Search

We assessed the association between cirrhosis and severe COVID-19-related outcomes among people with laboratory-diagnosed COVID-19 infection in British Columbia, Canada. We used data from the British Columbia (BC) COVID-19 Cohort, a population-based cohort that integrates data on all individuals tested for COVID-19, with data on hospitalizations, medical visits, emergency room visits, prescription drugs, chronic conditions, and deaths in the Canadian province of BC. We included all individuals aged ≥18 who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction from 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the associations of cirrhosis status with COVID-19-related hospitalization and with ICU admission. Of the 162,509 individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were included in the analysis, 768 (0.5%) had cirrhosis. In the multivariable models, cirrhosis was associated with increased odds of hospitalization (aOR = 1.97, 95% CI: 1.58-2.47) and ICU admission (aOR = 3.33, 95% CI: 2.56-4.35). In the analyses stratified by age, we found that the increased odds of ICU admission among people with cirrhosis were present in all the assessed age-groups. Cirrhosis is associated with increased odds of hospitalization and ICU admission among COVID-19 patients.

Purpose: The British Columbia COVID-19 Cohort (BCC19C) was developed from an innovative, dynamic surveillance platform and is accessed/analyzed through a cloud-based environment. The platform integrates recently developed provincial COVID-19 datasets (refreshed daily) with existing administrative holdings and provincial registries (refreshed weekly/monthly). The platform/cohort were established to inform the COVID-19 response in near "real-time" and to answer more in-depth epidemiologic questions., Participants: The surveillance platform facilitates the creation of large, up-to-date analytic cohorts of people accessing COVID-19 related services and their linked medical histories. The program of work focused on creating/analyzing these cohorts is referred to as the BCC19C. The administrative/registry datasets integrated within the platform are not specific to COVID-19 and allow for selection of "control" individuals who have not accessed COVID-19 services., Findings to Date: The platform has vastly broadened the range of COVID-19 analyses possible, and outputs from BCC19C analyses have been used to create dashboards, support routine reporting and contribute to the peer-reviewed literature. Published manuscripts (total of 15 as of July, 2023) have appeared in high-profile publications, generated significant media attention and informed policy and programming. In this paper, we conducted an analysis to identify sociodemographic and health characteristics associated with receiving SARS-CoV-2 laboratory testing, testing positive, and being fully vaccinated. Other published analyses have compared the relative clinical severity of different variants of concern; quantified the high "real-world" effectiveness of vaccines in addition to the higher risk of myocarditis among younger males following a 2nd dose of an mRNA vaccine; developed and validated an algorithm for identifying long-COVID patients in administrative data; identified a higher rate of diabetes and healthcare utilization among people with long-COVID; and measured the impact of the pandemic on mental health, among other analyses., Future Plans: While the global COVID-19 health emergency has ended, our program of work remains robust. We plan to integrate additional datasets into the surveillance platform to further improve and expand covariate measurement and scope of analyses. Our analyses continue to focus on retrospective studies of various aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as prospective assessment of post-acute COVID-19 conditions and other impacts of the pandemic., Competing Interests: NJ reported receiving personal fees from Gilead and AbbVie outside the submitted work. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wilton, Abdulmenan, Chong, Becerra, Najmul Hussain, Harrigan, Velásquez García, Naveed, Sbihi, Smolina, Taylor, Adhikari, Zandy, Setayeshgar, Li, Abdia, Binka, Rasali, Rose, Coss, Flatt, Mussavi Rizi and Janjua.)

