Development of a Definition of Postacute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Importance: SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with persistent, relapsing, or new symptoms or other health effects occurring after acute infection, termed postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), also known as long COVID. Characterizing PASC requires analysis of prospectively and uniformly collected data from diverse uninfected and infected individuals. Objective: To develop a definition of PASC using self-reported symptoms and describe PASC frequencies across cohorts, vaccination status, and number of infections. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective observational cohort study of adults with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection at 85 enrolling sites (hospitals, health centers, community organizations) located in 33 states plus Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico. Participants who were enrolled in the RECOVER adult cohort before April 10, 2023, completed a symptom survey 6 months or more after acute symptom onset or test date. Selection included population-based, volunteer, and convenience sampling. Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: PASC and 44 participant-reported symptoms (with severity thresholds). Results: A total of 9764 participants (89% SARS-CoV-2 infected; 71% female; 16% Hispanic/Latino; 15% non-Hispanic Black; median age, 47 years [IQR, 35-60]) met selection criteria. Adjusted odds ratios were 1.5 or greater (infected vs uninfected participants) for 37 symptoms. Symptoms contributing to PASC score included postexertional malaise, fatigue, brain fog, dizziness, gastrointestinal symptoms, palpitations, changes in sexual desire or capacity, loss of or change in smell or taste, thirst, chronic cough, chest pain, and abnormal movements. Among 2231 participants first infected on or after December 1, 2021, and enrolled within 30 days of infection, 224 (10% [95% CI, 8.8%-11%]) were PASC positive at 6 months. Conclusions and Relevance: A definition of PASC was developed based on symptoms in a prospective cohort study. As a first step to providing a framework for other investigations, iterative refinement that further incorporates other clinical features is needed to support actionable definitions of PASC.

Healthy hearts healthy minds: A randomized trial of online interventions to improve physical activity.

INTRODUCTION: Depressed individuals are more likely to die from cardiovascular disease (CVD) than those without depression. People with CVD have higher rates of depression than those without and have higher mortality rates if they have comorbid depression. While physical activity (PA) improves both, few people engage in enough. We compared self-guided internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) + Fitbit or mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) + Fitbit, with Fitbit only to increase daily steps for participants with depression who have low PA. METHODS: Adult participants (N = 340) were recruited from two online patient-powered research networks and randomized to one of three study interventions for 8 weeks with an additional 8 weeks of follow-up. Using linear mixed effects models, we evaluated the effect of the intervention on average daily steps (NCT03373110). RESULTS: Average daily steps increased 2.8 steps per day in MBCT+Fitbit, 2.9 steps/day in CBT + Fitbit, but decreased 8.2 steps/day in Fitbit Only. These changes were not statistically different between the MBCT+Fitbit and CBT + Fitbit groups, but were different from Fitbit Only across the initial 8-week period. Group differences were not maintained across follow-up. Exploratory analyses identified comorbid anxiety disorders, self-reported PA, and employment status as moderators. DISCUSSION: Changes in daily steps over both 8- and 16-week periods-regardless of intervention group-were minimal. The results emphasize the limits of using self-guided web-based psychotherapy with an activity tracker to increase PA in participants with a history of depression and low PA.

Web-Based Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Well-being: Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness can improve overall well-being by training individuals to focus on the present moment without judging their thoughts. However, it is unknown how much mindfulness practice and training are necessary to improve well-being. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to determine whether a standard 8-session web-based mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) program, compared with a brief 3-session mindfulness intervention, improved overall participant well-being. In addition, we sought to explore whether the treatment effects differed based on the baseline characteristics of the participants (ie, moderators). METHODS: Participants were recruited from 17 patient-powered research networks, web-based communities of stakeholders interested in a common research area. Participants were randomized to either a standard 8-session MBCT or a brief 3-session mindfulness training intervention accessed on the web. The participants were followed for 12 weeks. The primary outcome of the study was well-being, as measured by the World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index. We hypothesized that MBCT would be superior to a brief mindfulness training. RESULTS: We randomized 4411 participants, 3873 (87.80%) of whom were White and 3547 (80.41%) of female sex assigned at birth. The mean baseline World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index score was 50.3 (SD 20.7). The average self-reported well-being in each group increased over the intervention period (baseline to 8 weeks; model-based slope for the MBCT group: 0.78, 95% CI 0.63-0.93, and brief mindfulness group: 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.91) as well as the full study period (ie, intervention plus follow-up; baseline to 20 weeks; model-based slope for MBCT group: 0.41, 95% CI 0.34-0.48; and brief mindfulness group: 0.33, 95% CI 0.26-0.40). Changes in self-reported well-being were not significantly different between MBCT and brief mindfulness during the intervention period (model-based difference in slopes: -0.02, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.19; P=.80) or during the intervention period plus 12-week follow-up (-0.08, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.02; P=.10). During the intervention period, younger participants (P=.05) and participants who completed a higher percentage of intervention sessions (P=.005) experienced greater improvements in well-being across both interventions, with effects that were stronger for participants in the MBCT condition. Attrition was high (ie, 2142/4411, 48.56%), which is an important limitation of this study. CONCLUSIONS: Standard MBCT improved well-being but was not superior to a brief mindfulness intervention. This finding suggests that shorter mindfulness programs could yield important benefits across the general population of individuals with various medical conditions. Younger people and participants who completed more intervention sessions reported greater improvements in well-being, an effect that was more pronounced for participants in the MBCT condition. This finding suggests that standard MBCT may be a better choice for younger people as well as treatment-adherent individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03844321; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03844321.

