Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection outcomes in vaccinated patients with chronic liver disease and cirrhosis: A National COVID Cohort Collaborative study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Outcomes of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections have not been well characterized in non-veteran vaccinated patients with chronic liver diseases (CLD). We used the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) to describe these outcomes. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We identified all CLD patients with or without cirrhosis who had SARS-CoV-2 testing in the N3C Data Enclave as of January 15, 2022. We used Poisson regression to estimate incidence rates of breakthrough infections and Cox survival analyses to associate vaccination status with all-cause mortality at 30 days among infected CLD patients. We isolated 278,457 total CLD patients: 43,079 (15%) vaccinated and 235,378 (85%) unvaccinated. Of 43,079 vaccinated patients, 32,838 (76%) were without cirrhosis and 10,441 (24%) with cirrhosis. Breakthrough infection incidences were 5.4 and 4.9 per 1000 person-months for fully vaccinated CLD patients without cirrhosis and with cirrhosis, respectively. Of the 68,048 unvaccinated and 10,441 vaccinated CLD patients with cirrhosis, 15% and 3.7%, respectively, developed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The 30-day outcome of mechanical ventilation or death after SARS-CoV-2 infection for unvaccinated and vaccinated CLD patients with cirrhosis were 15.2% and 7.7%, respectively. Compared to unvaccinated patients with cirrhosis, full vaccination was associated with a 0.34-times adjusted hazard of death at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: In this N3C study, breakthrough infection rates were similar among CLD patients with and without cirrhosis. Full vaccination was associated with a 66% reduction in risk of all-cause mortality for breakthrough infection among CLD patients with cirrhosis. These results provide an additional impetus for increasing vaccination uptake in CLD populations.

Factors Associated With Long COVID Symptoms in an Online Cohort Study.

Background: Few prospective studies of Long COVID risk factors have been conducted. The purpose of this study was to determine whether sociodemographic factors, lifestyle, or medical history preceding COVID-19 or characteristics of acute severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are associated with Long COVID. Methods: In March 26, 2020, the COVID-19 Citizen Science study, an online cohort study, began enrolling participants with longitudinal assessment of symptoms before, during, and after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Adult participants who reported a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result before April 4, 2022 were surveyed for Long COVID symptoms. The primary outcome was at least 1 prevalent Long COVID symptom greater than 1 month after acute infection. Exposures of interest included age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, employment, socioeconomic status/financial insecurity, self-reported medical history, vaccination status, variant wave, number of acute symptoms, pre-COVID depression, anxiety, alcohol and drug use, sleep, and exercise. Results: Of 13 305 participants who reported a SARS-CoV-2 positive test, 1480 (11.1%) responded. Respondents' mean age was 53 and 1017 (69%) were female. Four hundred seventy-six (32.2%) participants reported Long COVID symptoms at a median 360 days after infection. In multivariable models, number of acute symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 1.30 per symptom; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-1.40), lower socioeconomic status/financial insecurity (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.02-2.63), preinfection depression (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16), and earlier variants (OR = 0.37 for Omicron compared with ancestral strain; 95% CI, 0.15-0.90) were associated with Long COVID symptoms. Conclusions: Variant wave, severity of acute infection, lower socioeconomic status, and pre-existing depression are associated with Long COVID symptoms.

Unreported SARS-CoV-2 Home Testing and Test Positivity.

This cohort study examines time trends in officially reported SARS-CoV-2 case counts and unreported home test positivity.

Disruption in Blood Pressure Control With the COVID-19 Pandemic: The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory.

OBJECTIVE: To explore trends in blood pressure (BP) control before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Health systems participating in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Blood Pressure Control Laboratory Surveillance System responded to data queries, producing 9 BP control metrics. Averages of the BP control metrics (weighted by numbers of observations in each health system) were calculated and compared between two 1-year measurement periods (January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, and January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020). RESULTS: Among 1,770,547 hypertensive persons in 2019, BP control to <140/<90 mm Hg varied across 24 health systems (range, 46%-74%). Reduced BP control occurred in most health systems with onset of the COVID-19 pandemic; the weighted average BP control was 60.5% in 2019 and 53.3% in 2020. Reductions were also evident for BP control to <130/<80 mm Hg (29.9% in 2019 and 25.4% in 2020) and improvement in BP (reduction of 10 mm Hg in systolic BP or achievement of systolic BP <140 mm Hg; 29.7% in 2019 and 23.8% in 2020). Two BP control process metrics exhibited pandemic-associated disruption: repeat visit in 4 weeks after a visit with uncontrolled hypertension (36.7% in 2019 and 31.7% in 2020) and prescription of fixed-dose combination medications among those with 2 or more drug classes (24.6% in 2019 and 21.5% in 2020). CONCLUSION: BP control decreased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a corresponding reduction in follow-up health care visits among persons with uncontrolled hypertension. It is unclear whether the observed decline in BP control during the pandemic will contribute to future cardiovascular events.

