Intravenous immunoglobulin treatment for patients with severe COVID-19: a retrospective multicentre study

ObjectivesIntravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is commonly used to treat severe COVID-19, although the clinical outcome of such treatment remains unclear. This study evaluated the effectiveness of IVIG treatment in severe COVID-19 patients.MethodsThis retrospective multicentre study evaluated 28-day mortality in severe COVID-19 patients with or without IVIG treatment. Each patient treated with IVIG was matched with one untreated patient. Logistic regression and inverse probability weighting (IPW) were used to control confounding factors.ResultsThe study included 850 patients (421 IVIG-treated patients and 429 non-IVIG-treated patients). After matching, 406 patients per group remained. No significant difference in 28-day mortality was observed after IPW analysis (average treatment effect (ATE) = 0.008, 95% CI –0.081 to 0.097, p 0.863). There were no significant differences between the IVIG group and non-IVIG group for acute respiratory distress syndrome, diffuse intravascular coagulation, myocardial injury, acute hepatic injury, shock, acute kidney injury, non-invasive mechanical ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, continuous renal replacement therapy and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation except for prone position ventilation (ATE = –0.022, 95% CI –0.041 to –0.002, p 0.028).DiscussionIVIG treatment was not associated with significant changes in 28-day mortality in severe COVID-19 patients. The effectiveness of IVIG in treating patients with severe COVID-19 needs to be further investigated through future studies.     

Risk factors for disease severity,unimprovement, and mortality in COVID-19 patients in Wuhan,China

ObjectiveIn December 2019, coronavirus disease (COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan. However, the characteristics and risk factors associated with disease severity, unimprovement and mortality are unclear and our objective is to throw some light on these.MethodsAll consecutive patients diagnosed with COVID-19 admitted to the Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University from January 11 to February 6, 2020, were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study.ResultsA total of 663 COVID-19 patients were included in this study. Among these, 247 (37.3%) had at least one kind of chronic disease; 0.5% of the patients (n = 3) were diagnosed with mild COVID-19, while 37.8% (251/663), 47.5% (315/663), and 14.2% (94/663) were in moderate, severe, and critical conditions, respectively. In our hospital, during follow-up 251 of 663 patients (37.9%) improved and 25 patients died, a mortality rate of 3.77%. Older patients (>60 years old) and those with chronic diseases were prone to have a severe to critical COVID-19 condition, to show unimprovement, and to die (p <0.001, <0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified being male (OR = 0.486, 95%CI 0.311–0.758; p 0.001), having a severe COVID-19 condition (OR = 0.129, 95%CI 0.082–0.201; p <0.001), expectoration (OR = 1.796, 95%CI 1.062–3.036; p 0.029), muscle ache (OR = 0.309, 95%CI 0.153–0.626; p 0.001), and decreased albumin (OR = 1.929, 95%CI 1.199–3.104; p 0.007) as being associated with unimprovement in COVID-19 patients.ConclusionMale sex, a severe COVID-19 condition, expectoration, muscle ache, and decreased albumin were independent risk factors which influence the improvement of COVID-19 patients.     

Socioeconomic disparities and COVID-19 vaccination acceptance: a nationwide ecologic study

ObjectiveTo analyse the correlation between COVID-19 vaccination percentage and socioeconomic status (SES).MethodsA nationwide ecologic study based on open-sourced, anonymized, aggregated data provided by the Israel Ministry of Health. The correlations between municipal SES, vaccination percentage and active COVID-19 cases during the vaccination campaign were analysed by using weighted Pearson correlations. To assess the adequacy of first dose vaccination rollout relative to the municipality COVID-19 disease burden, a metric termed the vaccination need ratio was devised by dividing the total number of active cases (per 10 000 people) by the vaccination percentage of the population over 60 in each municipality, and its correlation with the SES was examined.Results23 days after initiation of the vaccination campaign, 760 916 (56.8%) individuals over the age of 60 were vaccinated in Israel with the first dose of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine. A negative correlation was found between the COVID-19 active case burden and the vaccination percentage of the study population in each municipality (r = –0.47, 95% CI –0.59 to –0.30). The vaccination percentage significantly correlated with the municipal SES (r = 0.83, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.87). This finding persisted but was attenuated over a 5-week period. A negative correlation between the vaccination need ratio and municipal SES (r = –0.80, 95% CI –0.88 to –0.66) was found.DiscussionLower COVID-19 vaccination percentage was associated with lower SES and high active disease burden. Vaccination efforts should focus on areas with lower SES and high disease burden to assure equality of vaccine allocation and potentially provide a more diligent disease mitigation.     