Sex differences in inflammatory markers in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection: Insights from the MGH COVID-19 patient registry.

BACKGROUND: Men are at higher risk for serious complications related to COVID-19 infection than women. More robust immune activation in women has been proposed to contribute to decreased disease severity, although systemic inflammation has been associated with worse outcomes in COVID-19 infection. Whether systemic inflammation contributes to sex differences in COVID-19 infection is not known. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined sex differences in inflammatory markers among 453 men (mean age 61) and 328 women (mean age 62) hospitalized with COVID-19 infection at the Massachusetts General Hospital from March 8 to April 27, 2020. Multivariable linear regression models were used to examine the association of sex with initial and peak inflammatory markers. Exploratory analyses examined the association of sex and inflammatory markers with 28-day clinical outcomes using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Initial and peak CRP were higher in men compared with women after adjustment for baseline differences (initial CRP: ß 0.29, SE 0.07, p = 0.0001; peak CRP: ß 0.31, SE 0.07, p<0.0001) with similar findings for IL-6, PCT, and ferritin (p<0.05 for all). Men had greater than 1.5-greater odds of dying compared with women (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.04-2.80, p = 0.03). Sex modified the association of peak CRP with both death and ICU admission, with stronger associations observed in men compared with women (death: OR 9.19, 95% CI 4.29-19.7, p <0.0001 in men vs OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.52-5.18, p = 0.009 in women, Pinteraction = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In a sample of 781 men and women hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, men exhibited more robust inflammatory activation as evidenced by higher initial and peak inflammatory markers, as well as worse clinical outcomes. Better understanding of sex differences in immune responses to COVID-19 infection may shed light on the pathophysiology of COVID-19 infection.

The role of obesity in inflammatory markers in COVID-19 patients.

Obesity has emerged as a significant risk factor for severe COVID-19 worldwide. Given both COVID-19 infection and obesity have been associated with increased systemic inflammation, we evaluated inflammatory markers in obese and non-obese individuals hospitalized for COVID-19 at Massachusetts General Hospital. We hypothesized that obese patients would have a more exuberant inflammatory response as evidenced by higher initial and peak inflammatory markers along with worse clinical outcomes. Of the 781 patients, 349 were obese (45%). Obese individuals had higher initial and peak levels of CRP and ESR as well as higher peak d-dimer (P < 0.01 for all) in comparison to non-obese individuals, while. IL-6 and ferritin were similar. In addition, obese individuals had a higher odds of requiring vasopressor use (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.00-2.38, P = 0.05), developing hypoxemic respiratory failure (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.04-2.40, P = 0.03) and death (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.31-3.70, P = 0.003) within 28 days of presentation to care. Finally, higher baseline levels of CRP and D-dimer were associated with worse clinical outcomes even after adjustment for BMI. Our findings suggest greater disease severity in obese individuals is characterized by more exuberant inflammation.

Massachusetts general hospital Covid-19 registry reveals two distinct populations of hospitalized patients by race and ethnicity.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences by race/ethnicity in clinical characteristics and outcomes among hospitalized patients with Covid-19 at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH). METHODS: The MGH Covid-19 Registry includes confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patients hospitalized at MGH and is based on manual chart reviews and data extraction from electronic health records (EHRs). We evaluated differences between White/Non-Hispanic and Hispanic patients in demographics, complications and 14-day outcomes among the N = 866 patients hospitalized with Covid-19 from March 11, 2020-May 4, 2020. RESULTS: Overall, 43% of patients hospitalized with Covid-19 were women, median age was 60.4 [IQR = (48.2, 75)], 11.3% were Black/non-Hispanic and 35.2% were Hispanic. Hispanic patients, representing 35.2% of patients, were younger than White/non-Hispanic patients [median age 51y; IQR = (40.6, 61.6) versus 72y; (58.0, 81.7) (p<0.001)]. Hispanic patients were symptomatic longer before presenting to care (median 5 vs 3d, p = 0.039) but were more likely to be sent home with self-quarantine than be admitted to hospital (29% vs 16%, p<0.001). Hispanic patients had fewer comorbidities yet comparable rates of ICU or death (34% vs 36%). Nonetheless, a greater proportion of Hispanic patients recovered by 14 days after presentation (62% vs 45%, p<0.001; OR = 1.99, p = 0.011 in multivariable adjusted model) and fewer died (2% versus 18%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized Hispanic patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities compared to White/non-Hispanic patients; despite comparable rates of ICU care or death, a greater proportion recovered. These results have implications for public health policy and the design and conduct of clinical trials.