Objectives: We aimed to estimate the rate of myocarditis after the messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 booster vaccination by vaccine type, age, and sex., Methods: We used data from the British Columbia COVID-19 Cohort, a population-based cohort surveillance platform. The exposure was a booster dose of an mRNA vaccine. The outcome was diagnosis of myocarditis during hospitalization or an emergency department visit within 7-21 days of booster vaccination., Results: The overall rate of myocarditis was lower for the booster dose (6.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.50-10.75) than the second dose (17.97, 95% CI: 13.78-23.04); (Rate ratio booster vs dose-2  = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.17-0.61). This difference was more apparent for the mRNA-1273 vaccine type. After the second dose, the myocarditis rate in males was significantly lower for BNT162b2 than mRNA-1273 overall and among those aged 18-39 years. In contrast, after the booster dose, no significant differences between myocarditis and vaccine type was observed overall or within the specific age groups among males or females., Conclusion: Myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is a rare event. A lower absolute risk of myocarditis was observed after a booster dose of mRNA vaccine than the primary series second dose., Competing Interests: Declarations of competing interest NZJ participated in advisory boards and has spoken for AbbVie and Gilead, not related to current work. The other authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Importance: SARS-CoV-2 infection may lead to acute and chronic sequelae. Emerging evidence suggests a higher risk of diabetes after infection, but population-based evidence is still sparse., Objective: To evaluate the association between COVID-19 infection, including severity of infection, and risk of diabetes., Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study was conducted in British Columbia, Canada, from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021, using the British Columbia COVID-19 Cohort, a surveillance platform that integrates COVID-19 data with population-based registries and administrative data sets. Individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were included. Those who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (ie, those who were exposed) were matched on sex, age, and collection date of RT-PCR test at a 1:4 ratio to those who tested negative (ie, those who were unexposed). Analysis was conducted January 14, 2022, to January 19, 2023., Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 infection., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was incident diabetes (insulin dependent or not insulin dependent) identified more than 30 days after the specimen collection date for the SARS-CoV-2 test with a validated algorithm based on medical visits, hospitalization records, chronic disease registry, and prescription drugs for diabetes management. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling was performed to evaluate the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and diabetes risk. Stratified analyses were performed to assess the interaction of SARS-CoV-2 infection with diabetes risk by sex, age, and vaccination status., Results: Among 629 935 individuals (median [IQR] age, 32 [25.0-42.0] years; 322 565 females [51.2%]) tested for SARS-CoV-2 in the analytic sample, 125 987 individuals were exposed and 503 948 individuals were unexposed. During the median (IQR) follow-up of 257 (102-356) days, events of incident diabetes were observed among 608 individuals who were exposed (0.5%) and 1864 individuals who were not exposed (0.4%). The incident diabetes rate per 100 000 person-years was significantly higher in the exposed vs nonexposed group (672.2 incidents; 95% CI, 618.7-725.6 incidents vs 508.7 incidents; 95% CI, 485.6-531.8 incidents; P < .001). The risk of incident diabetes was also higher in the exposed group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.17; 95% CI, 1.06-1.28) and among males (adjusted HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.06-1.40). The risk of diabetes was higher among people with severe disease vs those without COVID-19, including individuals admitted to the intensive care unit (HR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.98-5.48) or hospital (HR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.87-3.15). The fraction of incident diabetes cases attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection was 3.41% (95% CI, 1.20%-5.61%) overall and 4.75% (95% CI, 1.30%-8.20%) among males., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a higher risk of diabetes and may have contributed to a 3% to 5% excess burden of diabetes at a population level.

Background: A major goal of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is to prevent severe outcomes (hospitalizations and deaths). We estimated the effectiveness of messenger RNA (mRNA) and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines against severe outcomes in 4 Canadian provinces between December 2020 and September 2021., Methods: We conducted this multiprovincial, retrospective, test-negative study among community-dwelling adults aged ≥18 years in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and Manitoba using linked provincial databases and a common study protocol. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate province-specific vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization and/or death. Estimates were pooled using random-effects models., Results: We included 2 508 296 tested participants, with 31 776 COVID-19 hospitalizations and 5842 deaths. Vaccine effectiveness was 83% after a first dose and 98% after a second dose against both hospitalization and death (separately). Against severe outcomes, effectiveness was 87% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71%-94%) ≥84 days after a first dose of mRNA vaccine, increasing to 98% (95% CI, 96%-99%) ≥112 days after a second dose. Vaccine effectiveness against severe outcomes for ChAdOx1 was 88% (95% CI, 75%-94%) ≥56 days after a first dose, increasing to 97% (95% CI, 91%-99%) ≥56 days after a second dose. Lower 1-dose effectiveness was observed for adults aged ≥80 years and those with comorbidities, but effectiveness became comparable after a second dose. Two doses of vaccines provided very high protection for both homologous and heterologous schedules and against Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants., Conclusions: Two doses of mRNA or ChAdOx1 vaccine provide excellent protection against severe outcomes., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. C. H. R. has received an unrestricted research grant from Pfizer for an unrelated study. S. M. M. received unrestricted research grants from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Merck, Pfizer, Roche-Assurex, and Sanofi Pasteur for unrelated studies and is/was a member of advisory boards for GSK, Merck, Sanofi Pasteur, and Seqirus and reports consulting fees from these companies. M. K. received contracts to identify severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–infected blood donors from Abcellera and to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 serology tests from Siemens; both unrelated to this study. G. D. S. received a grant from Pfizer for a meningococcal antibody seroprevalence study not related to this study with payments to his institution. M. T. reports grants or contracts from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Ontario Ministry of Health unrelated to this work and consulting fees from the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health and Green Shield Canada. N. Z. J. reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie and participation on a data and safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2022.)