Differences in incidence and fatality of COVID-19 by SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant versus Delta variant in relation to vaccine coverage: A world-wide review

We aim to evaluate the evolution differences in the incidence and case fatality rate (CFR) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Delta and Omicron variants. The average incidence and CFRs were described between different countries. A gamma generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) was used to compare the CFRs of Delta and Omicron variants based on vaccination coverage. Totally, 50 countries were included for analyses. The incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ranged from 0.16/100,000 to 82.95/100,000 during the Delta period and 0.03/100,000 to 440.88/100,000 during the Omicron period. The median CFRs were 8.56 (interquartile range [IQR]: 4.76–18.39) during the Delta period and 3.04 (IQR: 1.87–7.48) during the Omicron period, respectively. A total of 47 out of 50 countries showed decreased CFRs of the Omicron variant with the rate ratio ranging from 0.02 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.01–0.03) (in Cambodia) to 0.97 (95% CI: 0.87–1.08) (in Ireland). Gamma GLMM analysis showed that the decreased CFR was largely a result of the decreased pathogenicity of Omicron besides the increased vaccination coverage. The Omicron variant shows a higher incidence but a lower CFR around the world as a whole, which is mainly a result of the decreased pathogenicity by SARS-CoV-2's mutation, while the vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 still acts as a valuable measure in preventing people from death.     

Reduced susceptibility to COVID-19 associated with ABO blood group and pre-existing anti-A and anti-B antibodies

BackgroundSusceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 shows individual variability in un-vaccinated and previously un-exposed individuals. We investigated the impact of ABO blood group, titers of anti-A and anti-B, other blood group antigens, and the extracellular deposition of ABH antigens as controlled by secretor fucosyltransferase 2 (FUT2) status.Study design and methodsWe studied incidents in three different hospitals between April to September 2020, where un-diagnosed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients were cared for by health care workers without use of personal protection and with close contact while delivering therapy. We recruited 108 exposed staff, of whom 34 were diagnosed with COVID-19. ABO blood type, titer of anti-A and -B, blood group specific alleles, and secretor status were determined.ResultsBlood group O was associated with lower risk of COVID-19 (OR 0.39, 95 %CI (0.16–0.92), p = 0.03) compared to non-O, i.e., blood groups A, B and AB. High titer anti-A immunoglobulin G (IgG) compared to low titer was associated with lower risk of COVID-19 (OR 0.24 95 %CI (0.07–0.78), p = 0.017). High titer of anti-B immunoglobulin M (IgM) compared to no anti-B (IgM) was associated with lower risk of COVID-19 (OR 0.16, 95 %CI (0.039–0.608), p = 0.006) and the same applies to low titer anti-B (IgM) compared to no titer (OR 0.23, 95 %CI (0.07–0.72), p = 0.012).The 33Pro variant in Integrin beta-3, that is part of human platelet antigen 1b (HPA-1b), was associated with lower risk of COVID-19 (OR 0.23, 95 %CI (0.034–0.86), p = 0.028).ConclusionOur data showed that blood group O, anti-A (IgG) titer, anti-B (IgM) titer as well as HPA-1b are associated with lower risk for COVID-19.     

The performance of human papillomavirus DNA detection with type 16/18 genotyping by hybrid capture in primary test of cervical cancer screening: a cross-sectional study in 10,669 Chinese women

ObjectivesWe aimed to assess the performance of DH3 human papillomavirus (HPV) assay, a newly developed hybrid capture technique that detects 14 high-risk HPVs with type 16/18 genotyping, as a primary test in cervical cancer screening.MethodsIn total 11,356 Chinese women aged 21–65 years participated in a cervical cancer screening programme using cytology (Thinprep, Hologic) and HPV testing (Cobas 4800 Test, Roche). Residual samples were used to detect HPV by DH3 HPV.ResultsIn total 10,669 women with valid results were included in the study. Of those, 135 were diagnosed as CIN2+, and 83 were diagnosed as CIN3+; 1056 women (9.9%) were DH3 HPV-positive and 255 (2.4%) of those were 16/18-positive, while 990 (9.3%) women were Cobas HPV-positive and 243 (2.3%) of those were 16/18-positive. DH3 HPV was non-inferior to Cobas HPV in identifying CIN1− and CIN2+ using predetermined thresholds (both p < 0.001). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of DH3 HPV were 93.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 87.7–96.9), 91.2% (95%CI = 90.6–91.7), 12.0% (95%CI = 10.1–14.1) and 99.9% (95%CI = 99.8–100), respectively, similar to those of Cobas HPV (91.1%, 95%CI = 85.0–5.3; 91.8%, 95%CI = 91.2–92.3; 12.5%, 95%CI = 10.5–14.7; and 99.9%, 95%CI = 99.8–99.9, respectively), in identifying CIN2+ (all p > 0.05). When DH3 HPV and Cobas HPV were respectively used as primary testing in screening strategy, the performance of two strategies were similar in identifying CIN2+. The results were similar in identifying CIN3+.ConclusionOur data suggest that DH3 HPV performs similarly to Cobas HPV in identifying high-grade CIN in cervical cancer screening.     

