Search

Studies during the COVID-19 pandemic showed that children had heightened nasal innate immune responses compared with adults. To evaluate the role of nasal viruses and bacteria in driving these responses, we performed cytokine profiling and comprehensive, symptom-agnostic testing for respiratory viruses and bacterial pathobionts in nasopharyngeal samples from children tested for SARS-CoV-2 in 2021-22 (n = 467). Respiratory viruses and/or pathobionts were highly prevalent (82% of symptomatic and 30% asymptomatic children; 90 and 49% for children <5 years). Virus detection and load correlated with the nasal interferon response biomarker CXCL10, and the previously reported discrepancy between SARS-CoV-2 viral load and nasal interferon response was explained by viral coinfections. Bacterial pathobionts correlated with a distinct proinflammatory response with elevated IL-1β and TNF but not CXCL10. Furthermore, paired samples from healthy 1-year-olds collected 1-2 wk apart revealed frequent respiratory virus acquisition or clearance, with mucosal immunophenotype changing in parallel. These findings reveal that frequent, dynamic host-pathogen interactions drive nasal innate immune activation in children., (© 2024 Watkins et al.)

How to develop highly informative serology assays to evaluate the quality of immune protection against coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has been a global pursuit over the past years. Here, a microfluidic high-plex immuno-serolomic assay is developed to simultaneously measure50 plasma or serum samples for50 soluble markers including 35proteins, 11 anti-spike/receptor binding domian (RBD) IgG antibodies spanningmajor variants, and controls. This assay demonstrates the quintuplicate test in a single run with high throughput, low sample volume, high reproducibilityand accuracy. It is applied to the measurement of 1012 blood samples including in-depth analysis of sera from 127 patients and 21 healthy donors over multiple time points, either with acute COVID infection or vaccination. The protein analysis reveals distinct immune mediator modules that exhibit a reduced degree of diversity in protein-protein cooperation in patients with hematologic malignancies or receiving B cell depletion therapy. Serological analysis identifies that COVID-infected patients with hematologic malignancies display impaired anti-RBD antibody response despite high level of anti-spike IgG, which can be associated with limited clonotype diversity and functional deficiency in B cells. These findings underscore the importance to individualize immunization strategies for these high-risk patients and provide an informative tool to monitor their responses at the systems level., (© 2023 The Authors. Small Methods published by Wiley-VCH GmbH.)

Whether SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccines confer exposure-dependent ("leaky") protection against infection remains unknown. We examined the effect of prior infection, vaccination, and hybrid immunity on infection risk among residents of Connecticut correctional facilities during periods of predominant Omicron and Delta transmission. Residents with cell, cellblock, and no documented exposure to SARS-CoV-2 infected residents were matched by facility and date. During the Omicron period, prior infection, vaccination, and hybrid immunity reduced the infection risk of residents without a documented exposure (HR: 0.36 [0.25-0.54]; 0.57 [0.42-0.78]; 0.24 [0.15-0.39]; respectively) and with cellblock exposures (0.61 [0.49-0.75]; 0.69 [0.58-0.83]; 0.41 [0.31-0.55]; respectively) but not with cell exposures (0.89 [0.58-1.35]; 0.96 [0.64-1.46]; 0.80 [0.46-1.39]; respectively). Associations were similar during the Delta period and when analyses were restricted to tested residents. Although associations may not have been thoroughly adjusted due to dataset limitations, the findings suggest that prior infection and vaccination may be leaky, highlighting the potential benefits of pairing vaccination with non-pharmaceutical interventions in crowded settings., (© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: The impact variant-specific immune evasion and waning protection have on declining coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness (VE) remains unclear. Using whole-genome sequencing (WGS), we examined the contribution these factors had on the decline that followed the introduction of the Delta variant. Furthermore, we evaluated calendar-period-based classification as a WGS alternative., Methods: We conducted a test-negative case-control study among people tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between 1 April and 24 August 2021. Variants were classified using WGS and calendar period., Results: We included 2029 cases (positive, sequenced samples) and 343 727 controls (negative tests). VE 14-89 days after second dose was significantly higher against Alpha (84.