Baricitinib and imatinib are considered therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but their ultimate clinical impact remains to be elucidated, so our objective is to determine whether these kinase inhibitors provide benefit when added to standard care in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Phase-2, open-label, randomized trial with a pick-the-winner design conducted from September 2020 to June 2021 in a single Spanish center. Hospitalized adults with COVID-19 pneumonia and a symptom duration ≤10 days were assigned to 3 arms: imatinib (400 mg qd, 7 days) plus standard-care, baricitinib (4 mg qd, 7 days) plus standard-care, or standard-care alone. Primary outcome was time to clinical improvement (discharge alive or a reduction of 2 points in an ordinal scale of clinical status) compared on a day-by-day basis to identify differences ≥15% between the most and least favorable groups. Secondary outcomes included oxygenation and ventilatory support requirements, additional therapies administered, all-cause mortality, and safety. One hundred and sixty-five patients analyzed. Predefined criteria for selection of the most advantageous arm were met for baricitinib, but not for imatinib. However, no statistically significant differences were observed in formal analysis, but a trend toward better results in patients receiving baricitinib was found compared to standard care alone (hazard ratio [HR] for clinical improvement: 1.41, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.96-2.06; HR for discontinuing oxygen: 1.46, 95% CI: 0.94-2.28). No differences were found regarding additional therapies administered or safety. Baricitinib plus standard care showed better results for hospitalized COVID-19 patients, being the most advantageous therapeutic strategy among those proposed in this exploratory clinical trial., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objectives: With the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, there is a need for population-based studies to assess risk factors for COVID-19-related hospitalization after vaccination and how they differ from unvaccinated individuals., Methods: We used data from the British Columbia COVID-19 Cohort, a population-based cohort that includes all individuals (aged ≥18 years) who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction from January 1, 2021 (after the start of vaccination program) to December 31, 2021. We used multivariable logistic regression models to assess COVID-19-related hospitalization risk by vaccination status and age group among confirmed COVID-19 cases., Results: Of the 162,509 COVID-19 cases included in the analysis, 8,546 (5.3%) required hospitalization. Among vaccinated individuals, an increased odds of hospitalization with increasing age was observed for older age groups, namely those aged 50-59 years (odds ratio [OR] = 2.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.01-4.33), 60-69 years (OR = 4.82, 95% CI: 3.29, 7.07), 70-79 years (OR = 11.92, 95% CI: 8.02, 17.71), and ≥80 years (OR = 24.25, 95% CI: 16.02, 36.71). However, among unvaccinated individuals, there was a graded increase in odds of hospitalization with increasing age, starting at age group 30-39 years (OR = 2.14, 95% CI: 1.90, 2.41) to ≥80 years (OR = 41.95, 95% CI: 35.43, 49.67). Also, comparing all the age groups to the youngest, the observed magnitude of association was much higher among unvaccinated individuals than vaccinated ones., Conclusion: Alongside a number of comorbidities, our findings showed a strong association between age and COVID-19-related hospitalization, regardless of vaccination status. However, age-related hospitalization risk was reduced two-fold by vaccination, highlighting the need for vaccination in reducing the risk of severe disease and subsequent COVID-19-related hospitalization across all population groups., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest N.Z.J. participated in advisory boards for AbbVie and has spoken for AbbVie and Gilead not related to the current work. The other authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Face mask use has been associated with declines in COVID-19 incidence rates worldwide. A handful of studies have examined the factors associated with face mask use in North America during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, much less is known about the patterns of face mask use and the impact of mask mandates during this time. This information could have important policy implications, now and in the event of future pandemics., Objective: To address existing knowledge gaps, we assessed face mask usage patterns among British Columbia COVID-19 Population Mixing Patterns (BC-Mix) survey respondents and evaluated the impact of the provincial mask mandate on these usage patterns., Methods: Between September 2020 and July 2022, adult British Columbia residents completed the web-based BC-Mix survey, answering questions on the circumstances surrounding face mask use or lack thereof, movement patterns, and COVID-19-related beliefs. Trends in