N-antigenemia detection by a rapid lateral flow test predicts 90-day mortality in COVID-19: A prospective cohort study

ObjectivesTo evaluate if the detection of N antigen of SARS-CoV-2 in plasma by a rapid lateral flow test predicts 90-day mortality in COVID-19 patients hospitalized at the wards.MethodsThe presence of N-antigenemia was evaluated in the first 36 hours after hospitalization in 600 unvaccinated COVID-19 patients, by using the Panbio COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device from Abbott (Abbott Laboratories Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The impact of N-antigenemia on 90-day mortality was assessed by multivariable Cox regression analysis.ResultsPrevalence of N-antigenemia at hospitalization was higher in nonsurvivors (69% (82/118) vs. 52% (250/482); p < 0.001). The patients with N-antigenemia showed more frequently RNAemia (45.7% (148/324) vs. 19.8% (51/257); p < 0.001), absence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 N antibodies (80.7% (264/327) vs. 26.6% (69/259); p < 0.001) and absence of S1 antibodies (73.4% (240/327) vs. 23.6% (61/259); p < 0.001). The patients with antigenemia showed more frequently acute respiratory distress syndrome (30.1% (100/332) vs. 18.7% (50/268); p = 0.001) and nosocomial infections (13.6% (45/331) vs. 7.9% (21/267); p = 0.026). N-antigenemia was a risk factor for increased 90-day mortality in the multivariable analysis (HR, 1.99 (95% CI,1.09–3.61), whereas the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 N-antibodies represented a protective factor (HR, 0.47 (95% CI, 0.26–0.85).DiscussionThe presence of N-antigenemia or the absence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 N-antibodies after hospitalization is associated to increased 90-day mortality in unvaccinated COVID-19 patients. Detection of N-antigenemia by using lateral flow tests is a quick, widely available tool that could contribute to early identify those COVID-19 patients at risk of deterioration.     

A global analysis of replacement of genetic variants of SARS-CoV-2 in association with containment capacity and changes in disease severity

ObjectivesTo examine severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant replacement in association with containment capacity and changes in case fatality at country level.MethodsAltogether, 69 571 full SARS-CoV-2 genomes collected globally within the first 6 months of the pandemic were examined. The correlation between variant replacement and containment capacity was examined by logistic regression models using the WHO International Health Regulation (IHR) score, the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) and the vulnerability index INFORM as proxies, while correlation with changes in monthly crude case fatality ratios was examined by a mixed effect model.ResultsAt the global level, variant lineage G1, characterized by the S-D614G mutation, replaced the older lineages L and S in March 2020. European countries—including Finland, France and Italy—were the first to reach a 50% increment of G1, whereas only Singapore and South Korea had non-G1 persisting throughout the first 6 months. Countries with higher IHR scores (β-coefficient –0.001, 95%CI –0.016, –0.001; p 0.034) and higher stringency indexes (OxCGRT) (β-coefficient –0.011, 95%CI –0.020, –0.001; p 0.035) were associated with lower levels of G1 replacement, whereas higher vulnerability indexes (INFORM) (β-coefficient 0.049, 95%CI 0.001, 0.097; p 0.044) were associated with higher replacement levels. Crude case fatality ratio showed a positive correlation with G1 replacement (β-coefficient: 0.034, 95%CI 0.011, 0.058; p 0.004), even after adjusting for testing capacity and other country-specific characteristics.ConclusionsSARS-CoV-2 variant lineage G1 (S-D614G) replaced older lineages more efficiently in countries with lower containment capacity, and its possible association with increased disease severity deserves further investigation.     