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 75.6%-90.0%) than Delta infection (68.9%; 95% CI, 58.0%-77.1%). The odds of Delta infection were significantly higher 90-149 than 14-89 days after second dose (P value = .003). Calendar-period-classified VE estimates approximated WGS-classified estimates; however, calendar-period-based classification was subject to misclassification (35% Alpha, 4% Delta)., Conclusions: Both waning protection and variant-specific immune evasion contributed to the lower effectiveness. While calendar-period-classified VE estimates mirrored WGS-classified estimates, our analysis highlights the need for WGS when variants are cocirculating and misclassification is likely., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. A. I. K. serves as an expert panel member for Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute, scientific advisory board member for Revelar Biotherapeutics, and a consultant for Tata Medical and Diagnostics and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; and has received grants from Merck, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Tata Medical and Diagnostics for research related to COVID-19. W. L. S. was an investigator for a research agreement, through Yale University, from the Shenzhen Center for Health Information for work to advance intelligent disease prevention and health promotion; collaborates with the National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases in Beijing; is a technical consultant to Hugo Health, a personal health information platform; cofounder of Refactor Health, an AI-augmented data management platform for health care; and has received grants from Merck and Regeneron Pharmaceutical for research related to COVID-19. J. D. H., R. C., S. M., D. F., S. H., and A. Z. are employees and shareholders of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 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., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Symptomatic patients who test negative for common viruses are an important possible source of unrecognised or emerging pathogens, but metagenomic sequencing of all samples is inefficient because of the low likelihood of finding a pathogen in any given sample. We aimed to determine whether nasopharyngeal CXCL10 screening could be used as a strategy to enrich for samples containing undiagnosed viruses., Methods: In this pathogen surveillance and detection study, we measured CXCL10 concentrations from nasopharyngeal swabs from patients in the Yale New Haven health-care system, which had been tested at the Yale New Haven Hospital Clinical Virology Laboratory (New Haven, CT, USA). Patients who tested negative for a panel of respiratory viruses using multiplex PCR during Jan 23-29, 2017, or March 3-14, 2020, were included. We performed host and pathogen RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) and analysis for viral reads on samples with CXCL10 higher than 1 ng/mL or CXCL10 testing and quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) for SARS-CoV-2. We used RNA-Seq and cytokine profiling to compare the host response to infection in samples that were virus positive (rhinovirus, seasonal coronavirus CoV-NL63, or SARS-CoV-2) and virus negative (controls)., Findings: During Jan 23-29, 2017, 359 samples were tested for ten viruses on the multiplex PCR respiratory virus panel (RVP). 251 (70%) were RVP negative. 60 (24%) of 251 samples had CXCL10 higher than 150 pg/mL and were identified for further analysis. 28 (47%) of 60 CXCL10-high samples were positive for seasonal coronaviruses. 223 (89%) of 251 samples were PCR negative for 15 viruses and, of these, CXCL10-based screening identified 32 (13%) samples for further analysis. Of these 32 samples, eight (25%) with CXCL10 concentrations higher than 1 ng/mL and sufficient RNA were selected for RNA-Seq. Microbial RNA analysis showed the presence of influenza C virus in one sample and revealed RNA reads from bacterial pathobionts in four (50%) of eight samples. Between March 3 and March 14, 2020, 375 (59%) of 641 samples tested negative for 15 viruses on the RVP. 32 (9%) of 375 samples had CXCL10 concentrations ranging from 100 pg/mL to 1000 pg/mL and four of those were positive for SARS-CoV-2. CXCL10 elevation was statistically significant, and a distinguishing feature was found in 28 (8%) of 375 SARS-CoV-2-negative samples versus all four SARS-CoV-2-positive samples (p=4·4 × 10 -5 ). Transcriptomic signatures showed an interferon response in virus-positive samples and an additional neutrophil-high hyperinflammatory signature in samples with high amounts of bacterial pathobionts. The CXCL10 cutoff for detecting a virus was 166·5 pg/mL for optimal sensitivity and 1091·0 pg/mL for specificity using a clinic-ready automated microfluidics-based immunoassay., Interpretation: These results confirm CXCL10 as a robust nasopharyngeal biomarker of viral respiratory infection and support host response-based screening followed by metagenomic sequencing of CXCL10-high samples as a practical approach to incorporate clinical samples into pathogen discovery and surveillance efforts., Funding: National Institutes of Health, the Hartwell Foundation, the Gruber Foundation, Fast Grants for COVID-19 research from the Mercatus Center, and the Huffman Family Donor Advised Fund., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests EFF is an inventor on a pending patent application (WO2019/217296 A1) and provisional patent application (63/293386). EFF and MLL are inventors on a pending patent application (WO2018/071498 A1). NDG is a paid consultant for Tempus Labs and the National Basketball Association for infectious disease genomics. WLS is a consultant for Hugo Health; cofounder of Refacto Health; and received funds from Merck, Regeneron, the Shenzen Center for Health Information, and the Beijing National Center for Cardiac Diseases. AIK received funding from Merck, Regeneron, and the Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The benefit of primary and booster vaccination in people who experienced a prior Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains unclear. The objective of this study was to estimate the effectiveness of primary (two-dose series) and booster (third dose) mRNA vaccination against Omicron (lineage BA.1) infection among people with a prior documented infection., Methods and Findings: We conducted a test-negative case-control study of reverse transcription PCRs (RT-PCRs) analyzed with the TaqPath (Thermo Fisher Scientific) assay and recorded in the Yale New Haven Health system from November 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. Overall, 11,307 cases (positive TaqPath analyzed RT-PCRs with S-gene target failure [SGTF]) and 130,041 controls (negative TaqPath analyzed RT-PCRs) were included (median age: cases: 35 years, controls: 39 years). Among cases and controls, 5.9% and 8.1% had a documented prior infection (positive SARS-CoV-2 test record ≥90 days prior to the included test), respectively. We estimated the effectiveness of primary and booster vaccination relative to SGTF-defined Omicron (lineage BA.1) variant infection using a logistic regression adjusted for date of test, age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance, comorbidities, social venerability index, municipality, and healthcare utilization. The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14 to 149 days after the second dose was 41.