The U.S. COVID-19 County Policy Database: a novel resource to support pandemic-related research.

BACKGROUND: It is increasingly recognized that policies have played a role in both alleviating and exacerbating the health and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. There has been limited systematic evaluation of variation in U.S. local COVID-19-related policies. This study introduces the U.S. COVID-19 County Policy (UCCP) Database, whose objective is to systematically gather, characterize, and assess variation in U.S. county-level COVID-19-related policies. METHODS: In January-March 2021, we collected an initial wave of cross-sectional data from government and media websites for 171 counties in 7 states on 22 county-level COVID-19-related policies within 3 policy domains that are likely to affect health: (1) containment/closure, (2) economic support, and (3) public health. We characterized the presence and comprehensiveness of policies using univariate analyses. We also examined the correlation of policies with one another using bivariate Spearman's correlations. Finally, we examined geographical variation in policies across and within states. RESULTS: There was substantial variation in the presence and comprehensiveness of county policies during January-March 2021. For containment and closure policies, the percent of counties with no restrictions ranged from 0% (for public events) to more than half for public transportation (67.8%), hair salons (52.6%), and religious gatherings (52.0%). For economic policies, 76.6% of counties had housing support, while 64.9% had utility relief. For public health policies, most were comprehensive, with 70.8% of counties having coordinated public information campaigns, and 66.7% requiring masks outside the home at all times. Correlations between containment and closure policies tended to be positive and moderate (i.e., coefficients 0.4-0.59). There was variation within and across states in the number and comprehensiveness of policies. CONCLUSIONS: This study introduces the UCCP Database, presenting granular data on local governments' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. We documented substantial variation within and across states on a wide range of policies at a single point in time. By making these data publicly available, this study supports future research that can leverage this database to examine how policies contributed to and continue to influence pandemic-related health and socioeconomic outcomes and disparities. The UCCP database is available online and will include additional time points for 2020-2021 and additional counties nationwide.

Breakthrough SARS‐CoV‐2 Infection Outcomes in Vaccinated Patients with Chronic Liver Disease and Cirrhosis: A N3C Study

Background and Aims Outcomes of breakthrough SARS‐CoV‐2 infections have not been well‐characterized in non‐veteran vaccinated chronic liver disease (CLD) patients. We used the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) to describe these outcomes. Methods We identified all CLD patients with or without cirrhosis who had SARS‐CoV‐2 testing in the N3C Data Enclave as of 1/15/2022. We used Poisson regression to estimate incidence rates of breakthrough infections and Cox survival analyses to associate vaccination status with all‐cause mortality at 30 days among infected CLD patients. Results We isolated 278,457 total CLD patients: 43,079 (15%) vaccinated and 235,378 (85%) unvaccinated. Of 43,079 vaccinated patients, 32,838 (76%) were without cirrhosis and 10,441 (24%) with cirrhosis. Breakthrough infections incidences were 5.4 and 4.9 per 1,000 person‐months for fully vaccinated CLD patients without cirrhosis and with cirrhosis, respectively. Of the 68,048 unvaccinated and 10,441 vaccinated CLD patients with cirrhosis, 15% and 3.7%, respectively, developed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. The 30‐day outcome of mechanical ventilation or death after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection for unvaccinated and vaccinated CLD patients with cirrhosis were 15.2% and 7.7%, respectively. Compared to unvaccinated patients with cirrhosis, full vaccination was associated with a 0.34‐times adjusted hazard of death at 30 days. Conclusions In this N3C study, breakthrough infection rates were similar amongst CLD patients with and without cirrhosis. Full vaccination was associated with a 66% reduction in risk of all‐cause mortality for breakthrough infection among CLD patients with cirrhosis. These results provide an additional impetus for increasing vaccination uptake in CLD populations.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and COVID-19-related outcomes: A patient-level analysis of the PCORnet blood pressure control lab.

