The aerobiology of SARS-CoV-2 in UK hospitals and the impact of aerosol generating procedures

BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 nosocomial transmission to patients and healthcare workers (HCWs) has occurred throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Aerosol generating procedures (AGPs) seemed particularly risky, and policies have restricted their use in all settings. We examined the prevalence of aerosolized SARS-CoV-2 in the rooms of COVID-19 patients requiring AGP or supplemental oxygen compared to those on room air. MethodsSamples were collected prospectively near to adults hospitalised with COVID-19 at two tertiary care hospitals in the UK from November 2020 - October 2021. The Sartorius MD8 AirPort air sampler was used to collect air samples at a minimum distance of 1.5 meters from patients. RT-qPCR was used following overnight incubation of membranes in culture media and extraction. ResultsWe collected 219 samples from patients rooms: individuals on room air (n=67), receiving oxygen (n=65) or AGP (n=67). Of these, 54 (24.6%) samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA. The highest prevalence was identified in the air around patients receiving oxygen (32.3%, n=21, CI95% 22.2 to 44.3%) with AGP and room air recording prevalence of (20.7%, n=18, CI95% 14.1 - 33.7%) and (22.3%, n=15, CI95% 13.5 - 30.4%) respectively. We did not detect a significant difference in the observed frequency of viral RNA between interventions. InterpretationSARS-CoV-2 viral RNA was detected in the air of hospital rooms of COVID-19 patients, and AGPs did not appear to impact the likelihood of viral RNA. Enhanced respiratory protection and appropriate infection prevention and control measures are required to be fully and carefully implemented for all COVID-19 patients to reduce risk of aerosol transmission.

Nasal IgA wanes 9 months after hospitalisation with COVID-19 and is not induced by subsequent vaccination.

BackgroundMost studies of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 focus on circulating antibody, giving limited insights into mucosal defences that prevent viral replication and onward transmission. We studied nasal and plasma antibody responses one year after hospitalisation for COVID-19, including a period when SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was introduced. MethodsPlasma and nasosorption samples were prospectively collected from 446 adults hospitalised for COVID-19 between February 2020 and March 2021 via the ISARIC4C and PHOSP-COVID consortia. IgA and IgG responses to NP and S of ancestral SARS-CoV-2, Delta and Omicron (BA.1) variants were measured by electrochemiluminescence and compared with plasma neutralisation data. FindingsStrong and consistent nasal anti-NP and anti-S IgA responses were demonstrated, which remained elevated for nine months. Nasal and plasma anti-S IgG remained elevated for at least 12 months with high plasma neutralising titres against all variants. Of 180 with complete data, 160 were vaccinated between 6 and 12 months; coinciding with rises in nasal and plasma IgA and IgG anti-S titres for all SARS-CoV-2 variants, although the change in nasal IgA was minimal. Samples 12 months after admission showed no association between nasal IgA and plasma IgG responses, indicating that nasal IgA responses are distinct from those in plasma and minimally boosted by vaccination. InterpretationThe decline in nasal IgA responses 9 months after infection and minimal impact of subsequent vaccination may explain the lack of long-lasting nasal defence against reinfection and the limited effects of vaccination on transmission. These findings highlight the need to develop vaccines that enhance nasal immunity. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before the studyC_ST_ABSWhile systemic immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is important in preventing severe disease, mucosal immunity prevents viral replication at the point of entry and reduces onward transmission. We searched PubMed with search terms "mucosal", "nasal", "antibody", "IgA", "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "convalescent" and "vaccination" for studies published in English before 20th July 2022, identifying three previous studies examining the durability of nasal responses that generally show nasal antibody to persist for 3 to 9 months. However, these studies were small or included individuals with mild COVID-19. One study of 107 care-home residents demonstrated increased salivary IgG (but not IgA) after two doses of mRNA vaccine, and another examined nasal antibody responses after infection and subsequent vaccination in 20 cases, demonstrating rises in both nasal IgA and IgG 7 to 10 days after vaccination. Added value of this studyStudying 446 people hospitalised for COVID-19, we show durable nasal and plasma IgG responses to ancestral (B.1 lineage) SARS-CoV-2, Delta and Omicron (BA.1) variants up to 12 months after infection. Nasal antibody induced by infection with pre-Omicron variants, bind Omicron virus in vitro better than plasma antibody. Although nasal and plasma IgG responses were enhanced by vaccination, Omicron binding responses did not reach levels equivalent to responses for ancestral SARS-CoV-2. Using paired plasma and nasal samples collected approximately 12 months after infection, we show that nasal IgA declines and shows a minimal response to vaccination whilst plasma antibody responses to S antigen are well maintained and boosted by vaccination. Implications of all the available evidenceAfter COVID-19 and subsequent vaccination, Omicron binding plasma and nasal antibody responses are only moderately enhanced, supporting the need for booster vaccinations to maintain immunity against SARS-CoV-2 variants. Notably, there is distinct compartmentalisation between nasal IgA and plasma IgA and IgG responses after vaccination. These findings highlight the need for vaccines that induce robust and durable mucosal immunity.

