European society of clinical microbiology and infectious diseases guidelines for coronavirus disease 2019: an update on treatment of patients with mild/moderate disease

ScopeDespite the large availability of vaccines, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), induced by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, continues to be a major threat for health-care providers and fragile people. A number of options are now available for outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at the risk of disease progression for the prevention of deaths or hospitalization.MethodsA European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases COVID-19 guidelines task force was established by the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Executive Committee. A small group was established, half appointed by the chair and the remaining selected based on an open call. Each panel met virtually once a week. For all decisions, a simple majority vote was used. A long list of clinical questions using the population, intervention, comparison, outcome format was developed at the beginning of the process. For each population, intervention, comparison, outcome, two panel members performed a literature search, with a third panelist involved in case of inconsistent results. Voting was based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.RecommendationsIn this update, we focus on anti-viral agents, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and other treatment options proposed for patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 who are at the risk of hospitalization or death. Although the use of anti-virals is recommended, especially nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and remdesivir or, alternatively, molnupirarvir, the administration of mAbs against the spike protein strictly depends on circulating variants or the ability to test timely for variants and sub-variants. At the time of writing (April–June 2022), the only active mAb was tixagevimab/cilgavimab given the predominance of the Omicron BA.2, BA.3, BA.4 and BA.5 sub-lineages in Europe. However, considering that the epidemiological scenario is extremely dynamic, constant monitoring of variants of concern is mandatory.     

Evidence of co-infections during Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants co-circulation through prospective screening and sequencing

ObjectivesTo describe Delta/Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants co-infection detection and confirmation during the fifth wave of COVID-19 pandemics in France in 7 immunocompetent and epidemiologically unrelated patients.MethodsSince December 2021, the surveillance of Delta/Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC) circulation was performed through prospective screening of positive-samples using single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) PCR assays targeting SARS-CoV-2 S-gene mutations K417N (Omicron specific) and L452R (Delta specific). Samples showing unexpected mutational profiles were further submitted to whole genome sequencing (WGS) using three different primer sets.ResultsBetween weeks 49-2021 and 02-2022, SARS-CoV-2 genome was detected in 3831 respiratory samples, of which 3237 (84.5%) were screened for VOC specific SNPs. Unexpected mutation profiles suggesting a dual Delta/Omicron population were observed in 7 nasopharyngeal samples (0.2%). These co-infections were confirmed by WGS. For 2 patients, the sequence analyses of longitudinal samples collected 7 to 11 days apart showed that Delta or Omicron can outcompete the other variant during dual infection. Additionally, for one of these samples, a recombination event between Delta and Omicron was detected.ConclusionsThis work demonstrates that SARS-CoV-2 Delta/Omicron co-infections are not rare in high virus co-circulation periods. Moreover, co-infections can further lead to genetic recombination which may generate new chimeric variants with unpredictable epidemic or pathogenic properties that could represent a serious health threat.     

Clinical characteristics of asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with mild COVID-19

ObjectivesDetailed knowledge on the prevalence of asymptomatic cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the clinical characteristics of mild COVID-19 is essential for effective control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We determined the prevalence of asymptomatic cases of COVID-19 and characterized the symptoms of patients with mild COVID-19.MethodsStudy participants were recruited from a community facility designated for the isolation of patients without moderate-to-severe symptoms of COVID-19 in South Korea. The prevalence of asymptomatic patients at admission and the detailed symptoms of mild COVID-19 were evaluated through a questionnaire-based survey. Diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed by real-time RT-PCR.ResultsOf the 213 individuals with COVID-19, 41 (19.2%) were asymptomatic until admission. Among the remaining patients with mild COVID-19, the most common symptom was cough (40.1%; 69/172), followed by hyposmia (39.5%; 68/172) and sputum (39.5%; 68/172). Of the 68 individuals with hyposmia, 61 (90%) had accompanying symptoms such as hypogeusia, nasal congestion or rhinorrhoea. Fever (>37.5°C) was only observed in 20 (11.6%) individuals.ConclusionsAs much as one-fifth of individuals with COVID-19 remained asymptomatic from exposure to admission. Hyposmia was quite frequent among individuals with mild COVID-19, but fever was not. Social distancing should be strongly implemented to prevent disease transmission from asymptomatic individuals or those with mild and inconspicuous symptoms.     

