Dataset Information

Kinetic changes in virology, specific antibody response and imaging during the clinical course of COVID-19: a descriptive study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To explore the kinetic changes in virology, specific antibody response and imaging during the clinical course of COVID-19.

Methods

This observational study enrolled 20 patients with COVID-19, who were hospitalized between January 20-April 6, 2020, in the two COVID-19 designated hospitals of Zhoushan, Zhejiang and Rushan, Shandong, China, The laboratory findings, imaging, serum response to viral infection, and viral RNA level in the throat and stool samples were assessed from onset to recovery phase in patients with COVID-19.

Results

SARS-COV-2 RNA was positive as early as day four. It remained positive until day 55 post-onset in the sputum-throat swabs and became negative in most cases (55%) within 14 days after onset. Lymphocytopenia occurred in 40% (8/20) of patients during the peak infection period and returned to normal at week five. The most severe inflammation in the lungs appeared in week 2 or 3 after onset, and this was completely absorbed between week 6 and 8 in 85.7% of patients. All patients had detectable antibodies to the receptor binding domain (RBD), and 95% of these patients had IgG to viral N proteins. The antibody titer peaked at week four. Anti-S IgM was positive in 7 of 20 patients after week three.

Conclusions

All COVID-19 patients in this study were self-limiting and recovered well though it may take as long as 6-8 weeks. Our findings on the kinetic changes in imaging, serum response to viral infection and viral RNA level may help understand pathogenesis and define clinical course of COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Wang QJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7652587 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPublic web-based COVID-19 dashboards are in use worldwide to communicate pandemic-related information. Actionability of dashboards, as a predictor of their potential use for data-driven decision-making, was assessed in a global study during the early stages of the pandemic. It revealed a widespread lack of features needed to support actionability. In view of the inherently dynamic nature of dashboards and their unprecedented speed of creation, the evolution of dashboards and changes to their actionability merit exploration.ObjectiveWe aimed to explore how COVID-19 dashboards evolved in the Canadian context during 2020 and whether the presence of actionability features changed over time.MethodsWe conducted a descriptive assessment of a pan-Canadian sample of COVID-19 dashboards (N=26), followed by an appraisal of changes to their actionability by a panel of expert scorers (N=8). Scorers assessed the dashboards at two points in time, July and November 2020, using an assessment tool informed by communication theory and health care performance intelligence. Applying the nominal group technique, scorers were grouped in panels of three, and evaluated the presence of the seven defined features of highly actionable dashboards at each time point.ResultsImprovements had been made to the dashboards over time. These predominantly involved data provision (specificity of geographic breakdowns, range of indicators reported, and explanations of data sources or calculations) and advancements enabled by the technologies employed (customization of time trends and interactive or visual chart elements). Further improvements in actionability were noted especially in features involving local-level data provision, time-trend reporting, and indicator management. No improvements were found in communicative elements (clarity of purpose and audience), while the use of storytelling techniques to narrate trends remained largely absent from the dashboards.ConclusionsImprovements to COVID-19 dashboards in the Canadian context during 2020 were seen mostly in data availability and dashboard technology. Further improving the actionability of dashboards for public reporting will require attention to both technical and organizational aspects of dashboard development. Such efforts would include better skill-mixing across disciplines, continued investment in data standards, and clearer mandates for their developers to ensure accountability and the development of purpose-driven dashboards.

Project description:BackgroundNeutralizing monoclonal antibody (MAB) therapies may benefit patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progressing to severe COVID-19 or hospitalization. Studies documenting approaches to deliver MAB infusions and demonstrating their efficacy are lacking.ObjectiveWe describe our experience and the outcomes of almost 3000 patients who received MAB infusion therapy at Northwell Health, a large integrated health care system in New York.MethodsThis is a descriptive study of adult patients who received MAB therapy between November 20, 2020, to January 31, 2021, and a retrospective cohort survival analysis comparing patients who received MAB therapy prior to admission versus those who did not. A multivariable Cox model with inverse probability weighting according to the propensity score including covariates (sociodemographic, comorbidities, and presenting vital signs) was used. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; additional evaluations included emergency department use and hospitalization within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test for patients who received MAB therapy.ResultsDuring the study period, 2818 adult patients received MAB infusion. Following therapy and within 28 days of a COVID-19 test, 123 (4.4%) patients presented to the emergency department and were released, and 145 (5.1%) patients were hospitalized. These 145 patients were compared with 200 controls who were eligible for but did not receive MAB therapy and were hospitalized. In the MAB group, 16 (11%) patients met the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality, versus 21 (10.5%) in the control group. In an unadjusted Cox model, the hazard ratio (HR) for time to in-hospital mortality for the MAB group was 1.38 (95% CI 0.696-2.719). Models adjusting for demographics (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.53-2.23), demographics and Charlson Comorbidity Index (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.573-2.59), and with inverse probability weighting according to propensity scores (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.619-2.29) did not demonstrate significance. The hospitalization rate was 4.4% for patients who received MAB therapy within 0 to 4 days, 5% within 5 to 7 days, and 6.1% in ≥8 days of symptom onset (P=.15).ConclusionsEstablishing the capability to provide neutralizing MAB infusion therapy requires substantial planning and coordination. Although this therapy may be an important treatment option for early mild to moderate COVID-19 in patients who are at high risk, further investigations are needed to define the optimal timing of MAB treatment to reduce hospitalization and mortality.