bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025 huggingface dataset:
60. New Prognostic Markers for COVID-19 Disease
Authors: Ramahi Amr , Chan Kok Hoe , Prabhakar Laxminarayan , Farouji Iyad , Thimmareddygari Divya , DaCosta Theodore R , Chittamuri Sahithi , Patel Kinjal D , Poudel Bishnu , Omour Bader I Al , Paige Amy , Joseph Ormena , Patel Khamoshi , Bhavsar Nilam , Shaaban Hamid S , Slim Jihad
Published: January 2021

Background

A few COVID-19 related retrospective studies have established that older age, elevated neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and decreased lymphocyte-CRP ratio (LCR) were associated with worse outcome. Herein, we aim to identify new prognostic markers associated with mortality.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective hospital cohort study on patients ≥ 18 years old with confirmed COVID-19, who were admitted to our hospital between 03/15/2020 and 05/25/2020. Study individuals were recruited if they had a complete CBC profile and inflammatory markers such as CRP, ferritin, D-dimer and LDH, as well as a well-defined clinical outcomes (discharged alive or expired). Demographic, clinical and laboratory data were reviewed and retrieved. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression methods were employed to identify prognostic markers associated with mortality.

Results

Out of the 344 confirmed COVID-19 hospitalized patients during the study period, 31 who did not have a complete blood profile were excluded; 303 patients were included in the study, 89 (29%) expired, and 214 (71%) were discharged alive. Demographic analysis was tabulated in Table 1.

The univariate analysis showed a significant association of death with absolute neutrophil count (ANC, p=0.022), NLR (p=002), neutrophil-monocyte ratio (NMR, p=< 0.0001), LCR (p=0.007), lymphocyte-LDH ratio (LLR, p=< 0.0001), lymphocyte-D-dimer ratio (LDR, p=< 0.0001), lymphocyte-ferritin ratio (LFR, p=< 0.0001), and platelets (p=0.037) with mortality. With multivariable logistic regression analysis, the only values that had an odds of survival were high LDR (odds ratio [OR] 1.763; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20–2.69), and a high LFR (OR 1.136, CI 1.01–1.34).

We further build up a model which can predict >85% mortality in our cohorts with the utilization of D-dimer (>500 ng/ml), Ferritin (>200 ng/ml), LDR (< 1.6), LFR (< 4) and ANC (>2.5). This new model has a ROC of 0.68 (p< 0.0001).

Conclusion

This retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 suggests LDR and LFR as potential independent prognostic indicators. A new model with combination of D-dimer, Ferritin, LDR, LFR and ANC, was able to predict >85% mortality in our cohort with ROC of 0.68, it will need to be validated in a prospective cohort study.

Disclosures

Jihad Slim, MD, Abbvie (Speaker’s Bureau)Gilead (Speaker’s Bureau)Jansen (Speaker’s Bureau)Merck (Speaker’s Bureau)ViiV (Speaker’s Bureau)
61. Using Machine Learning for Prediction of Poor Clinical Outcomes in Adult Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19
Authors: Rodriguez-Nava Guillermo , Trelles-Garcia Daniela Patricia , Yanez-Bello Maria Adriana , Chung Chul Won , Chaudry Sana , Khan Aimen , Friedman Harvey , Hines David
Published: January 2021

Background

As the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic develops, there is a need for prediction rules to guide clinical decisions. Previous reports have identified risk factors using statistical inference model. The primary goal of these models is to characterize the relationship between variables and outcomes, not to make predictions. In contrast, the primary purpose of machine learning is obtaining a model that can make repeatable predictions. The objective of this study is to develop decision rules tailored to our patient population to predict ICU admissions and death in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We used a de-identified dataset of hospitalized adults with COVID-19 admitted to our community hospital between March 2020 and June 2020. We used a Random Forest algorithm to build the prediction models for ICU admissions and death. Random Forest is one of the most powerful machine learning algorithms; it leverages the power of multiple decision trees, randomly created, for making decisions.

Results

313 patients were included; 237 patients were used to train each model, 26 were used for testing, and 50 for validation. A total of 16 variables, selected according to their availability in the Emergency Department, were fit into the models. For the survival model, the combination of age >57 years, the presence of altered mental status, procalcitonin ≥3.0 ng/mL, a respiratory rate >22, and a blood urea nitrogen >32 mg/dL resulted in a decision rule with an accuracy of 98.7% in the training model, 73.1% in the testing model, and 70% in the validation model (Table 1, Figure 1). For the ICU admission model, the combination of age < 82 years, a systolic blood pressure of ≤94 mm Hg, oxygen saturation of ≤93%, a lactate dehydrogenase >591 IU/L, and a lactic acid >1.5 mmol/L resulted in a decision rule with an accuracy of 99.6% in the training model, 80.8% in the testing model, and 82% in the validation model (Table 2, Figure 2).

Table 1. Measures of Performance in Predicting Inpatient Mortality

Conclusion

We created decision rules using machine learning to predict ICU admission or death in patients with COVID-19. Although there are variables previously described with statistical inference, these decision rules are customized to our patient population; furthermore, we can continue to train the models fitting more data with new patients to create even more accurate prediction rules.