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 14.1% to 59.4%, p 0.006) and 27.1% (95% CI: 18.7% to 34.6%, p < 0.001) for people with and without a documented prior infection, respectively. The effectiveness of booster vaccination (≥14 days after booster dose) was 47.1% (95% CI: 22.4% to 63.9%, p 0.001) and 54.1% (95% CI: 49.2% to 58.4%, p < 0.001) in people with and without a documented prior infection, respectively. To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds of infection among boosted (≥14 days after booster dose) and booster-eligible people (≥150 days after second dose). The odds ratio (OR) comparing boosted and booster-eligible people with a documented prior infection was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.54 to 1.16, p 0.222), whereas the OR comparing boosted and booster-eligible people without a documented prior infection was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.49 to 0.59, p < 0.001). This study's limitations include the risk of residual confounding, the use of data from a single system, and the reliance on TaqPath analyzed RT-PCR results., Conclusions: In this study, we observed that primary vaccination provided significant but limited protection against Omicron (lineage BA.1) infection among people with and without a documented prior infection. While booster vaccination was associated with additional protection against Omicron BA.1 infection in people without a documented prior infection, it was not found to be associated with additional protection among people with a documented prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of documented prior infection status but suggest that infection history may impact the relative benefit of booster doses., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: A.I.K serves as an expert panel member for Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute, scientific advisory board member for Revelar Biotherapeutics and a consultant for Tata Medical and Diagnostics and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and has received grants from Merck, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Tata Medical and Diagnostics for research related to COVID-19. W.L.S. was an investigator for a research agreement, through Yale University, from the Shenzhen Center for Health Information for work to advance intelligent disease prevention and health promotion; collaborates with the National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases in Beijing; is a technical consultant to Hugo Health, a personal health information platform, and co-founder of Refactor Health, an AI-augmented data management platform for healthcare; and has received grants from Merck and Regeneron Pharmaceutical for research related to COVID-19. Other authors declare no conflict of interest. M.O.F had past stock ownership in GlaxoSmithKline. MDTH reports a contract (to the University of Florida) from Merck, Sharp and Dohme to perform research unrelated to this project., (Copyright: © 2022 Lind et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: SARS-CoV-2 serologic assays are becoming increasingly available and may serve as a diagnostic aid in a multitude of settings relating to past infection status. However, there is limited literature detailing the longitudinal performance of EUA-cleared serologic assays in US populations, particularly in cohorts with a remote history of PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (e.g., >2 months)., Methods: We evaluated the diagnostic sensitivities and specificities of the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 (anti-N) and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (anti-S1-RBD) assays, using 174 residual clinical samples up to 267 days post-PCR diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 154) and a subset of samples obtained prior to the COVID-19 pandemic as negative controls (n = 20)., Results: The calculated diagnostic sensitivities for the anti-N and anti-S1-RBD assays were 89% and 93%, respectively. Of the 154 samples in the SARS-CoV-2-positive cohort, there were 6 discrepant results between the anti-N and anti-S1-RBD assays, 5 of which were specimens collected ≥200 days post-PCR positivity and only had detectable levels of anti-S1-RBD antibodies. When only considering specimens collected ≥100 days post-PCR positivity (n = 41), the sensitivities for the anti-N and anti-S1-RBD assays were 85% and 98%, respectively., Conclusions: The anti-S1-RBD assay demonstrated superior sensitivity at time points more remote to the PCR detection date, with 6 more specimens from the SARS-CoV-2-positive cohort detected, 5 of which were collected more than 200 days post-PCR positivity. While analytical differences and reagent lot-to-lot variability are possible, this may indicate that, in some instances, anti-S1-RBD antibodies may persist longer in vivo and may be a better target for detecting remote SARS-CoV-2 infection., (© American Association for Clinical Chemistry 2021. