Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Clinical evaluation of distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP), which can include small fiber neuropathy (SFN), differs among neurologists, neuromuscular specialists, and internists. The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) 2009 Practice Parameter guides evaluation of DSP, but there are no guidelines or AAN practice parameters for the evaluation of SFN. OBJECTIVE:Determine how neurologists evaluate and test for SFN in their clinical practice and compare responses between neuromuscular (NM) and non-neuromuscular specialists (non-NM). DESIGN/METHODS/METHODS:Eight hundred randomly selected AAN members, which included 400 members who indicated NM medicine to be a primary or secondary specialty, were selected to answer a survey about SFN. Respondents answered a survey instrument with a list of 44 serum tests and procedures for different neuropathy clinical scenarios. RESULTS:The survey response rate was 29.3% (234/798), with 48.8% (N = 114) indicating that their primary specialty was neuromuscular. For an initial evaluation of distal symmetric SFN, respondents ordered a mean of 12 tests (SD 5.8) with a range of 0-26 tests. There was no statistically significant difference between the mean number of tests ordered by neuromuscular versus non-neuromuscular specialists. The 5 most common overall responses were complete blood count (87%), vitamin B12 (86%), basic metabolic panel (84%), thyroid stimulating hormone (78%), and hemoglobin A1c (77%). For a secondary evaluation of etiologies of distal symmetric SFN, 52% of non-neuromuscular specialists (95% CI, 42%-61%) versus 35% of neuromuscular specialists (95% CI, 26%-45%) would order a paraneoplastic panel. There was significant disparity in ordering a skin biopsy for intraepidermal nerve fiber density, with 65% of neuromuscular specialists (95% CI, 55%-74%) indicating that they would order this test compared with 38% of non-neuromuscular specialists (95% CI, 29%-48%). CONCLUSIONS:The recommended studies with the highest yield for finding a cause of DSP were not universally ordered. There is variability in approaches to diagnosing SFN and searching for a possible etiology. The development of an AAN practice parameter for SFN may help promote consistent practice among neurologists of all subspecialties.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Classification of persons with long COVID (LC) or post-COVID-19 condition must encompass the complexity and heterogeneity of the condition. Iterative refinement of the classification index for research is needed to incorporate newly available data as the field rapidly evolves. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To update the 2023 research index for adults with LC using additional participant data from the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER-Adult) study and an expanded symptom list based on input from patient communities. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:Prospective, observational cohort study including adults 18 years or older with or without known prior SARS-CoV-2 infection who were enrolled at 83 sites in the US and Puerto Rico. Included participants had at least 1 study visit taking place 4.5 months after first SARS-CoV-2 infection or later, and not within 30 days of a reinfection. The study visits took place between October 2021 and March 2024. EXPOSURE/UNASSIGNED:SARS-CoV-2 infection. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:Presence of LC and participant-reported symptoms. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:A total of 13 647 participants (11 743 with known SARS-CoV-2 infection and 1904 without known prior SARS-CoV-2 infection; median age, 45 years [IQR, 34-69 years]; and 73% were female) were included. Using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator analysis regression approach from the 2023 model, symptoms contributing to the updated 2024 index included postexertional malaise, fatigue, brain fog, dizziness, palpitations, change in smell or taste, thirst, chronic cough, chest pain, shortness of breath, and sleep apnea. For the 2024 LC research index, the optimal threshold to identify participants with highly symptomatic LC was a score of 11 or greater. The 2024 index classified 20% of participants with known prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and 4% of those without known prior SARS-CoV-2 infection as having likely LC (vs 21% and 5%, respectively, using the 2023 index) and 39% of participants with known prior SARS-CoV-2 infection as having possible LC, which is a new category for the 2024 model. Cluster analysis identified 5 LC subtypes that tracked quality-of-life measures. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:The 2024 LC research index for adults builds on the 2023 index with additional data and symptoms to help researchers classify symptomatic LC and its symptom subtypes. Continued future refinement of the index will be needed as the understanding of LC evolves.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:A substantial number of individuals worldwide experience long COVID, or post-COVID condition. Other postviral and autoimmune conditions have a female predominance, but whether the same is true for long COVID, especially within different subgroups, is uncertain. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To evaluate sex differences in the risk of developing long COVID among adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:This cohort study used data from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER)-Adult cohort, which consists of individuals enrolled in and prospectively followed up at 83 sites in 33 US states plus Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico. Data were examined from all participants enrolled between October 29, 2021, and July 5, 2024, who had a qualifying study visit 6 months or more after their initial SARS-CoV-2 infection. EXPOSURE/UNASSIGNED:Self-reported sex (male, female) assigned at birth. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:Development of long COVID, measured using a self-reported symptom-based questionnaire and scoring guideline at the first study visit that occurred at least 6 months after infection. Propensity score matching was used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (95% CIs). The full model included demographic and clinical characteristics and social determinants of health, and the reduced model included only age, race, and ethnicity. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Among 12 276 participants who had experienced SARS-CoV-2 infection (8969 [73%] female; mean [SD] age at infection, 46 [15] years), female sex was associated with higher risk of long COVID in the primary full (RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.06-1.62) and reduced (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.17-1.77) models. This finding was observed across all age groups except 18 to 39 years (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.72-1.49). Female sex was associated with significantly higher overall long COVID risk when the analysis was restricted to nonpregnant participants (RR, 1.50; 95%: CI, 1.27-1.77). Among participants aged 40 to 54 years, the risk ratio was 1.42 (95% CI, 0.99-2.03) in menopausal female participants and 1.45 (95% CI, 1.15-1.83) in nonmenopausal female participants compared with male participants. