Search

Considering sex as a biological variable in modern digital health solutions, we investigated sex-specific differences in the trajectory of four physiological parameters across a COVID-19 infection. A wearable medical device measured breathing rate, heart rate, heart rate variability, and wrist skin temperature in 1163 participants (mean age = 44.1 years, standard deviation [SD] = 5.6; 667 [57%] females). Participants reported daily symptoms and confounders in a complementary app. A machine learning algorithm retrospectively ingested daily biophysical parameters to detect COVID-19 infections. COVID-19 serology samples were collected from all participants at baseline and follow-up. We analysed potential sex-specific differences in physiology and antibody titres using multilevel modelling and t-tests. Over 1.5 million hours of physiological data were recorded. During the symptomatic period of infection, men demonstrated larger increases in skin temperature, breathing rate, and heart rate as well as larger decreases in heart rate variability than women. The COVID-19 infection detection algorithm performed similarly well for men and women. Our study belongs to the first research to provide evidence for differential physiological responses to COVID-19 between females and males, highlighting the potential of wearable technology to inform future precision medicine approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of dielectrophoretic forces is crucially tied to the knowledge of Joule heating within a fluid, since the use of planar microelectrodes creates a temperature gradient within which the particle of interest is manipulated. Mapping temperature with sufficient spatial resolution within a dielectrophoretic trap is recognized to be of high importance. Herein, we demonstrate local temperature measurements in the vicinity of a trapped micrometersize particle using confocal fluorescence spectroscopy. Such measurements are shown to provide a novel calibration tool for screening temperature-mediated processes with high resolution. 10.1021/ac101557g

Both capillary and chip-based electrophoresis are powerful separation methods widely used for the separation of complex analytical mixtures in the fields of genomics, proteomics, metabolomics, and cellular analysis. However their utility as basic tools in high-throughput analysis and multidimensional separations has been hampered by inefficient or biased sample injection methods. Herein, we address this problem through the development of a simple separation platform that incorporates droplet-based microfluidic module for the encapsulation of analytes prior to the analytical separation. This method allows for the precise and reproducible injection of pL to nL volume isolated plugs into an electrophoretic separation channel. The developed platform is free from inter sample contamination, allows for small sample size, high-throughput analysis, and can provide quantitative analytical information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused >1 million infections during January-March 2020. There is an urgent need for reliable antibody detection approaches to support diagnosis, vaccine development, safe release of individuals from quarantine, and population lock-down exit strategies. We set out to evaluate the performance of ELISA and lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) devices. Methods: We tested plasma for COVID (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SARS-CoV-2) IgM and IgG antibodies by ELISA and using nine different LFIA devices. We used a panel of plasma samples from individuals who have had confirmed COVID infection based on a PCR result (n=40), and pre-pandemic negative control samples banked in the UK prior to December-2019 (n=142). Results: ELISA detected IgM or IgG in 34/40 individuals with a confirmed history of COVID infection (sensitivity 85%, 95%CI 70-94%), vs. 0/50 pre-pandemic controls (specificity 100% [95%CI 93-100%]). IgG levels were detected in 31/31 COVID-positive individuals tested ≥10 days after symptom onset (sensitivity 100%, 95%CI 89-100%). IgG titres rose during the 3 weeks post symptom onset and began to fall by 8 weeks, but remained above the detection threshold. Point estimates for the sensitivity of LFIA devices ranged from 55-70% versus RT-PCR and 65-85% versus ELISA, with specificity 95-100% and 93-100% respectively. Within the limits of the study size, the performance of most LFIA devices was similar. Conclusions: Currently available commercial LFIA devices do not perform sufficiently well for individual patient applications. However, ELISA can be calibrated to be specific for detecting and quantifying SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG and is highly sensitive for IgG from 10 days following first symptoms., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RC reports personal fees and other from MIROBIO Ltd, outside the submitted work. DWE reports personal fees from Gilead, outside the submitted work. SH reports grants from NIHR, during the conduct of the study. AJP reports grants from NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, outside the submitted work; and AJP is Chair of UK Dept. Health and Social Care’s (DHSC) Joint Committee on Vaccination & Immunisation (JCVI) and is a member of the WHO’s SAGE. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of DHSC, JCVI, NIHR or WHO. GRS reports personal fees from GSK Vaccines SAB. MGS reports grants from National Institute of Health Research, grants from Medical Research Council UK, grants from Health Protection Research Unit in Emerging & Zoonotic Infections, University of Liverpool, during the conduct of the study; other from Integrum Scientific LLC, Greensboro, NC, USA, outside the submitted work. ASW reports grants from NIHR, during the conduct of the study. No other author has a conflict of interest to declare., (Copyright: © 2020 Adams ER et al.)