Figure 1. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve for Inpatient Mortality

Table 2. Measures of Performance in Predicting Intensive Care Unit Admission

Figure 2. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve for Intensive Care Unit Admission

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
62. Association Between Influenza Co-infection and Poor Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19
Authors: Bobadilla Renato G , Flores Carlos , Francis Garry , Bengualid Victoria
Published: January 2021

Background

In December 2019, a novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infection emerged in Wuhan, China, establishing itself as a deadly pathogen leading to an ongoing pandemic. The incidence of co-infection of COVID-19 and Influenza has not been widely reported. Both infections have been known to share similar mechanisms of transmission, however currently, there is no evidence regarding the relationship between co-infection between this viruses and worsening outcomes. Once social distancing measures are eased, and daily activities resumed, there is a possibility for a second wave of cases. Given the incidence of influenza is higher during winter, a higher co-infection rate is expected in these months.

Methods

In this study, the aim was to assess the association of influenza co-infection with outcomes in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a hospital-based case-control study in Bronx, New York. 19 patients with Influenza co-infection were found in total. 1 patient did not meet inclusion/exclusion criteria. Charts were reviewed from 18 confirmed cases of influenza and COVID-19 patients. Controls were selected from the remaining pool of patients with COVID-19 in the same period. Cases were matched for age, sex and underlying comorbidities (Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus, liver disease, cardiovascular disease, HIV status, immunocompromised state other than HIV). The measured outcomes were: in-hospital mortality, need for mechanical ventilation, need for vasopressors and need for renal replacement therapy. For each outcome, Chi Square test and Odds ratio were obtained.

Results

After statistical analysis, no significative difference was found in the following variables: in-hospital mortality [Odds ratio (OR) 0.769; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.185–3.191; p value= 0.717], need for mechanical ventilation (OR 1.3; 95% CI: 0.313–5.393; p value= 0.717), need for vasopressors (OR 1.923; 95% CI: 0.383–9.646; p value= 0.423), need for renal replacement therapy (OR 1.0; 95% CI: 0.208–4.814; p value= 1.0).

Conclusion

There was no difference in the outcome in COVID-19 patients co-infected with influenza compared to non co-infected patients, however, a larger sample of cases will be needed for further assessment of these outcomes.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
64. Metagenomic Sequencing to Identify Alternative Infections and Co-infections in Persons Under Investigation for covid-19
Authors: Babiker Ahmed , Bradley Heath L , Stittleburg Victoria D , Key Autum , Kraft Colleen , Waggoner Jesse , Piantadosi Anne
Published: January 2021

Background

Broad testing for respiratory viruses among persons under investigation (PUI) for SARS-CoV-2 is performed inconsistently, limiting our understanding of alternative infections and co-infections in these patients. Here, we used unbiased metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) to assess the frequencies of 1) alternative viral infections in SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR negative PUIs and 2) viral co-infections in SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive PUIs.

Methods

A convenience sample set was selected from PUIs who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 in the Emory Healthcare system during the first 2 months of the pandemic from 02/26-04/23/20. Laboratory results were extracted by chart review; Flu/RSV and multiplex respiratory pathogen PCRs had been performed at the discretion of treating physicians. Excess nasopharyngeal swab samples were retrieved within 72 hours of collection and underwent RNA extraction and SARS-CoV-2 testing by triplex RT-PCR. mNGS was performed by DNAse treatment, random primer cDNA synthesis, Nextera XT tagmentation, and high-depth Illumina sequencing. Reads underwent taxonomic classification by KrakenUniq, as implemented in viral-ngs.

Results

53 PUIs were included, 30 negative and 23 positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Among SARS-CoV-2 negative PUIs, 28 (93%) underwent clinical testing for alternative infections, and 8 (29%) tested positive for another respiratory virus. In all cases, mNGS identified the same virus (Table 1). In another 3 PUIs, mNGS identified two viruses that were not tested for and one that was missed by routine testing. No SARS-CoV-2 was detected by mNGS among RT-PCR negative PUIs. Among SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive PUIs, 18 (69%) underwent clinical testing for co-infections, and none were detected. mNGS did not identify any viral co-infections but did detect SARS-CoV-2 in all 23 PUIs.

Table 1: Molecular and Metagenomic Testing of Persons Under Investigation

Conclusion

Unbiased mNGS offers the powerful opportunity to streamline testing for PUIs by assessing for SARS-CoV-2 and alternative infections simultaneously; this technique can also be used to identify co-infections, but none were observed in our study population. Interestingly, many PUIs had no infection identified on routine testing or mNGS, which may reflect inadequate sampling, rapid virus clearance, or a non-viral process.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
67. SARS-CoV-2 Transmission: Preliminary Findings from a Household-based Study
Authors: Grijalva Carlos G , Zhu Yuwei , Halasa Natasha B , Kim Ahra , Rolfes Melissa A , Steffens Andrea , Reed Carrie , Talbot Helen
Published: January 2021

Background

Social distancing measures, such as shelter-in-place or stay-at-home orders, are recommended for control of community transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Few studies, however, have characterized the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infections in households.

