ABSTRACT
Importance Despite widespread use of clinical diagnostic tests to assess prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2, limited evidence exists regarding how test results affect patient behaviors and decision-making.
Objective To understand the rationale behind ordering diagnostic T-cell receptor (TCR) immunosequencing for assessment of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and evaluate how test results affect patient behaviors, including day-to-day activities and decisions about vaccination.
Design Mandatory demographic information and clinical characteristics were collected for all individuals ordering T-Detect™ COVID. Study participants completed a one-time survey that included additional questions about demographics and clinical characteristics, relevant interactions with healthcare providers, reasons for ordering diagnostic TCR immunosequencing, and the utility of test results.
Setting US participants ordering T-Detect COVID between February 2021 and March 2022.
Participants Of the 806 individuals who underwent diagnostic TCR immunosequencing, provided informed consent, and were sent the email survey, 718 completed the survey (response rate, 89.1%). At the time of receiving the test report, 25.5% of participants had been vaccinated against COVID-19, 29.7% reported a previous COVID-19 infection, and 25.6% were immunocompromised.
Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s) Patient demographics and clinical characteristics were reported using descriptive statistics. Additional analyses explored trends in reported data over time and evaluated reasons for ordering diagnostic TCR immunosequencing and behaviors among participant subgroups (vaccinated or unvaccinated individuals and those with positive or negative test results). Logistic regression analysis evaluated factors that increased the likelihood of post-test vaccination.
Results Study participants ordered diagnostic TCR immunosequencing to understand their health status (55.0%) and to inform decision-making about daily activities (43.6%) and vaccination (38.3%). Most participants (92.1%) ordered diagnostic TCR immunosequencing for themselves without consulting their physician. Testing negative for prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with increased likelihood of subsequent COVID-19 vaccination (31.0% vs 6.9%; median time to vaccination, 17.0 days vs 47.5 days), which was confirmed by logistic regression analysis.
Conclusions and Relevance This report presents patient-reported clinical utility of a commercial COVID-19 assay based on an immune response readout. Our findings suggest that participants used diagnostic TCR immunosequencing results to inform decisions about daily activities and COVID-19 vaccination.
Trial Registration Not applicable.
KEY POINTS
We aimed to understand the factors driving immunologic testing for SARS-CoV-2 and characterize the actions and decisions spurred by test results.
Results of this study suggest that individuals frequently ordered immunologic testing for themselves to understand their health status and to inform decision-making about daily activities and vaccination.
Among unvaccinated participants, testing negative for prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with increased likelihood of undergoing vaccination and shorter time to vaccination.
This study provides the first real-world evidence of patient-perceived utility of a COVID-19 immunologic test for decision-making related to vaccination and lifestyle.
Competing Interest Statement
Miao Jiang declares current employment with Adaptive Biotechnologies related to the current work and current equity ownership and past employment with AstraZeneca LLC unrelated to and outside the current work. Nicholas K. Akers, Darcy B. Gill, Benjamin Eckhert, and Emily Svejnoha declare employment and equity ownership with Adaptive Biotechnologies related to the current work. Harlan Robins declares leadership, employment, and equity ownership with Adaptive Biotechnologies related to the current work.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by Adaptive Biotechnologies. Medical writing and editorial support were funded by Adaptive Biotechnologies and provided by Melanie Styers, PhD, Leslie Mitchell, PhD, and Anuradha Kumari, PhD, of BluPrint Oncology Concepts, LLC.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Survey data were collected pursuant to an Institutional Review Board-approved clinical study protocol (PRO-00854, WIRB# 20210171).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* Author was employed by Adaptive Biotechnologies at time of study.
Data Availability
Data requests may be submitted for consideration to Adaptive Biotechnologies Medical Information.
https://www.adaptivebiotech.com/medical-information-request/
