Spatial Inequities in COVID-19 Testing, Positivity, Confirmed Cases, and Mortality in 3 U.S. Cities: An Ecological Study: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 174, No 7

Background: Preliminary evidence has shown inequities in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)–related cases and deaths in the United States. Objective: To explore the emergence of spatial inequities in COVID-19 testing, positivity, confirmed cases, and mortality in New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago during the first 6 months of the pandemic. Design: Ecological, observational study at the ZIP code tabulation area (ZCTA) level from March to September 2020. Setting: Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia. Participants: All populated ZCTAs in the 3 cities. Measurements: Outcomes were ZCTA-level COVID-19 testing, positivity, confirmed cases, and mortality cumulatively through the end of September 2020. Predictors were the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index and its 4 domains, obtained from the 2014–2018 American Community Survey. The spatial autocorrelation of COVID-19 outcomes was examined by using global and local Moran I statistics, and estimated associations were examined by using spatial conditional autoregressive negative binomial models. Results: Spatial clusters of high and low positivity, confirmed cases, and mortality were found, co-located with clusters of low and high social vulnerability in the 3 cities. Evidence was also found for spatial inequities in testing, positivity, confirmed cases, and mortality. Specifically, neighborhoods with higher social vulnerability had lower testing rates and higher positivity ratios, confirmed case rates, and mortality rates. Limitations: The ZCTAs are imperfect and heterogeneous geographic units of analysis. Surveillance data were used, which may be incomplete. Conclusion: Spatial inequities exist in COVID-19 testing, positivity, confirmed cases, and mortality in 3 large U.S. cities. Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health.

The Effects of Four Doses of Vitamin D Supplements on Falls in Older Adults: A Response-Adaptive, Randomized Clinical Trial: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 174, No 2

Background: Vitamin D supplementation may prevent falls in older persons, but evidence is inconsistent, possibly because of dosage differences. Objective: To compare the effects of 4 doses of vitamin D3 supplements on falls. Design: 2-stage Bayesian, response-adaptive, randomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02166333) Setting: 2 community-based research units. Participants: 688 participants, aged 70 years and older, with elevated fall risk and a serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25-(OH)D] level of 25 to 72.5 nmol/L. Intervention: 200 (control), 1000, 2000, or 4000 IU of vitamin D3 per day. During the dose-finding stage, participants were randomly assigned to 1 of the 4 vitamin D3 doses, and the best noncontrol dose for preventing falls was determined. After dose finding, participants previously assigned to receive noncontrol doses received the best dose, and new enrollees were randomly assigned to receive 200 IU/d or the best dose. Measurements: Time to first fall or death over 2 years (primary outcome). Results: During the dose-finding stage, the primary outcome rates were higher for the 2000- and 4000-IU/d doses than for the 1000-IU/d dose, which was selected as the best dose (posterior probability of being best, 0.90). In the confirmatory stage, event rates were not significantly different between participants with experience receiving the best dose (events and observation time limited to the period they were receiving 1000 IU/d; n = 308) and those randomly assigned to receive 200 IU/d (n = 339) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.15]; P = 0.54). Analysis of falls with adverse outcomes suggested greater risk in the experience-with-best-dose group versus the 200-IU/d group (serious fall: HR, 1.87 [CI, 1.03 to 3.41]; fall with hospitalization: HR, 2.48 [CI, 1.13 to 5.46]). Limitations: The control group received 200 IU of vitamin D3 per day, not a placebo. Dose finding ended before the prespecified thresholds for dose suspension and dose selection were reached. Conclusion: In older persons with elevated fall risk and low serum 25-(OH)D levels, vitamin D3 supplementation at doses of 1000 IU/d or higher did not prevent falls compared with 200 IU/d. Several analyses raised safety concerns about vitamin D3 doses of 1000 IU/d or higher. Primary Funding Source: National Institute on Aging.

Characteristics of COVID-19 in Homeless Shelters: A Community-Based Surveillance Study: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 174, No 1

Background: Homeless shelters are a high-risk setting for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission because of crowding and shared hygiene facilities. Objective: To investigate SARS-CoV-2 case counts across several adult and family homeless shelters in a major metropolitan area. Design: Cross-sectional, community-based surveillance study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04141917) Setting: 14 homeless shelters in King County, Washington. Participants: A total of 1434 study encounters were done in shelter residents and staff, regardless of symptoms. Intervention: 2 strategies were used for SARS-CoV-2 testing: routine surveillance and contact tracing (“surge testing”) events. Measurements: The primary outcome measure was test positivity rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection at shelters, determined by dividing the number of positive cases by the total number of participant encounters, regardless of symptoms. Sociodemographic, clinical, and virologic variables were assessed as correlates of viral positivity. Results: Among 1434 encounters, 29 (2% [95% CI, 1.4% to 2.9%]) cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were detected across 5 shelters. Most (n = 21 [72.4%]) were detected during surge testing events rather than routine surveillance, and most (n = 21 [72.4% {CI, 52.8% to 87.3%}]) were asymptomatic at the time of sample collection. Persons who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 were more frequently aged 60 years or older than those without SARS-CoV-2 (44.8% vs. 15.9%). Eighty-six percent of persons with positive test results slept in a communal space rather than in a private or shared room. Limitation: Selection bias due to voluntary participation and a relatively small case count. Conclusion: Active surveillance and surge testing were used to detect multiple cases of asymptomatic and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in homeless shelters. The findings suggest an unmet need for routine viral testing outside of clinical settings for homeless populations. Primary Funding Source: Gates Ventures.