SARS-CoV-2 accesses host cells via angiotensin-converting enzyme-2, which is also affected by commonly used angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), raising concerns that ACEI or ARB exposure may portend differential COVID-19 outcomes. In parallel cohort studies of outpatient and inpatient COVID-19-diagnosed adults with hypertension, we assessed associations between antihypertensive exposure (ACEI/ARB vs. non-ACEI/ARB antihypertensives, as well as between ACEI- vs. ARB) at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, using electronic health record data from PCORnet health systems. The primary outcomes were all-cause hospitalization or death (outpatient cohort) or all-cause death (inpatient), analyzed via Cox regression weighted by inverse probability of treatment weights. From February 2020 through December 9, 2020, 11,246 patients (3477 person-years) and 2200 patients (777 person-years) were included from 17 health systems in outpatient and inpatient cohorts, respectively. There were 1015 all-cause hospitalization or deaths in the outpatient cohort (incidence, 29.2 events per 100 person-years), with no significant difference by ACEI/ARB use (adjusted HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.88, 1.15). In the inpatient cohort, there were 218 all-cause deaths (incidence, 28.1 per 100 person-years) and ACEI/ARB exposure was associated with reduced death (adjusted HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.57, 0.99). ACEI, versus ARB exposure, was associated with higher risk of hospitalization in the outpatient cohort, but no difference in all-cause death in either cohort. There was no evidence of effect modification across pre-specified baseline characteristics. Our results suggest ACEI and ARB exposure have no detrimental effect on hospitalizations and may reduce death among hypertensive patients diagnosed with COVID-19.

Prospective arrhythmia surveillance after a COVID-19 diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac arrhythmias have been observed among patients hospitalised with acute COVID-19 infection, and palpitations remain a common symptom among the much larger outpatient population of COVID-19 survivors in the convalescent stage of the disease. OBJECTIVE: To determine arrhythmia prevalence among outpatients after a COVID-19 diagnosis. METHODS: Adults with a positive COVID-19 test and without a history of arrhythmia were prospectively evaluated with 14-day ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring. Participants were instructed to trigger the monitor for palpitations. RESULTS: A total of 51 individuals (mean age 42±11 years, 65% women) underwent monitoring at a median 75 (IQR 34-126) days after a positive COVID-19 test. Median monitoring duration was 13.2 (IQR 10.5-13.8) days. No participant demonstrated atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, sustained supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), sustained ventricular tachycardia or infranodal atrioventricular block. Nearly all participants (96%) had an ectopic burden of <1%; one participant had a 2.8% supraventricular ectopic burden and one had a 15.4% ventricular ectopic burden. While 47 (92%) participants triggered their monitor for palpitation symptoms, 78% of these triggers were for either sinus rhythm or sinus tachycardia. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence of malignant or sustained arrhythmias in outpatients after a positive COVID-19 diagnosis. While palpitations were common, symptoms frequently corresponded to sinus rhythm/sinus tachycardia or non-malignant arrhythmias such as isolated ectopy or non-sustained SVT. While these findings cannot exclude the possibility of serious arrhythmias in select individuals, they do not support a strong or widespread proarrhythmic effect of COVID-19 infection after resolution of acute illness.

Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccine Type and Adverse Effects Following Vaccination.

Importance: Little is known about the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine adverse effects in a real-world population. Objective: To evaluate factors potentially associated with participant-reported adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination. Design, Setting, and Participants: The COVID-19 Citizen Science Study, an online cohort study, includes adults aged 18 years and older with a smartphone or internet access. Participants complete daily, weekly, and monthly surveys on health and COVID-19-related events. This analysis includes participants who provided consent between March 26, 2020, and May 19, 2021, and received at least 1 COVID-19 vaccine dose. Exposures: Participant-reported COVID-19 vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participant-reported adverse effects and adverse effect severity. Candidate factors in multivariable logistic regression models included age, sex, race, ethnicity, subjective social status, prior COVID-19 infection, medical conditions, substance use, vaccine dose, and vaccine brand. Results: The 19 586 participants had a median (IQR) age of 54 (38-66) years, and 13 420 (68.8%) were women. Allergic reaction or anaphylaxis was reported in 26 of 8680 participants (0.3%) after 1 dose of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine, 27 of 11 141 (0.2%) after 2 doses of the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine or 1 dose of the JNJ-78436735 (Johnson & Johnson) vaccine. The strongest factors associated with adverse effects were vaccine dose (2 doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 or 1 dose of JNJ-78436735 vs 1 dose of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273; odds ratio [OR], 3.10; 95% CI, 2.89-3.34; P < .001), vaccine brand (mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2, OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.86-2.15; P < .001; JNJ-78436735 vs BNT162b2: OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52-0.79; P < .001), age (per 10 years: OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.72-0.76; P < .001), female sex (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.53-1.78; P < .001), and having had COVID-19 before vaccination (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.77-2.66; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this real-world cohort, serious COVID-19 vaccine adverse effects were rare and comparisons across brands could be made, revealing that full vaccination dose, vaccine brand, younger age, female sex, and having had COVID-19 before vaccination were associated with greater odds of adverse effects. Large digital cohort studies may provide a mechanism for independent postmarket surveillance of drugs and devices.

Outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Patients With Chronic Liver Disease and Cirrhosis: A National COVID Cohort Collaborative Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) with or without cirrhosis, existing studies on the outcomes with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection have limited generalizability. We used the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), a harmonized electronic health record dataset of 6.4 million, to describe SARS-CoV-2 outcomes in patients with CLD and cirrhosis. METHODS: We identified all patients with CLD with or without cirrhosis who had SARS-CoV-2 testing in the N3C Data Enclave as of July 1, 2021. We used survival analyses to associate SARS-CoV-2 infection, presence of cirrhosis, and clinical factors with the primary outcome of 30-day mortality. RESULTS: We isolated 220,727 patients with CLD and SARS-CoV-2 test status: 128,864 (58%) were noncirrhosis/negative, 29,446 (13%) were noncirrhosis/positive, 53,476 (24%) were cirrhosis/negative, and 8941 (4%) were cirrhosis/positive patients. Thirty-day all-cause mortality rates were 3.9% in cirrhosis/negative and 8.9% in cirrhosis/positive patients. Compared to cirrhosis/negative patients, cirrhosis/positive patients had 2.38 times adjusted hazard of death at 30 days. Compared to noncirrhosis/positive patients, cirrhosis/positive patients had 3.31 times adjusted hazard of death at 30 days. In stratified analyses among patients with cirrhosis with increased age, obesity, and comorbid conditions (ie, diabetes, heart failure, and pulmonary disease), SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with increased adjusted hazard of death. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of approximately 221,000 nationally representative, diverse, and sex-balanced patients with CLD; we found SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with cirrhosis was associated with 2.38 times mortality hazard, and the presence of cirrhosis among patients with CLD infected with SARS-CoV-2 was associated with 3.31 times mortality hazard. These results provide an additional impetus for increasing vaccination uptake and further research regarding immune responses to vaccines in patients with severe liver disease.

The COVID-19 Citizen Science Study: Protocol for a Longitudinal Digital Health Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed a global public response and innovation in clinical study methods. OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 Citizen Science study was designed to generate knowledge about participant-reported COVID-19 symptoms, behaviors, and disease occurrence. METHODS: COVID-19 Citizen Science is a longitudinal cohort study launched on March 26, 2020, on the Eureka Research Platform. This study illustrates important advances in digital clinical studies, including entirely digital study participation, targeted recruitment strategies, electronic consent, recurrent and time-updated assessments, integration with smartphone-based measurements, analytics for recruitment and engagement, connection with partner studies, novel engagement strategies such as participant-proposed questions, and feedback in the form of real-time results to participants. RESULTS: As of February 2021, the study has enrolled over 50,000 participants. Study enrollment and participation are ongoing. Over the lifetime of the study, an average of 59% of participants have completed at least one survey in the past 4 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Insights about COVID-19 symptoms, behaviors, and disease occurrence can be drawn through digital clinical studies. Continued innovation in digital clinical study methods represents the future of clinical research. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/28169.