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Recent studies have provided insights into innate and adaptive immune dynamics in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the exact features of antibody responses that govern COVID-19 disease outcomes remain unclear. In this study, we analyzed humoral immune responses in 229 patients with asymptomatic, mild, moderate and severe COVID-19 over time to probe the nature of antibody responses in disease severity and mortality. We observed a correlation between anti-spike (S) immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels, length of hospitalization and clinical parameters associated with worse clinical progression. Although high anti-S IgG levels correlated with worse disease severity, such correlation was time dependent. Deceased patients did not have higher overall humoral response than discharged patients. However, they mounted a robust, yet delayed, response, measured by anti-S, anti-receptor-binding domain IgG and neutralizing antibody (NAb) levels compared to survivors. Delayed seroconversion kinetics correlated with impaired viral control in deceased patients. Finally, although sera from 85% of patients displayed some neutralization capacity during their disease course, NAb generation before 14 d of disease onset emerged as a key factor for recovery. These data indicate that COVID-19 mortality does not correlate with the cross-sectional antiviral antibody levels per se but, rather, with the delayed kinetics of NAb production., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

COVID-19 manifests with a wide spectrum of clinical phenotypes that are characterized by exaggerated and misdirected host immune responses 1-6 . Although pathological innate immune activation is well-documented in severe disease 1 , the effect of autoantibodies on disease progression is less well-defined. Here we use a high-throughput autoantibody discovery technique known as rapid extracellular antigen profiling 7 to screen a cohort of 194 individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2, comprising 172 patients with COVID-19 and 22 healthcare workers with mild disease or asymptomatic infection, for autoantibodies against 2,770 extracellular and secreted proteins (members of the exoproteome). We found that patients with COVID-19 exhibit marked increases in autoantibody reactivities as compared to uninfected individuals, and show a high prevalence of autoantibodies against immunomodulatory proteins (including cytokines, chemokines, complement components and cell-surface proteins). We established that these autoantibodies perturb immune function and impair virological control by inhibiting immunoreceptor signalling and by altering peripheral immune cell composition, and found that mouse surrogates of these autoantibodies increase disease severity in a mouse model of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our analysis of autoantibodies against tissue-associated antigens revealed associations with specific clinical characteristics. Our findings suggest a pathological role for exoproteome-directed autoantibodies in COVID-19, with diverse effects on immune functionality and associations with clinical outcomes.

Objective: Severe acute respiratory syndrome virus (SARS-CoV-2) has infected millions of people worldwide. Our goal was to identify risk factors associated with admission and disease severity in patients with SARS-CoV-2., Design: This was an observational, retrospective study based on real-world data for 7,995 patients with SARS-CoV-2 from a clinical data repository., Setting: Yale New Haven Health (YNHH) is a five-hospital academic health system serving a diverse patient population with community and teaching facilities in both urban and suburban areas., Populations: The study included adult patients who had SARS-CoV-2 testing at YNHH between March 1 and April 30, 2020., Main Outcome and Performance Measures: Primary outcomes were admission and in-hospital mortality for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection as determined by RT-PCR testing. We also assessed features associated with the need for respiratory support., Results: Of the 28605 patients tested for SARS-CoV-2, 7995 patients (27.9%) had an infection (median age 52.3 years) and 2154 (26.9%) of these had an associated admission (median age 66.2 years). Of admitted patients, 2152 (99.9%) had a discharge disposition at the end of the study period. Of these, 329 (15.3%) required invasive mechanical ventilation and 305 (14.2%) expired. Increased age and male sex were positively associated with admission and in-hospital mortality (median age 80.7 years), while comorbidities had a much weaker association with the risk of admission or mortality. Black race (OR 1.43, 95%CI 1.14-1.78) and Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.81, 95%CI 1.50-2.18) were identified as risk factors for admission, but, among discharged patients, age-adjusted in-hospital mortality was not significantly different among racial and ethnic groups., Conclusions: This observational study identified, among people testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection, older age and male sex as the most strongly associated risks for admission and in-hospital mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. While minority racial and ethnic groups had increased burden of disease and risk of admission, age-adjusted in-hospital mortality for discharged patients was not significantly different among racial and ethnic groups. Ongoing studies will be needed to continue to evaluate these risks, particularly in the setting of evolving treatment guidelines., Competing Interests: H.M.K. works under contract