Outcome of COVID-19 in hospitalised immunocompromised patients: an analysis of the WHO ISARIC CCP-UK prospective cohort study.

BackgroundImmunocompromised patients may be at higher risk of mortality if hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with immunocompetent patients. However, previous studies have been contradictory. We aimed to determine whether immunocompromised patients were at greater risk of in-hospital death, and how this risk changed over the pandemic. MethodsWe included patients >=19yrs with symptomatic community-acquired COVID-19 recruited to the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK. We defined immunocompromise as: immunosuppressant medication preadmission, cancer treatment, organ transplant, HIV, or congenital immunodeficiency. We used logistic regression to compare the risk of death in both groups, adjusting for age, sex, deprivation, ethnicity, vaccination and co-morbidities. We used Bayesian logistic regression to explore mortality over time. FindingsBetween 17/01/2020 and 28/02/2022 we recruited 156,552 eligible patients, of whom 21,954 (14%) were immunocompromised. 29% (n=6,499) of immunocompromised and 21% (n=28,608) of immunocompetent patients died in hospital. The odds of in-hospital mortality were elevated for immunocompromised patients (adjOR 1.44, 95% CI 1.39-1.50, p<0.001). As the pandemic progressed, in-hospital mortality reduced more slowly for immunocompromised patients than for immunocompetent patients. This was particularly evident with increasing age: the probability of the reduction in hospital mortality being less for immunocompromised patients aged 50-69yrs was 88% for men and 83% for women, and for those >80yrs was 99% for men, and 98% for women. ConclusionsImmunocompromised patients remain at elevated risk of death from COVID-19. Targeted measures such as additional vaccine doses and monoclonal antibodies should be considered for this group. FundingNational Institute for Health Research; Medical Research Council; Chief Scientist Office, Scotland.

Evolution of long-term hybrid immunity in healthcare workers after different COVID-19 vaccination regimens: a longitudinal observational cohort study

Both infection and vaccination, alone or in combination, generate antibody and T cell responses against SARSCoV2. However, the maintenance of such responses, and hence protection from disease, requires careful characterisation. In a large prospective study of UK healthcare workers (Protective immunity from T cells in Healthcare workers (PITCH), within the larger SARSCoV2 immunity and reinfection evaluation (SIREN) study) we previously observed that prior infection impacted strongly on subsequent cellular and humoral immunity induced after long and short dosing intervals of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccination. Here, we report longer follow up of 684 HCWs in this cohort over 6-9 months following two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD1222 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) vaccination and up to 6 months following a subsequent mRNA booster vaccination. We make three observations: Firstly, the dynamics of humoral and cellular responses differ; binding and neutralising antibodies declined whereas T and memory B cell responses were maintained after the second vaccine dose. Secondly, vaccine boosting restored IgG levels, broadened neutralising activity against variants of concern including omicron BA.1, BA.2 and BA.5, and boosted T cell responses above the 6 month level post dose 2. Thirdly, prior infection maintained its impact driving larger as well as broader T cell responses compared with never-infected people, a feature maintained until 6 months after the third dose. In conclusion, broadly cross-reactive T cell responses are well maintained over time, especially in those with combined vaccine and infection-induced immunity (hybrid immunity), and may contribute to continued protection against severe disease.

Changing patterns of SARS-CoV-2 infection through Delta and Omicron waves by vaccination status, previous infection and neighbourhood deprivation: A cohort analysis of 2.7M people.