Methods

We conducted a case-ascertained study of household transmission in Nashville, TN starting in April 2020, after recommendations to stay at home were enacted. Index cases were ambulatory patients identified through clinical RT-PCR testing at Vanderbilt walk-in-clinics dispersed across the Nashville metropolitan area. For this study, the index case was the first person presenting with respiratory or compatible symptoms in a household and who lived with at least one other household member. After informed consent was obtained, household members were remotely trained in the self-collection of nasal swabs and use of REDCap electronic questionnaires. Household members completed daily symptom diaries and collected daily nasal swabs for 14 days. Contact patterns within households before and after disease onset were ascertained. Nasal swab samples were tested using RT-PCR at an academic research laboratory.

Results

At the time of writing, 18 families were enrolled (including 18 index cases and 34 household members) with at least 1 follow-up nasal swab tested. The median age of index cases and household members was 37 years (IQR: 26–46) and 27 years (15–39), respectively. The median number of days from index patient onset of symptoms to first sample collected in the household was 4 (2–5). Before onset of symptoms, 83% of index cases spent >4 hours in the same room with at least one other household member, whereas after disease onset and diagnosis, 44% did. Among 34 non-index household members, 18 (53%) had a positive test during follow-up; the median number of days from index case’s symptoms onset to first positive detection in a household member was 4.5 (3–5) days. Interestingly, 13 (72%) of 18 secondary infections were detected within the first 3 days of follow-up, whereas 5 (28%) were detected during subsequent days.

Conclusion

These observations suggest that transmission of SARS-CoV-2 within households is high, with many infections detected during the initial days of study follow-up.

Disclosures

Carlos G. Grijalva, MD, MPH, AHRQ (Grant/Research Support)Campbell Alliance (Grant/Research Support)CDC (Grant/Research Support)FDA (Grant/Research Support)Merck (Consultant)NIH (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Pfizer (Consultant)Sanofi (Consultant)Sanofi (Grant/Research Support) Natasha B. Halasa, MD, MPH, Genentech (Other Financial or Material Support, I receive an honorarium for lectures - it’s a education grant, supported by genetech)Karius (Consultant)Moderna (Consultant)Quidel (Grant/Research Support, Research Grant or Support)Sanofi (Grant/Research Support, Research Grant or Support)
68. Active Monitoring of a Healthcare Worker Cohort During the COVID-19 Epidemic
Authors: Datta Rupak , Campbell Melissa , Wyllie Anne , Casanovas-Massana Arnau , Handoko Ryan , Sewanan Lorenzo , Naushad Nida , Simonov Michael , White Elizabeth , Valdez Jordan , Liu Feimei , Omer Saad , Cruz Charles Dela , Farhadian Shelli F , Ring Aaron , Iwasaki Akiko , Grubaugh Nathan , Martinello Richard A , Ko Albert I
Published: January 2021

Background

Initial CDC recommendations for passive monitoring of COVID-19 related symptoms among staff may not be sufficient in preventing the introduction and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare settings. We therefore implemented active monitoring for SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers (HCWs) at an academic medical center during the COVID-19 epidemic in northeast US.

Methods

We recruited a cohort of HCWs at Yale New Haven Hospital who worked in COVID-19 units and did not have COVID-19 related symptoms between March 28 and June 1, 2020. During follow-up, participants provided daily information on symptoms by responding to a web-based questionnaire, self-administered nasopharyngeal (NP) and saliva specimens every 3 days, and blood specimens every 14 days. We performed SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and an anti-spike protein IgM and IgG ELISA to identify virological and serological-confirmed infection, respectively.

Results

We enrolled 525 (13%) amongst 4,136 HCW of whom daily information on symptoms and NP, saliva, and blood specimens were obtained for 66% (of 13208), 42% (or 1977), 44% (of 2071) and 65% (of 1099), respectively, of the follow-up measurement points. We identified 16 (3.0% of 525) HCWs with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and an additional 12 (2.3% of 525) who were not tested by PCR or had negative PCR results but had serological evidence of infection. The overall cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 5.3% (28 of 525) amongst HCWs. Cases were not identified by hospital protocols for passive staff self-monitoring for symptoms. Amongst 16 PCR-confirmed cases, 9 (56%) of the 16 PCR-confirmed HCW had symptoms during or after the date of initial detection. We did not identify an epidemiological link between the 28 confirmed cases.

Conclusion

We found that a significant proportion (5.3%) of HCWs were infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 epidemic. In the setting of universal PPE use, infections were possibly acquired in the community rather than stemming from patient-HCW or HCW-HCW transmission. Passive monitoring of symptoms is inadequate in preventing introductions of SARS-CoV-2 into the healthcare setting due to asymptomatic and oligosymptomatic presentations.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
70. Lack of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Seroconversion After Prompt Identification and Cohorting of Sentinel sars-cov-2-positive Residents in a Skilled Nursing Facility
Authors: Bhattacharya Debika , Winnett Alexander , Fulcher Jennifer A , Sohn Linda , Calub Feliza , Lee-Chang Ian , Schwartzman William A , Beenhouwer David O , Vallone John , Graber Christopher J , Goetz Matthew B
Published: January 2021

Background

Despite numerous outbreaks, antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in residents of skilled nursing facilities (SNF) are not well described. We reviewed serological test results in a cohort of SNF residents who had been repetitively screened for SARS-CoV-2 infection by nasopharyngeal swab PCR.