A new SARS-CoV-2 variant with high lethality poorly detected by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples: an observational study

ObjectivesIn early January 2021 an outbreak of nosocomial cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in Western France; RT-PCR tests were repeatedly negative on nasopharyngeal samples but positive on lower respiratory tract samples. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) revealed a new variant, currently defining a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) lineage B.1.616. In March, the WHO classified this as a ‘variant under investigation’ (VUI). We analysed the characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 cases related to this new variant.MethodsClinical, virological, and radiological data were retrospectively collected from medical charts in the two hospitals involved. We enrolled those inpatients with: (a) positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on a respiratory sample, (b) seroconversion with anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM, or (c) suggestive symptoms and typical features of COVID-19 on a chest CT scan. Cases were categorized as B.1.616, a variant of concern (VOC), or unknown.ResultsFrom 1st January to 24th March 2021, 114 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria: B.1.616 (n = 39), VOC (n = 32), and unknown (n = 43). B.1.616-related cases were older than VOC-related cases (81 years, interquartile range (IQR) 73–88 versus 73 years, IQR 67–82, p < 0.05) and their first RT-PCR tests were rarely positive (6/39, 15% versus 31/32, 97%, p < 0.05). The B.1.616 variant was independently associated with severe disease (multivariable Cox model HR 4.0, 95%CI 1.5–10.9) and increased lethality (28-day mortality 18/39 (46%) for B.1.616 versus 5/32 (16%) for VOC, p = 0.006).ConclusionWe report a nosocomial outbreak of COVID-19 cases related to a new variant, B.1.616, which is poorly detected by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples and is associated with high lethality.     

Immune checkpoint inhibitors therapies in patients with cancer and preexisting autoimmune diseases: A meta-analysis of observational studies

IntroductionImmune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) are associated with frequent immune-related adverse events (irAEs), but patients with preexisting autoimmune disease (PAD) have been excluded from clinical trials, leaving serious gaps in knowledge.ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of ICIs in PAD patients and cancer and explore the impact of different PAD types and baseline receiving immunosuppressive therapy.MethodsSystematic searches were performed of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library from inception through August 2019 for observational studies reporting safety and efficacy data among ICI-treated patients with cancer and PAD.Results619 ICI-treated patients with PAD in 14 publications were finally identified. In the random-effects meta-analysis, pooled incidence of PAD flares, de novo immune-related adverse events (irAEs) or both of any grade was 60% (95%CI = 52%–68%). Separately, there were 219 and 206 patients experiencing PAD exacerbation and de novo irAEs of any grade, yielding a pooled incidence of 35% (95%CI = 29%–41%) and 33% (95%CI = 24%–42%) respectively. Rheumatoid arthritis was associated with a trend toward higher flare occurrence compared with another individual PADs (RR = 1.25–1.88). A total of 136 patients showed complete or partial response, corresponding to a pooled response rates of 30% (95%CI = 22%–39%). There were no statistical differences between patients with and without immunosuppressive therapy at ICI start regarding flare (RR = 1.08, 95%CI = 0.72–1.62), but a trend toward lower response rates was observed in patients with baseline immunosuppressants (RR = 0.58, 95%CI = 0.26–1.33).ConclusionsImmune toxicities are frequent in ICI-treated patients with PAD but often mild and manageable without discontinuing therapy. ICI treatment are also effective in PAD patients, but close monitoring and multidisciplinary collaboration should be contemplated, especially for those concomitantly receiving immunosuppressant or having rheumatoid arthritis.     

A whole blood test to measure SARS-CoV-2-specific response in COVID-19 patients

ObjectivesTo examine whether specific T-cell-responses to SARS-CoV-2 peptides can be detected in COVID-19 using a whole-blood experimental setting, which may be further explored as a potential diagnostic tool.MethodsWe evaluated interferon (IFN)-γ levels after stimulating whole-blood with spike and remainder-antigens peptides megapools (MP) derived from SARS-CoV-2 sequences; interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-1RA, IL-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-7, IL-8, IL-9, IL-10, IL-12p70, IL-13, IL-15, IL-17A, eotaxin, basic fibroblast growth factor (FGF), granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), IFN-γ, Interferon gamma-induced protein 10 (IP-10), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-1α, MIP-1β, Platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), RANTES (regulated on activation, normal T cell expressed and secreted), tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) were also evaluated.ResultsIFN-γ-response to spike and remainder-antigens MPs was significantly increased in 35 COVID-19 patients compared with 29 ‘no COVID-19’ individuals (medians spike-MP: 0.26 vs 0, p = 0.0002; medians remainder-antigens-MP: 0.07 vs 0.02; p = 0.02).This response was detected independently of patients' clinical parameters. IFN-γ-response to SARS-CoV-2-unrelated antigens cytomegalovirus (CMV) and Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B (SEB) was similar in COVID-19 compared with ‘no COVID-19’ individuals (median CMV: 3.46 vs 5.28, p = 0.16; median SEB: 12.68 vs 15.05; p = 0.1). In response to spike-MPs in COVID-19- compared with ‘no COVID-19’ -individuals, we found significant higher median of IL-2 (50.08 vs 0, p = 0.0018), IFN-γ (90.16 vs 0, p = 0.01), IL-4 (0.52 vs 0, p = 0.03), IL-13 (0.84 vs 0, p = 0.007) and MCP-1 (4602 vs 359.2, p = 0.05).ConclusionsImmune response to SARS-CoV-2 peptides in a whole-blood assay is associated with COVID-19 and it is characterized by both Th1 and Th2 profile. This experimental approach may be useful for developing new T-cell based diagnostic tests for disease and vaccine settings.     

