RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There are currently no validated clinical biomarkers of postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). OBJECTIVE: To investigate clinical laboratory markers of SARS-CoV-2 and PASC. DESIGN: Propensity score-weighted linear regression models were fitted to evaluate differences in mean laboratory measures by prior infection and PASC index (≥12 vs. 0). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05172024). SETTING: 83 enrolling sites. PARTICIPANTS: RECOVER-Adult cohort participants with or without SARS-CoV-2 infection with a study visit and laboratory measures 6 months after the index date (or at enrollment if >6 months after the index date). Participants were excluded if the 6-month visit occurred within 30 days of reinfection. MEASUREMENTS: Participants completed questionnaires and standard clinical laboratory tests. RESULTS: Among 10 094 participants, 8746 had prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, 1348 were uninfected, 1880 had a PASC index of 12 or higher, and 3351 had a PASC index of zero. After propensity score adjustment, participants with prior infection had a lower mean platelet count (265.9 × 109 cells/L [95% CI, 264.5 to 267.4 × 109 cells/L]) than participants without known prior infection (275.2 × 109 cells/L [CI, 268.5 to 282.0 × 109 cells/L]), as well as higher mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level (5.58% [CI, 5.56% to 5.60%] vs. 5.46% [CI, 5.40% to 5.51%]) and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (81.9 mg/g [CI, 67.5 to 96.2 mg/g] vs. 43.0 mg/g [CI, 25.4 to 60.6 mg/g]), although differences were of modest clinical significance. The difference in HbA1c levels was attenuated after participants with preexisting diabetes were excluded. Among participants with prior infection, no meaningful differences in mean laboratory values were found between those with a PASC index of 12 or higher and those with a PASC index of zero. LIMITATION: Whether differences in laboratory markers represent consequences of or risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection could not be determined. CONCLUSION: Overall, no evidence was found that any of the 25 routine clinical laboratory values assessed in this study could serve as a clinically useful biomarker of PASC. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The relationship between diet and the management of chronic illnesses is well established. However, it is unknown the extent to which people with chronic illnesses pay attention to nutritional information and act upon the information obtained. We evaluated the menu ordering practices of adults with chronic illnesses. METHODS: We analyzed the 2018 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 5 Cycle 2). Our analytic cohort included 3,154 respondents (weighted population size=228,464,822) who answered questions regarding a personal history of diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, and obesity. They also answered questions about their nutritional habits regarding whether they noticed caloric information at fast-food or sit-down restaurants and how that information influenced their dietary choices. RESULTS: Among respondents with these chronic illnesses, only obese patients were significantly more likely to pay attention to caloric information (OR=1.56; 95%CI: 1.06-2.31). However, noticing the calorie information was not associated with ordering less calories among all categories of respondents with chronic illnesses. CONCLUSION: US adults with chronic illnesses do not pay sufficient attention to the calorie information of their diet. Furthermore, awareness of the calorie information did not influence their dietary choices. Healthcare professionals should incorporate dietary counseling into the management of chronic illnesses of their patients.