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:In this prospective cohort study of the NIH RECOVER-Adult cohort, female sex was associated with an increased risk of long COVID compared with male sex, and this association was age, pregnancy, and menopausal status dependent. These findings highlight the need to identify biological mechanisms contributing to sex specificity to facilitate risk stratification, targeted drug development, and improved management of long COVID.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To determine the proportion of individuals with detectable antigen in plasma or serum after SARS-CoV-2 infection and the association of antigen detection with postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) symptoms. METHODS:Plasma and serum samples were collected from adults participating in four independent studies at different time points, ranging from several days up to 14 months post-SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was to quantify SARS-CoV-2 antigens, including the S1 subunit of spike, full-length spike, and nucleocapsid, in participant samples. The presence of 34 commonly reported PASC symptoms during the postacute period was determined from participant surveys or chart reviews of electronic health records. RESULTS:Of the 1569 samples analysed from 706 individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2, 21% (95% CI, 18-24%) were positive for either S1, spike, or nucleocapsid. Spike was predominantly detected, and the highest proportion of samples was spike positive (20%; 95% CI, 18-22%) between 4 and 7 months postinfection. In total, 578 participants (82%) reported at least one of the 34 PASC symptoms included in our analysis ≥1 month postinfection. Cardiopulmonary, musculoskeletal, and neurologic symptoms had the highest reported prevalence in over half of all participants, and among those participants, 43% (95% CI, 40-45%) on average were antigen-positive. Among the participants who reported no ongoing symptoms (128, 18%), antigen was detected in 28 participants (21%). The presence of antigen was associated with the presence of one or more PASC symptoms, adjusting for sex, age, time postinfection, and cohort (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4-2.2). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:The findings of this multicohort study indicate that SARS-CoV-2 antigens can be detected in the blood of a substantial proportion of individuals up to 14 months after infection. While approximately one in five asymptomatic individuals was antigen-positive, roughly half of all individuals reporting ongoing cardiopulmonary, musculoskeletal, and neurologic symptoms were antigen-positive.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:There are currently no validated clinical biomarkers of postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To investigate clinical laboratory markers of SARS-CoV-2 and PASC. DESIGN/UNASSIGNED: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/UNASSIGNED:83 enrolling sites. PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED: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/UNASSIGNED:Participants completed questionnaires and standard clinical laboratory tests. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: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/UNASSIGNED:Whether differences in laboratory markers represent consequences of or risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection could not be determined. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED: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/UNASSIGNED:National Institutes of Health.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Most research to understand postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), or long COVID, has focused on adults, with less known about this complex condition in children. Research is needed to characterize pediatric PASC to enable studies of underlying mechanisms that will guide future treatment. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To identify the most common prolonged symptoms experienced by children (aged 6 to 17 years) after SARS-CoV-2 infection, how these symptoms differ by age (school-age [6-11 years] vs adolescents [12-17 years]), how they cluster into distinct phenotypes, and what symptoms in combination could be used as an empirically derived index to assist researchers to study the likely presence of PASC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:Multicenter longitudinal observational cohort study with participants recruited from more than 60 US health care and community settings between March 2022 and December 2023, including school-age children and adolescents with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection history. EXPOSURE/UNASSIGNED:SARS-CoV-2 infection. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:PASC and 89 prolonged symptoms across 9 symptom domains. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:A total of 898 school-age children (751 with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection [referred to as infected] and 147 without [referred to as uninfected]; mean age, 8.6 years; 49% female; 11% were Black or African American, 34% were Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish, and 60% were White) and 4469 adolescents (3109 infected and 1360 uninfected; mean age, 14.8 years; 48% female; 13% were Black or African American, 21% were Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish, and 73% were White) were included. Median time between first infection and symptom survey was 506 days for school-age children and 556 days for adolescents. In models adjusted for sex and race and ethnicity, 14 symptoms in both school-age children and adolescents were more common in those with SARS-CoV-2 infection history compared with those without infection history, with 4 additional symptoms in school-age children only and 3 in adolescents only. These symptoms affected almost every organ system. Combinations of symptoms most associated with infection history were identified to form a PASC research index for each age group; these indices correlated with poorer overall health and quality of life. The index emphasizes neurocognitive, pain, and gastrointestinal symptoms in school-age children but change or loss in smell or taste, pain, and fatigue/malaise-related symptoms in adolescents. Clustering analyses identified 4 PASC symptom phenotypes in school-age children and 3 in adolescents. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:This study developed research indices for characterizing PASC in children and adolescents. Symptom patterns were similar but distinguishable between the 2 groups, highlighting the importance of characterizing PASC separately for these age ranges.

INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM STATEMENT/UNASSIGNED:As the role of teleneurology expands, it is important to prepare trainees to perform virtual encounters proficiently. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:We created a comprehensive multimodality teleneurology curriculum for residents to teach key aspects of telehealth encounters including the virtual examination and skill development across several environments. METHODS AND CURRICULUM DESCRIPTION/UNASSIGNED:We developed and implemented a teleneurology curriculum focused on teaching the virtual neurologic examination, measuring teleneurology competency, and providing opportunities for trainees to perform telehealth encounters in multiple settings. Residents (N = 22) were first surveyed on what methods would be most helpful to learn teleneurology. Trainees observed a faculty member conducting a teleneurology visit with another faculty member playing a patient. Residents then practiced a teleneurology encounter during a 10-minute objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) at a simulation center. After positive feedback from the fall of 2020, we adapted the OSCE to be completely remote in the spring of 2021 for senior residents. Trainees then performed teleneurology visits during their continuity clinics and subspecialty clinic rotations. RESULTS AND ASSESSMENT DATA/UNASSIGNED:< 0.05) and requested more access to simulations during training. Sensorimotor assessment and adequate visualization of the affected limb were identified as areas for improvement. DISCUSSION AND LESSONS LEARNED/UNASSIGNED:Our multimodal 3-year teleneurology curriculum provides opportunities for residents to learn and apply teleneurology. Survey tools helped strengthen the curriculum to optimize educational potential. We implemented a teleneurology simulation with and without the use of a simulation center. We plan to expand our teleneurology clinical and simulation experiences to trainees based on our data and further developments in teleneurology and to track the progress of teleneurology skills as residents advance through training.

BACKGROUND:Limited data exists evaluating predictors of long-term outcomes after hospitalization for COVID-19. METHODS:We conducted a prospective, longitudinal cohort study of patients hospitalized for COVID-19. The following outcomes were collected at 6 and 12-months post-diagnosis: disability using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), activities of daily living assessed with the Barthel Index, cognition assessed with the telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment (t-MoCA), Neuro-QoL batteries for anxiety, depression, fatigue and sleep, and post-acute symptoms of COVID-19. Predictors of these outcomes, including demographics, pre-COVID-19 comorbidities, index COVID-19 hospitalization metrics, and life stressors, were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS:Of 790 COVID-19 patients who survived hospitalization, 451(57%) completed 6-month (N = 383) and/or 12-month (N = 242) follow-up, and 77/451 (17%) died between discharge and 12-month follow-up. Significant life stressors were reported in 121/239 (51%) at 12-months. In multivariable analyses, life stressors including financial insecurity, food insecurity, death of a close contact and new disability were the strongest independent predictors of worse mRS, Barthel Index, depression, fatigue, and sleep scores, and prolonged symptoms, with adjusted odds ratios ranging from 2.5 to 20.8. Other predictors of poor outcome included older age (associated with worse mRS, Barthel, t-MoCA, depression scores), baseline disability (associated with worse mRS, fatigue, Barthel scores), female sex (associated with worse Barthel, anxiety scores) and index COVID-19 severity (associated with worse Barthel index, prolonged symptoms). CONCLUSIONS:Life stressors contribute substantially to worse functional, cognitive and neuropsychiatric outcomes 12-months after COVID-19 hospitalization. Other predictors of poor outcome include older age, female sex, baseline disability and severity of index COVID-19.