An open-label randomized controlled trial of the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir,lopinavir/ritonavir plus IFN-β-1a and hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

ObjectivesWe evaluated the clinical, virological and safety outcomes of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir–interferon (IFN)-β-1a, hydroxychloroquine or remdesivir in comparison to standard of care (control) in coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) inpatients requiring oxygen and/or ventilatory support.MethodsWe conducted a phase III multicentre, open-label, randomized 1:1:1:1:1, adaptive, controlled trial (DisCoVeRy), an add-on to the Solidarity trial (NCT04315948, EudraCT2020-000936-23). The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15, measured by the WHO seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes included quantification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in respiratory specimens and pharmacokinetic and safety analyses. We report the results for the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms and for the hydroxychloroquine arm, trials of which were stopped prematurely.ResultsThe intention-to-treat population included 583 participants—lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 145), lopinavir/ritonavir–IFN–β-1a (n = 145), hydroxychloroquine (n = 145), control (n = 148)—among whom 418 (71.7%) were male, the median age was 63 years (IQR 54–71), and 211 (36.2%) had a severe disease. The day-15 clinical status was not improved with the investigational treatments: lopinavir/ritonavir versus control, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.83, (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55–1.26, p 0.39), lopinavir/ritonavir–IFN–β-1a versus control, aOR 0.69 (95%CI 0.45–1.04, p 0.08), and hydroxychloroquine versus control, aOR 0.93 (95%CI 0.62–1.41, p 0.75). No significant effect of investigational treatment was observed on SARS-CoV-2 clearance. Trough plasma concentrations of lopinavir and ritonavir were higher than those expected, while those of hydroxychloroquine were those expected with the dosing regimen. The occurrence of serious adverse events was significantly higher in participants allocated to the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms.ConclusionIn adults hospitalized for COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir–IFN–β-1a and hydroxychloroquine improved neither the clinical status at day 15 nor SARS-CoV-2 clearance in respiratory tract specimens.     

Genotype-phenotype associations in a large PTEN Hamartoma Tumor Syndrome (PHTS) patient cohort

BackgroundPathogenic PTEN germline variants cause PTEN Hamartoma Tumor Syndrome (PHTS), a rare disease with a variable genotype and phenotype. Knowledge about these spectra and genotype-phenotype associations could help diagnostics and potentially lead to personalized care. Therefore, we assessed the PHTS genotype and phenotype spectrum in a large cohort study.MethodsInformation was collected of 510 index patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic (LP/P) PTEN variants (n = 467) or variants of uncertain significance. Genotype-phenotype associations were assessed using logistic regression analyses adjusted for sex and age.ResultsAt time of genetic testing, the majority of children (n = 229) had macrocephaly (81%) or developmental delay (DD, 61%), and about half of the adults (n = 238) had cancer (51%), macrocephaly (61%), or cutaneous pathology (49%). Across PTEN, 268 LP/P variants were identified, with exon 5 as hotspot. Missense variants (n = 161) were mainly located in the phosphatase domain (PD, 90%) and truncating variants (n = 306) across all domains. A trend towards 2 times more often truncating variants was observed in adults (OR = 2.3, 95%CI = 1.5–3.4) and patients with cutaneous pathology (OR = 1.6, 95%CI = 1.1–2.5) or benign thyroid pathology (OR = 2.0, 95%CI = 1.1–3.5), with trends up to 2–4 times more variants in PD. Whereas patients with DD (OR = 0.5, 95%CI = 0.3–0.9) or macrocephaly (OR = 0.6, 95%CI = 0.4–0.9) had about 2 times less often truncating variants compared to missense variants. In DD patients these missense variants were often located in domain C2.ConclusionThe PHTS phenotypic diversity may partly be explained by the PTEN variant coding effect and the combination of coding effect and domain. PHTS patients with early-onset disease often had missense variants, and those with later-onset disease often truncating variants.     