ObjectiveTo examine if SARS-CoV-2 infections vary by vaccination status, if an individual had previously tested positive and by neighbourhood socioeconomic deprivation across the Delta and Omicron epidemic waves of SARS-CoV-2. DesignCohort study using electronic health records SettingCheshire and Merseyside, England (3rd June 2021 to 1st March 2022) Participants2.7M residents Main Outcome measureRegistered positive test for SARS-CoV-2 ResultsSocial inequalities in registered positive tests were dynamic during the study. Originally higher SARS-CoV-2 rates in the most socioeconomically deprived neighbourhoods changed to being higher in the least deprived neighbourhoods from the 1st September 2021. While the introduction of Omicron initially reset inequalities, they continued to be dynamic and inconsistent. Individuals who were fully vaccinated (two doses) were associated with fewer registered positive tests (e.g., between 1st September and 27th November 2021: (i) individuals engaged in testing - Hazards Ratio (HR) = 0.48, 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) = 0.47-0.50; (ii) individuals engaged with healthcare - HR = 0.34, 95% CIs = 0.33-0.34). Individuals with a previous registered positive test were also less likely to have a registered positive test (e.g., between 1st September and 27th November 2021: (i) individuals engaged in testing - HR = 0.16, 95% CIs = 0.15-0.18; (ii) individuals engaged with healthcare - HR = 0.14, 95% CIs = 0.13-0.16). However, Omicron is disrupting these associations due to immune escape resulting in smaller effect sizes for both measures. ConclusionsChanging patterns of SARS-CoV-2 infections during the Delta and Omicron waves reveals a dynamic pandemic that continues to affect diverse communities in sometimes unexpected ways.

Evaluation of Eight Lateral Flow Tests For The Detection Of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies In A Vaccinated Population

With the distribution of COVID-19 vaccinations across the globe and the limited access in many countries, quick determination of an individuals antibody status could be beneficial in allocating limited vaccine doses in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Antibody lateral flow tests (LFTs) have potential to address this need as a quick, point of care test, they also have a use case for identifying sero-negative individuals for novel therapeutics, and for epidemiology. Here we present a proof-of-concept evaluation of eight LFT brands using sera from 95 vaccinated individuals to determine sensitivity for detecting vaccination generated antibodies. All 95 (100%) participants tested positive for anti-spike antibodies by the chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) reference standard post-dose two of their SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech, n=60), AZD1222 (AstraZeneca, n=31), mRNA-1273 (Moderna, n=2) and Undeclared Vaccine Brand (n=2). Sensitivity increased from dose one to dose two in six out of eight LFTs with three tests achieving 100% sensitivity at dose two in detecting anti-spike antibodies. These tests are quick, low-cost point-of-care tools that can be used without prior training to establish antibody status and may prove valuable for allocating limited vaccine doses in LMICs to ensure those in at risk groups access the protection they need. Further investigation into their performance in vaccinated peoples is required before more widespread utilisation is considered.

Comparison of two T cell assays to evaluate T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 following vaccination in naive and convalescent healthcare workers

BackgroundT cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 following infection and vaccination are less characterised than antibody responses, due to a more complex experimental pathway. MethodsWe measured T cell responses in 108 healthcare workers (HCWs) in an observational cohort study, using the commercialised Oxford Immunotec T-SPOT Discovery SARS-CoV-2 assay (OI T-SPOT) and the PITCH ELISpot protocol established for academic research settings. ResultsBoth assays detected T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike, membrane and nucleocapsid proteins. Responses were significantly lower when reported by OI T-SPOT than by PITCH ELISpot. Four weeks after two doses of either Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 AZD1222 vaccine, the responder rate was 63% for OI T-SPOT Panels1+2 (peptides representing SARS-CoV-2 spike protein excluding regions present in seasonal coronaviruses), 69% for OI T-SPOT Panel 14 (peptides representing the entire SARS-CoV-2 spike), and 94% for the PITCH ELISpot assay. The two OI T-SPOT panels correlated strongly with each other showing that either readout quantifies spike-specific T cell responses, although the correlation between the OI T-SPOT panels and the PITCH ELISpot was moderate. ConclusionThe standardisation, relative scalability and longer interval between blood acquisition and processing are advantages of the commercial OI T-SPOT assay. However, the OI T-SPOT assay measures T cell responses at a significantly lower magnitude compared to the PITCH ELISpot assay, detecting T cell responses in a lower proportion of vaccinees. This has implications for the reporting of low-level T cell responses that may be observed in patient populations and for the assessment of T cell durability after vaccination.

Rapid selection of P323L in the SARS-CoV-2 polymerase (NSP12) in humans and non-human primate models and confers a large plaque phenotype

The mutational landscape of SARS-CoV-2 varies at both the dominant viral genome sequence and minor genomic variant population. An early change associated with transmissibility was the D614G substitution in the spike protein. This appeared to be accompanied by a P323L substitution in the viral polymerase (NSP12), but this latter change was not under strong selective pressure. Investigation of P323L/D614G changes in the human population showed rapid emergence during the containment phase and early surge phase of wave 1 in the UK. This rapid substitution was from minor genomic variants to become part of the dominant viral genome sequence. A rapid emergence of 323L but not 614G was observed in a non-human primate model of COVID-19 using a starting virus with P323 and D614 in the dominant genome sequence and 323L and 614G in the minor variant population. In cell culture, a recombinant virus with 323L in NSP12 had a larger plaque size than the same recombinant virus with P323. These data suggest that it may be possible to predict the emergence of a new variant based on tracking the distribution and frequency of minor variant genomes at a population level, rather than just focusing on providing information on the dominant viral genome sequence e.g., consensus level reporting. The ability to predict an emerging variant of SARS-CoV-2 in the global landscape may aid in the evaluation of medical countermeasures and non-pharmaceutical interventions.

