WHO Ordinal Scale and Inflammation Risk Categories in COVID-19. Comparative Study of the Severity Scales

Risk Factors for Liver Injury and Their Association with Treatment in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19

Objective This study investigated the frequency and risk factors of acute liver injury (ALI) and the association between ALI and treatment in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods This was a single-center retrospective study of 631 hospitalized patients ≥18 years old who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and received treatment between July 1, 2020, and January 31, 2024. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical records. ALI was defined according to the consensus guidelines of the Asia Pacific Association of the Study of Liver. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence of ALI to assess the risk factors for the occurrence of ALI. Results Seventy-six patients (12.0%) developed ALI. Seven patients discontinued remdesivir owing to hepatic impairment, and only 1 patient (0.2%) had an increase in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ≥10 times the upper limit of normal. ALI was associated with men [odds ratio (OR)=3.052, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.456-6.398], a higher World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale score at admission (OR=1.408, 95% CI=1.036-1.912), higher ALT level at admission (OR=1.017, 95% CI=1.009-1.024), tocilizumab administration (OR=2.788, 95% CI=1.372-5.666), the absence of diabetes (OR=0.456, 95% CI=0.226-0.922) and the absence of dyslipidemia (OR=0.244, 95% CI=0.083-0.723). In the comparison of the propensity score-matched groups, neither remdesivir nor tocilizumab administration was associated with ALI. Conclusion Men, severe COVID-19, and elevated ALT levels at admission were significantly associated with an increased risk of ALI in patients treated for COVID-19. ALI may have been associated with tocilizumab administration but not with remdesivir administration.

Role of Procalcitonin as a Prognostic Biomarker in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Comparative Analysis

Background

Procalcitonin (PCT) is recognized as an inflammatory biomarker, often elevated in COVID-19 pneumonia alongside other biomarkers. Understanding its association with severe outcomes and comparing its predictive ability with other biomarkers is crucial for clinical management.

Objectives

This retrospective multicenter observational study aimed to investigate the association between PCT levels and adverse outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Additionally, it sought to compare the predictive performance of various biomarkers.

Design

The study analyzed data from the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) registry, comprising COVID-19 patients hospitalized across multiple Mayo Clinic sites between March 2020 and June 2022.

Methods

A total of 7851 adult COVID-19 patients were included. Patients were categorized into 6 groups based on the worst WHO ordinal scale. Multivariate models were constructed using peak biomarker levels within 72 hours of admission, adjusted for confounders.

Results

Elevated PCT levels were independently associated with increased odds of adverse outcomes, including ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.32, 95%CI 1.27-1.38), IMV requirement (aOR 1.35, 95%CI: 1.28-1.42), and in-hospital mortality (aOR 1.30, 95%CI: 1.22-1.37). A 3.48-fold increase in IMV requirement and 3.55 times increase in in-hospital mortality were noted with peak PCT ⩾ 0.25 ng/ml. Similar associations were observed with other biomarkers like NLR (AUC 0.730), CRP, IL-6, LDH (AUC 0.800), and D-dimer (AUC 0.719). Models incorporating NLR, LDH, D-dimer, and PCT demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy, with a combined model exhibiting an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.826 (95%CI 0.803-0.849).

Conclusions

Higher PCT levels were significantly linked to worse outcomes in COVID-19 patients, emphasizing its potential as a prognostic marker. Biomarker-based predictive models, particularly those including PCT, showed promising utility for risk assessment and clinical decision-making. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings on a larger scale.