Methods

In late March 2019, we identified symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive residents at a SNF. In response, all remaining SNF patients were serially screened, and all SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patients were transferred to the acute care hospital or cohorted in a separate COVID Recovery Unit (CRU) in the SNF. In early June, all SNF residents (SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive and negative) underwent serologic testing for SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S1/S2) IgG (DiaSorin). DiaSorin IgG-positive results for patients that were SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative were reflexed to nucleocapsid IgG (Abbott). Antibody testing occurred a median of 69 days (63–70 IQR) after PCR positivity.

Results

Nineteen SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive residents were identified from the outbreak and an additional 9 were transferred from the acute care hospital to the CRU; 1 died and 1 received convalescent plasma leaving 26 SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive residents, including 6 who were asymptomatic, that were eligible for serologic testing. Twenty-four of the 26 were positive for IgG by the DiaSorin assay; one seronegative resident was one of the asymptomatic residents. There were an additional 121 residents in the SNF whose SARS-CoV-2 PCR was negative at least once. Among these 121 SNF residents with negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR, all but two were seronegative by the Diasorin assay. The two seropositive residents had no nucleocapsid antibodies when reflex tested by the Abbott assay.

Conclusion

In a limited sample of SNF residents with SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity, the sensitivity of the Diasorin assay was 92% (24/26) and the specificity was 98% (119/121). None of the residents with negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR had confirmed positive antibody results using reflex testing (DiaSorin/Abbott). Despite high risk exposure in congregate living facilities, we found no evidence of additional SARS-CoV-2 exposure, reinforcing the importance of serial surveillance SARS-CoV-2 testing and early cohorting in SNF settings.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
71. Use of Intravenous Immunoglobulin Therapy Reduces Progression to Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19 Patients with Moderate to Severe Hypoxia
Authors: Sakoulas George , Geriak Matthew , Kullar Ravina , Greenwood Kris , Habib Mackenzie , Vyas Anuja , Ghafourian Mitra , Dintyala Venkata Naga Kiran , Haddad Fadi
Published: January 2021

Background

The majority of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality occurs in patients who progress to mechanical ventilation. Therefore, therapeutic interventions targeting the mitigation of this complication would markedly improve outcomes and reduce healthcare utilization.

Methods

Patients with COVID-19 from two hospitals in San Diego, California were randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive standard of care (SOC) plus intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) at 0.5 g/kg/day x 3 days with solumedrol 40 mg 30 minutes before infusion (IVIG group) versus SOC alone. The primary composite endpoint was receipt of mechanical ventilation or death before receiving ventilation. Patients were followed until discharge to home or up to 30 days from time of enrollment.

Results

Sixteen patients received IVIG plus SOC and 17 SOC alone. The median age was 54 years for SOC and 57 years for IVIG. Median time from hospital admission to study enrollment was 1 day (range 0–4) for SOC and 2 days (range 0–8) for IVIG. APACHE II scores and Charlson comorbidity indices were similar for IVIG and SOC (median 8 vs 7 and 2 for both, respectively). Seven SOC patients achieved the composite endpoint (6 ventilated, 1 death) versus 2 IVIG patients (2 ventilated), p=0.12, Fisher exact test. Among the subgroup with an estimated A-a gradient of >200 mm Hg at time of enrollment, the IVIG group showed a lower rate of progression to the composite endpoint (2/14 vs 7/12, p=0.04 Fisher exact test), shorter median hospital length (11 vs 24 days, p=0.001 Mann Whitney U), and shorter median intensive care unit (ICU) stay (3 vs 13 days, p=0.005 Mann Whitey U).

Conclusion

This small, prospective, randomized, open-label study showed that when administered to hypoxic non-ventilated COVID-19 patients with an A-a gradient of >200 mm Hg (corresponding to a requirement of 6 liters O2 via nasal cannula to achieve an SpO2 of 92%), IVIG significantly decreased the rates of progression to mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, and total hospital length of stay. A Phase 3 prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial is underway to further validate these findings.

Disclosures

George Sakoulas, MD, Octapharma (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)
74. Empiric Antibiotic Therapy and Community-onset Bacterial Co-infection in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Multi-hospital Cohort Study
Authors: Vaughn Valerie , Gandhi Tejal N , Petty Lindsay A , Patel Payal K , Prescott Hallie , Malani Anurag N , Ratz David , McLaughlin Elizabeth , Chopra Vineet , Flanders Scott A
Published: January 2021

Background

Antibiotic therapy has no known benefit against COVID-19, but is often initiated out of concern for concomitant bacterial infection. We sought to determine how common early empiric antibiotic therapy and community-onset bacterial co-infections are in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Methods

In this multi-center cohort study of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 discharged from 32 Michigan hospitals during the COVID-19 Michigan surge, we describe the use of early empiric antibiotic therapy (within the first two days) and prevalence of community-onset bacterial co-infection. Additionally, we assessed patient and hospital predictors of early empiric antibiotic using poison generalized estimating equation models.