A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the global data involving 61,532 cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 have been shown to be associated with more severe disease and death in cancer patient. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the risk by age, tumour type and treatment of infection with SARS-CoV-2 in cancer patients. MethodsSystematic review by searching PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for articles published in English up to June 14, 2021 of SARS-CoV-2 infection in >10 patients with malignant disease. Outcomes included factors in patients with malignant disease that may predict a poor outcome from COVID-19 compared to patients without malignant disease, including patient demographics, tumour subtype and cancer treatments. A meta-analysis was performed using random effects model. Results81 studies were included, totalling 61,532 cancer patients. Haematological malignancies comprised 22.1% (9,672 of 43,676) of cases. Relative risk (RR) of mortality when age and sex matched was 1.69 (95% CI, 1.46-1.95; p<0.001; I2=51%). RR of mortality, versus non-cancer patients, was associated with decreasing age (exp(b)0.96; 95% CI, 0.922-0.994; p=0.028) but not male sex (exp(b)1.89; 95% CI, 0.222-6.366; p=0.83). RR of mortality in those with haematological malignancies versus non-cancer control was 1.81 (95% CI, 1.53-2.95; I2=0.0%). Compared to other cancers, increased risk of death was seen for lung (RR 1.68, 95% CI, 1.45-1.94; p<0.001), genitourinary (RR 1.11; 95% CI, 1.00-1.24; p=0.059) and haematological malignancies (RR 1.42; 95% CI, 1.31-1.54; p<0.001). Breast (RR 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36-0.71; p<0.001) and gynaecological cancers (RR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.93; p=0.009) had lower risk of death. Receipt of chemotherapy had greatest overall pooled mortality risk of 30% (95% CI, 25-36%; I2=86.97%) and endocrine therapy the lowest at 11% (95% CI, 6-16%; I2=70.7%). ConclusionsCancer patients, particularly younger cancer patients, appear at increased risk of mortality from COVID-19 compared to non-cancer patients. Differences in outcomes were seen based on tumour types and treatment. Highlights- To our knowledge this is the largest review and meta-analysis of COVID-19 in cancer patients with insights into tumour types and therapies. - In unadjusted analysis cancer doubles the risk of COVID-19 related mortality. This decreased when adjusted for age and sex. - Younger cancer patients have the highest risk of mortality when compared to non-cancer COVID-19 patient of a similar age. - Patients with lung, genitourinary and haematological malignancies are at increased risk of mortality, breast and gynaecological cancers are at lower risk. - Patients on chemotherapy have the highest pooled mortality risk with those on endocrine therapy the lowest.

Antiviral activity of molnupiravir precursor NHC against Variants of Concern (VOCs) and its therapeutic window in a human lung cell model

SynopsisO_ST_ABSBackgroundC_ST_ABSThe UK Medicines and Regulatory Healthcare Agency (MHRA) have recently licensed the anti-viral drug, molnupiravir, for use in patients with mild-moderate COVID-19 disease with one or more risk factors for serious illness. Treatment with anti-viral drugs is best initiated early to prevent progression to severe disease, although the therapeutic window for intervention has not yet been fully defined. ObjectivesThis study aimed to determine the activity of the molnupiravir (NHC) to different SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern (VoCs), and to establish the therapeutic window in human lung cell model. MethodsDose response assays were performed in parallel to determine the IC50 (the concentration of drug required to inhibit virus titre by 50%) of NHC against different variants. Human ACE-2 A549 cells were treated with NHC at different time points either before, during or after infection with SARS- CoV-2. ResultsHere we demonstrate that {beta}-D-N4-hydroxycytidine (NHC), the active metabolite of molnupiravir, has equivalent activity against four variants of SARS-CoV-2 in a human lung cell line ranging 0.04-0.16{micro}M IC50. Furthermore, we demonstrate that in-vitro activity of the drug is reduced in cells exposed to drug 48 hours after infection. ConclusionsOne of the main advantages of molnupiravir is that it can be administered orally, and thus given to patients in an out-patient setting. These results support giving the drug early on after diagnosis or even in prophylaxis for individuals with high risk of developing severe disease.