with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to support quality measurement programs; was a recipient of a research grant, through Yale, from Medtronic and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to develop methods for post-market surveillance of medical devices; was a recipient of a research grant from Johnson & Johnson, through Yale University, to support clinical trial data sharing; was a recipient of a research agreement, through Yale University, from the Shenzhen Center for Health Information for work to advance intelligent disease prevention and health promotion; collaborates with the National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases in Beijing; receives payment from the Arnold & Porter Law Firm for work related to the Sanofi clopidogrel litigation, from the Martin Baughman Law Firm for work related to the Cook Celect IVC filter litigation, and from the Siegfried and Jensen Law Firm for work related to Vioxx litigation; chairs a Cardiac Scientific Advisory Board for UnitedHealth; was a member of the IBM Watson Health Life Sciences Board; is a member of the Advisory Board for Element Science, the Advisory Board for Facebook, and the Physician Advisory Board for Aetna; and is the co-founder of HugoHealth, a personal health information platform, and cofounder of Refactor Health, a healthcare AI-augmented data management company. W.L.S. was an investigator for a research agreement, through Yale University, from the Shenzhen Center for Health Information for work to advance intelligent disease prevention and health promotion; collaborates with the National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases in Beijing; is a technical consultant to HugoHealth, a personal health information platform, and cofounder of Refactor Health, an AI-augmented data management platform for healthcare; is a consultant for Interpace Diagnostics Group, a molecular diagnostics company. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products associated with this research to declare.

There is increasing evidence that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) produces more severe symptoms and higher mortality among men than among women 1-5 . However, whether immune responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) differ between sexes, and whether such differences correlate with the sex difference in the disease course of COVID-19, is currently unknown. Here we examined sex differences in viral loads, SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody titres, plasma cytokines and blood-cell phenotyping in patients with moderate COVID-19 who had not received immunomodulatory medications. Male patients had higher plasma levels of innate immune cytokines such as IL-8 and IL-18 along with more robust induction of non-classical monocytes. By contrast, female patients had more robust T cell activation than male patients during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Notably, we found that a poor T cell response negatively correlated with patients' age and was associated with worse disease outcome in male patients, but not in female patients. By contrast, higher levels of innate immune cytokines were associated with worse disease progression in female patients, but not in male patients. These findings provide a possible explanation for the observed sex biases in COVID-19, and provide an important basis for the development of a sex-based approach to the treatment and care of male and female patients with COVID-19.

Diagnosis codes are used to study SARS-CoV2 infections and COVID-19 hospitalizations in administrative and electronic health record (EHR) data. Using EHR data (April 2020–March 2021) at the Yale-New Haven Health System and the three hospital systems of the Mayo Clinic, computable phenotype definitions based on ICD-10 diagnosis of COVID-19 (U07.1) were evaluated against positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or antigen tests. We included 69,423 patients at Yale and 75,748 at Mayo Clinic with either a diagnosis code or a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. The precision and recall of a COVID-19 diagnosis for a positive test were 68.8% and 83.3%, respectively, at Yale, with higher precision (95%) and lower recall (63.5%) at Mayo Clinic, varying between 59.2% in Rochester to 97.3% in Arizona. For hospitalizations with a principal COVID-19 diagnosis, 94.8% at Yale and 80.5% at Mayo Clinic had an associated positive laboratory test, with secondary diagnosis of COVID-19 identifying additional patients. These patients had a twofold higher inhospital mortality than based on principal diagnosis. Standardization of coding practices is needed before the use of diagnosis codes in clinical research and epidemiological surveillance of COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ongoing coronavirus disease outbreak demonstrates the need for novel applications of real-time data to produce timely information about incident cases. Using health information technology (HIT) and real-world data, we sought to produce an interface that could, in near real time, identify patients presenting with suspected respiratory tract infection and enable monitoring of test results related to specific pathogens, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. This tool was built upon our computational health platform, which provides access to near real-time data from disparate HIT sources across our health system. This combination of technology allowed us to rapidly prototype, iterate, and deploy a platform to support a cohesive organizational response to a rapidly evolving outbreak. Platforms that allow for agile analytics are needed to keep pace with evolving needs within the health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]