Search

Clinicians in the emergency department (ED) face challenges in concurrently assessing patients with suspected COVID-19 infection, detecting bacterial coinfection, and determining illness severity since current practices require separate workflows. Here, we explore the accuracy of the IMX-BVN-3/IMX-SEV-3 29 mRNA host response classifiers in simultaneously detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and bacterial coinfections and predicting clinical severity of COVID-19. A total of 161 patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 (52.2% female; median age, 50.0 years; 51% hospitalized; 5.6% deaths) were enrolled at the Stanford Hospital ED. RNA was extracted (2.5 mL whole blood in PAXgene blood RNA), and 29 host mRNAs in response to the infection were quantified using Nanostring nCounter. The IMX-BVN-3 classifier identified SARS-CoV-2 infection in 151 patients with a sensitivity of 93.8%. Six of 10 patients undetected by the classifier had positive COVID tests more than 9 days prior to enrollment, and the remaining patients oscillated between positive and negative results in subsequent tests. The classifier also predicted that 6 (3.7%) patients had a bacterial coinfection. Clinical adjudication confirmed that 5/6 (83.3%) of the patients had bacterial infections, i.e., Clostridioides difficile colitis (n = 1), urinary tract infection (n = 1), and clinically diagnosed bacterial infections (n = 3), for a specificity of 99.4%. Two of 101 (2.8%) patients in the IMX-SEV-3 "Low" severity classification and 7/60 (11.7%) in the "Moderate" severity classification died within 30 days of enrollment. IMX-BVN-3/IMX-SEV-3 classifiers accurately identified patients with COVID-19 and bacterial coinfections and predicted patients' risk of death. A point-of-care version of these classifiers, under development, could improve ED patient management, including more accurate treatment decisions and optimized resource utilization. IMPORTANCE We assay the utility of the single-test IMX-BVN-3/IMX-SEV-3 classifiers that require just 2.5 mL of patient blood in concurrently detecting viral and bacterial infections as well as predicting the severity and 30-day outcome from the infection. A point-of-care device, in development, will circumvent the need for blood culturing and drastically reduce the time needed to detect an infection. This will negate the need for empirical use of broad-spectrum antibiotics and allow for antibiotic use stewardship. Additionally, accurate classification of the severity of infection and the prediction of 30-day severe outcomes will allow for appropriate allocation of hospital resources.

Three cases of juvenile xanthogranuloma from two ophthalmology departments were reviewed. Clinical histories, ophthalmic examination, physical examination, investigations, and treatment of these cases are described. A 4-month-old boy presented with spontaneous hyphema and secondary glaucoma. He was treated with intensive topical steroid and anti-glaucomatous eye drops. The hyphema gradually resolved and the intra-ocular pressure reverted to 11 mm Hg without any other medication. Biopsy of his scalp mass confirmed the diagnosis of juvenile xanthogranuloma. A 31-month-old boy presented with a limbal mass. Excisional biopsy of the mass was performed and confirmed it was a juvenile xanthogranuloma. A 20-month-old boy was regularly followed up for epiblepharon and astigmatism. He presented to a paediatrician with a skin nodule over his back. Skin biopsy confirmed juvenile xanthogranuloma. He had no other ocular signs. Presentation of juvenile xanthogranuloma can be very different, about which ophthalmologists should be aware of. Biopsy of the suspected lesion is essential to confirm the diagnosis.