Comparison of children and young people admitted with SARS-CoV-2 across the UK in the first and second pandemic waves: prospective multicentre observational cohort study

BackgroundChildren and young people (CYP) were less affected than adults in the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 in the UK. We test the hypothesis that clinical characteristics of hospitalized CYP with SARS-CoV-2 in the UK second wave would differ from the first due to the combined impact of the alpha variant, school reopening and relaxation of shielding. MethodsPatients <19 years hospitalised in the UK with clinician-reported SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled in a prospective multicentre observational cohort study between 17th January 2020 and 31st January 2021. Minimum follow up time was two weeks. Clinical characteristics were compared between the first (W1) and second wave (W2) of infections. Findings2044 CYP aged <19 years were reported from 187 hospitals. 427/2044 (20.6%) had asymptomatic/incidental SARS-CoV-2 infection and were excluded from main analysis. 16.0% (248/1548) of symptomatic CYP were admitted to critical care and 0.8% (12/1504) died. 5.6% (91/1617) of symptomatic CYP had Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C). Patients in W2 were significantly older (median age 6.5 years, IQR 0.3-14.9) than W1 (4.0 (0.4-13.6, p 0.015). Fever was more common in W1, otherwise presenting symptoms and comorbidities were similar across waves. After excluding CYP with MIS-C, patients in W2 had lower PEWS at presentation, lower antibiotic use and less respiratory and cardiovascular support compared to W1. There was no change in the proportion of CYP admitted to critical care between W1 and W2. 58.0% (938/1617) of symptomatic CYP had no reported comorbidity. Patients without co-morbidities were younger (42.4%, 398/938, <1 year old), had lower Paediatric Early Warning Scores (PEWS) at presentation, shorter length of hospital stay and received less respiratory support. MIS-C was responsible for a large proportion of critical care admissions, invasive and non-invasive ventilatory support, inotrope and intravenous corticosteroid use in CYP without comorbidities. InterpretationSevere disease in CYP admitted with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 in the UK remains rare. One in five CYP in this cohort had asymptomatic/incidental SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found no evidence of increased disease severity in W2 compared with W1. FundingShort form: National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Department for International Development and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Long form: This work is supported by grants from the National Institute for Health Research (award CO-CIN-01) and the Medical Research Council (grant MC_PC_19059) and by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford (NIHR award 200907), Wellcome Trust and Department for International Development (215091/Z/18/Z), and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1209135). Liverpool Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre provided infrastructure support for this research (grant reference: C18616/A25153). JSN-V-T is seconded to the Department of Health and Social Care, England (DHSC). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the DHSC, DID, NIHR, MRC, Wellcome Trust, or PHE.

A blood atlas of COVID-19 defines hallmarks of disease severity and specificity

Treatment of severe COVID-19 is currently limited by clinical heterogeneity and incomplete understanding of potentially druggable immune mediators of disease. To advance this, we present a comprehensive multi-omic blood atlas in patients with varying COVID-19 severity and compare with influenza, sepsis and healthy volunteers. We identify immune signatures and correlates of host response. Hallmarks of disease severity revealed cells, their inflammatory mediators and networks as potential therapeutic targets, including progenitor cells and specific myeloid and lymphocyte subsets, features of the immune repertoire, acute phase response, metabolism and coagulation. Persisting immune activation involving AP-1/p38MAPK was a specific feature of COVID-19. The plasma proteome enabled sub-phenotyping into patient clusters, predictive of severity and outcome. Tensor and matrix decomposition of the overall dataset revealed feature groupings linked with disease severity and specificity. Our systems-based integrative approach and blood atlas will inform future drug development, clinical trial design and personalised medicine approaches for COVID-19.

The impact of viral mutations on recognition by SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cells

We identify amino acid variants within dominant SARS-CoV-2 T-cell epitopes by interrogating global sequence data. Several variants within nucleocapsid and ORF3a epitopes have arisen independently in multiple lineages and result in loss of recognition by epitope-specific T-cells assessed by IFN-{gamma} and cytotoxic killing assays. These data demonstrate the potential for T-cell evasion and highlight the need for ongoing surveillance for variants capable of escaping T-cell as well as humoral immunity.

Long Covid in adults discharged from UK hospitals after Covid-19: A prospective, multicentre cohort study using the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol.

