Publications

INTRODUCTION

As of 26 March 2021, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention had reported 4 159 055 cases of COVID-19 and 111 357 deaths among the 55 African Union member states; however, no country has published a nationally representative serosurvey as of October 2021. Such data are vital for understanding the pandemic's progression on the continent, evaluating containment measures, and policy planning.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional, nationally representative, age-stratified serosurvey in Sierra Leone in March 2021 by randomly selecting 120 Enumeration Areas throughout the country and 10 randomly selected households in each of these. One to two persons per selected household were interviewed to collect information on sociodemographics, symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, exposure history to laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases, and history of COVID-19 illness. Capillary blood was collected by fingerstick, and blood samples were tested using the Hangzhou Biotest Biotech RightSign COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Cassette. Total seroprevalence was estimated after applying sampling weights.

RESULTS

The overall weighted seroprevalence was 2.6% (95% CI 1.9% to 3.4%). This was 43 times higher than the reported number of cases. Rural seropositivity was 1.8% (95% CI 1.0% to 2.5%), and urban seropositivity was 4.2% (95% CI 2.6% to 5.7%).

DISCUSSION

Overall seroprevalence was low compared with countries in Europe and the Americas (suggesting relatively successful containment in Sierra Leone). This has ramifications for the country's third wave (which started in June 2021), during which the average number of daily reported cases was 87 by the end of the month:this could potentially be on the order of 3700 actual infections per day, calling for stronger containment measures in a country with only 0.2% of people fully vaccinated. It may also reflect significant under-reporting of incidence and mortality across the continent.

IMPORTANCE

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed increased strain on health care workers and disrupted childcare and schooling arrangements in unprecedented ways. As substantial gender inequalities existed in medicine before the pandemic, physician mothers may be at particular risk for adverse professional and psychological consequences.

OBJECTIVE

To assess gender differences in work-family factors and mental health among physician parents during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This prospective cohort study included 276 US physicians enrolled in the Intern Health Study since their first year of residency training. Physicians who had participated in the primary study as interns during the 2007 to 2008 and 2008 to 2009 academic years and opted into a secondary longitudinal follow-up study were invited to complete an online survey in August 2018 and August 2020.

EXPOSURES

Work-family experience included 3 single-item questions and the Work and Family Conflict Scale, and mental health symptoms included the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes were work-to-family and family-to-work conflict and depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms during August 2020. Depressive symptoms between 2018 (before the COVID-19 pandemic) and 2020 (during the COVID-19 pandemic) were compared by gender.

RESULTS

Among 215 physician parents who completed the August 2020 survey, 114 (53.0%) were female and the weighted mean (SD) age was 40.1 (3.57) years. Among physician parents, women were more likely to be responsible for childcare or schooling (24.6% [95% CI, 19.0%-30.2%] vs 0.8% [95% CI, 0.01%-2.1%]; P < .001) and household tasks (31.4% [95% CI, 25.4%-37.4%] vs 7.2% [95% CI, 3.5%-10.9%]; P < .001) during the pandemic compared with men. Women were also more likely than men to work primarily from home (40.9% [95% CI, 35.1%-46.8%] vs 22.0% [95% CI, 17.2%-26.8%]; P < .001) and reduce their work hours (19.4% [95% CI, 14.7%-24.1%] vs 9.4% [95% CI, 6.0%-12.8%]; P = .007). Women experienced greater work-to-family conflict (β = 2.79; 95% CI, 1.00 to 4.59; P = .03), family-to-work conflict (β = 3.09; 95% CI, 1.18-4.99; P = .02), and depressive (β = 1.76; 95% CI, 0.56-2.95; P = .046) and anxiety (β = 2.87; 95% CI, 1.49-4.26; P < .001) symptoms compared with men. We observed a difference between women and men in depressive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic (mean [SD] PHQ-9 score: 5.05 [6.64] vs 3.52 [5.75]; P = .009) that was not present before the pandemic (mean [SD] PHQ-9 score: 3.69 [5.26] vs 3.60 [6.30]; P = .86).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found significant gender disparities in work and family experiences and mental health symptoms among physician parents during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may translate to increased risk for suicide, medical errors, and lower quality of patient care for physician mothers. Institutional and public policy solutions are needed to mitigate the potential adverse consequences for women's careers and well-being.

PURPOSE

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is an important component of first-line treatment selection for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and is typically ordered by medical oncologists in the outpatient setting after the pathologic diagnosis has been established. Time to treatment initiation is an important clinical challenge, especially for patients with rapidly progressive disease.

METHODS

Plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) NGS was performed on 20 patients with suspected metastatic NSCLC hospitalized at an academic cancer center, before pathologic diagnosis. Clinicopathologic and treatment data were analyzed. Time from pathologic diagnosis to genotyping result was compared with standard care groups who underwent plasma or tumor NGS in routine clinical care.

RESULTS

The median time from pathologic diagnosis to the plasma cfDNA NGS result was 3 days in the study cohort, versus 18 days and 35.5 days in the standard care plasma and tumor NGS groups, respectively. 68.4% of evaluable patients had metastatic NSCLC, and 21.1% had another advanced solid tumor. Forty-five percent of plasma cfDNA results demonstrated actionable or informative genomic variants, and 20% of patients received standard or investigational first-line targeted therapy as a direct result of the plasma cfDNA NGS.

CONCLUSION

Plasma cfDNA NGS before pathologic diagnosis in hospitalized patients with suspected metastatic NSCLC results in substantially shorter time to genotyping result compared with standard outpatient workflows. This provides important initial evidence for the use of plasma-based genotyping earlier in the diagnostic journey, especially for patients with clinically aggressive disease. Additional studies and innovative approaches toward regulatory and reimbursement considerations are needed.