Magnitude and Durability of the Antibody Response to mRNA-Based Vaccination Among SARS-CoV-2 Seronegative and Seropositive Health Care Personnel.

Few studies have described changes in SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels in response to infection and vaccination at frequent intervals and over extended follow-up periods. The purpose of this study was to assess changes in SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses among a prospective cohort of health care personnel over 18 months with up to 22 samples per person. Antibody levels and live virus neutralization were measured before and after mRNA-based vaccination with results stratified by (1) SARS-CoV-2 infection status prior to initial vaccination and (2) SARS-CoV-2 infection at any point during follow-up. We found that the antibody response to the first dose was almost 2-fold higher in individuals who were seropositive prior to vaccination, although neutralization titers were more variable. The antibody response induced by vaccination appeared to wane over time but generally persisted for 8 to 9 months, and those who were infected at any point during the study had slightly higher antibody levels over time vs those who remained uninfected. These findings underscore the need to account for SARS-CoV-2 natural infection as a modifier of vaccine responses, and they highlight the importance of frequent testing of longitudinal antibody titers over time. Together, our results provide a clearer understanding of the trajectories of antibody response among vaccinated individuals with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Disparities in Mpox Vaccination Among Priority Populations During the 2022 Outbreak.

Background: The 2022 mpox outbreak disproportionately affected men who have sex with men and persons living with HIV (PLWH). A 2-dose mpox vaccine series was deployed in mid-2022. Structural racism and insurance status may have affected equitable vaccination. Methods: We defined 3 cohorts: PLWH with at least 1 clinic visit between 1 July 2021 and 1 July 2022 (n = 2066), HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) recipients as of 1 January 2022 (n = 262), and all mpox-vaccinated patients in our health system between 1 July 2022 and 30 November 2022 (n = 807). We identified patients with prior diagnosed sexually transmitted infections (STIs) as having a positive test result for gonorrhea, chlamydia, or syphilis between 1 July 2021-1 July 2022. The primary outcome was receipt of at least 1 dose of mpox vaccine. Results: We identified 224 (10.8%) PLWH and 50 (19.0%) PrEP patients who received at least 1 dose of mpox vaccine. Among PLWH, White race (odds ratio [OR], 1.55; 95% CI, 1.11-2.16), private insurance (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.01-3.34), prior STI (OR, 3.04; 95% CI, 2.16-4.27), prior COVID-19 vaccination (OR, 3.17; 95% CI, 1.93-5.20), and prior influenza vaccination (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.30-1.96) independently predicted mpox vaccination. Within the PrEP cohort, prior COVID-19 vaccination and seasonal influenza vaccination predicted mpox vaccination. Uninsured patients were vaccinated later in the outbreak than patients with private insurance (median time to vaccination, 41 days in the privately insured group vs 83 days in the uninsured group; P < .0001). Conclusions: Race, insurance status, prior STI, and previous receipt of other vaccines influenced uptake of mpox vaccine. Addressing health disparities and vaccine acceptance will be essential in improving future outbreak response.

Concurrent Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing Among Patients Tested for Mpox at a Tertiary Healthcare System.

Coinfection with sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and mpox is common. We evaluated concurrent STI testing among Duke Health patients tested for mpox. We found that most patients tested for mpox were not comprehensively tested for STIs, despite concurrent STIs being diagnosed in 15% of patients when testing was performed.

Rationale and design of the Prone Position and Respiratory Outcomes in Non-intubated COVID-19 PatiEnts: The "PRONE" Study.

While benefits of prone position in mechanically-ventilated patients have been well-described, a randomized-control trial to determine the effects of prone positioning in awake, spontaneously-breathing patients with an acute pneumonia has not been previously conducted. Prone Position and Respiratory Outcomes in Non-Intubated COVID-19 PatiEnts: the "PRONE" Study (PRONE) was conducted in non-intubated hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia as defined by respiratory rate ≥ 20/min or an oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO2) ≤ 93% without supplemental oxygen [1]. The PRONE trial was designed to investigate the effects of prone positioning on need for escalation in respiratory support, as defined by need for transition to a higher acuity level of care, increased fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), or the initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation. Secondary objectives were to assess the duration of effect of prone positioning on respiratory parameters such as respiratory rate and SpO2, as well as other outcomes such as time to discharge or transition in level of care.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Health Care Personnel and Their Household Contacts at a Tertiary Academic Medical Center: Protocol for a Longitudinal Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Health care personnel (HCP) are at high risk for exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. While personal protective equipment (PPE) may mitigate this risk, prospective data collection on its use and other risk factors for seroconversion in this population is needed. OBJECTIVE: The primary objectives of this study are to (1) determine the incidence of, and risk factors for, SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCP at a tertiary care medical center and (2) actively monitor PPE use, interactions between study participants via electronic sensors, secondary cases in households, and participant mental health and well-being. METHODS: To achieve these objectives, we designed a prospective, observational study of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCP and their household contacts at an academic tertiary care medical center in North Carolina, USA. Enrolled HCP completed frequent surveys on symptoms and work activities and provided serum and nasal samples for SARS-CoV-2 testing every 2 weeks. Additionally, interactions between participants and their movement within the clinical environment were captured with a smartphone app and Bluetooth sensors. Finally, a subset of participants' households was randomly selected every 2 weeks for further investigation, and enrolled households provided serum and nasal samples via at-home collection kits. RESULTS: As of December 31, 2020, 211 HCP and 53 household participants have been enrolled. Recruitment and follow-up are ongoing and expected to continue through September 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Much remains to be learned regarding the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCP and their household contacts. Through the use of a multifaceted prospective study design and a well-characterized cohort, we will collect critical information regarding SARS-CoV-2 transmission risks in the health care setting and its linkage to the community. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/25410.

Prognostic value of labs ordered on patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Background: Hospitalists at our institution have taken on most non-intensive care unit (ICU) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) care. Based on sparse research, our institution developed a protocol for ordering labs for this patient population, including routine admission labs in addition to eight COVID-19-specific daily labs. The study goal is to determine if COVID-19-specific admission labs have any prognostic value beyond that provided by routine admission labs and vitals, and costs of labs with no prognostic value.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed adult patients admitted with COVID-19 from 3/2020 to 7/2020. Outcomes were mortality, ICU stay, and length of hospitalization. Multivariable logistic and linear regression were used to determine if COVID-19-specific admission labs have any prognostic value beyond that provided by vitals and routine admission labs. COVID-19-specific labs were d-Dimer, fibrinogen, ferritin, LDH, CK, pro-BNP, troponin, and CRP. Multivariable models included all routine admission labs and vitals. COVID-19-specific admission labs were included in the multivariable models if the p-value was <0.05 in the univariable analysis.Results: 331 patients met study criteria, inpatient mortality was 13.0%, 52.4% of patients required ICU stays and the average length of hospitalization was 8.9 days. COVID-19-specific labs showed no additional prognostic value for mortality. CRP, LDH, and d-Dimer provided additional prognostic information for ICU stay. CRP≥100 mg/dL and LDH≥900 U/L were associated with increased length of hospitalization.Conclusion: Only 3 of 8 admission COVID-19-specific labs recommended by our institution's protocol had additional prognostic value beyond that provided by routine labs and vitals. The total cost of non-prognostic COVID-19-specific labs during the study period was $75,874.