COVID-19 susceptibility and clinical outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

The susceptibility, risk factors, and prognosis of COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remain unknown. Thus, our study aims to assess the prevalence and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in IBD. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and medRxiv from 2019 to 1 June 2022 for cohort and case-control studies comparing the prevalence and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with IBD and in the general population. We also compared the outcomes of patients receiving and not receiving 5-aminosalicylates (ASA), tumour necrosis factor antagonists, biologics, systemic corticosteroids, or immunomodulators for IBD. Thirty five studies were eligible for our analysis. Pooled odds ratio of COVID-19-related hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or death in IBD compared to in non-IBD were 0.58 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.28–1.18), 1.09 (95% CI = 0.27–4.47), and 0.67 (95% CI = 0.32–1.42), respectively. Inflammatory bowel disease was not associated with increased hospitalisation, ICU admission, or death. Susceptibility to COVID-19 did not increase with any drugs for IBD. Hospitalisation, ICU admission, and death were more likely with 5-ASA and corticosteroid use. COVID-19-related hospitalisation (Odds Ratio (OR): 0.53; 95% CI = 0.38–0.74) and death (OR: 0.13; 95% CI = 0.13–0.70) were less likely with Crohn's disease than ulcerative colitis (UC). In conclusion, IBD does not increase the mortality and morbidity of COVID-19. However, physicians should be aware that additional monitoring is needed in UC patients or in patients taking 5-ASA or systemic corticosteroids.     

Role of the early short-course corticosteroids treatment in ARDS caused by COVID-19: A single-center,retrospective analysis

PurposeSevere coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is strongly related to interstitial pneumonia with frequent development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The role of corticosteroids (CS) treatment in these patients is still controversial. Some studies evidenced a possible role of an early short-term course of CS treatment in the treatment of severe pneumonia.Patients and methodsThis is a single-center, retrospective study considering the patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to our hospital between 9th March and 15^th June 2020. Two groups were considered: early high-dose of methyl-prednisolone (eHDM; n ​= ​31) and the control group (n ​= ​52). Patients in the eHDM group received the dose of 5-8 ​mg/kg/day of methyl-prednisolone for 2 consecutive days. Primary outcome was the mortality evaluation; secondary outcomes were clinical improvement, side-effects and laboratory/radiographic changes.ResultsSignificant differences between the two groups were: length of hospitalization (21.5 vs 28.4 days, p ​= ​0.026), length of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) or mechanical ventilation (11.5 vs 14.5 days, p ​= ​0.031), death (5 vs 12, p ​= ​0.006) and clinical improvement (16 vs 11, p=0.018). The following factors were related to in-hospital mortality in the multivariate analysis: comorbidities (OR ​= ​2.919; 95%CI ​= ​1.515-16.705; p<0.001), days from the onset of symptoms and the hospital admission (OR ​= ​1.404; 95%CI ​= ​1.069-12.492; p ​= ​0.011), PaO₂/FiO₂ (P/F) ratio (OR ​= ​3.111; 95%CI ​= ​2.334-16.991; p ​= ​0.009) and eHDM treatment (OR ​= ​0.741; 95%CI ​= ​0.129-0.917; p ​= ​0.007).ConclusionThe eHDM is an interesting and promising approach in the ARDS related to COVID-19 pneumonia, which reduces mortality, length of hospitalization and the need for mechanical ventilation.     

More than loss of taste and smell: burning watering eyes in coronavirus disease 2019

ObjectivesTo evaluate ocular symptoms in European non-hospitalized patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and to investigate associations with the demographic data as well as nasal and general physical symptoms.MethodsIn this prospective, observational study, 108 non-hospitalized patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection not requiring intensive care were asked about disease-associated ocular symptoms, demographic data, as well as general physical and nasal symptoms using a standardized questionnaire. Total ocular symptom score (TOSS) was evaluated during and, retrospectively, before development of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Associations between TOSS and demographic data as well as general and nasal symptoms were evaluated.ResultsSeventy-five of the 108 COVID-19 patients (69.4%) had at least one ocular symptom during COVID-19. The most common symptoms included burning sensations in 39 (36.1%), epiphora in 37 (34.3%) and redness in 28 (25.9%), compatible with conjunctivitis. These symptoms occurred 1.96 ± 3.17 days after the beginning of COVID-19 and were mild. TOSS was significantly higher during COVID-19 (1.27 ± 1.85) than before the infection (0.33 ± 1.04; p < 0.001). There were no significant associations between TOSS and gender (β coefficient –0.108; p 0.302), age (–0.024; p 0.816), rhinorrhoea (–0.127; p 0.353), nasal itching (–0.026; p 0.803), sneezing (0.099; p 0.470), nasal congestion (–0.012; p 0.930), cough (–0.079; p 0.450), headache (0.102; p 0.325), sore throat (0.208; p 0.052), or fever (0.094; p 0.361).ConclusionsOcular involvement in European non-hospitalized individuals with COVID-19 seems to be highly underestimated. Overall, these ocular symptoms, including burning sensations, epiphora and redness, seem to be mild and to not need treatment.     