Immunological and clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised populations: a systematic review

BackgroundAvailable data show that COVID-19 vaccines may be less effective in immunocompromised populations, who are at increased risk of severe COVID-19.ObjectivesWe conducted a systematic review of literature to assess immunogenicity, efficacy and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised populations.Data sourcesWe searched Medline and Embase databases.Study eligibility criteria, patients, interventionsWe included studies of COVID-19 vaccines after complete vaccination in immunocompromised patients until 31 August 2021. Studies with <10 patients, safety data only and case series of breakthrough infections were excluded.MethodsRisk of bias was assessed via the tool developed by the National Institutes of Health on interventional and observational studies. Immunogenicity was assessed through non-response rate defined as no anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies, efficacy and effectiveness by the relative reduction in risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19. We collected factors associated with the risk of non-response. We presented collected data by immunosuppression type.ResultsWe screened 5917 results, included 162 studies. There were 157 on immunogenicity in 25 209 participants, including 7835 cancer or haematological malignancy patients (31.1%), 6302 patients on dialysis (25.0%), 5974 solid organ transplant recipients (23.7%) and 4680 immune-mediated disease patients (18.6%). Proportion of non-responders seemed higher among solid organ transplant recipients (range 18–100%) and patients with haematological malignancy (range 14–61%), and lower in patients with cancer (range 2–36%) and patients on dialysis (range 2–30%). Risk factors for non-response included older age, use of corticosteroids, immunosuppressive or anti-CD20 agent. Ten studies evaluated immunogenicity of an additional dose. Five studies evaluated vaccine efficacy or effectiveness: three on SARS-CoV-2 infection (range 71–81%), one on COVID-19-related hospitalization (62.9%), one had a too small sample size.ConclusionsThis systematic review highlights the risk of low immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised populations, especially solid organ transplant recipients and patients with haematological malignancy. Despite lack of vaccine effectiveness data, enhanced vaccine regimens may be necessary.     

Duration of infectious shedding of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant and its relation with symptoms

ObjectivesSARS-CoV-2 infections with Omicron variants have a high capability of human-to-human transmission. Nevertheless, the duration of isolation for mild cases was shortened to 5 to 7 days. We aimed to detect the duration of viral shedding among healthcare workers (HCWs) with Omicron by using viral culture.MethodsWe prospectively included newly diagnosed nonsevere, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive HCWs. Nasopharyngeal swab samples were obtained consecutively on days 5, 7,10, and 14 of onset of symptoms. The samples were examined by nucleic acid amplification test and viral culture.ResultsIn total, 55 non-severe patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant were included. The mean age of the population was 34 years (range, 23 to 54) and 78% (43/55) were female. The PCR positivity rate on days 5, 7, 10, and 14 was 96.4% (53/55), 87.3% (48/55), 74.545% (41/55), and 41.8% (23/55) consecutively, whereas the viral culture positivity rates were 83% (44/53), 52% (26/50), 13.5% (7/52), and 8% (4/50). Among the patients who became symptom-free, the viral culture positivity rates were 100% (4/4), 58% (7/12), 11% (3/27), and 5% (2/41).DiscussionWe showed that among the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infected patients, viral shedding continues for ≥10 days in 13.5% of all cases and 11% in symptom-free cases. The decision for cessation of isolation according to the presence of symptoms could be reconsidered until further studies disapprove of our results. Meanwhile, the infected HCWs who give care to high-risk patients for severe COVID-19 might extend their isolations ≤10 days after the onset of symptoms, regardless of their symptoms.     

Comparison of secondary attack rate and viable virus shedding between patients with SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants: A prospective cohort study

There are limited data comparing the transmission rates and kinetics of viable virus shedding of the Omicron variant to those of the Delta variant. We compared these rates in hospitalized patients infected with Delta and Omicron variants. We prospectively enrolled adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to a tertiary care hospital in South Korea between September 2021 and May 2022. Secondary attack rates were calculated by epidemiologic investigation, and daily saliva samples were collected to evaluate viral shedding kinetics. Genomic and subgenomic SARS-CoV-2 RNA was measured by PCR, and virus culture was performed from daily saliva samples. A total of 88 patients with COVID-19 who agreed to daily sampling and were interviewed, were included. Of the 88 patients, 48 (59%) were infected with Delta, and 34 (41%) with Omicron; a further 5 patients gave undetectable or inconclusive RNA PCR results and 1 was suspected of being coinfected with both variants. Omicron group had a higher secondary attack rate (31% [38/124] vs. 7% [34/456], p < 0.001). Survival analysis revealed that shorter viable virus shedding period was observed in Omicron variant compared with Delta variant (median 4, IQR [1−7], vs. 8.5 days, IQR [5–12 days], p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed that moderate-to-critical disease severity (HR: 1.96), and immunocompromised status (HR: 2.17) were independent predictors of prolonged viral shedding, whereas completion of initial vaccine series or first booster-vaccinated status (HR: 0.49), and Omicron infection (HR: 0.44) were independently associated with shorter viable virus shedding. Patients with Omicron infections had higher transmission rates but shorter periods of transmissible virus shedding than those with Delta infections.     

