Adherence to COVID-19 vaccination recommendations and vaccine hesitancy in US blood donors.

BACKGROUND: General vaccination rates have been falling globally despite unequivocal health benefits. Noncompliance can result from access barriers and/or hesitant attitudes. Few studies have investigated the prevalence and determinants of noncompliance with COVID-19 vaccination in blood donors. METHODS: We surveyed blood donors on COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, barriers and motivations for COVID-19 vaccination, and comorbidities. We estimate the prevalence of noncompliance, the prevalence of hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccines, and investigate associated factors using multivariable models. RESULTS: From December 2021 to December 2022, 33,610 survey respondents were included. Of these, 24% had not been vaccinated for COVID-19 or had missing vaccination information, and 99% of those who reported reasons for being unvaccinated declared at least one of three hesitant attitudes presented in the survey (safety concerns; personal/cultural/religious beliefs; being young and not worrying about being vaccinated). Among noncompliant donors, <2% reported access barriers. In the multivariable model addressing factors associated with vaccine noncompliance, younger age, male gender, White/Caucasian race, absence of comorbidities, residency in a State with less restrictive COVID-19 policies, and living in micropolitan or rural areas were identified as significant predictors. Younger age and White/Caucasian race were independently associated with vaccine hesitancy among noncompliant donors. CONCLUSIONS: We found high rates of noncompliance with COVID-19 vaccination in blood donors, mostly driven by vaccine hesitancy. Understanding vaccine adherence among blood donors-a relatively highly educated and healthy population, with good healthcare access and usually motivated by altruism-could provide key information on determinants of vaccine noncompliance that may be harder to overcome.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels and long COVID occurrence in blood donors.

BACKGROUND: Long COVID is a common condition lacking consensus definition; determinants remain incompletely understood. Characterizing immune profiles associated with long COVID could support the development of preventive and therapeutic strategies. METHODS: We used a survey to investigate blood donors' infection/vaccination history and acute/persistent symptoms following COVID-19. The prevalence of long COVID was evaluated using self-report and an adapted definition from the RECOVER study. We evaluated factors associated with long COVID, focusing on anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Lastly, we investigated long COVID clinical subphenotypes using hierarchical clustering. RESULTS: Of 33,610 participants, 16,003 (48%) reported having had COVID-19; 1853 (12%) had self-reported long COVID, 685 (4%) met an adapted RECOVER definition, and 2050 (13%) met at least one definition. Higher anti-nucleocapsid levels measured 12-24 weeks post-infection were associated with higher risk of self-reported and RECOVER long COVID. Higher anti-spike IgG levels measured 12-24 weeks post-infection were associated with lower risk of self-reported long COVID. Higher total anti-spike measured 24-48 weeks post-infection was associated with lower risk of RECOVER long COVID. Cluster analysis identified four clinical subphenotypes; patterns included neurological and psychiatric for cluster 1; neurological and respiratory for cluster 2; multi-systemic for cluster 3; and neurological for cluster 4. DISCUSSION: Long COVID prevalence in blood donors varies depending on the adopted definition. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were time-dependently associated with long COVID; higher anti-nucleocapsid levels were associated with higher risk; and higher anti-spike levels were associated with lower risk of long COVID. Different underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms may be associated with distinct clinical subphenotypes.

Detection of Nucleocapsid Antibodies Associated with Primary SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Unvaccinated and Vaccinated Blood Donors.

Nucleocapsid antibody assays can be used to estimate SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence in regions implementing spike-based COVID-19 vaccines. However, poor sensitivity of nucleocapsid antibody assays in detecting infection after vaccination has been reported. We derived a lower cutoff for identifying previous infections in a large blood donor cohort (N = 142,599) by using the Ortho VITROS Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total-N Antibody assay, improving sensitivity while maintaining specificity >98%. We validated sensitivity in samples donated after self-reported swab-confirmed infections diagnoses. Sensitivity for first infections in unvaccinated donors was 98.1% (95% CI 98.0-98.2) and for infection after vaccination was 95.6% (95% CI 95.6-95.7) based on the standard cutoff. Regression analysis showed sensitivity was reduced in the Delta compared with Omicron period, in older donors, in asymptomatic infections, <30 days after infection, and for infection after vaccination. The standard Ortho N antibody threshold demonstrated good sensitivity, which was modestly improved with the revised cutoff.

The COVID-19 Symptom to Isolation Cascade in a Latinx Community: A Call to Action.