Results

Between 3/10/2020 and 5/10/2020, data were collected on 951 COVID-19 PCR positive patients. Patient characteristics are described in Table 1. Nearly two thirds (62.4%, 593/951) of COVID-19 positive patients were prescribed early empiric antibiotic therapy, most of which (66.2%, 393/593) was directed at community-acquired pathogens. Across hospitals, the proportion of COVID-19 patients prescribed early empiric antibiotics varied from 40% to 90% (Figure 1). On multivariable analysis, patients were more likely to receive early empiric antibiotic therapy if they were older (adjusted rate ratio [ARR]: 1.01 [1.00–1.01] per year), required respiratory support (e.g., low flow oxygen, ARR: 1.16 [1.04–1.29]), had signs of a bacterial infection (e.g., lobar infiltrate, ARR: 1.17 [1.02–1.34]), or were admitted to a for-profit hospital (ARR: 1.27 [1.11–1.45]); patients admitted later were less likely to receive empiric antibiotics (April vs. March, ARR: 0.72 [0.62–0.84], Table 2). Community-onset bacterial co-infections were identified in 4.5% (43/951) of COVID-19 positive patients (2.4% [23/951] positive blood culture; 1.9% [18/951] positive respiratory culture).

Conclusion

Despite low prevalence of community-onset bacterial co-infections, patients hospitalized with COVID-19 often received early empiric antibiotic therapy. Given the potential harms from unnecessary antibiotic use, including additional personal protective equipment to administer antibiotics, judicious antibiotic use is key in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Disclosures

Tejal N. Gandhi, MD, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (Grant/Research Support) Scott A. Flanders, MD, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (Research Grant or Support)Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (Research Grant or Support)
75. Systemic Anticoagulation Use Is Independently Associated with Lower Mortality in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients with D-dimer Level Higher Than 5 Mcg/ml
Authors: Sung Joowhan , Bachour Rima
Published: January 2021

Background

Elevated D-dimer level is frequently seen in patients with COVID-19 and is associated with worse clinical outcomes. The potential benefit of systemic anticoagulation in COVID-19 has been suggested, but data lack on when to initiate anticoagulation. We aimed to identify a cut-off value of D-dimer at which anticoagulation may provide mortality benefit in COVID-19.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted for a cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at a 262-bed community hospital in a Washington D.C. suburb. Patients hospitalized between April 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020, with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were included if d-dimer levels were checked during hospitalization. Demographics, laboratory results, and hospital courses were reviewed. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between anticoagulation and in-hospital mortality, controlling for the d-dimer value. The association was examined in subgroups with different d-dimer cut-offs. Multivariable logistic regression models were developed to assess if the association between anticoagulation and mortality remains after adjusting for other mortality risk factors.

Results

101 patients were included in the study and 32 (31.7%) died during hospitalization. The average age was 61.2 ± 14.8 years old and 50.5% were males. Older age, male sex, hypertension, and peak d-dimer level were associated with mortality in univariable analysis (p< 0.05). For patients with peak d-dimer level >3mcg/mL, anticoagulation use was associated with lower mortality after controlling for the d-dimer level (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.06–0.97 p=0.045). This association weakened after adjusting for age, sex, and hypertension. (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.07–1.46, p=0.143). For patients with peak d-dimer level >5 mcg/mL, anticoagulation use was associated with lower mortality after controlling for the d-dimer level (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02–0.68, p=0.017) and this association remained significant after adjusting for age, sex, and hypertension (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01–0.86, p=0.035).

Conclusion

In hospitalized COVID-19 patients with a d-dimer level higher than 5 mcg/mL, anticoagulation use was independently associated with lower mortality.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
76. Effect of Early Administration of Systemic Corticosteroids on Outcomes in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia
Authors: Papamanoli Aikaterini , Kalogeropoulos Andreas , Fung Jenny , Nakamura Jacquelyn , Yoo Jeanwoo , Grewal Prabhjot , Karkala Nikitha , Abata Joshua , Tsui Stella T , Coritsidis Alexandra , Mojahedi Azad , Jacob Robin , Hotelling Jessica , Dhaliwal Simrat , Rawal Sahil , Marcos Luis
Published: January 2021

Background

Systemic corticosteroids (steroids) have been empirically used in acute respiratory distress syndrome, an entity also present in coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). Early steroids administration could accelerate resolution of symptoms and reduce intensive care unit (ICU) stay in these patients, but practice varies widely as evidence is scant.

Methods

We reviewed the records of 498 adults admitted to Stony Brook University Hospital, NY, from 3/1 to 4/15, 2020 with COVID-19 requiring high-ﬂow O2 (non-rebreather mask, Venturi mask with FiO2 >50%, or high-ﬂow nasal cannula). We excluded those (N=29) who received mechanical ventilation (MV) or died within 24h of admission. We followed patients until death or discharge. We compared outcomes between patients who received early steroids (i.e. prior to MV) and those who did not. We used adjusted Cox models to evaluate the composite of death or need for MV. We also evaluated healthcare resources utilization.