Effectiveness of MRNA booster vaccine among healthcare workers in New York City during the Omicron surge,December 2021 to January 2022

ObjectiveTo describe effectiveness of mRNA vaccines by comparing 2-dose (2D) and 3-dose (3D) healthcare worker (HCW) recipients in the setting of Omicron variant dominance. Performance of 2D and 3D vaccine series against SARS-CoV-2 variants and the clinical outcomes of HCWs may inform return-to-work guidance.MethodsIn a retrospective study from December 15, 2020 to January 15, 2022, SARS-CoV-2 infections among HCWs at a large tertiary cancer centre in New York City were examined to estimate infection rates (aggregated positive tests / person-days) and 95% CIs over the Omicron period in 3D and 2D mRNA vaccinated HCWs and were compared using rate ratios. We described the clinical features of post-vaccine infections and impact of prior (pre-Omicron) COVID infection on vaccine effectiveness.ResultsAmong the 20857 HCWs in our cohort, 20,660 completed the 2D series with an mRNA vaccine during our study period and 12461 had received a third dose by January 15, 2022. The infection rate ratio for 3D versus 2D vaccinated HCWs was 0.667 (95% CI 0.623, 0.713) for an estimated 3D vaccine effectiveness of 33.3% compared to two doses only during the Omicron dominant period from December 15, 2021 to January 15, 2022. Breakthrough Omicron infections after 3D + 14 days occurred in 1,315 HCWs. Omicron infections were mild, with 16% of 3D and 11% 2D HCWs being asymptomatic.DiscussionStudy demonstrates improved vaccine-derived protection against COVID-19 infection in 3D versus 2D mRNA vaccinees during the Omicron surge. The advantage of 3D vaccination was maintained irrespective of prior COVID-19 infection status.     

The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron lineages,immune escape,and vaccine effectivity

As of November 2021, several SARS-CoV-2 variants appeared and became dominant epidemic strains in many countries, including five variants of concern (VOCs) Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Omicron defined by the World Health Organization during the COVID-19 pandemic. As of August 2022, Omicron is classified into five main lineages, BA.1, BA.2, BA.3, BA.4, BA.5 and some sublineages (BA.1.1, BA.2.12.1, BA.2.11, BA.2.75, BA.4.6) ( https://www.gisaid.org/ ). Compared to the previous VOCs (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta), all the Omicron lineages have the most highly mutations in the spike protein, and with 50 mutations accumulated throughout the genome. Early data indicated that Omicron BA.2 sublineage had higher infectivity and more immune escape than the early wild-type (WT) strain, the previous VOCs, and BA.1. Recently, global surveillance data suggest a higher transmissibility of BA.4/BA.5 than BA.1, BA.1.1 and BA.2, and BA.4/BA.5 is becoming dominant strain in many countries globally.     

BNT162b2 vaccine breakthrough: clinical characteristics of 152 fully vaccinated hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Israel

