An external exposome-wide association study of COVID-19 mortality in the United States.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: The risk factors for severe COVID-19 beyond older age and certain underlying health conditions are largely unknown. Recent studies suggested that long-term environmental exposures may be important determinants of severe COVID-19. However, very few environmental factors have been studied, often separately, without considering the totality of the external environment (i.e., the external exposome). We conducted an external exposome-wide association study (ExWAS) using the nationwide county-level COVID-19 mortality data in the contiguous US. A total of 337 variables characterizing the external exposome from 8 data sources were integrated, harmonized, and spatiotemporally linked to each county. A two-phase procedure was used: (1) in Phase 1, a random 50:50 split divided the data into a discovery set and a replication set, and associations between COVID-19 mortality and individual factors were examined using mixed-effect negative binomial regression models, with multiple comparisons addressed, and (2) in Phase 2, a multivariable regression model including all variables that are significant from both the discovery and replication sets in Phase 1 was fitted. A total of 13 and 22 variables were significant in the discovery and replication sets in Phase 1, respectively. All the 4 variables that were significant in both sets in Phase 1 remained statistically significant in Phase 2, including two air toxicants (i.e., nitrogen dioxide or NO2, and benzidine), one vacant land measure, and one food environment measure. This is the first external exposome study of COVID-19 mortality. It confirmed some of the previously reported environmental factors associated with COVID-19 mortality, but also generated unexpected predictors that may warrant more focused evaluation.
Project description:The heterogeneity in symptomatology and phenotypic profile attributable to COVID-19 is widely unknown. For the first time, our study provides the unique advantage of obtaining samples from the Middle Eastern population, an underrepresented region in genetic studies, and explore new genotypes in this population that will yield to novel genetic association. Specifically, we studied 646 patients in the United Arab Emirates. We describe strong association signals from genes on chromosomes 2, 3, 5, 11 and 13, which carry genes that are expressed in the lung, have been associated with tumour progression, emphysema, airway obstruction, and surface tension within the lung. Identifying genetic variants associated to COVID-19 susceptibility and severity may uncover novel biological insights into disease pathogenesis and identify mechanistic targets for therapeutic and vaccine development.
Project description:It is widely recognized that exogenous factors play an important role in the development of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP). However, only a few external environmental factors have been studied, often separately, with no attempt to examine the totality of the external environment, or the external exposome. We conducted an external exposome-wide association study (ExWAS) using the Florida Vital Statistics Birth Records including 819,399 women with live births in 2010-2013. A total of 5784 factors characterizing women's surrounding natural, built, and social environment during pregnancy from 10 data sources were collected, harmonized, integrated, and spatiotemporally linked to the women based on pregnancy periods using 250 m buffers around their geocoded residential addresses. A random 50:50 split divided the data into discovery and replication sets, and a 3-phase procedure was used. In phase 1, associations between HDP and individual factors were examined, and Bonferroni adjustment was performed. In phase 2, an elastic net model was used to perform variable selection among significant variables from phase 1. In phase 3, a multivariable logistic regression model including all variables selected by the elastic net model was fitted. Variables that were significant in both the discovery and replication sets were retained. Among the 528 and 490 variables identified in Phase 1, 232 and 224 were selected by the elastic net model in Phase 2, and 67 and 48 variables remained statistically significant in Phase 3 in the discovery and replication sets, respectively. A total of 12 variables were significant in both the discovery and replication sets, including air toxicants (e.g., 2,2,4-trimethylpentane), meteorological factors (e.g., omega or vertical velocity at 125mb pressure level), neighborhood crime and safety (e.g., burglary rate), and neighborhood sociodemographic status (e.g., urbanization). This is the first large external exposome study of HDP. It confirmed some of the previously reported associations and generated unexpected predictors within the environment that may warrant more focused evaluation.
Project description:BackgroundIdentifying patients at risk for mortality from COVID-19 is crucial to triage, clinical decision-making, and the allocation of scarce hospital resources. The 4C Mortality Score effectively predicts COVID-19 mortality, but it has not been validated in a United States (U.S.) population. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the 4C Mortality Score accurately predicts COVID-19 mortality in an urban U.S. adult inpatient population.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included adult patients admitted to a single-center, tertiary care hospital (Philadelphia, PA) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR from 3/01/2020 to 6/06/2020. Variables were extracted through a combination of automated export and manual chart review. The outcome of interest was mortality during hospital admission or within 30 days of discharge.ResultsThis study included 426 patients; mean age was 64.4 years, 43.4% were female, and 54.5% self-identified as Black or African American. All-cause mortality was observed in 71 patients (16.7%). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of the 4C Mortality Score was 0.85 (95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.89).ConclusionsClinicians may use the 4C Mortality Score in an urban, majority Black, U.S. inpatient population. The derivation and validation cohorts were treated in the pre-vaccine era so the 4C Score may over-predict mortality in current patient populations. With stubbornly high inpatient mortality rates, however, the 4C Score remains one of the best tools available to date to inform thoughtful triage and treatment allocation.