Results

Of 469 patients, 175 (37.3%) received steroids while on high flow O2. Table 1 summarizes the baseline characteristics. Patients who received steroids were more likely to have asthma, had slightly longer duration of symptoms, lower O2 saturation, higher NT-proBNP and lower IL-6 levels at baseline. In total, 228 patients (48.6%) reached the composite endpoint (123 died and 105 received MV). By 7 days, 32.5% of patients who received steroids died or were intubated vs. 44.8% of those who did not (log-rank P=0.008), Figure 1. In models adjusted for race, age, sex, comorbidities, baseline O2 saturation and procalcitonin, steroids reduced risk for death or MV by 44% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.56; 95%CI 0.42–0.76; P< 0.001). The effect was time-dependent with initial HR 0.34 (95%CI 0.21–0.56; P< 0.001) and daily attenuation by 10.2% (95%CI 1.7%–19.4%; P=0.017). Mortality at 7 and 14 days did not differ between groups (8.1% vs. 8.3% and 19.1% vs. 21.0%, respectively, log-rank P=0.75). Among discharged patients, length of hospital stay was longer, but ICU stay was shorter with steroids, Table 2.

Patient Characteristics According to Use of Early Steroids

Healthcare Resources Utilization According to Use of Early Steroids Among Discharged Patients

Conclusion

Early administration of steroids reduced primarily the need for MV in our high-risk COVID-19 patients, with shorter ICU utilization, at the expense of longer hospital stay. Further studies are needed to optimize the use of steroids in these patients.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
77. Long Term Care Facility Residents Hospitalized with COVID-19 Infection Present with Atypical Symptoms
Authors: Pop-Vicas Aurora E , Haleem Ambar , Osman Fauzia , Shirley Daniel , Striker Robert , Safdar Nasia
Published: January 2021

Background

Fever and cough are frequently reported in COVID-19 infections, although little is known about the subgroup of symptomatic patients who do not manifest these classic symptoms. We aimed to compare clinical manifestations and outcomes for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with typical vs. atypical presentations and identify risk factors for atypical COVID-19 presentations.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort of all patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infections during 3/13- 5/13/2020 at UW Health, a network of 3 acute-care hospitals in Midwest. We defined atypical cases as patients hospitalized for COVID-19 related reasons presenting without fever and cough and compared them in univariate analysis with patients manifesting both symptoms (controls). We identified independent risk factors for atypical COVID-19 presentations by logistic regression.

Results

Among the 163 patients hospitalized during the 60-day study frame, 39 (24%) had atypical presentations. Table 1 shows demographic, clinical manifestations, and outcomes of atypical vs. typical cases. On univariate analysis, atypical cases were more likely to be older, reside in a long-term-care facility (LTCF), have underlying diabetes mellitus, stroke, cardiac disease, and deny myalgias or dyspnea, despite having no significant difference in the prevalence of hypoxia or radiological lung infiltrates. Atypical cases also had a significantly higher Beta-Natriuretic-Peptide and lower C-Reactive-Protein, although other inflammatory markers were not significantly different. They were less likely to be admitted to the ICU, and more likely to die within 30 days, as older patients with respiratory failure and multiple comorbidities opted for comfort measures and less aggressive care. On multivariate analysis, LTCF residence was the only independent predictor for atypical status (Table 2).

Conclusion

LTCF residents are more likely to experience COVID-19 respiratory illness (hypoxia, pneumonia) without classic symptoms (fever, cough, myalgias, dyspnea). Given the excessive pandemic burden in the LTCF setting, timely recognition and diagnosis of these atypical, more subtle presentations is critical.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
80. COVID-19 Testing, Characteristics, and Outcomes Among People Living with HIV in an Integrated Health System
Authors: Chang Jennifer J , Bruxvoort Katia , Chen Lie Hong , Rodriguez Janelle , Akhavan Bobak , Hechter Rulin C
Published: January 2021

Background

Understanding attributes of COVID-19 clinical severity among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWH) is critical for risk stratification and treatment strategies, but data among this population are limited.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study among health plan members at Kaiser Permanente Southern California. We identified PLWH aged ≥ 18 years with a positive SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic test or COVID-19 diagnosis and compared COVID-19 outcomes to HIV-negative cases. Chart review was conducted to examine HIV viral suppression, most recent CD4+ counts, and antiretroviral regimens in the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis, as well as COVID-19 clinical presentation and outcomes.

Results

Between 3/1/20 and 5/31/20, 590 PLWH were tested for SARS-CoV-2, of which 47 (8.0%) were positive. An additional 14 patients had a clinical COVID-19 diagnosis, for a total of 61 cases identified among the population of 10,702 PLWH. Of these, 10 (16.4%) were hospitalized, 4 (6.6%) were admitted to ICU, 3 (6.4%) required invasive mechanical ventilation, and 1 (1.6%) died from COVID-19. In comparison, of the 12,921 HIV-negative individuals with COVID-19, 1975 (15.3%) were hospitalized, 494 (3.8%) were admitted to ICU, 444 (3.4%) required invasive mechanical ventilation, and 300 (2.3%) died from COVID-19. For 42 PLWH for whom chart review was complete (cases through 5/7/20), 52% were aged ≥ 50 years, and 98% were male. In the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis, 98% were virally suppressed (HIV RNA < 40 copies/mL). Most recent mean CD4+ count was 600 cells/mm3, and 4.8% had CD4+ ≤ 200 cells/mm3. Median CD4 count was similar between hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients. Antiretroviral regimens included NRTIs (98% of patients), NNRTIs (31%), PIs (26%), INSTIs (57%), and CCR5 inhibitors (2.3%). The most common presenting symptoms were cough (76% of patients), fever (71%), and shortness of breath (48%).