ObjectivesThe mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have shown high effectiveness in the prevention of symptomatic COVID-19, hospitalization, severe disease and death. Nevertheless, a minority of vaccinated individuals might become infected and experience significant morbidity. Characteristics of vaccine breakthrough infections have not been studied. We sought to portray the population of Israeli patients, who were hospitalized with COVID-19 despite full vaccination.MethodsA retrospective multicentre cohort study of 17 hospitals included patients fully vaccinated with Pfizer/BioNTech's BNT162b2 vaccine who developed COVID-19 more than 7 days after the second vaccine dose and required hospitalization. The risk for poor outcome, defined as a composite of mechanical ventilation or death, was assessed.ResultsA total of 152 patients were included, accounting for half of hospitalized fully vaccinated patients in Israel. Poor outcome was noted in 38 patients and mortality rate reached 22% (34/152). Notably, the cohort was characterized by a high rate of co-morbidities predisposing to severe COVID-19, including hypertension (108; 71%), diabetes (73; 48%), congestive heart failure (41; 27%), chronic kidney and lung diseases (37; 24% each), dementia (29; 19%) and cancer (36; 24%), and only six (4%) had no co-morbidities. Sixty (40%) of the patients were immunocompromised. Higher viral load was associated with a significant risk for poor outcome. Risk also appeared higher in patients receiving anti-CD20 treatment and in patients with low titres of anti-Spike IgG, but these differences did not reach statistical significance.ConclusionsWe found that severe COVID-19 infection, associated with a high mortality rate, might develop in a minority of fully vaccinated individuals with multiple co-morbidities. Our patients had a higher rate of co-morbidities and immunosuppression compared with previously reported non-vaccinated hospitalized individuals with COVID-19. Further characterization of this vulnerable population may help to develop guidance to augment their protection, either by continued social distancing, or by additional active or passive vaccinations.     

Vaccine effectiveness against Delta,Omicron BA.1, and BA.2 in a highly vaccinated Asian setting: a test-negative design study

ObjectivesWe compared the vaccine effectiveness over time of the primary series and booster against infection and severe disease with the Delta, Omicron BA.1, and BA.2 variants in Singapore, an Asian setting with high vaccination coverage.MethodsWe conducted a test-negative case-control study on all adult residents in Singapore who underwent PCR testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in acute hospitals. Individuals with a negative PCR from 1 September, 2021, to 30 November, 2021, and 1 December, 2021, to 25 April, 2022, served as controls for the Delta and Omicron variants respectively, and PCR-positive individuals within these two time periods served as cases. Associations between vaccination status and SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease with the Delta or Omicron variants were measured using Poisson regressions. Vaccine effectiveness was calculated by taking 1 minus risk ratio.ResultsThere were 68 114 individuals comprising 58 495 controls and 9619 cases for the Delta period, of whom 53 093 completed the primary series and 9161 were boosted. For the Omicron period, 104 601 individuals comprising 80 428 controls, 8643 BA.1 cases, and 15 530 BA.2 cases were included, of whom 29 183 and 71 513 were vaccinated with the primary series and boosted, respectively. The primary series provided greater protection against infection with Delta (45%, 95% CI 40–50%) than against infection with Omicron (21%, 95% CI 7–34% for BA.1; 18%, 95% CI 6–29% for BA.2) at <2 months from vaccination. Vaccine effectiveness of the booster was similar against infection with BA.1 (44%, 95% CI 38–50%) and BA.2 (40%, 95% CI 35–40%). Protection against severe disease by the booster for BA.1 (83%, 95% CI 76–88%) and BA.2 (78%, 95% CI 73–82%) was comparable to that by the primary series for Delta (80%, 95% CI 73–85%).ConclusionOur findings support the use of a booster dose to reduce the risk of severe disease and mitigate the impact on the healthcare system in an Omicron-predominant epidemic.     

Cross neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariants after repeated doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines

We have measured the humoral response to messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines in COVID-19 naïve and convalescent individuals. Third doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines induced a significant increase in potency and breadth of neutralization against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoC) including Omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.2, and BA.2.12.1, that were cross-neutralized at comparable levels and less for BA.4/5. This booster effect was especially important in naïve individuals that only after the third dose achieved a level that was comparable with that of vaccinated COVID-19 convalescents except for BA.4/5. Avidity of RBD-binding antibodies was also significantly increased in naïve individuals after the third dose, indicating an association between affinity maturation and cross neutralization of VoC. These results suggest that at least three antigenic stimuli by infection or vaccination with ancestral SARS-CoV-2 sequences are required to induce high avidity cross-neutralizing antibodies. Nevertheless, the circulation of new subvariants such as BA.4/5 with partial resistance to neutralization will have to be closely monitored and eventually consider for future vaccine developments.     