Structured AbstractO_ST_ABSObjectivesC_ST_ABSThe long-term consequences of severe Covid-19 requiring hospital admission are not well characterised. The objective of this study was to establish the long-term effects of Covid-19 following hospitalisation and the impact these may have on patient reported outcome measures. DesignA multicentre, prospective cohort study with at least 3 months follow-up of participants admitted to hospital between 5th February 2020 and 5th October 2020. Setting31 hospitals in the United Kingdom. Participants327 hospitalised participants discharged alive from hospital with confirmed/high likelihood SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main outcome measures and comparisonsThe primary outcome was self-reported recovery at least ninety days after initial Covid-19 symptom onset. Secondary outcomes included new symptoms, new or increased disability (Washington group short scale), breathlessness (MRC Dyspnoea scale) and quality of life (EQ5D-5L). We compared these outcome measures across age, comorbidity status and in-hospital Covid-19 severity to identify groups at highest risk of developing long-term difficulties. Multilevel logistic and linear regression models were built to adjust for the effects of patient and centre level risk factors on these outcomes. ResultsIn total 53.7% (443/824) contacted participants responded, yielding 73.8% (327/443) responses with follow-up of 90 days or more from symptom onset. The median time between symptom onset of initial illness and completing the participant questionnaire was 222 days (Interquartile range (IQR) 189 to 269 days). In total, 54.7% (179/327) of participants reported they did not feel fully recovered. Persistent symptoms were reported by 93.3% (305/325) of participants, with fatigue the most common (82.8%, 255/308), followed by breathlessness (53.5%, 175/327). 46.8% (153/327) reported an increase in MRC dyspnoea scale of at least one grade. New or worse disability was reported by 24.2% (79/327) of participants. Overall (EQ5D-5L) summary index was significantly worse at the time of follow-up (median difference 0.1 points on a scale of 0 to 1, IQR: -0.2 to 0.0). Females under the age of 50 years were five times less likely to report feeling recovered (adjusted OR 5.09, 95% CI 1.64 to 15.74), were more likely to have greater disability (adjusted OR 4.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 15.94), twice as likely to report worse fatigue (adjusted OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.31) and seven times more likely to become more breathless (adjusted OR 7.15, 95% CI 2.24 to 22.83) than men of the same age. ConclusionsSurvivors of Covid-19 experienced long-term symptoms, new disability, increased breathlessness, and reduced quality of life. These findings were present even in young, previously healthy working age adults, and were most common in younger females. Policymakers should fund further research to identify effective treatments for long-Covid and ensure healthcare, social care and welfare support is available for individuals with long-Covid. Section 1: What is already known on this topicO_LILong-term symptoms after hospitalisation for Covid-19 have been reported, but it is not clear what impact this has on quality of life. C_LIO_LIIt is not known which patient groups are most likely to have long-term persistent symptoms following hospitalisation for Covid-19, or if this differs by disease severity. C_LI Section 2: What this study addsO_LIMore than half of patients reported not being fully recovered 7 months after onset of Covid-19 symptoms. C_LIO_LIPreviously healthy participants and those under the age of 50 had higher odds of worse long-term outcomes compared to older participants and those with comorbidities. C_LIO_LIYounger women and those with more severe acute disease in-hospital had the worst long-term outcomes. C_LIO_LIPolicy makers need to ensure there is long-term support for people experiencing long-Covid and should plan for lasting long-term population morbidity. Funding for research to understand mechanisms underlying long-Covid and identify potential interventions for testing in randomised trials is urgently required. C_LI

Sequence analysis of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal samples from patients with COVID-19 illustrates population variation and diverse phenotypes, placing the in vitro growth properties of B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 lineage viruses in context.

New variants of SARS-CoV-2 are continuing to emerge and dominate the regional and global sequence landscapes. Several variants have been labelled as Variants of Concern (VOCs) because of perceptions or evidence that these may have a transmission advantage, increased risk of morbidly and/or mortality or immune evasion in the context of prior infection or vaccination. Placing the VOCs in context and also the underlying variability of SARS-CoV-2 is essential in understanding virus evolution and selection pressures. Sequences of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swabs from hospitalised patients in the UK were determined and virus isolated. The data indicated the virus existed as a population with a consensus level and non-synonymous changes at a minor variant. For example, viruses containing the nsp12 P323L variation from the Wuhan reference sequence, contained minor variants at the position including P and F and other amino acids. These populations were generally preserved when isolates were amplified in cell culture. In order to place VOCs B.1.1.7 (the UK Kent variant) and B.1.351 (the South African variant) in context their growth was compared to a spread of other clinical isolates. The data indicated that the growth in cell culture of the B.1.1.7 VOC was no different from other variants, suggesting that its apparent transmission advantage was not down to replicating more quickly. Growth of B.1.351 was towards the higher end of the variants. Overall, the study suggested that studying the biology of SARS-CoV-2 is complicated by population dynamics and that these need to be considered with new variants. ImportanceSARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of COVID-19. The virus has spread across the planet causing a global pandemic. In common with other coronaviruses, SARS-CoV-2 genetic material (genomes) can become quite diverse as a consequence of replicating inside cells. This has given rise to multiple variants from the original virus that infected humans. These variants may have different properties and in the context of a widespread vaccination program may render vaccines less ineffective. Our research confirms the degree of genetic diversity of SARS-CoV-2 in patients. By isolating viruses from these patients, we show that there is a 100-fold range in growth of even normal variants. Interestingly, by comparing this to the pattern seen with two Variants of Concern (UK and South African variants), we show that at least in cells the ability of the B.1.1.7 variant to grow is not substantially different to many of the previous variants.