Predictors of incident viral symptoms ascertained in the era of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: In the absence of universal testing, effective therapies, or vaccines, identifying risk factors for viral infection, particularly readily modifiable exposures and behaviors, is required to identify effective strategies against viral infection and transmission. METHODS: We conducted a world-wide mobile application-based prospective cohort study available to English speaking adults with a smartphone. We collected self-reported characteristics, exposures, and behaviors, as well as smartphone-based geolocation data. Our main outcome was incident symptoms of viral infection, defined as fevers and chills plus one other symptom previously shown to occur with SARS-CoV-2 infection, determined by daily surveys. FINDINGS: Among 14, 335 participants residing in all 50 US states and 93 different countries followed for a median 21 days (IQR 10-26 days), 424 (3%) developed incident viral symptoms. In pooled multivariable logistic regression models, female biological sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95% CI 1.39-2.20, p<0.001), anemia (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.16-1.81, p = 0.001), hypertension (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.08-1.68, p = 0.007), cigarette smoking in the last 30 days (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.35-2.55, p<0.001), any viral symptoms among household members 6-12 days prior (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.67-2.55, p<0.001), and the maximum number of individuals the participant interacted with within 6 feet in the past 6-12 days (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.06-1.25, p<0.001) were each associated with a higher risk of developing viral symptoms. Conversely, a higher subjective social status (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.83-0.93, p<0.001), at least weekly exercise (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.47-0.70, p<0.001), and sanitizing one's phone (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99, p = 0.037) were each associated with a lower risk of developing viral symptoms. INTERPRETATION: While several immutable characteristics were associated with the risk of developing viral symptoms, multiple immediately modifiable exposures and habits that influence risk were also observed, potentially identifying readily accessible strategies to mitigate risk in the COVID-19 era.

Privacy-protecting, reliable response data discovery using COVID-19 patient observations.

OBJECTIVE: To utilize, in an individual and institutional privacy-preserving manner, electronic health record (EHR) data from 202 hospitals by analyzing answers to COVID-19-related questions and posting these answers online. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a distributed, federated network of 12 health systems that harmonized their EHRs and submitted aggregate answers to consortia questions posted at https://www.covid19questions.org. Our consortium developed processes and implemented distributed algorithms to produce answers to a variety of questions. We were able to generate counts, descriptive statistics, and build a multivariate, iterative regression model without centralizing individual-level data. RESULTS: Our public website contains answers to various clinical questions, a web form for users to ask questions in natural language, and a list of items that are currently pending responses. The results show, for example, that patients who were taking angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers, within the year before admission, had lower unadjusted in-hospital mortality rates. We also showed that, when adjusted for, age, sex, and ethnicity were not significantly associated with mortality. We demonstrated that it is possible to answer questions about COVID-19 using EHR data from systems that have different policies and must follow various regulations, without moving data out of their health systems. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: We present an alternative or a complement to centralized COVID-19 registries of EHR data. We can use multivariate distributed logistic regression on observations recorded in the process of care to generate results without transferring individual-level data outside the health systems.

Factors Associated With Access to and Timing of Coronavirus Testing Among US Adults After Onset of Febrile Illness.

Importance: Active SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus) transmission continues in the US. It is unclear whether better access to coronavirus testing and more consistent use of testing could substantially reduce transmission. Objective: To describe coronavirus testing in persons with new onset of febrile illness and analyze whether there are changes over time and differences by race and ethnicity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from the COVID-19 Citizen Science Study, launched in March 2020, which recruited participants via press release, word-of-mouth, and partner organizations. Participants completed daily surveys about COVID-19 symptoms and weekly surveys about coronavirus testing. All adults (aged at least 18 years) with a smartphone were eligible to join. For this analysis, US participants with new onset of febrile illness from April 2020 to October 2020 were included. Data analysis was performed from November 2020 to March 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Receipt of a coronavirus test result within 7 days of febrile illness onset. Results: Of the 2679 participants included in this analysis, the mean (SD) age was 46.3 (13.4) years, 1983 were female (74%), 2017 were college educated (75%), and a total of 3865 distinct new febrile illness episodes were reported (300 episodes [7.8%] from Hispanic participants, 71 episodes [1.8%] from Black participants, and 3494 episodes [90.4%] from not Black, not Hispanic participants) between April 2 and October 23, 2020. In weekly surveys delivered during the 14 days after fever onset, 12% overall (753 participants) indicated receipt of a test result. Using serial survey responses and parametric time-to-event modeling, it was estimated that by 7 days after onset of febrile illness, a total of 20.5% (95% CI, 19.1%-22.0%) had received a test result. This proportion increased from 9.8% (95% CI, 7.5%-12.0%) early in the epidemic to 24.1% (95% CI, 21.5%-26.7%) at the end of July, but testing rates did not substantially improve since then, increasing to 25.9% (95% CI; 21.6%-30.3%) in late October at the start of the winter surge. Black participants reported receiving a test result about half as often as others (7% [7 of 103] of survey responses vs 12% [53 of 461] for Hispanic vs 13% [693 of 5516] for not Black, not Hispanic; P = .03). This association was not statistically significant in adjusted time-to-event models (hazard ratio = 0.59 vs not Black, not Hispanic participants; 95% CI, 0.26-1.34). Conclusions and Relevance: Systematic underuse of coronavirus testing was observed in this cohort study through late October 2020, at the beginning of the winter COVID-19 surge, which may have contributed to preventable coronavirus transmission.

