COVID-19 vaccine reactogenicity among participants enrolled in the GENCOV study

BACKGROUND

GENCOV is a prospective, observational cohort study of COVID-19-positive adults. Here, we characterize and compare side effects between COVID-19 vaccines and determine whether reactogenicity is exacerbated by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

Participants were recruited across Ontario, Canada. Participant-reported demographic and COVID-19 vaccination data were collected using a questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess whether vaccine manufacturer, type, and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection are associated with reactogenicity.

RESULTS

Responses were obtained from n = 554 participants. Tiredness and localized side effects were the most common reactions across vaccine doses. For most participants, side effects occurred and subsided within 1-2 days. Recipients of Moderna mRNA and AstraZeneca vector vaccines reported reactions more frequently compared to recipients of a Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was independently associated with developing side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide evidence of relatively mild and short-lived reactions reported by participants who have received approved COVID-19 vaccines.

Imprecision of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays at the female 99th-percentile

BACKGROUND

An analytical benchmark for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays is to achieve a coefficient of variation (CV) of ≤ 10.0 % at the 99th percentile upper reference limit (URL) used for the diagnosis of myocardial infarction. Few prospective multicenter studies have evaluated assay imprecision and none have determined precision at the female URL which is lower than the male URL for all cardiac troponin assays.

METHODS

Human serum and plasma matrix samples were constructed to yield hs-cTn concentrations near the female URLs for the Abbott, Beckman, Roche, and Siemens hs-cTn assays. These materials were sent (on dry ice) to 35 Canadian hospital laboratories (n = 64 instruments evaluated) participating in a larger clinical trial, with instructions for storage, handling, and monthly testing over one year. The mean concentration, standard deviation, and CV for each instrument type and an overall pooled CV for each manufacturer were calculated.

RESULTS

The CVs for all individual instruments and overall were ≤ 10.0 % for two manufacturers (Abbott CVpooled = 6.3 % and Beckman CVpooled = 7.0 %). One of four Siemens Atellica instruments yielded a CV > 10.0 % (CVpooled = 7.7 %), whereas 15 of 41 Roche instruments yielded CVs > 10.0 % at the female URL of 9 ng/L used worldwide (6 cobas e411, 1 cobas e601, 4 cobas e602, and 4 cobas e801) (CVpooled = 11.7 %). Four Roche instruments also yielded CVs > 10.0 % near the female URL of 14 ng/L used in the United States (CVpooled = 8.5 %).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of instruments achieving a CV ≤ 10.0 % at the female 99th-percentile URL varies by manufacturer and by instrument. Monitoring assay precision at the female URL is necessary for some assays to ensure optimal use of this threshold in clinical practice.

Characterizing Risk Factors for Hospitalization and Clinical Characteristics in a Cohort of COVID-19 Patients Enrolled in the GENCOV Study

The GENCOV study aims to identify patient factors which affect COVID-19 severity and outcomes. Here, we aimed to evaluate patient characteristics, acute symptoms and their persistence, and associations with hospitalization. Participants were recruited at hospital sites across the Greater Toronto Area in Ontario, Canada. Patient-reported demographics, medical history, and COVID-19 symptoms and complications were collected through an intake survey. Regression analyses were performed to identify associations with outcomes including hospitalization and COVID-19 symptoms. In total, 966 responses were obtained from 1106 eligible participants (87% response rate) between November 2020 and May 2022. Increasing continuous age (aOR: 1.05 [95%CI: 1.01-1.08]) and BMI (aOR: 1.17 [95%CI: 1.10-1.24]), non-White/European ethnicity (aOR: 2.72 [95%CI: 1.22-6.05]), hypertension (aOR: 2.78 [95%CI: 1.22-6.34]), and infection by viral variants (aOR: 5.43 [95%CI: 1.45-20.34]) were identified as risk factors for hospitalization. Several symptoms including shortness of breath and fever were found to be more common among inpatients and tended to persist for longer durations following acute illness. Sex, age, ethnicity, BMI, vaccination status, viral strain, and underlying health conditions were associated with developing and having persistent symptoms. By improving our understanding of risk factors for severe COVID-19, our findings may guide COVID-19 patient management strategies by enabling more efficient clinical decision making.

Public knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 serological and viral lineage laboratory testing and result interpretation: A GENCOV study cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

Concepts related to SARS-CoV-2 laboratory testing and result interpretation can be challenging to understand. A cross-sectional survey of COVID-19 positive adults residing in Ontario, Canada was conducted to explore how well people understand SARS-CoV-2 laboratory tests and their associated results.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Participants were recruited through fliers or by prospective recruitment of outpatients and hospitalized inpatients with COVID-19. Enrolled participants included consenting adults with a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test result. An 11-item questionnaire was developed by researchers, nurses, and physicians in the study team and was administered online between April 2021 to May 2022 upon enrolment into the study.

