Patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 outcomes on remdesivir according to baseline 4C mortality score.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir was the first antiviral to show clinical benefit in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19. Previous trials demonstrated a faster time to recovery in hospitalized patients treated with remdesivir vs placebo. Current guidelines recommend treatment with remdesivir based on hospitalization status, oxygen requirements, and time from symptom onset. However, other factors may be evaluated to determine disease severity and risk for progression. The 4C mortality score is a validated, eight variable score that may be used to categorize patients by mortality risk at the time of hospital admission for COVID pneumonia. The objective of this study was to determine if the 4C mortality score may be used to predict which patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 would benefit the most from remdesivir at the time of hospital admission. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study comparing time to recovery among hospitalized patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 who were treated with remdesivir compared to those who were treated with standard of care (SOC). The primary outcome was time to recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital or no longer requiring supplemental oxygen, stratified by the 4C mortality score risk group. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay, and time to recovery in patients who were started on remdesivir within 7 days from symptom onset vs after 7 days from symptom onset. A survival analysis was used to analyze time to recovery outcomes. RESULTS: Data was collected and analyzed for a total of 300 patients, of which 200 received remdesivir and 100 received SOC. Patients in the remdesivir group had a longer time to recovery compared to patients in the SOC group (6 days vs 4 days). This finding was driven by patients who were categorized to the intermediate risk and high risk mortality groups. Additionally, patients who received remdesivir had a longer length of hospital stay compared to those who received SOC (12 days vs 9 days). Remdesivir was not associated with an increased rate of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This study of patients admitted with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 found that patients who were treated with remdesivir had a longer time to recovery and a longer length of stay compared to those who received SOC. These findings add to the body of evidence questioning the benefit of remdesivir therapy among patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Discordant neutralizing antibody and T cell responses in asymptomatic and mild SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Understanding the nature of immunity following mild/asymptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 is crucial to controlling the pandemic. We analyzed T cell and neutralizing antibody responses in 136 healthcare workers (HCW) 16-18 weeks after United Kingdom lockdown, 76 of whom had mild/asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection captured by serial sampling. Neutralizing antibodies (nAb) were present in 89% of previously infected HCW. T cell responses tended to be lower following asymptomatic infection than in those reporting case-definition symptoms of COVID-19, while nAb titers were maintained irrespective of symptoms. T cell and antibody responses were sometimes discordant. Eleven percent lacked nAb and had undetectable T cell responses to spike protein but had T cells reactive with other SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Our findings suggest that the majority of individuals with mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection carry nAb complemented by multispecific T cell responses at 16-18 weeks after mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Healthcare providers' practice protocols, strategies, and needed tools to address parental HPV vaccine hesitancy: An exploratory study.

Parental hesitancy related to human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines has increased during the pandemic, and there is a call to action by the National HPV Vaccination Roundtable to improve vaccination rates. While there are evidence-based strategies available to address parental hesitancy, there are few clear guidelines on how to engage parents to build confidence in the HPV vaccine within the clinical settings. The purpose of this investigation is to explore practice protocols, individual provider strategies, and perceived tools needed to address HPV vaccine hesitant parents from the perspective of providers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Fifteen healthcare providers participated in qualitative, semi-structured interviews between May 2021 and March 2022. An inductive, qualitative content analysis approach was used to analyze the data. Five themes were described: 1) Provider experiences engaging with HPV vaccine hesitant parents; 2) Existing protocols in the clinics to address HPV vaccine hesitant parents; 3) Strategies used by providers to address parental HPV vaccine hesitancy; 4) Sample message content used by providers to address parental HPV vaccine concerns; and 5) Perceived strategies and tools needed to address parental vaccine hesitancy. Recommendations to address parental hesitancy include recommending HPV vaccinationat 9 years, using a strong recommendation and continued discussion, applying evidence-based approaches and/or promising strategies, linking parents to credible outside sources, and ongoing follow-up if delayed or declined. These findings can be used by researchers and clinicians to improve strategies and messages to inform the development of a protocol to standardize encounters and communication for patient-parent-provider encounters that can influence parental decision-making around HPV vaccine uptake.