Project description:Environmental exposures have been linked to COVID-19 severity. Previous studies examined very few environmental factors, and often only separately without considering the totality of the environment, or the exposome. In addition, existing risk prediction models of severe COVID-19 predominantly rely on demographic and clinical factors. To address these gaps, we conducted a spatial and contextual exposome-wide association study (ExWAS) and developed polyexposomic scores (PES) of COVID-19 hospitalization leveraging rich information from individuals' spatial and contextual exposome. Individual-level electronic health records of 50 368 patients aged 18 years and older with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR/Antigen lab test or a COVID-19 diagnosis between March 2020 and October 2021 were obtained from the OneFlorida+ Clinical Research Network. A total of 194 spatial and contextual exposome factors from 10 data sources were spatiotemporally linked to each patient based on geocoded residential histories. We used a standard two-phase procedure in the ExWAS and developed and validated PES using gradient boosting decision trees models. Four exposome measures significantly associated with COVID-19 hospitalization were identified, including 2-chloroacetophenone, low food access, neighborhood deprivation, and reduced access to fitness centers. The initial prediction model in all patients without considering exposome factors had a testing-area under the curve (AUC) of 0.778. Incorporation of exposome data increased the testing-AUC to 0.787. Similar findings were observed in subgroup analyses focusing on populations without comorbidities and aged 18-24 years old. This spatial and contextual exposome study of COVID-19 hospitalization confirmed previously reported risk factor but also generated novel predictors that warrant more focused evaluation.
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the association between United States county-level COVID-19 mortality and changes in presidential voting between 2016 and 2020.Study designThe study design is a county-level ecological study.MethodsWe analysed county-level population-weighted differences in partisan vote change, voter turnout and sociodemographic and health status characteristics across pre-election COVID-19 mortality quartiles. We estimated a population-weighted linear regression of the 2020-2016 Democratic vote change testing the significance of differences between quartiles of COVID-19 mortality, controlling for other county characteristics.ResultsThe overall change in the 2020-2016 Democratic vote was +2.9% but ranged from a +4.3% increase in the lowest mortality quartile counties to +0.9% in the highest mortality quartile counties. Change in turnout ranged from +9.1% in the lowest mortality counties to only +6.2% in highest mortality counties. In regression estimates, the highest mortality quartile was associated with a -1.26% change in the Democratic 2020-2016 vote compared with the lowest quartile (P < 0.001).ConclusionsHigher county-level COVID-19 mortality was associated with smaller increases in Democratic vote share in 2020 compared with 2016. Possible explanations to be explored in future research could include fear of in-person voting in heavily Democratic, high-mortality counties, fear of the economic effects of perceived Democratic support for tighter lockdowns and stay-at-home orders and general exhaustion that lowered political participation in hard-hit counties.
Project description:Patients infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), exhibit a wide spectrum of disease behavior. Since DNA methylation has been implicated in the regulation of viral infections and the immune system, we performed an epigenome- wide association study (EWAS) to identify candidate loci regulated by this epigenetic mark that could be involved in the onset of COVID-19 in patients without comorbidities.
Project description:BackgroundFully assessing the mortality burden of the COVID-19 pandemic requires measuring years of life lost (YLLs) and accounting for quality-of-life differences.ObjectiveTo measure YLLs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) lost from the COVID-19 pandemic, by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and comorbidity.DesignState-transition microsimulation model.Data sourcesHealth and Retirement Study, Panel Study of Income Dynamics, data on excess deaths from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and nursing home death counts from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.Target populationU.S. population aged 25 years and older.Time horizonLifetime.PerspectiveIndividual.InterventionCOVID-19 pandemic through 13 March 2021.Outcome measuresYLLs and QALYs lost per 10 000 persons in the population. The estimates account for the age, sex, and race/ethnicity of decedents, along with obesity, smoking behavior, lung disease, heart disease, diabetes, cancer, stroke, hypertension, dementia, and nursing home residence.Results of base-case analysisThe COVID-19 pandemic resulted in 6.62 million QALYs lost (9.08 million YLLs) through 13 March 2021, with 3.6 million (54%) lost by those aged 25 to 64 years. The greatest toll was on Black and Hispanic communities, especially among men aged 65 years or older, who lost 1138 and 1371 QALYs, respectively, per 10 000 persons. Absent the pandemic, 38% of decedents would have had average or above-average life expectancies for their subgroup defined by age, sex, and race/ethnicity.Results of sensitivity analysisAccounting for uncertainty in risk factors for death from COVID-19 yielded similar results.LimitationEstimates may vary depending on assumptions about mortality and quality-of-life projections.ConclusionBeyond excess deaths alone, the COVID-19 pandemic imposed a greater life expectancy burden on persons aged 25 to 64 years, including those with average or above-average life expectancies, and a disproportionate burden on Black and Hispanic communities.Primary funding sourceNational Institute on Aging.