face mask use over time were assessed, and associated factors were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. A stratified analysis was done to examine effect modification by the provincial mask mandate., Results: Of the 44,301 respondents, 81.9% reported wearing face masks during the 23-month period. In-store and public transit mask mandates supported monthly face mask usage rates of approximately 80%, which was further bolstered up to 92% with the introduction of the provincial mask mandate. Face mask users mostly visited retail locations (51.8%) and travelled alone by car (49.6%), whereas nonusers mostly traveled by car with others (35.2%) to their destinations-most commonly parks (45.7%). Nonusers of face masks were much more likely to be male than female, especially in retail locations and restaurants, bars, and cafés. In a multivariable logistic regression model adjusted for possible confounders, factors associated with face mask use included age, ethnicity, health region, mode of travel, destination, and time period. The odds of face mask use were 3.68 times greater when the provincial mask mandate was in effect than when it was not (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.68, 95% CI 3.33-4.05). The impact of the mask mandate was greatest in restaurants, bars, or cafés (mandate: aOR 7.35, 95% CI 4.23-12.78 vs no mandate: aOR 2.81, 95% CI 1.50-5.26) and in retail locations (mandate: aOR 19.94, 95% CI 14.86-26.77 vs no mandate: aOR 7.71, 95% CI 5.68-10.46)., Conclusions: Study findings provide added insight into the dynamics of face mask use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mask mandates supported increased and sustained high face mask usage rates during the first 2 years of the pandemic, having the greatest impact in indoor public locations with limited opportunity for physical distancing targeted by these mandates. These findings highlight the utility of mask mandates in supporting high face mask usage rates during the COVID-19 pandemic., (©Mawuena Binka, Prince Asumadu Adu, Dahn Jeong, Nirma Khatri Vadlamudi, Héctor Alexander Velásquez García, Bushra Mahmood, Terri Buller-Taylor, Michael Otterstatter, Naveed Zafar Janjua. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 11.01.2023.)

Background: Postmarketing evaluations have linked myocarditis to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines. We sought to estimate the incidence of myocarditis after mRNA vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, and to compare the incidence with expected rates based on historical background rates in British Columbia., Methods: We conducted an observational study using population health administrative data from the BC COVID-19 Cohort from Dec. 15, 2020, to Mar. 10, 2022. The primary exposure was any dose of an mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. The primary outcome was incidence of hospital admission or emergency department visit for myocarditis or myopericarditis within 7 and 21 days postvaccination, calculated as myocarditis rates per 100 000 mRNA vaccine doses, expected rates of myocarditis cases and observedto-expected ratios. We stratified analyses by age, sex, vaccine type and dose number., Results: We observed 99 incident cases of myocarditis within 7 days (0.97 cases per 100 000 vaccine doses; observed v. expected ratio 14.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.83-16.55) and 141 cases within 21 days (1.37 cases per 100 000 vaccine doses; observed v. expected ratio 7.03, 95% CI 5.92-8.29) postvaccination. Cases of myocarditis per 100 000 vaccine doses were higher for people aged 12-17 years (2.64, 95% CI 1.54-4.22) and 18-29 years (2.63, 95% CI 1.94-3.50) than for older age groups, for males compared with females (1.64, 95% CI 1.30-2.04 v. 0.35, 95% CI 0.21-0.55), for those receiving a second dose compared with a third dose (1.90, 95% CI 1.50-2.39 v. 0.76, 95% CI 0.45-1.30) and for those who received the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine compared with the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine (1.44, 95% CI 1.06-1.91 v. 0.74, 95% CI 0.56-0.98). The highest observed-to-expected ratio was seen after the second dose among males aged 18-29 years who received the mRNA-1273 vaccine (148.32, 95% CI 95.03-220.69)., Interpretation: Although absolute rates of myocarditis were low, vaccine type, age and sex are important factors to consider when strategizing vaccine administration to reduce the risk of postvaccination myocarditis. Our findings support the preferential use of the BNT162b2 vaccine over the mRNA-1273 vaccine for people aged 18-29 years., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Naveed Zafar Janjua reports honoraria from AbbVie and Gilead, as well as participation on advisory boards with AbbVie, outside the submitted work. He also reports roles as coprincipal investigator and member of the steering committee with the Canadian Hepatitis C Network. No other competing interests were declared., (© 2022 CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors.)