Identification and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 leader subgenomic mRNA gene junctions in nasopharyngeal samples shows phasic transcription in animal models of COVID-19 and aberrant pattens in humans

IntroductionSARS-CoV-2 has a complex strategy for the transcription of viral subgenomic mRNAs (sgmRNAs), which are targets for nucleic acid diagnostics. Each of these sgRNAs has a unique 5 sequence, the leader-transcriptional regulatory sequence gene junction (leader-TRS-junction), that can be identified using sequencing. ResultsHigh resolution sequencing has been used to investigate the biology of SARS-CoV-2 and the host response in cell culture models and from clinical samples. LeTRS, a bioinformatics tool, was developed to identify leader-TRS-junctions and be used as a proxy to quantify sgmRNAs for understanding virus biology. This was tested on published datasets and clinical samples from patients and longitudinal samples from animal models with COVID-19. DiscussionLeTRS identified known leader-TRS-junctions and identified novel species that were common across different species. The data indicated multi-phasic abundance of sgmRNAs in two different animal models, with spikes in sgmRNA abundance reflected in human samples, and therefore has implications for transmission models and nucleic acid-based diagnostics.

Changes in UK hospital mortality in the first wave of COVID-19: the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol prospective multicentre observational cohort study

BackgroundMortality rates of UK patients hospitalised with COVID-19 appeared to fall during the first wave. We quantify potential drivers of this change and identify groups of patients who remain at high risk of dying in hospital. MethodsThe International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK recruited a prospective cohort admitted to 247 acute UK hospitals with COVID-19 in the first wave (March to August 2020). Outcome was hospital mortality within 28 days of admission. We performed a three-way decomposition mediation analysis using natural effects models to explore associations between week of admission and hospital mortality adjusting for confounders (demographics, comorbidity, illness severity) and quantifying potential mediators (respiratory support and steroids). FindingsUnadjusted hospital mortality fell from 32.3% (95%CI 31.8, 32.7) in March/April to 16.4% (95%CI 15.0, 17.8) in June/July 2020. Reductions were seen in all ages, ethnicities, both sexes, and in comorbid and non-comorbid patients. After adjustment, there was a 19% reduction in the odds of mortality per 4 week period (OR 0.81, 95%CI 0.79, 0.83). 15.2% of this reduction was explained by greater disease severity and comorbidity earlier in the epidemic. The use of respiratory support changed with greater use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV). 22.2% (OR 0.94, 95%CI 0.94, 0.96) of the reduction in mortality was mediated by changes in respiratory support. InterpretationThe fall in hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients during the first wave in the UK was partly accounted for by changes in case mix and illness severity. A significant reduction was associated with differences in respiratory support and critical care use, which may partly reflect improved clinical decision making. The remaining improvement in mortality is not explained by these factors, and may relate to community behaviour on inoculum dose and hospital capacity strain. FundingNIHR & MRC Key points / Research in ContextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSRisk factors for mortality in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 have been established. However there is little literature regarding how mortality is changing over time, and potential explanations for why this might be. Understanding changes in mortality rates over time will help policy makers identify evolving risk, strategies to manage this and broader decisions about public health interventions. Added value of this studyMortality in hospitalised patients at the beginning of the first wave was extremely high. Patients who were admitted to hospital in March and early April were significantly more unwell at presentation than patients who were admitted in later months. Mortality fell in all ages, ethnic groups, both sexes and in patients with and without comorbidity, over and above contributions from falling illness severity. After adjustment for these variables, a fifth of the fall in mortality was explained by changes in the use of respiratory support and steroid treatment, along with associated changes in clinical decision-making relating to supportive interventions. However, mortality was persistently high in patients who required invasive mechanical ventilation, and in those patients who received non-invasive ventilation outside of critical care. Implications of all the available evidenceThe observed reduction in hospital mortality was greater than expected based on the changes seen in both case mix and illness severity. Some of this fall can be explained by changes in respiratory care, including clinical learning. In addition, introduction of community policies including wearing of masks, social distancing, shielding of vulnerable patients and the UK lockdown potentially resulted in people being exposed to less virus. The decrease in mortality varied depending on the level of respiratory support received. Patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation have persistently high mortality rates, albeit with a changing case-mix, and further research should target this group. Severe COVID-19 disease has primarily affected older people in the UK. Many of these people, but not all have significant frailty. It is essential to ensure that patients and their families remain at the centre of decision-making, and we continue with an individualised approach to their treatment and care.