Project description:BackgroundBlack populations in the United States are being disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, but the increased mortality burden after accounting for health and other demographic characteristics is not well understood. We examined characteristics of individuals who died from COVID-19 in Michigan by race stratified by their age, sex and comorbidity prevalence to illustrate and understand this disparity in mortality risk.MethodsWe evaluate COVID-19 mortality in Michigan by demographic and health characteristics, using individual-level linked death certificate and surveillance data collected by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services from March 16 to October 26, 2020. We identified differences in demographics and comorbidity prevalence across race among individuals who died from COVID-19 and calculated mortality rates by age, sex, race, and number of comorbidities.FindingsAmong the 6,065 COVID-19 related deaths in Michigan, Black individuals are experiencing 3·6 times the mortality rate of White individuals (p<0.001), with a mortality rate for Black individuals under 65 years without comorbidities that is 12·6 times that of their White counterparts (p<0.001). After accounting for age, race, sex, and number of comorbidities, we find that Black individuals in all strata are at higher risk of COVID-19 mortality than their White counterparts.InterpretationOur findings demonstrate that Black populations are disproportionately burdened by COVID-19 mortality, even after accounting for demographic and underlying health characteristics. We highlight how disparities across race, which result from systemic racism, are compounded in crises.FundingASP, AP and APG were funded by NSF Expeditions grant 1918784, NIH grant 1R01AI151176-01, NSF Rapid Response Research for COVID-19 grant RAPID-2027755, and the Notsew Orm Sands Foundation. MCF was supported by NIH grant K01AI141576.
Project description:ImportanceSARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19, poses considerable morbidity and mortality risks. Studies using data collected during routine clinical practice can supplement randomized clinical trials to provide needed evidence, especially during a global pandemic, and can yield markedly larger sample sizes to assess outcomes for important patient subgroups.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of remdesivir treatment with inpatient mortality among patients with COVID-19 outside of the clinical trial setting.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study in US hospitals using health insurance claims data linked to hospital chargemaster data from December 1, 2018, to May 3, 2021, was conducted among 24 856 adults hospitalized between May 1, 2020, and May 3, 2021, with newly diagnosed COVID-19 who received remdesivir and 24 856 propensity score-matched control patients.ExposureRemdesivir treatment.Main outcomes and measuresAll-cause inpatient mortality within 28 days of the start of remdesivir treatment for the remdesivir-exposed group or the matched index date for the control group.ResultsA total of 24 856 remdesivir-exposed patients (12 596 men [50.7%]; mean [SD] age, 66.8 [15.4] years) and 24 856 propensity score-matched control patients (12 621 men [50.8%]; mean [SD] age, 66.8 [15.4] years) were included in the study. Median follow-up was 6 days (IQR, 4-11 days) in the remdesivir group and 5 days (IQR, 2-10 days) in the control group. There were 3557 mortality events (14.3%) in the remdesivir group and 3775 mortality events (15.2%) in the control group. The 28-day mortality rate was 0.5 per person-month in the remdesivir group and 0.6 per person-month in the control group. Remdesivir treatment was associated with a statistically significant 17% reduction in inpatient mortality among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with propensity score-matched control patients (hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.79-0.87]).Conclusions and relevanceIn this retrospective cohort study using health insurance claims and hospital chargemaster data, remdesivir treatment was associated with a significantly reduced inpatient mortality overall among patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Results of this analysis using data collected during routine clinical practice and state-of-the-art methods complement results from randomized clinical trials. Future areas of research include assessing the association of remdesivir treatment with inpatient mortality during the circulation of different variants and relative to time from symptom onset.
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has placed forecasting models at the forefront of health policy making. Predictions of mortality, cases and hospitalisations help governments meet planning and resource allocation challenges. In this paper, we consider the weekly forecasting of the cumulative mortality due to COVID-19 at the national and state level in the U.S. Optimal decision-making requires a forecast of a probability distribution, rather than just a single point forecast. Interval forecasts are also important, as they can support decision making and provide situational awareness. We consider the case where probabilistic forecasts have been provided by multiple forecasting teams, and we combine the forecasts to extract the wisdom of the crowd. We use a dataset that has been made publicly available from the COVID-19 Forecast Hub. A notable feature of the dataset is that the availability of forecasts from participating teams varies greatly across the 40 weeks in our study. We evaluate the accuracy of combining methods that have been previously proposed for interval forecasts and predictions of probability distributions. These include the use of the simple average, the median, and trimming methods. In addition, we propose several new weighted combining methods. Our results show that, although the median was very useful for the early weeks of the pandemic, the simple average was preferable thereafter, and that, as a history of forecast accuracy accumulates, the best results can be produced by a weighted combining method that uses weights that are inversely proportional to the historical accuracy of the individual forecasting teams.