Background: Postmarketing evaluations have linked myocarditis to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. However, few population-based analyses have directly compared the safety of the 2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccines., Objectives: This study aimed to compare the risk of myocarditis, pericarditis, and myopericarditis between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273., Methods: We used data from the British Columbia COVID-19 Cohort (BCC19C), a population-based cohort study. The exposure was the second dose of an mRNA vaccine. The outcome was diagnosis of myocarditis, pericarditis, or myopericarditis during a hospitalization or an emergency department visit within 21 days of the second vaccination dose. We performed multivariable logistic regression to assess the association between vaccine product and the outcomes of interest., Results: The rates of myocarditis and pericarditis per million second doses were higher for mRNA-1273 (n = 31, rate 35.6; 95% CI: 24.1-50.5; and n = 20, rate 22.9; 95% CI: 14.0-35.4, respectively) than BNT162b2 (n = 28, rate 12.6; 95% CI: 8.4-18.2 and n = 21, rate 9.4; 95% CI: 5.8-14.4, respectively). mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 had significantly higher odds of myocarditis (adjusted OR [aOR]: 2.78; 95% CI: 1.67-4.62), pericarditis (aOR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.31-4.46) and myopericarditis (aOR: 2.63; 95% CI: 1.76-3.93). The association between mRNA-1273 and myocarditis was stronger for men (aOR: 3.21; 95% CI: 1.77-5.83) and younger age group (18-39 years; aOR: 5.09; 95% CI: 2.68-9.66)., Conclusions: Myocarditis/pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is rare, but we observed a 2- to 3-fold higher odds among individuals who received mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2. The rate of myocarditis following mRNA-1273 receipt is highest among younger men (age 18-39 years) and does not seem to be present at older ages. Our findings may have policy implications regarding the choice of vaccine offered., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported by the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control and the Canadian Immunization Research Network (CIRN) through a grant from the Public Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CNF 151944). This project was also supported by funding from the Public Health Agency of Canada through the Vaccine Surveillance Reference Group and the COVID-19 Immunity Task Force. All inferences, opinions, and conclusions drawn in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the opinions or policies of the Data Steward(s). Dr Kwong is supported by a Clinician-Scientist Award from the University of Toronto Department of Family and Community Medicine. Dr Janjua has participated in advisory boards and has spoken for AbbVie, not related to the current work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Vaccine hesitancy threatens efforts to bring the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to an end. Given that social or interpersonal contact is an important driver for COVID-19 transmission, understanding the relationship between contact rates and vaccine hesitancy may help identify appropriate targets for strategic intervention. The purpose of this study was to assess the association between interpersonal contact and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among a sample of unvaccinated adults in the Canadian province of British Columbia (BC)., Methods: Unvaccinated individuals participating in the BC COVID-19 Population Mixing Patterns Survey (BC-Mix) were asked to indicate their level of agreement to the statement, " I plan to get the COVID-19 vaccine ." Multivariable multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the association between self-reported interpersonal contact and vaccine hesitancy, adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, educational attainment, occupation, household size and region of residence. All analyses incorporated survey sampling weights based on age, sex, geography, and ethnicity., Results: Results were based on survey responses collected between March 8, 2021 and December 6, 2021, by a total of 4,515 adults aged 18 years and older. Overall, 56.7% of respondents reported that they were willing to get the COVID-19 vaccine, 27.0% were unwilling and 16.3% were undecided. We found a dose-response association between interpersonal contact and vaccine hesitancy. Compared to individuals in the lowest quartile (least contact), those in the fourth quartile (highest contact), third quartile and second quartile groups were more likely to be vaccine hesitant, with adjusted odd ratios (aORs) of 2.85 (95% CI: 2.02, 4.00), 1.91(95% CI: 1.38, 2.64), 1.78 (95% CI: 1.13, 2.82), respectively., Conclusion: Study findings show that among unvaccinated people in BC, vaccine hesitancy is greater among those who have high contact rates, and hence potentially at higher risk of acquiring and transmitting infection. This may also impact future uptake of booster doses., Competing Interests: Author NJ has advised and spoken for AbbVie, not related to this project or COVID-19. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Adu, Iyaniwura, Mahmood, Jeong, Makuza, Cua, Binka, García, Ringa, Wong, Yu, Irvine, Otterstatter and Janjua.)