Establishment of CORONET; COVID-19 Risk in Oncology Evaluation Tool to identify cancer patients at low versus high risk of severe complications of COVID-19 infection upon presentation to hospital

BackgroundCancer patients are at increased risk of severe COVID-19. As COVID-19 presentation and outcomes are heterogeneous in cancer patients, decision-making tools for hospital admission, severity prediction and increased monitoring for early intervention are critical. ObjectiveTo identify features of COVID-19 in cancer patients predicting severe disease and build a decision-support online tool; COVID-19 Risk in Oncology Evaluation Tool (CORONET) MethodData was obtained for consecutive patients with active cancer with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 presenting in 12 hospitals throughout the United Kingdom (UK). Univariable logistic regression was performed on pre-specified features to assess their association with admission ([≥]24 hours inpatient), oxygen requirement and death. Multivariable logistic regression and random forest models (RFM) were compared with patients randomly split into training and validation sets. Cost function determined cut-offs were defined for admission/death using RFM. Performance was assessed by sensitivity, specificity and Brier scores (BS). The CORONET model was then assessed in the entire cohort to build the online CORONET tool. ResultsTraining and validation sets comprised 234 and 66 patients respectively with median age 69 (range 19-93), 54% males, 46% females, 71% vs 29% had solid and haematological cancers. The RFM, selected for further development, demonstrated superior performance over logistic regression with AUROC predicting admission (0.85 vs. 0.78) and death (0.76 vs. 0.72). C-reactive protein was the most important feature predicting COVID-19 severity. CORONET cut-offs for admission and mortality of 1.05 and 1.8 were established. In the training set, admission prediction sensitivity and specificity were 94.5% and 44.3% with BS 0.118; mortality sensitivity and specificity were 78.5% and 57.2% with BS 0.364. In the validation set, admission sensitivity and specificity were 90.7% and 42.9% with BS 0.148; mortality sensitivity and specificity were 92.3% and 45.8% with BS 0.442. In the entire cohort, the CORONET decision support tool recommended admission of 99% of patients requiring oxygen and of 99% of patients who died. Conclusions and RelevanceCORONET, a decision support tool validated in hospitals throughout the UK showed promise in aiding decisions regarding admission and predicting COVID-19 severity in patients with cancer presenting to hospital. Future work will validate and refine the tool in further datasets.

Elevated antiviral, myeloid and endothelial inflammatory markers in severe COVID-19

Introductory paragraphThe mechanisms that underpin COVID-19 disease severity, and determine the outcome of infection, are only beginning to be unraveled. The host inflammatory response contributes to lung injury, but circulating mediators levels fall below those in classical cytokine storms. We analyzed serial plasma samples from 619 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 recruited through the prospective multicenter ISARIC clinical characterization protocol U.K. study and 39 milder community cases not requiring hospitalization. Elevated levels of numerous mediators including angiopoietin-2, CXCL10, and GM-CSF were seen at recruitment in patients who later died. Markers of endothelial injury (angiopoietin-2 and von-Willebrand factor A2) were detected early in some patients, while inflammatory cytokines and markers of lung injury persisted for several weeks in fatal COVID-19 despite decreasing antiviral cytokine levels. Overall, markers of myeloid or endothelial cell activation were associated with severe, progressive, and fatal disease indicating a central role for innate immune activation and vascular inflammation in COVID-19.

Development and validation of the 4C Deterioration model for adults hospitalised with COVID-19

Prognostic models to predict the risk of clinical deterioration in acute COVID-19 are required to inform clinical management decisions. Among 75,016 consecutive adults across England, Scotland and Wales prospectively recruited to the ISARIC Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium (ISARIC4C) study, we developed and validated a multivariable logistic regression model for in-hospital clinical deterioration (defined as any requirement of ventilatory support or critical care, or death) using 11 routinely measured variables. We used internal-external cross-validation to show consistent measures of discrimination, calibration and clinical utility across eight geographical regions. We further validated the final model in held-out data from 8,252 individuals in London, with similarly consistent performance (C-statistic 0.77 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.78); calibration-in-the-large 0.01 (-0.04 to 0.06); calibration slope 0.96 (0.90 to 1.02)). Importantly, this model demonstrated higher net benefit than using other candidate scores to inform decision-making. Our 4C Deterioration model thus demonstrates unprecedented clinical utility and generalisability to predict clinical deterioration among adults hospitalised with COVID-19.