Table 1. SARS-CoV-2 testing, characteristics, and COVID-19 outcomes of HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected individuals at Kaiser Permanente Southern California, 3/1/20 to 5/31/20

Conclusion

In this population of patients with well-controlled HIV, risks of severe COVID-19 outcomes were similar to HIV-negative individuals, although sample sizes of PLWH with COVID-19 were small. Analyses adjusted for demographics and comorbidities are needed to assess risk of severe COVID-19 among PLWH and to determine clinical predictors in this population.

Disclosures

Katia Bruxvoort, PhD, MPH, GlaxoSmithKlein (Research Grant or Support) Lie Hong Chen, DrPH, Merk (Research Grant or Support)
82. Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children and non-sars-cov-2 Infections: A Retrospective Cross-sectional Study
Authors: Campbell Jeffrey , Roberts Jordan E , Dubois Melanie , Li Caitlin , Sandora Thomas , Lamb Gabriella S
Published: January 2021

Background

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) has been described in areas with high Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) burden. Clinical features included in the MIS-C case definition (e.g fever, elevated inflammatory markers) overlap with features of other childhood infections. The prevalence of non-SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients evaluated for MIS-C has not been described.

Patients evaluated for MIS-C, and therapies administered.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study of patients < 21 years of age admitted to a freestanding children’s hospital in Boston, MA from May 14-June 6, 2020 who were evaluated for MIS-C. We identified patients undergoing Rheumatology consultation and echocardiogram (per the hospital’s protocol for evaluating children with suspicion for MIS-C). We tabulated patients evaluated for MIS-C found to have non-SARS-CoV-2 infection detected on standard microbiologic testing.

Results

39 patients met inclusion criteria. Median age was 5 years (IQR 2–12 years). Of evaluated patients, 19/39 (49%) were diagnosed with MIS-C according to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health case definition; 10/39 (26%) required ICU admission. Non-SARS-CoV-2 infections were identified in 7/39 (18%), of whom 5/7 (71%) had bacterial infections, 1/7 (14%) had viral infection, and 1/7 (14%) had viral and bacterial co-infections; no fungal or parasitic infections were identified. Of patients diagnosed with MIS-C, 2/19 (11%) were found to have non-SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additionally, 5/19 (26%) had a positive polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 at time of MIS-C diagnosis, of whom 4/5 (80%) received remdesivir. Of patients evaluated for MIS-C, 17/39 (44%) received intravenous immune globulin, 14/39 (36%) aspirin, 4/39 (10%) anakinra, and 14/39 (36%) methylprednisolone. Additionally, 21/39 (54%) received antibacterial and 5/39 (13%) antiviral therapy (Table).

Conclusion

In this study, non-SARS-CoV-2 infections were diagnosed in 18% of children evaluated for MIS-C. Clinicians should consider alternative or concomitant infectious diagnoses in patients undergoing MIS-C evaluation. Research is needed to identify clinical and laboratory features that may distinguish patients with MIS-C from those with non-SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
83. A Descriptive Analysis of a Multi-disciplinary Approach to Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Within an Infectious Diseases Clinic
Authors: Blevins Sarah R , Stivers Tiffany , Sabitus Kathryn , Weeks Ryan , Porterfield J Zachary , Thornton Alice
Published: January 2021

Background

Opioid overdose is the leading cause of injury-related death in the US. Kentucky ranks in the top 5 states for opioid overdose deaths. The rate of injection drug use-associated infections (IDU-AI) has risen; the University of Kentucky Infectious Diseases division (UKID) treated 401 endocarditis cases in 2018, of which 73% were IDU-AI. To curb overdose deaths, ease financial burden on healthcare, and improve patient outcomes, patients need tools for recovery from opioid use disorder (OUD). Access to OUD treatment in Kentucky and much of the US is limited. Poverty, unemployment, and legal issues are barriers.

Methods

UKID implemented a multi-disciplinary approach to expand access to medication assisted treatment (MAT). This is an ongoing study. Any patient ≥18 years old with IDU-AI and OUD is eligible for enrollment unless pregnant or incarcerated. At enrollment and at three additional time points, patients complete both a study specific and Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) survey. Patients may start MAT and mental health counseling with UKID or be referred elsewhere and are eligible for transportation assistance and medical case management.

Results

To date, there have been 127 referrals. Of these, 87 (69%) were eligible and 54 enrolled (62% of eligible). Primary IVDU-AI includes HIV (n=4; 7%), HCV (n=5; 9%), HIV/HCV (n=3; 6%), endocarditis (n=32; 59%), and other (n=10; 19%). Patients are 48% male (n=26) and 91% white (n=91) with a median age of 34 years (IQR: 16); 35% are receiving MAT (n=19) with 14.8% (n=8) managed by UKID. Other service data are available for 51 patients. Naloxone was dispensed to 45 (88%) patients, 24 (47%) received relapse prevention services, 13 (25%) engaged in peer support, 9 (18%) participated in self-help groups, and 10 (20%) received transportation aid.