Promoting Better Clinical Trials and Drug Information as Public Health Interventions for the COVID-19 Emergency in Italy

Dynamics and Correlation Among Viral Positivity, Seroconversion, and Disease Severity in COVID-19: A Retrospective Study: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 174, No 4

Background: The understanding of viral positivity and seroconversion during the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To describe patterns of viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity and evaluate their correlations with seroconversion and disease severity. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: 3 designated specialty care centers for COVID-19 in Wuhan, China. Participants: 3192 adult patients with COVID-19. Measurements: Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data. Results: Among 12 780 reverse transcriptase PCR tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 that were done, 24.0% had positive results. In 2142 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, the viral positivity rate peaked within the first 3 days. The median duration of viral positivity was 24.0 days (95% CI, 18.9 to 29.1 days) in critically ill patients and 18.0 days (CI, 16.8 to 19.1 days) in noncritically ill patients. Being critically ill was an independent risk factor for longer viral positivity (hazard ratio, 0.700 [CI, 0.595 to 0.824]; P < 0.001). In patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, the IgM-positive rate was 19.3% in the first week, peaked in the fifth week (81.5%), and then decreased steadily to around 55% within 9 to 10 weeks. The IgG-positive rate was 44.6% in the first week, reached 93.3% in the fourth week, and then remained high. Similar antibody responses were seen in clinically diagnosed cases. Serum inflammatory markers remained higher in critically ill patients. Among noncritically ill patients, a higher proportion of those with persistent viral positivity had low IgM titers (<100 AU/mL) during the entire course compared with those with short viral positivity. Limitation: Retrospective study and irregular viral and serology testing. Conclusion: The rate of viral PCR positivity peaked within the initial few days. Seroconversion rates peaked within 4 to 5 weeks. Dynamic laboratory index changes corresponded well to clinical signs, the recovery process, and disease severity. Low IgM titers (<100 AU/mL) are an independent risk factor for persistent viral positivity. Primary Funding Source: None.

Every Body Counts: Measuring Mortality From the COVID-19 Pandemic

As of mid-August 2020, more than 170 000 U.S. residents have died of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, the true number of deaths resulting from COVID-19, both directly and indirectly, is likely to be much higher. The proper attribution of deaths to this pandemic has a range of societal, legal, mortuary, and public health consequences. This article discusses the current difficulties of disaster death attribution and describes the strengths and limitations of relying on death counts from death certificates, estimations of indirect deaths, and estimations of excess mortality. Improving the tabulation of direct and indirect deaths on death certificates will require concerted efforts and consensus across medical institutions and public health agencies. In addition, actionable estimates of excess mortality will require timely access to standardized and structured vital registry data, which should be shared directly at the state level to ensure rapid response for local governments. Correct attribution of direct and indirect deaths and estimation of excess mortality are complementary goals that are critical to our understanding of the pandemic and its effect on human life.

Reduced In-Person and Increased Telehealth Outpatient Visits During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Obesity and COVID-19 in New York City: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Cloth Masks May Prevent Transmission of COVID-19: An Evidence-Based, Risk-Based Approach

Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: Synopsis of the 2020 American Diabetes Association's Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes Clinical Guideline

Description: The American Diabetes Association (ADA) updates the Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes annually to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payers, and other interested parties with evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of diabetes. Methods: To develop the 2020 Standards, the ADA Professional Practice Committee, comprising physicians, adult and pediatric endocrinologists, diabetes educators, registered dietitians, epidemiologists, pharmacists, and public health experts, continuously searched MEDLINE (English language only) from 15 October 2018 through August–September 2019 for pertinent studies, including high-quality trials that addressed pharmacologic management of type 2 diabetes. The committee selected and reviewed the studies, developed the recommendations, and solicited feedback from the larger clinical community. Recommendations: This synopsis focuses on guidance relating to the pharmacologic treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes. Recommendations address oral and noninsulin injectable therapies, insulin treatment, and combination injectable therapies. Results of recent large trials with cardiovascular and renal outcomes are emphasized.