BACKGROUND: Rapid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis and isolation of infectious persons are critical to stopping forward transmission, and the care cascade framework can identify gaps in the COVID-19 response. METHODS: We described a COVID-19 symptom to isolation cascade and barriers among symptomatic persons who tested polymerase chain reaction positive for severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at a low-barrier testing site serving a low-income Latinx community in San Francisco. Steps in the cascade are defined as days from symptom onset to test, test to result, and result to counseling on self-isolation. We examined SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold (Ct) values to assess the likelihood of infectiousness on the day of testing and during missed isolation days. RESULTS: Among 145 persons, 97% were Latinx and 81% had an income of <$50 000. The median time from symptom onset to isolation (interquartile range [IQR]) was 7 (5-10) days, leaving a median (IQR) of 3 (0-6) days of isolation. Eighty-three percent had moderate to high levels of virus (Ct <33), but by disclosure 23% were out of their isolation period. The longest intervals were symptom onset to test (median [IQR], 4 [2-9] days) and test to results notification (median [IQR], 3 [2-4] days). Access to a test site was the most common barrier to testing, and food and income loss was the most common barrier to isolation. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of the 10-day isolation period passed by the time of disclosure, and over a fifth of people were likely outside the window of infectiousness by the time they received results. Improvements in test access and turnaround time, plus support for isolation, are needed for epidemic control of SARS-CoV-2 in highly impacted communities.

Efficacy of Clopidogrel for Prevention of Stroke Based on CYP2C19 Allele Status in the POINT Trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Clopidogrel is an antiplatelet drug that is metabolized to its active form by the CYP2C19 enzyme. The CHANCE trial (Clopidogrel in High-Risk Patients With Acute Nondisabling Cerebrovascular Events) found a significant interaction between loss-of-function allele status for the CYP2C19 gene and the effect of dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel on the rate of early recurrent stroke following acute transient ischemic attack/minor stroke. The POINT (Platelet-Oriented Inhibition in New TIA and Minor Ischemic Stroke Trial), similar in design to CHANCE but performed largely in North America and Europe, demonstrated a reduction in early recurrent stroke with dual antiplatelet therapy compared with aspirin alone. This substudy was done to evaluate a potential interaction between loss-of-function CYP2C19 alleles and outcome by treatment group in POINT. METHODS: Of the 269 sites in 10 countries that enrolled patients in POINT, 134 sites participated in this substudy. DNA samples were genotyped for CYP2C19 *2, *3, and *17 alleles and classified as being carriers or noncarriers of loss-of-function alleles. Major ischemia consisted of ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or ischemic vascular death. RESULTS: Nine hundred thirty-two patients provided analyzable DNA. The rates of major ischemia were 6.7% for the aspirin group versus 2.3% for the dual antiplatelet therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.09-1.21]; P=0.09) among carriers of loss-of-function allele. The rates of major ischemia were 5.6% for the aspirin group versus 3.7% for the dual antiplatelet therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.32-1.34]; P=0.25) among noncarriers. There was no significant interaction by genotype for major ischemia (P=0.36) or stroke (P=0.33). CONCLUSIONS: This substudy of POINT found no significant interaction with CYP2C19 loss-of-function carrier status and outcome by treatment group. Failure to confirm the findings from the CHANCE trial may be because the loss-of-function alleles tested are not clinically important in this context or because the 2 trials had differences in racial/ethnic composition. Additionally, differences between the 2 trials might be due to chance as our statistical power was limited to 50%. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00991029.

Time Course for Benefit and Risk of Clopidogrel and Aspirin After Acute Transient Ischemic Attack and Minor Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND: In patients with acute minor ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack enrolled in the POINT trial (Platelet-Oriented Inhibition in New TIA and Minor Ischemic Stroke [POINT] Trial), the combination of clopidogrel and aspirin for 90 days reduced major ischemic events but increased major hemorrhage in comparison to aspirin alone. METHODS: In a secondary analysis of POINT (N=4881), we assessed the time course for benefit and risk from the combination of clopidogrel and aspirin. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or ischemic vascular death. The primary safety outcome was major hemorrhage. Risks and benefits were estimated for delayed times of treatment initiation using left-truncated models. RESULTS: Through 90 days, the rate of major ischemic events was initially high then decreased markedly, whereas the rate of major hemorrhage remained low but relatively constant throughout. With the use of a model-based approach, the optimal change point for major ischemic events was 21 days (0-21 days hazard ratio 0.65 for clopidogrel-aspirin versus aspirin; 95% CI, 0.50-0.85; P=0.0015, in comparison to 22-90 days hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.81-2.35; P=0.24). Models showed benefits of clopidogrel-aspirin for treatment delayed as long as 3 days after symptom onset. CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of clopidogrel-aspirin occurs predominantly within the first 21 days, and outweighs the low, but ongoing risk of major hemorrhage. When considered with the results of the CHANCE trial (Clopidogrel in High-Risk Patients With Non-disabling Cerebrovascular Events), a similar trial treating with clopidogrel-aspirin for 21 days and showing no increase in major hemorrhage, these results suggest that limiting clopidogrel-aspirin use to 21 days may maximize benefit and reduce risk after high-risk transient ischemic attack or minor ischemic stroke. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00991029.