Real-life evaluation of a rapid antigen test (DPP SARS-CoV-2 Antigen) for COVID-19 diagnosis of primary healthcare patients,in the context of the Omicron-dominant wave in Brazil

ObjectivesWe aimed to investigate the real-life performance of the rapid antigen test in the context of a primary healthcare setting, including symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals that sought diagnosis during an Omicron infection wave.MethodsWe prospectively accessed the performance of the DPP SARS-CoV-2 Antigen test in the context of an Omicron-dominant real-life setting. We evaluated 347 unselected individuals (all-comers) from a public testing centre in Brazil, performing the rapid antigen test diagnosis at point-of-care with fresh samples. The combinatory result from two distinct real-time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) methods was employed as a reference and 13 samples with discordant PCR results were excluded.ResultsThe assessment of the rapid test in 67 PCR-positive and 265 negative samples revealed an overall sensitivity of 80.5% (CI 95% = 69.1%–89.2%), specificity of 99.2% (CI 95% = 97.3%–99.1%) and positive/negative predictive values higher than 95%. However, we observed that the sensitivity was dependent on the viral load (sensitivity in Ct < 31 = 93.7%, CI = 82.8%–98.7%; Ct > 31 = 47.4%, CI = 24.4%–71.1%). The positive samples evaluated in the study were Omicron (BA.1/BA.1.1) by whole-genome sequencing (n = 40) and multiplex RT-qPCR (n = 17).ConclusionsAltogether, the data obtained from a real-life prospective cohort supports that the rapid antigen test sensitivity for Omicron remains high and underscores the reliability of the test for COVID-19 diagnosis in settings with high disease prevalence and limited PCR testing capability.     

ESCMID COVID-19 living guidelines: drug treatment and clinical management

ScopeIn January 2021, the ESCMID Executive Committee decided to launch a new initiative to develop ESCMID guidelines on several COVID-19-related issues, including treatment of COVID-19.MethodsAn ESCMID COVID-19 guidelines task force was established by the ESCMID Executive Committee. A small group was established, half appointed by the chair, and the remaining selected with an open call. Each panel met virtually once a week. For all decisions, a simple majority vote was used. A long list of clinical questions using the PICO (population, intervention, comparison, outcome) format was developed at the beginning of the process. For each PICO, two panel members performed a literature search with a third panellist involved in case of inconsistent results. Voting was based on the GRADE approach.Questions addressed by the guideline and recommendationsA synthesis of the available evidence and recommendations is provided for each of the 15 PICOs, which cover use of hydroxychloroquine, bamlanivimab alone or in combination with etesevimab, casirivimab combined with imdevimab, ivermectin, azithromycin and empirical antibiotics, colchicine, corticosteroids, convalescent plasma, favipiravir, remdesivir, tocilizumab and interferon β-1a, as well as the utility of antifungal prophylaxis and enoxaparin. In general, the panel recommended against the use of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, azithromycin, colchicine and interferon β-1a. Conditional recommendations were given for the use of monoclonal antibodies in high-risk outpatients with mild–moderate COVID-19, and remdesivir. There was insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for use of favipiravir and antifungal prophylaxis, and it was recommended that antibiotics should not be routinely prescribed in patients with COVID-19 unless bacterial coinfection or secondary infection is suspected or confirmed. Tocilizumab and corticosteroids were recommended for treatment of severe COVID-19 but not in outpatients with non-severe COVID-19.ScopeThe aim of the present guidance is to provide evidence-based recommendations for management of adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). More specifically, the goal is to aid clinicians managing patients with COVID-19 at various levels of severity including outpatients, hospitalized patients, and those admitted to intensive care unit. Considering the composition of the panel, mostly clinical microbiologists or infectious disease specialists with no pulmonology or intensive care background, we focus only on pharmacological treatment and do not give recommendations on oxygen supplement/support. Similarly, as no paediatricians were included in the panel; the recommendations are only for adult patients with COVID-19. Considering the current literature, no guidance was given for special populations such as the immunocompromised.     

Update on the omicron sub-variants BA.4 and BA.5

Several nations have recently begun to relax their public health protocols, particularly regarding the use of face masks when engaging in outdoor activities. This is because there has been a general trend towards fewer cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, new Omicron sub-variants (designated BA.4 and BA.5) have recently emerged. These two subvariants are thought to be the cause of an increase in COVID-19 cases in South Africa, the United States, and Europe. They have also begun to spread throughout Asia. They evolved from the Omicron lineage with characteristics that make them even more contagious and which allow them to circumvent immunity from a previous infection or vaccination. This article reviews a number of scientific considerations about these new variants, including their apparently reduced clinical severity.     

