Differentiation of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and postacute sequelae by standard clinical laboratory measurements in the RECOVER cohort

Short Summary

This summary was prepared by the RECOVER Initiative.

Publication Details

DOI: 10.7326/M24-0737

Abstract

Background: There are currently no validated clinical biomarkers of postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC).

Objective: To investigate clinical laboratory markers of SARS-CoV-2 and PASC.

Design: Propensity score-weighted linear regression models were fitted to evaluate differences in mean laboratory measures by prior infection and PASC index (≥12 vs. 0). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05172024).

Setting: 83 enrolling sites.

Participants: RECOVER-Adult cohort participants with or without SARS-CoV-2 infection with a study visit and laboratory measures 6 months after the index date (or at enrollment if >6 months after the index date). Participants were excluded if the 6-month visit occurred within 30 days of reinfection.

Measurements: Participants completed questionnaires and standard clinical laboratory tests.

Results: Among 10 094 participants, 8746 had prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, 1348 were uninfected, 1880 had a PASC index of 12 or higher, and 3351 had a PASC index of zero. After propensity score adjustment, participants with prior infection had a lower mean platelet count (265.9 × 10⁹ cells/L [95% CI, 264.5 to 267.4 × 10⁹ cells/L]) than participants without known prior infection (275.2 × 10⁹ cells/L [CI, 268.5 to 282.0 × 10⁹ cells/L]), as well as higher mean hemoglobin A_1c (HbA_1c) level (5.58% [CI, 5.56% to 5.60%] vs. 5.46% [CI, 5.40% to 5.51%]) and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (81.9 mg/g [CI, 67.5 to 96.2 mg/g] vs. 43.0 mg/g [CI, 25.4 to 60.6 mg/g]), although differences were of modest clinical significance. The difference in HbA_1c levels was attenuated after participants with preexisting diabetes were excluded. Among participants with prior infection, no meaningful differences in mean laboratory values were found between those with a PASC index of 12 or higher and those with a PASC index of zero.

Limitation: Whether differences in laboratory markers represent consequences of or risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection could not be determined.

Conclusion: Overall, no evidence was found that any of the 25 routine clinical laboratory values assessed in this study could serve as a clinically useful biomarker of PASC.

Primary funding source: National Institutes of Health.

Authors

Kristine M Erlandson, Linda N Geng, Caitlin A Selvaggi, Tanayott Thaweethai, Peter Chen, Nathan B Erdmann, Jason D Goldman, Timothy J Henrich, Mady Hornig, Elizabeth W Karlson, Stuart D Katz, C Kim, Sushma K Cribbs, Adeyinka O Laiyemo, Rebecca Letts, Janet Y Lin, Jai Marathe, Sairam Parthasarathy, Thomas F Patterson, Brittany D Taylor, Elizabeth R Duffy, Monika Haack, Boris Julg, Gabrielle Maranga, Carla Hernandez, Nora G Singer, Jenny Han, Priscilla Pemu, Hassan Brim, Hassan Ashktorab, Alexander W Charney, Juan Wisnivesky, Jenny J Lin, Helen Y Chu, Minjoung Go, Upinder Singh, Emily B Levitan, Paul A Goepfert, Janko Ž Nikolich, Harvey Hsu, Michael J Peluso, J Daniel Kelly, Megumi J Okumura, Valerie J Flaherman, John G Quigley, Jerry A Krishnan, Mary Beth Scholand, Rachel Hess, Torri D Metz, Maged M Costantine, Dwight J Rouse, Barbara S Taylor, Mark P Goldberg, Gailen D Marshall, Jeremy Wood, David Warren, Leora Horwitz, Andrea S Foulkes, Grace A McComsey, RECOVER-Adult Cohort

Keywords

Adult; Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Biomarkers/blood; Cohort Studies; COVID-19/complications/diagnosis/blood; Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome; Propensity Score; SARS-CoV-2