Purpose: Several non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as physical distancing, handwashing, self-isolation, and school and business closures, were implemented in British Columbia (BC) following the first laboratory-confirmed case of COVID-19 on 26 January 2020, to minimise in-person contacts that could spread infections. The BC COVID-19 Population Mixing Patterns Survey (BC-Mix) was established as a surveillance system to measure behaviour and contact patterns in BC over time to inform the timing of the easing/re-imposition of control measures. In this paper, we describe the BC-Mix survey design and the demographic characteristics of respondents., Participants: The ongoing repeated online survey was launched in September 2020. Participants are mainly recruited through social media platforms (including Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp). A follow-up survey is sent to participants 2-4 weeks after completing the baseline survey. Survey responses are weighted to BC's population by age, sex, geography and ethnicity to obtain generalisable estimates. Additional indices such as the Material and Social Deprivation Index, residential instability, economic dependency, and others are generated using census and location data., Findings to Date: As of 26 July 2021, over 61 000 baseline survey responses were received of which 41 375 were eligible for analysis. Of the eligible participants, about 60% consented to follow-up and about 27% provided their personal health numbers for linkage with healthcare databases. Approximately 83.5% of respondents were female, 58.7% were 55 years or older, 87.5% identified as white and 45.9% had at least a university degree. After weighting, approximately 50% were female, 39% were 55 years or older, 65% identified as white and 50% had at least a university degree., Future Plans: Multiple papers describing contact patterns, physical distancing measures, regular handwashing and facemask wearing, modelling looking at impact of physical distancing measures and vaccine acceptance, hesitancy and uptake are either in progress or have been published., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Understanding inequalities in SARS-CoV-2 transmission associated with the social determinants of health could help the development of effective mitigation strategies that are responsive to local transmission dynamics. This study aims to quantify social determinants of geographic concentration of SARS-CoV-2 cases across 16 census metropolitan areas (hereafter, cities) in 4 Canadian provinces, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec., Methods: We used surveillance data on confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases and census data for social determinants at the level of the dissemination area (DA). We calculated Gini coefficients to determine the overall geographic heterogeneity of confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 in each city, and calculated Gini covariance coefficients to determine each city's heterogeneity by each social determinant (income, education, housing density and proportions of visible minorities, recent immigrants and essential workers). We visualized heterogeneity using Lorenz (concentration) curves., Results: We observed geographic concentration of SARS-CoV-2 cases in cities, as half of the cumulative cases were concentrated in DAs containing 21%-35% of their population, with the greatest geographic heterogeneity in Ontario cities (Gini coefficients 0.32-0.47), followed by British Columbia (0.23-0.36), Manitoba (0.32) and Quebec (0.28-0.37). Cases were disproportionately concentrated in areas with lower income and educational attainment, and in areas with a higher proportion of visible minorities, recent immigrants, high-density housing and essential workers. Although a consistent feature across cities was concentration by the proportion of visible minorities, the magnitude of concentration by social determinant varied across cities., Interpretation: Geographic concentration of SARS-CoV-2 cases was observed in all of the included cities, but the pattern by social determinants varied. Geographically prioritized allocation of resources and services should be tailored to the local drivers of inequalities in transmission in response to the resurgence of SARS-CoV-2., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Alan Katz is president of the Canadian Association for Health Services and Policy Research, and sits on the board of the College of Family Physicians of Canada and the international advisory board of SAIL Databank. He also reports grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), outside the submitted work. Marc Brisson reports grants from CIHR and the Institut national de santé publique du Québec (INSPQ), outside the submitted work. Mathieu Maheu-Giroux reports a research grant from Gilead Sciences Inc., and contractual agreements with the World Health Organization, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS INSPQ and the Institut d’excellence en santé et en services sociaux, outside the submitted work. No other competing interests were declared., (© 2022 CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors.)