Non-occupational and occupational factors associated with specific SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among hospital workers – A multicentre cross-sectional study

ObjectivesProtecting healthcare workers (HCWs) from coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is critical to preserve the functioning of healthcare systems. We therefore assessed seroprevalence and identified risk factors for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) seropositivity in this population.MethodsBetween 22 June 22 and 15 August 2020, HCWs from institutions in northern/eastern Switzerland were screened for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We recorded baseline characteristics, non-occupational and occupational risk factors. We used pairwise tests of associations and multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with seropositivity.ResultsAmong 4664 HCWs from 23 healthcare facilities, 139 (3%) were seropositive. Non-occupational exposures independently associated with seropositivity were contact with a COVID-19-positive household (adjusted OR 59, 95% CI 33–106), stay in a COVID-19 hotspot (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2–4.2) and male sex (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1–3.1). Blood group 0 vs. non-0 (aOR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3–0.8), active smoking (aOR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2–0.7), living with children <12 years (aOR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2–0.6) and being a physician (aOR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1–0.5) were associated with decreased risk. Other occupational risk factors were close contact to COVID-19 patients (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.4–5.4), exposure to COVID-19-positive co-workers (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1–2.9), poor knowledge of standard hygiene precautions (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2–2.9) and frequent visits to the hospital canteen (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.4–3.8).DiscussionLiving with COVID-19-positive households showed the strongest association with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. We identified several potentially modifiable work-related risk factors, which might allow mitigation of the COVID-19 risk among HCWs. The lower risk among those living with children, even after correction for multiple confounders, is remarkable and merits further study.     

Post–COVID-19 syndrome and humoral response association after 1 year in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients

ObjectivesThis study aimed to describe the impact of vaccination and the role of humoral responses on post–COVID-19 syndrome 1 year after the onset of SARS coronavirus type 2 (CoV-2).MethodsThis prospective study was conducted through interviews to investigate post–COVID-19 syndrome 6 and 12 months after disease onset in all adult in- and outpatients with COVID-19 at Udine Hospital (March–May 2020). Vaccination status and two different serological assays to distinguish between response to vaccination (receptor-binding domain (RBD) SARS-CoV-2 IgG) and/or natural infection (non-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 IgG) were also assessed.ResultsA total of 479 patients (52.6% female; mean age: 53 years) were interviewed 13.5 months (standard deviation: 0.6 months) after acute infection. Post–COVID-19 syndrome was observed in 47.2% of patients (n = 226) after 1 year. There were no significant differences in the worsening of post–COVID-19 symptoms (22.7% vs. 15.8%; p = 0.209) among vaccinated (n = 132) and unvaccinated (n = 347) patients. The presence of non-RBD SARS-CoV-2 IgG induced by natural infection showed a significant association with post–COVID-19 syndrome (OR: 1.35; 95% CI, 1.11–1.64; p = 0.003), and median non-RBD SARS-CoV-2 IgG titres were significantly higher in long haulers than in patients without symptoms (22 kAU/L (interquartile range, 9.7–37.2 kAU/L) vs. 14.1 kAU/L (interquartile range, 5.4–31.3 kAU/L); p = 0.009) after 1 year. In contrast, the presence of RBD SARS-CoV-2 IgG was not associated with the occurrence of post–COVID-19 syndrome (>2500 U/mL vs. 0.9–2500 U/mL; OR: 1.36; 95% CI, 0.62–3.00; p = 0.441), and RBD SARS-CoV-2 IgG titres were similar in long haulers as in patients without symptoms (50% values > 2500 U/mL vs. 55.6% values > 2500 U/mL; p = 0.451).DiscussionThe SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is not associated with the emergence of post–COVID-19 symptoms more than 1 year after acute infection. The persistence of high serological titre response induced by natural infection, but not vaccination, may play a role in long-haul COVID-19.     