A Descriptive Analysis of the Execution of the Expert Field Medical Badge Competition with Mitigation Measures during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Introduction: In September 2020, the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team of the 4th Infantry Division at Fort Carson, CO, executed an Expert Field Medical Badge (EFMB) event, unique in its implementation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) mitigation measures. We conducted a descriptive analysis of our experience to inform future EFMB events. METHODS: We planned and resourced the EFMB competition in accordance with the Army Medical Department Center and School Pamphlet 350-10. We additionally defined adjustments to each event based upon the installation's COVID-19 Health Protection Condition (B, B+, or C) to set conditions for us to execute training regardless of shifts in the public health posture. We further implemented mitigation measures to include a 72-hour restriction of movement for all candidates and cadre prior to competition start, strict use of face coverings, and two daily temperature and symptom screenings. We recorded numbers of candidates and cadre withdrawing from the competition each day and the reasons for withdrawal. RESULTS: Of the 66 evaluators, 179 support personnel, and 113 candidates, 2 personnel withdrew for reasons related to COVID-19 mitigation measures. A single cadre member entered a quarantine for the development of a sore throat during the competition. One candidate withdrew after disclosing failure to comply with the 72-hour restriction of movement prior to competition start. Another candidate withdrew prior to start due to an injury sustained during land navigation. Of the remaining 111 candidates, 22 (20%) earned the EFMB. Most failures occurred due to the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT, 33) and land navigation (44). DISCUSSION: Our competition provides proof in principle that large-scale events to train individual skills such as EFMB are feasible in conjunction with COVID-19 public health measures. Our experience highlights the imperative of prior preparation of candidates in particular for the APFT and land navigation.

Impact of Early Corticosteroids on Preventing Clinical Deterioration in Non-critically Ill Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Multi-hospital Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: While guidelines stronglyrecommend dexamethasone in critical COVID-19, the optimal threshold to initiate corticosteroids in non-critically ill patients with COVID-19 remains unclear. Using data from a state-wide COVID-19 registry, we evaluated the effectiveness of early corticosteroids for preventing clinical deterioration among non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and receiving non-invasive oxygen therapy. METHODS: This was a target trial using observational data from patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at 39 hospitals participating in the MI-COVID19 registry between March 16, 2020 and August 24, 2020. We studied the impact of corticosteroids initiated within 2 calendar days of hospitalization ("early steroids") versus no early steroids among non-ICU patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV2 receiving non-invasive supplemental oxygen therapy. Our primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, transfer to intensive care, and receipt of invasive mechanical ventilation. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score-weighted regression to measure the association of early steroids and outcomes. RESULTS: Among 1002 patients meeting study criteria, 231 (23.1%) received early steroids. After IPTW, to balance potential confounders between the treatment groups, early steroids were not associated with a decrease in the composite outcome (aOR 1.1, 95%CI 0.8-1.6) or in any components of the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that early corticosteroid therapy prevents clinical deterioration among hospitalized non-critically ill COVID-19 patients receiving non-invasive oxygen therapy. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal threshold for initiating corticosteroids in this population.

Instructional leadership: Perceptions of assistant principals on their work pre- and post-COVID

The purpose of this study was to identify the perceptions of assistant principals as instructional leaders, pre- and post-COVID. This study addressed three research questions: 1) How do assistant principals define and enact instructional leadership? 2) What supports or hinders assistant principals' efforts to engage in instructional leadership/function as instructional leaders? 3) How has instructional leadership for assistant principals (d)evolved throughout the COVID-19 response efforts? Survey participants included 59 secondary Texas Region XI assistant principals, with 10 assistant principals participating in the interview portion of the study. A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was used to examine elements of instructional leadership and how assistant principals perceived their roles. Rich, thick descriptions were used to convey assistant principals' perceptions as instructional leaders pre- and post-COVID. The findings revealed that assistant principals felt they enacted instructional leadership primarily by supporting teachers, visiting classrooms, participating in professional learning communities, and building relationships with teachers outside the classroom. Assistant principals felt supported as instructional leaders when their campus principal supported their work as instructional leaders and had support from their peers. Although the assistant principals interviewed were dedicated to being instructional leaders, factors that hindered them from doing this critical work included responding to "fires," managing time, and expectations from central administration and the community. As assistant principals navigated through the 2020-2021 school year, COVID-19 affected their roles as instructional leaders, often requiring campus leaders to focus on safety protocols over instruction. At the time the study concluded, the pandemic was still affecting schools, and long-term changes were unable to be identified. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Implementation and Extended Evaluation of the Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Assay and Its Contribution to the United Kingdom's COVID-19 Public Health Response.

In March 2020, the Rare and Imported Pathogens Laboratory at the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) (formerly Public Health England [PHE]) Porton Down, was tasked by the Department of Health and Social Care with setting up a national surveillance laboratory facility to study SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses and population-level sero-surveillance in response to the growing SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. In the following 12 months, the laboratory tested more than 160,000 samples, facilitating a wide range of research and informing UKHSA, DHSC, and UK government policy. Here we describe the implementation and use of the Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay and provide an extended evaluation of its performance. We present a markedly improved overall sensitivity of 91.39% (≥14 days 92.74%, ≥21 days 93.59%) compared to our small-scale early study, and a specificity of 98.56%. In addition, we detail extended characteristics of the Euroimmun assay: intra- and interassay precision, correlation to neutralization, and assay linearity. IMPORTANCE Serology assays have been useful in determining those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in a wide range of research and serosurveillance projects. However, assays vary in their sensitivity at detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Here, we detail an extended evaluation and characterization of the Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay, one that has been widely used within the United Kingdom on over 160,000 samples to date.