Background & Aims: Public health measures introduced to limit transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), also disrupted various healthcare services in many regions worldwide, including British Columbia (BC), Canada. We assessed the impact of these measures, first introduced in BC in March 2020, on hepatitis C (HCV) testing and first-time HCV-positive diagnoses within the province., Methods: De-identified HCV testing data for BC residents were obtained from the provincial Public Health Laboratory. Weekly changes in anti-HCV, HCV RNA and genotype testing episodes and first-time HCV-positive (anti-HCV/RNA/genotype) diagnoses from January 2018 to December 2020 were assessed and associations were determined using segmented regression models examining rates before vs after calendar week 12 of 2020, when measures were introduced., Results: Average weekly HCV testing and first-time HCV-positive diagnosis rates fell immediately following the imposition of public health measures by 62.3 per 100 000 population and 2.9 episodes per 1 000 000 population, respectively (P < .0001 for both), and recovered in subsequent weeks to near pre-March 2020 levels. Average weekly anti-HCV positivity rates decreased steadily pre-restrictions and this trend remained unchanged afterwards., Conclusions: Reductions in HCV testing and first-time HCV-positive diagnosis rates, key drivers of progression along the HCV care cascade, occurred following the introduction of COVID-19-related public health measures. Further assessment will be required to better understand the full impact of these service disruptions on the HCV care cascade and to inform strategies for the re-engagement of people who may have been lost to care because of these measures., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

This study identified factors associated with hospital admission among people with laboratory-diagnosed COVID-19 cases in British Columbia. The study used data from the BC COVID-19 Cohort, which integrates data on all COVID-19 cases with data on hospitalizations, medical visits, emergency room visits, prescription drugs, chronic conditions and deaths. The analysis included all laboratory-diagnosed COVID-19 cases in British Columbia to 15 January 2021. We evaluated factors associated with hospital admission using multivariable Poisson regression analysis with robust error variance. Of the 56,874 COVID-19 cases included in the analysis, 2298 were hospitalized. Factors associated with increased hospitalization risk were as follows: male sex (adjusted risk ratio (aRR) = 1.27; 95% CI = 1.17-1.37), older age ( p -trend < 0.0001 across age groups increasing hospitalization risk with increasing age [aRR 30-39 years = 3.06; 95% CI = 2.32-4.03, to aRR 80+ years = 43.68; 95% CI = 33.41-57.10 compared to 20-29 years-old]), asthma (aRR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.04-1.26), cancer (aRR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.09-1.29), chronic kidney disease (aRR = 1.32; 95% CI = 1.19-1.47), diabetes (treated without insulin aRR = 1.13; 95% CI = 1.03-1.25, requiring insulin aRR = 5.05; 95% CI = 4.43-5.76), hypertension (aRR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.08-1.31), injection drug use (aRR = 2.51; 95% CI = 2.14-2.95), intellectual and developmental disabilities (aRR = 1.67; 95% CI = 1.05-2.66), problematic alcohol use (aRR = 1.63; 95% CI = 1.43-1.85), immunosuppression (aRR = 1.29; 95% CI = 1.09-1.53), and schizophrenia and psychotic disorders (aRR = 1.49; 95% CI = 1.23-1.82). In an analysis restricted to women of reproductive age, pregnancy (aRR = 2.69; 95% CI = 1.42-5.07) was associated with increased risk of hospital admission. Older age, male sex, substance use, intellectual and developmental disability, chronic comorbidities, and pregnancy increase the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization.

Antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were detected in 303/673 rural Ecuadorian adults (45%), 77% of whom had compatible clinical manifestations. Seropositivity was associated with the use of open latrines. Our findings support the fears of mass spread of SARS-CoV-2 in rural Latin America and cannot exclude a contributing role for fecal-oral transmission., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Information about factors potentially favoring the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in rural settings is limited. Following a case-control study design in a rural Ecuadorian village that was severely struck by the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 RNA were detected by real-time PCR in swabs obtained from inner and upper walls in 24/48 randomly selected latrines from case-houses and in 12/48 flushing toilets from paired control-houses (P = 0.014; McNemar's test). This association persisted in a conditional logistic regression model adjusted for relevant covariates (OR: 4.82; 95% CI: 1.38-16.8; P = 0.014). In addition, SARS-CoV-2-seropositive subjects were more often identified among those living in houses with a latrine (P = 0.002). Latrines have almost five times the odds of containing SARS-CoV-2 RNA than their paired flushing toilets. Latrines are reservoirs of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, and it cannot be ruled out that latrines could contribute to viral transmission in rural settings. Frequent disinfection of latrines should be recommended to reduce the likelihood of fecal contamination.

Data on SARS-CoV-2 transmission in rural communities is scarce or non-existent. A previous cross-sectional study in middle-aged and older adults enrolled in the Atahualpa Project Cohort demonstrated that 45% of participants had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, 77% of whom were symptomatic. Here, we assessed the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the above-mentioned rural population. One month after baseline testing, 362 of 370 initially seronegative individuals were re-tested to assess incidence of seroconversion and associated risk factors. Twenty-eight of them (7.7%) became seropositive. The overall incidence rate ratio was 7.4 per 100 person months of potential virus exposure (95% C.I.: 4.7-10.2). Six seroconverted individuals (21.4%) developed SARS-CoV-2-related symptomatology. The only covariate significantly associated with seroconversion was the use of an open latrine. Predictive margins showed that these individuals were 2.5 times more likely to be infected (95% C.I.: 1.03-6.1) than those using a flushing toilet. Therefore, along one month, approximately 8% of seronegative individuals became infected, even after almost half of the population was already seropositive. Nevertheless, a smaller proportion of incident cases were symptomatic (21% versus 77% of the earlier cases), and no deaths were recorded. Whether this decreased clinical expression resulted from a lower viral load in new infections cannot be determined. Increased seroconversion in individuals using latrines is consistent with a contributory role of fecal-oral transmission, although we cannot rule out the possibility that latrines are acting as a proxy for poverty or other unknown interacting variables.

Background Long coronavirus disease (COVID) patients experience persistent symptoms after acute severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Healthcare utilization data could provide critical information on the disease burden of long COVID for service planning; however, not all patients are diagnosed or assigned long COVID diagnostic codes. We developed an algorithm to identify individuals with long COVID using population-level health administrative data from British Columbia (BC), Canada. Methods An elastic net penalized logistic regression model was developed to identify long COVID patients based on demographic characteristics, pre-existing conditions, COVID-19-related data, and all symptoms/conditions recorded >28–183 days after the COVID-19 symptom onset/reported (index) date of known long COVID patients (n = 2430) and a control group (n = 24 300), selected from all adult COVID-19 cases in BC with an index date on/before October 31, 2021 (n = 168 111). Known long COVID cases were diagnosed in a clinic and/or had the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Canada (ICD-10-CA) code for "post COVID-19 condition" in their records. Results The algorithm retained known symptoms/conditions associated with long COVID, demonstrating high sensitivity (86%), specificity (86%), and area under the receiver operator curve (93%). It identified 25 220 (18%) long COVID patients among the remaining 141 381 adult COVID-19 cases, >10 times the number of known cases. Known and predicted long COVID patients had comparable demographic and health-related characteristics. Conclusions Our algorithm identified long COVID patients with a high level of accuracy. This large cohort of long COVID patients will serve as a platform for robust assessments on the clinical course of long COVID, and provide much needed concrete information for decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were detected in 303/673 rural Ecuadorian adults (45%), 77% of whom had compatible clinical manifestations. Seropositivity was associated with the use of open latrines. Our findings support the fears of mass spread of SARS-CoV-2 in rural Latin America and cannot exclude a contributing role for fecal-oral transmission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]