Characteristics and Behaviors Associated with Prevalent SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), has been a serious threat to global health. Previous work has focused primarily on hospitalized patients or on identifying risk factors for disease severity and mortality once the infection has taken place. We sought to leverage the ubiquity of smartphones and mobile applications to study risk factors for Covid-19 infection in a large, geographically heterogenous cohort. METHODS: We analyzed data obtained from the Covid-19 Citizen Science (CCS) Study, a worldwide, mobile application-based cohort. After employing forward selection to identify variables with p values < 0.1, multivariable logistic regression models were utilized to identify independent risk factors associated with prevalent SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: Among 36,041 participants in 113 countries and all 50 states in the US, 484 participants had prevalent SARS-CoV-2 infection. After multivariable adjustment, being a healthcare worker, living with at least one school-aged child, having pets at home, and having immunodeficiency were each associated with an increased odds of SARS-CoV-2. The association between pets and prevalent SARS-CoV-2 was driven by dog ownership. After adjustment for the same covariates, Asian or Pacific Islander race, receiving a flu shot within the past year, increased level of education, and smoking or vaping marijuana within the last 30 days were each associated with a lower odds of SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: We identified various characteristics and behaviors, many of which are potentially modifiable, associated with prevalent SARS-CoV-2 infection in a world-wide mobile application-based cohort.

Rationale and design of the TAILOR-PCI digital study: Transitioning a randomized controlled trial to a digital registry.

BACKGROUND: Tailored Antiplatelet Initiation to Lessen Outcomes Due to Decreased Clopidogrel Response after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (TAILOR-PCI) is the largest cardiovascular genotype-based randomized pragmatic trial (NCT#01742117) to evaluate the role of genotype-guided selection of oral P2Y12 inhibitor therapy in improving ischemic outcomes after PCI. The trial has been extended from the original 12- to 24-month follow-up, using study coordinator-initiated telephone visits. TAILOR-PCI Digital Study tests the feasibility of extending the trial follow-up in a subset of patients for up to 24 months using state-of-the-art digital solutions. The rationale, design, and approach of extended digital study of patients recruited into a large, international, multi-center clinical trial has not been previously described. METHODS: A total of 930 patients from U.S. and Canadian sites previously enrolled in the 5,302 patient TAILOR-PCI trial within 23 months of randomization are invited by mail to the Digital Study website (http://tailorpci.eurekaplatform.org) and by up to 2 recruiting telephone calls. Eureka, a direct-to-participant digital research platform, is used to consent and collect prospective data on patients for the digital study. Patients are asked to answer health-related surveys at fixed intervals using the Eureka mobile app and or desktop platform. The likelihood of patients enrolled in a randomized clinical trial transitioning to a registry using digital technology, the reasons for nonparticipation and engagement rates are evaluated. To capture hospitalizations, patients may optionally enable geofencing, a process that allows background location tracking and triggering of surveys if a hospital visit greater than 4 hours is detected. In addition, patients answer digital hospitalization surveys every month. Hospitalization data received from the Digital Study will be compared to data collected from study coordinator telephone visits during the same time frame. CONCLUSIONS: The TAILOR-PCI Digital Study evaluates the feasibility of transitioning a large multicenter randomized clinical trial to a digital registry. The study could provide evidence for the ability of digital technology to follow clinical trial patients and to ascertain trial-related events thus also building the foundation for conducting digital clinical trials. Such a digital approach may be especially pertinent in the era of COVID-19.

Privacy-Protecting, Reliable Response Data Discovery Using COVID-19 Patient Observations.

There is an urgent need to answer questions related to COVID-19's clinical course and associations with underlying conditions and health outcomes. Multi-center data are necessary to generate reliable answers, but centralizing data in a single repository is not always possible. Using a privacy-protecting strategy, we launched a public Questions & Answers web portal (https://covid19questions.org) with analyses of comorbidities, medications and laboratory tests using data from 202 hospitals (59,074 COVID-19 patients) in the USA and Germany. We find, for example, that 8.6% of hospitalizations in which the patient was not admitted to the ICU resulted in the patient returning to the hospital within seven days from discharge and that, when adjusted for age, mortality for hospitalized patients was not significantly different by gender or ethnicity.