RESULTS

Responses were obtained from 940 of 1106 eligible participants (85% participation rate). Most respondents understood 1) that antibody results should not influence adherence to social distancing measures (n=602/888, 68%), 2) asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection following test positivity (n=698/888, 79%), 3) serological test sensitivity in relation to post-infection timeline (n=540/891, 61%), and 4) limitations of experts' knowledge related to SARS-CoV-2 serology (n=693/887, 78%). Conversely, respondents demonstrated challenges understanding 1) conflicting molecular and serological test results and their relationship with immune protection (n=162/893, 18%) and 2) the impact of SARS-CoV-2 variants on vaccine effectiveness (n=235/891, 26%). Analysis of responses stratified by sociodemographic variables identified that respondents who were either: 1) female, 2) more educated, 3) aged 18-44, 4) from a high-income household, or 5) healthcare workers responded expectedly more often.

CONCLUSIONS

We have highlighted concepts related to SARS-CoV-2 laboratory tests and associated results which may be challenging to understand. The findings of this study enable us to identify 1) misconceptions related to various SARS-CoV-2 test results, 2) groups of individuals at risk, and 3) strategies to improve people's understanding of their test results.

Establishing quality indicators for point of care glucose testing: recommendations from the Canadian Society for Clinical Chemists Point of Care Testing and Quality Indicators Special Interest Groups

OBJECTIVES

Monitoring quality indicators (QIs) is an important part of laboratory quality assurance (QA). Here, the Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists (CSCC) Point of Care Testing (POCT) and QI Special Interest Groups describe a process for establishing and monitoring QIs for POCT glucose testing.

METHODS

Key, error prone steps in the POCT glucose testing process were collaboratively mapped out, followed by risk assessment for each step. Steps with the highest risk and ability to detect a non-conformance were chosen for follow-up. These were positive patient identification (PPID) and repeat of critically high glucose measurements. Participating sites were asked to submit aggregate data for these indicators from their site(s) for a one-month period. The PPID QI was also included as part of a national QI monitoring program for which fifty-seven sites submitted data.

RESULTS

The percentage of POCT glucose tests performed without valid PPID ranged from 0-87%. Sites without Admission-Discharge-Transfer (ADT) connectivity to POCT meters were among those with the highest percentage of POCT glucose tests performed without valid PPID. The percentage repeated critically high glucose measurements ranged from 0-50%, indicating low compliance with this recommendation. A high rate of discordance was also noted when critically high POCT glucose measurements were repeated, demonstrating the importance of repeat testing prior to insulin administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Here, a process for establishing these QIs is described, with preliminary data for two QIs chosen from this process. The findings demonstrate the importance of QIs for identification and comparative performance monitoring of non-conformances to improve POCT quality.

Implementation of serological and molecular tools to inform COVID-19 patient management: protocol for the GENCOV prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

There is considerable variability in symptoms and severity of COVID-19 among patients infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Linking host and virus genome sequence information to antibody response and biological information may identify patient or viral characteristics associated with poor and favourable outcomes. This study aims to (1) identify characteristics of the antibody response that result in maintained immune response and better outcomes, (2) determine the impact of genetic differences on infection severity and immune response, (3) determine the impact of viral lineage on antibody response and patient outcomes and (4) evaluate patient-reported outcomes of receiving host genome, antibody and viral lineage results.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A prospective, observational cohort study is being conducted among adult patients with COVID-19 in the Greater Toronto Area. Blood samples are collected at baseline (during infection) and 1, 6 and 12 months after diagnosis. Serial antibody titres, isotype, antigen target and viral neutralisation will be assessed. Clinical data will be collected from chart reviews and patient surveys. Host genomes and T-cell and B-cell receptors will be sequenced. Viral genomes will be sequenced to identify viral lineage. Regression models will be used to test associations between antibody response, physiological response, genetic markers and patient outcomes. Pathogenic genomic variants related to disease severity, or negative outcomes will be identified and genome wide association will be conducted. Immune repertoire diversity during infection will be correlated with severity of COVID-19 symptoms and human leucocyte antigen-type associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants can learn their genome sequencing, antibody and viral sequencing results; patient-reported outcomes of receiving this information will be assessed through surveys and qualitative interviews.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by Clinical Trials Ontario Streamlined Ethics Review System (CTO Project ID: 3302) and the research ethics boards at participating hospitals. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and end-users.

Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists (CSCC) consensus guidance for testing, selection and quality management of SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care tests

OBJECTIVES

A consensus guidance is provided for testing, utility and verification of SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care test (POCT) performance and implementation of a quality management program, focusing on nucleic acid and antigen targeted technologies.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The recommendations are based on current literature and expert opinion from the members of Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists (CSCC), and are intended for use inside or outside of healthcare settings that have varied levels of expertise and experience with POCT.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Here we discuss sampling requirements, biosafety, SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care testing methodologies (with focus on Health Canada approved tests), test performance and limitations, test selection, testing utility, development and implementation of quality management systems, quality improvement, and medical and scientific oversight.