COVID-19 Outcomes in Patients Undergoing B Cell Depletion Therapy and Those with Humoral Immunodeficiency States: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: The role of humoral immunity has been well established in reducing infection risk and facilitating viral clearance in patients with COVID-19. However, the relationship between specific antibody responses and severity of COVID-19 is less well understood. METHODS: To address this question and identify gaps in knowledge, we utilized the methodology of a scoping review to interrogate risk of infection and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with iatrogenic and inborn humoral immunodeficiency states based on existing literature. RESULTS: Among patients with iatrogenic B-cell depletion, particularly with agents targeting CD20, our analysis found increased risk of severe COVID-19 and death across a range of underlying disease states. Among patients with humoral inborn errors of immunity with COVID-19, our synthesis found that patients with dysregulated humoral immunity, predominantly common variable immunodeficiency (CVID), may be more susceptible to severe COVID-19 than patients with humoral immunodeficiency states due to X-linked agammaglobulinemia and other miscellaneous forms of humoral immunodeficiency. There were insufficient data to appraise the risk of COVID-19 infection in both populations of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our work identifies potentially significant predictors of COVID-19 severity in patients with humoral immunodeficiency states and highlights the need for larger studies to control for clinical and biologic confounders of disease severity.

Time series analysis and mechanistic modelling of heterogeneity and sero-reversion in antibody responses to mild SARS­CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 serology is used to identify prior infection at individual and at population level. Extended longitudinal studies with multi-timepoint sampling to evaluate dynamic changes in antibody levels are required to identify the time horizon in which these applications of serology are valid, and to explore the longevity of protective humoral immunity. METHODS: Healthcare workers were recruited to a prospective cohort study from the first SARS-CoV-2 epidemic peak in London, undergoing weekly symptom screen, viral PCR and blood sampling over 16-21 weeks. Serological analysis (n =12,990) was performed using semi-quantitative Euroimmun IgG to viral spike S1 domain and Roche total antibody to viral nucleocapsid protein (NP) assays. Comparisons were made to pseudovirus neutralizing antibody measurements. FINDINGS: A total of 157/729 (21.5%) participants developed positive SARS-CoV-2 serology by one or other assay, of whom 31.0% were asymptomatic and there were no deaths. Peak Euroimmun anti-S1 and Roche anti-NP measurements correlated (r = 0.57, p<0.0001) but only anti-S1 measurements correlated with near-contemporary pseudovirus neutralising antibody titres (measured at 16-18 weeks, r = 0.57, p<0.0001). By 21 weeks' follow-up, 31/143 (21.7%) anti-S1 and 6/150 (4.0%) anti-NP measurements reverted to negative. Mathematical modelling revealed faster clearance of anti-S1 compared to anti-NP (median half-life of 2.5 weeks versus 4.0 weeks), earlier transition to lower levels of antibody production (median of 8 versus 13 weeks), and greater reductions in relative antibody production rate after the transition (median of 35% versus 50%). INTERPRETATION: Mild SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with heterogeneous serological responses in Euroimmun anti-S1 and Roche anti-NP assays. Anti-S1 responses showed faster rates of clearance, more rapid transition from high to low level production rate and greater reduction in production rate after this transition. In mild infection, anti-S1 serology alone may underestimate incident infections. The mechanisms that underpin faster clearance and lower rates of sustained anti-S1 production may impact on the longevity of humoral immunity. FUNDING: Charitable donations via Barts Charity, Wellcome Trust, NIHR.

Presentation, Treatment Response and Short-Term Outcomes in Paediatric Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome Temporally Associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS).

The novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the pathogen responsible for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Whilst most children and young people develop mild symptoms, recent reports suggest a novel paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS). Case definition and classification are preliminary, treatment is empiric and disease-associated outcomes are unclear. Here, we report 29 patients with PIMS-TS who were diagnosed, admitted and treated in the English North West between March and June 2020. Consistent with patterns observed internationally, cases peaked approximately 4 weeks after the initial surge of COVID-19-like symptoms in the UK population. Clinical symptoms included fever (100%), skin rashes (72%), cardiovascular involvement (86%), conjunctivitis (62%) and respiratory involvement (21%). Some patients had clinical features partially resembling Kawasaki disease (KD), toxic shock syndrome and cytokine storm syndrome. Male gender (69%), black, Asian and other minority ethnicities (BAME, 59%) were over-represented. Immune modulating treatment was used in all, including intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), corticosteroids and cytokine blockers. Notably, 32% of patients treated with IVIG alone went into remission. The rest required additional treatment, usually corticosteroids, with the exception of two patients who were treated with TNF inhibition and IL-1 blockade, respectively. Another patient received IL-1 inhibition as primary therapy, with associated rapid and sustained remission. Randomized and prospective studies are needed to investigate efficacy and safety of treatment, especially as resources of IVIG may be depleted secondary to high demand during future waves of COVID-19.