Conclusion

Increasing engagement in MAT and wrap-around services is an important touchpoint for OUD. We present a comprehensive program to achieve this for patients who would otherwise be discharged without follow-up for OUD. This program shows proof of concept that patients can be engaged in MAT by ID providers. Ongoing analysis will include longitudinal review of patient progress and outcomes, including hospital readmission, and a study to determine patients’ perceived impact on their quality of life.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
89. Construction of an Electronic Algorithm to Efficiently Target Antimicrobial Stewardship Efforts for Adults Hospitalized with Community-acquired Pneumonia
Authors: Lautenbach Ebbing , Hamilton Keith W , Grundmeier Robert , Neuhauser Melinda M , Hicks Lauri , Jaskowiak Anne , Cressman Leigh , James Tony , Omorogbe Jacqueline , Frager Nicole , Menon Muida , Kratz Ellen , Gerber Jeffrey
Published: January 2021

Background

Although antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) have had success in curtailing inappropriate antibiotic use, they remain time- and labor-intensive. To expand the reach of ASPs, approaches to more efficiently target ASP efforts are urgently needed. We developed and validated an electronic algorithm to identify inappropriate antibiotic use in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).

Methods

Within the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (HUP) and Penn Presbyterian Medical Center (PPMC), we used ICD-10 diagnostic codes to identify inpatient patient encounters for pneumonia between 3/15/17 – 3/14/18 for which patients received a systemic antibiotic in the first 48 hours of hospitalization. Exclusion criteria included transfer from another facility, intensive care unit admission or death in first 48 hours, immunocompromising condition, or specific comorbidities. We randomly selected 300 subjects (150-HUP, 150-PPMC). Inappropriateness of antibiotic use based on chart review served as the basis for assessment of the electronic algorithm which was constructed using only data in the electronic health record (EHR). Criteria for appropriate prescribing, choice of antibiotic, and duration of therapy were based on established hospital and IDSA guidelines.

Results

Of 300 subjects, median age was 60, 53% were female, and median hospital stay was 4.25 days. Of the 300 subjects, 237 (79%) were admitted to general medicine, hospitalist, family medicine, or geriatrics services. On chart review, 295 (98%) subjects were correctly diagnosed with CAP. Of these subjects, the choice of initial antibiotic(s) was appropriate in 263 (89%). Of these 263 subjects, 222 (84%) had an appropriate duration of therapy. Test characteristics of the EHR algorithm (compared to chart review) are noted in the Table.

Conclusion

An electronic algorithm for identifying inappropriate prescribing, antibiotic choice, and duration is highly accurate for patients hospitalized for CAP. This algorithm could be used to efficiently target ASP initiatives. The impact of interventions based on this algorithm should be tested in future studies.

Test Characteristics of Electronic Algorithm for Inappropriate Prescribing, Agent, and Duration

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures
90. Incidence and Risk Factors for Inappropriate Use of Non-culture Based Fungal Assays: Implication for Diagnostic Stewardship
Authors: Ito Hiroshi , Okamoto Koh , Yamashita Marie , Yamamoto Shinya , Kanno Yoshiaki , Jubishi Daisuke , Ikeda Mahoko , Harada Sohei , Okugawa Shu , Moriya Kyoji
Published: January 2021

Background

Culture-based diagnostic tests are the gold standard for diagnosing invasive fungal diseases (IFDs). Because these tests have low sensitivity, non-culture-based fungal assays (NCBFAs) have been used increasingly to help diagnose IFDs. However, little is known about inappropriate use of NCBFAs. We aimed to investigate inappropriate use of NCBFAs in a tertiary academic hospital in Tokyo, Japan.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent testing with beta-D glucan (BDG) between January and March 2018, or galactomannan antigen (GMA) or cryptococcal antigen (CRAG) between January and June 2018. Patients who had received hematopoietic stem cell or solid organ transplantations were excluded. Appropriateness was assessed according to the previously published study. We compared patients with appropriate and inappropriate use of NCBFAs. Risk factors for inappropriate use were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

Of 1,140 patients (BDG, 1,009; GMA 273; CRAG, 310) who underwent tests, 470 patients (BDG, 394; GMA, 138; CRAG, 164) were included in this study. Four hundred thirty-eight patients (93.2%) were aged 18 or older. About 80% of NCBFAs (BDG, 334 patients [74.8%]; GMA, 117 patients [74.8%]; CRAG, 146 patients [89.0%]) were deemed inappropriate. The factors associated with inappropriate NCBFAs use included specialties of ordering physicians, risk factors for fungal infections, and recommendation from infectious disease physicians (Table). Sixty-four patients (13.6%) underwent three inappropriate NCBFAs simultaneously. Furthermore, during the study period, 408 patients (35.8%) with inappropriate NCBFAs underwent the same assays repeatedly during the study period; 643 times for BDG, 163 times for GMA, and 192 times for CRAG.

The Factors Associated with Inappropriate Use of Non-Culture Based Fungal Assays

Conclusion

We found a large proportion of NCBFAs were deemed inappropriate and it was mostly driven by ordering physicians who generally care for transplant patients. Because inappropriate use of NCBFAs could lead to additional inappropriate tests and treatment with substantial costs to patients and health systems, diagnostic stewardship targeting NCBFAs is urgently needed.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures