mutations were identified in all the samples, consisting of 22 non-synonymous, 17 synonymous, two in upstream, and one in downstream regions of the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Comparative genomic and protein-based annotation analyses revealed differences in the presence and absence of specific mutations in the virus sequences from the two episodes in all four paired samples. Interpretation: Based on the criteria of genome variations identified by whole genome sequencing and supported by clinical presentation, molecular and serological tests, we were able to confirm reinfections in two patients, provide weak evidence of reinfection in the third patient and unable to rule out a prolonged infection in the fourth. This study emphasizes the importance of detailed analyses of clinical and serological information as well as the virus's genomic variations while assessing cases of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection.

Identification and definition of asthma-COPD overlap: The CanCOLD study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Lack of consensus on diagnosis of ACO limits our understanding of the impact, management and outcomes of ACO. The present observational study aims to describe the prevalence, clinical characteristics and course of individuals with ACO based on various definitions used in clinical practice. METHODS: We included individuals with COPD from the prospective, multisite CanCOLD study and defined subjects with ACO using seven definitions commonly used in the literature. RESULTS: Data including questionnaires, lung function and CT scans were analysed from 522 individuals with COPD who were randomly recruited from the population. Among them, 264 fulfilled at least one of the seven definitions of ACO. Prevalence of ACO varied from 3.8% to 31%. Regardless of the definition, individuals with ACO had worse outcomes (lung function and higher percentage of fast decliners, symptoms and exacerbations, health-related quality of life and comorbidities) than the remaining patients with COPD. Conversely, patients with non-ACO had higher emphysema and bronchiolitis scores. The three definitions that included atopy and/or physician diagnosis of asthma identified subjects who differed significantly from patients with COPD. The two ACO definitions with post-bronchodilator reversibility were concordant with COPD and were the least stable, with less than 50% of the patients from each group maintaining reversibility over visits. CONCLUSION: Atopy and physician-diagnosed asthma are more distinguishing characteristics to identify ACO. This finding needs to be validated using measures of airway inflammation and other specific biomarkers.

The COPD Assessment Test: Can It Discriminate Across COPD Subpopulations?

BACKGROUND: The COPD Assessment Test (CAT) is a valid disease-specific questionnaire measuring health status. However, knowledge concerning its use regarding patient and disease characteristics remains limited. Our main objective was to assess the degree to which the CAT score varies and can discriminate between specific patient population groups. METHODS: The Canadian Cohort Obstructive Lung Disease (CanCOLD) is a random-sampled, population-based, multicenter, prospective cohort that includes subjects with COPD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease [GOLD] classifications 1 to 3). The CAT questionnaire was administered at three visits (baseline, 1.5 years, and 3 years). The CAT total score was determined for sex, age groups, smoking status, GOLD classification, exacerbations, and comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 716 subjects with COPD were included in the analysis. The majority of subjects (72.5%) were not previously diagnosed with COPD. The mean FEV1/FVC ratio was 61.1 ± 8.1%, with a mean FEV1 % predicted of 82.3 ± 19.3%. The mean CAT scores were 5.8 ± 5.0, 9.6 ± 6.7, and 16.1 ± 10.0 for GOLD 1, 2, and 3+ classifications, respectively. Higher CAT scores were observed in women, current smokers, ever-smokers, and subjects with a previous diagnosis of COPD. The CAT was also able to distinguish between subjects who experience exacerbations vs those who had no exacerbation. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the CAT, originally designed for use in clinically symptomatic patients with COPD, can also be used in individuals with mild airflow obstruction and newly diagnosed COPD. In addition, the CAT was able to discriminate between sexes and subjects who experience frequent and infrequent exacerbations. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00920348; Study ID No.: IRO-93326.

Early COPD Exacerbation Treatment with Combination of ICS and LABA for Patients Presenting with Mild-to-Moderate Worsening of Dyspnea.

This is a proof of concept study that aims to establish feasibility and safety of a new strategy that includes an action plan for early treatment of acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) with doubling dose of a combination of a long-acting beta2 agonist and an inhaled corticosteroid, and to explore its potential for avoiding the requirement of prednisone and its safety. Thirty-seven COPD outpatients with previous exacerbations were enrolled and followed-up for 12 months. The written action plan included a standing prescription to be used in the event of an AECOPD: Antibiotic, for 5 days (for purulent exacerbations) and doubling a combination of Salmeterol and Fluticasone Propionate for 10 days. The primary outcome was "treatment success" defined as "no need of prednisone within 30 days of the onset." Twenty-seven patients experienced an AECOPD and doubled their combination dose. Among the 27 patients, there were 21 patients (78%) who did not require prednisone, and none of those had cardiovascular events, pneumonia, ER and hospital admissions. We have assessed that an early treatment of AECOPD with doubling the dose of a combination of Salmeterol and Fluticasone Propionate appears to be safe, well-tolerated and adhered to, and results in no requirement of systemic corticosteroid in a large proportion of patients presenting with mild-to-moderate worsening of dyspnea. This trial has the potential to change the approach of treatment of AECOPD and reduce the use of oral corticosteroids.

Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The traditional classification of COPD, which relies solely on spirometry, fails to account for the complexity and heterogeneity of the disease. Phenotyping is a method that attempts to derive a single or combination of disease attributes that are associated with clinically meaningful outcomes. Deriving phenotypes entails the use of cluster analyses, and helps individualize patient management by identifying groups of individuals with similar characteristics. We aimed to systematically review the literature for studies that had derived such phenotypes using unsupervised methods. METHODS: Two independent reviewers systematically searched multiple databases for studies that performed validated statistical analyses, free of definitive pre-determined hypotheses, to derive phenotypes among patients with COPD. Data were extracted independently. RESULTS: 9156 citations were retrieved, of which, 8 studies were included. The number of subjects ranged from 213 to 1543. Most studies appeared to be biased: patients were more likely males, with severe disease, and recruited in tertiary care settings. Statistical methods used to derive phenotypes varied by study. The number of phenotypes identified ranged from 2 to 5. Two phenotypes, with poor longitudinal health outcomes, were common across multiple studies: young patients with severe respiratory disease, few cardiovascular co-morbidities, poor nutritional status and poor health status, and a phenotype of older patients with moderate respiratory disease, obesity, cardiovascular and metabolic co-morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: The recognition that two phenotypes of COPD were often reported may have clinical implications for altering the course of the disease. This review also provided important information on limitations of phenotype studies in COPD and the need for improvement in future studies.

The COPD assessment test: a systematic review.

The COPD assessment test (CAT) is a self-administered questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life. We aimed to systematically evaluate the literature for reliability, validity, responsiveness and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of the CAT. Multiple databases were searched for studies analysing the psychometric properties of the CAT in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Two reviewers independently screened, selected and extracted data, and assessed methodological quality of relevant studies using the COSMIN checklist. From 792 records identified, 36 studies were included. The number of participants ranged from 45 to 6469, mean age from 56 to 73 years, and mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s from 39% to 98% predicted. Internal consistency (reliability) was 0.85-0.98, and test-retest reliability was 0.80-0.96. Convergent and longitudinal validity using Pearson's correlation coefficient were: SGRQ-C 0.69-0.82 and 0.63, CCQ 0.68-0.78 and 0.60, and mMRC 0.29-0.61 and 0.20, respectively. Scores differed with GOLD stages, exacerbation and mMRC grades. Mean scores decreased with pulmonary rehabilitation (2.2-3 units) and increased at exacerbation onset (4.7 units). Only one study with adequate methodology reported an MCID of 2 units and 3.3-3.8 units using the anchor-based approach and distribution-based approach, respectively. Most studies had fair methodological quality. We conclude that the studies support the reliability and validity of the CAT and that the tool is responsive to interventions, although the MCID remains debatable.

Derivation of normative data for the COPD assessment test (CAT).

BACKGROUND: The tradition classification of the severity of COPD, based on spirometry, fails to encompass the heterogeneity of the disease. The COPD assessment test (CAT), a multi-dimensional, patient-filled questionnaire, assesses the overall health status of patients, and is recommended as part of the assessment of individuals with COPD. However, information regarding the range of values for the test in a non-COPD population (normative values) is limited, and consequently, knowledge regarding the optimal cut-off, and the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the test remain largely empirical. METHODS: CanCOLD is a population-based multi-center cohort study conducted across Canada, the methodology of which is based on the international BOLD initiative. The study includes subjects with COPD, at-risk individuals who smoke, and healthy control subjects. CAT questionnaires were administered at baseline to all subjects. Among non-COPD subjects, normative values for the CAT questionnaire, and psychometric properties of the test were characterized. Predictors of high CAT scores were identified using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 525 non-COPD subjects enrolled, 500 were included in the analysis. Mean FEV1/FVC ratio among the 500 included subjects was 0.77 (SD 0.49); the mean predicted FEV1 was 99.38% (SD 16.88%). The overall mean CAT score was 6 (SD 5.09); scores were higher among females (6.43, SD 5.59), and subjects over 80 years of age (mean 7.58, SD 6.82). Cronbach alpha for the CAT was 0.79, suggesting a high internal consistency for the test. A score of 16 was the 95th percentile for the population, and 27 subjects (5.4%) were found to have a CAT score > =16. Current smoking (aOR 3.41, 95% CI 1.05, 11.02), subject-reported physician-diagnosed asthma (aOR 7.59, 95% CI 2.71, 21.25) and musculoskeletal disease (aOR 4.09, 95% CI 1.72, 9.71) were found to be significantly associated with a score ≥16. CONCLUSIONS: The characterization of CAT scores in the general population will be useful for norm-based comparisons. Longitudinal follow-up of these subjects will help in the optimization of cut-offs for the test.