Clinical characteristics of 1139 mild cases of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infected patients in Shanghai

In March 2022, the Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) surged during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Shanghai, but over 90% of patients were mild. This study included 1139 COVID-19 patients mildly infected with the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 in Shanghai from May 1 to 10, 2022, aiming to clarify the demographic characteristics and clinical symptoms of patients with mild Omicron infection. The clinical phenotypes of Omicron infection were identified by model-based cluster analysis to explore the features of different clusters. The median age of the patients was 41.0 years [IQR: 31.0–52.0 years] and 73.0% were male. The top three clinical manifestations are cough (57.5%), expectoration (48.3%), and nasal congestion and runny nose (43.4%). The prevalence of nasal congestion and runny nose varied significantly across the doses of vaccinations, with 23.1% in the unvaccinated population and 30%, 45.9%, and 44.3% in the 1-dose, 2-dose and 3-dose vaccinated populations, respectively. In addition, there were significant differences for fever (23.1%, 26.0%, 28.6%, 18.4%), head and body heaviness (15.4%, 14.0%, 26.7%, 22.4%), and loss of appetite (25.6%, 30.0%, 33.6%, 27.7%). The unvaccinated population had a lower incidence of symptoms than the vaccinated population. Cluster analysis revealed that all four clusters had multisystemic symptoms and were dominated by both general and respiratory symptoms. The more severe the degree of the symptoms was, the higher the prevalence of multisystemic symptoms will be. The Omicron variant produced a lower incidence of symptoms in mildly infected patients than previous SARS-CoV-2 variants, but the clinical symptoms caused by the Omicron variant are more complex, so that it needs to be differentiated from influenza.     

The efficacy of Paxlovid against COVID-19 is the result of the tight molecular docking between Mpro and antiviral drugs (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir)

PurposeCurrently, a number of medications for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment are tested in clinical trials; however, credible clinical studies are becoming increasingly difficult to come by. Paxlovid is a ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir drug that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized for the treatment of COVID-19.This study aimed to demonstrate the interaction of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir on the active site of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) main protease (M^pro).Materials and methodsTo locate the optimal docking between M^pro and antiviral drugs, and to conduct dynamic simulations between atoms in the fusion areas, various bioinformatics and mathematical equations were applied.ResultsAccording to the docking data, nirmatrelvir has a stronger interaction with M^pro than ritonavir, which has more multiple bonds. Molecular docking of antiviral drugs such as Paxlovid has a significant impact on the treatment of COVID-19 virus.ConclusionsAccording to this study, Paxlovid may work on new strains, including Omicron, because the M^pro mutation P132H in the Omicron variant has no direct effect on the protein.     

Clinical characteristics,management and in-hospital mortality of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 in Genoa,Italy

ObjectivesTo describe clinical characteristics, management and outcome of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); and to evaluate risk factors for all-cause in-hospital mortality.MethodsThis retrospective study from a University tertiary care hospital in northern Italy, included hospitalized adult patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 between 25 February 2020 and 25 March 2020.ResultsOverall, 317 individuals were enrolled. Their median age was 71 years and 67.2% were male (213/317). The most common underlying diseases were hypertension (149/317; 47.0%), cardiovascular disease (63/317; 19.9%) and diabetes (49/317; 15.5%). Common symptoms at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis included fever (285/317; 89.9%), shortness of breath (167/317; 52.7%) and dry cough (156/317; 49.2%). An ‘atypical’ presentation including at least one among mental confusion, diarrhoea or nausea and vomiting was observed in 53/317 patients (16.7%). Hypokalaemia occurred in 25.8% (78/302) and 18.5% (56/303) had acute kidney injury. During hospitalization, 111/317 patients (35.0%) received non-invasive respiratory support, 65/317 (20.5%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and 60/317 (18.5%) required invasive mechanical ventilation. All-cause in-hospital mortality, assessed in 275 patients, was 43.6% (120/275). On multivariable analysis, age (per-year increase OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.04–1.10; p < 0.001), cardiovascular disease (OR 2.58; 95% CI 1.07–6.25; p 0.03), and C-reactive protein levels (per-point increase OR 1.009; 95% CI 1.004–1.014; p 0.001) were independent risk factors for all-cause in-hospital mortality.ConclusionsCOVID-19 mainly affected elderly patients with predisposing conditions and caused severe illness, frequently requiring non-invasive respiratory support or ICU admission. Despite supportive care, COVID-19 remains associated with a substantial risk of all-cause in-hospital mortality.