Clinical outcome in solid organ transplant recipients affected by COVID-19 compared to general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundA significant increased risk of complications and mortality in immunocompromised patients affected by COVID-19 has been described. However, the impact of COVID-19 in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients is an issue still under debate, due to conflicting evidence that has emerged from different observational studies.ObjectivesWe performed a systematic review with a meta-analysis to assess the clinical outcome in SOT recipients with COVID-19 compared with the general population.Data sourcesPubMed-MEDLINE and Scopus were independently searched until 13 October 2021.Study eligibility criteriaProspective or retrospective observational studies comparing clinical outcome in SOT recipients versus general populations affected by COVID-19 were included. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality.ParticipantsParticipants were patients with confirmed COVID-19.InterventionsInterventions reviewed were SOTs.MethodsThe quality of the included studies was independently assessed with the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool for observational studies. The meta-analysis was performed by pooling ORs retrieved from studies providing adjustment for confounders using a random-effects model with the inverse variance method. Multiple subgroups and sensitivity analyses were conducted to investigate the source of heterogeneity.ResultsA total of 3501 articles were screened, and 31 observational studies (N = 590 375; 5759 SOT recipients vs. 584 616 general population) were included in the meta-analyses. No difference in 30-day mortality rate was found in the primary analysis, including studies providing adjustment for confounders (N = 17; 3752 SOT recipients vs. 159 745 general population; OR: 1.13; 95% CI, 0.94–1.35; I² = 33.9%). No evidence of publication bias was reported. A higher risk of intensive care unit admission (OR: 1.56; 95% CI, 1.03–2.63) and occurrence of acute kidney injury (OR: 2.50; 95% CI, 1.81–3.45) was found in SOT recipients.ConclusionsNo increased risk in mortality was found in SOT recipients affected by COVID-19 compared with the general population when adjusted for demographic and clinical features and COVID-19 severity.     

Obesity,diabetes, hypertension and severe outcomes among inpatients with coronavirus disease 2019: a nationwide study

ObjectivesInitial studies of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) revealed that obesity, diabetes and hypertension were associated with severe outcomes. Subsequently, some authors showed that the risk could vary according to age, gender, co-morbidities and medical history. In a nationwide retrospective cohort, we studied the association between these co-morbidities and patients' requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or their death.MethodsAll French adult inpatients with COVID-19 admitted during the first epidemic wave (February to September 2020) were included. When patients were diagnosed with obesity, diabetes or hypertension for the first time in 2020, these conditions were considered as incident co-morbidities, otherwise they were considered prevalent. We compared outcomes of IMV and in-hospital death according to obesity, diabetes and hypertension, taking age, gender and Charlson's co-morbidity index score (CCIS) into account.ResultsA total of 134 209 adult inpatients with COVID-19 were included, half of them had hypertension (n = 66 613, 49.6%), one in four were diabetic (n = 32 209, 24.0%), and one in four were obese (n = 32 070, 23.9%). Among this cohort, IMV was required for 13 596 inpatients, and 19 969 patients died. IMV and death were more frequent in male patients (adjusted oods ratio (aOR) 2.0, 95% CI 1.9–2.1 and aOR 1.5, 95% CI 1.4–1.5, respectively), IMV in patients with co-morbidities (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 2.0–2.2 for CCIS = 2 and aOR 3.0, 95% CI 2.8–3.1 for CCIS ≥5), and death in patients aged 80 or above (aOR 17.0, 95% CI 15.5–18.6). Adjusted on age, gender and CCIS, death was more frequent among inpatients with obesity (aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1–1.2) and diabetes (aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1–1.2). IMV was more frequently necessary for inpatients with obesity (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.8–2.0), diabetes (aOR 1.4, 95% CI 1.3–1.4) and hypertension (aOR 1.7, 95% CI 1.6–1.8). Comparatively, IMV was more often required for patients with the following incident co-morbidities: obesity (aOR 3.5, 95% CI 3.3–3.7), diabetes (aOR 2.0, 95% CI 1.8–2.1) and hypertension (aOR 2.5, 95% CI 2.4–2.6).ConclusionsAmong 134 209 inpatients with COVID-19, mortality was more frequent among patients with obesity and diabetes. IMV was more frequently necessary for inpatients with obesity, diabetes and hypertension. Patients for whom these were incident co-morbidities were particularly at risk. Specific medical monitoring and vaccination should be priorities for patients with these co-morbidities.