Comprehensive analysis of human coronavirus antibody responses in ICU and non-ICU COVID-19 patients reveals IgG3 against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein as a key biomarker of disease severity

Introduction. Pre-existing immunity to human coronaviruses (HCoVs) may shape the immune response in COVID-19 patients. Increasing evidence suggests that immune cross-reactivity between SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses may determine clinical prognosis.Hypothesis. SARS-CoV-2 disease severity is influenced by pre-existing immunity to HCoVs, with distinct antibody profiles and cross-reactivity patterns.Aim. To investigate the antibody response of ICU and non-ICU SARS-CoV-2 patients against different HCoV proteins and assess the potential impact of pre-existing immunity on SARS-CoV-2 disease outcomes.Methodology. This study used a comprehensive HCoVs antigen bead array to measure antibody response to pathogenic Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), SARS-CoV, SARS-CoV-2 and the four seasonal HCoVs in 70 ICU and 63 non-ICU COVID-19 patients.Results. Our analysis demonstrates an overall higher antibody response in ICU than in non-ICU COVID-19 patients. Interestingly, the anti-S1 IgG and IgA were significantly higher among ICU than in non-ICU patients. Similarly, the anti-S1 IgG against NL63 showed a lower response among ICU compared to non-ICU. Cross-reactivity was evident between SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV antibodies but not with MERS-CoV and seasonal HCoVs. The subclass analysis of antibodies recognizing SARS-CoV-2 revealed that anti-S1 IgG1, IgG3, IgA1 and IgA2 were significantly higher in ICU compared to non-ICU. The predominant IgA subtype among SARS-CoV-2 patients was IgA1. We applied machine learning algorithms to subclass serological responses to build classifiers that could distinguish between ICU patients and patients with milder COVID-19. Out of 90 variables used in two different types of models, the variable of highest influence in determining the ICU status was IgG3 against SARS-CoV-2 S, and the top 8 variables of influence included the presence of IgG3 against S-trimer as well as IgA against SARS-CoV-2 S.Conclusion. Understanding the complexities of humoral immunity in various patients is critical for early medical intervention, disease management, selective vaccination and passive immunotherapy.

Efficacy of solnatide to treat pulmonary permeability edema in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients with moderate to severe ARDS: A randomized controlled pilot-trial

BACKGROUND

Because of the initially urgent need for treatments for COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the efficacy and tolerability of inhaled solnatide, a direct activator of the epithelial sodium channel (ENaC) under clinical investigation for the treatment of ARDS, were assessed in a pilot trial.

METHODS

This randomized controlled double-blind clinical trial was performed at two study centers in Vienna, Austria. Adult mechanically ventilated patients with moderate to severe ARDS (Berlin Definition) caused by COVID-19 were randomized 1:1 to inhalation of solnatide (100 mg) or placebo twice daily for seven days. The primary outcome parameter was ventilator-free days (VFDs) within 28 days; survival was assessed at 28 and 60 days as a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 30 out of the 40 planned patients were included, 15 randomized to solnatide and 15 to placebo. Then the trial was stopped early due to slow recruitment. The median VFDs were 0 in both groups (p =  0.653). Twenty out of 30 patients (66.7%) survived until day 28 [solnatide group: n = 11 (73.3%), placebo group: n = 9 (60%)]. One additional patient per group died until day 60. In total, 41 adverse events (AEs) and 10 serious AEs occurred in the solnatide group, and 26 AEs and 14 serious AEs in the placebo group. No AE was considered to be related to the study treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in VFDs or survival between the solnatide and the placebo group. Solnatide appeared safe in this limited cohort of critically ill patients with COVID-19.

REGISTRATION

EU clinical trials register, EudraCT number 2020-001244-26.

Effectiveness and Safety of Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 Patients with Liver Cirrhosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with liver cirrhosis are at an increased risk of mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir, an adenosine analog, exhibits activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and is thus recommended for inpatients with COVID-19. This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19 and liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted using data from Taiwan's largest healthcare system. The study cohort comprised adult patients with COVID-19 and liver cirrhosis who visited our emergency department between April 2021 and September 2022. Remdesivir's adverse effects, including bradycardia, anemia, unstable glucose levels, and abnormal liver function test results, were recorded. Treatment outcomes were assessed in terms of hospitalization duration, mortality, intubation, and intensive care unit admission.

RESULTS

This study included 1368 patients with COVID-19 and liver cirrhosis, of whom 46 received remdesivir. Remdesivir recipients were older (66.5 vs. 62 years; p = 0.042) and had a higher rate of oxygen therapy use (56.52% vs. 32.22%; p = 0.001) than nonrecipients. Common adverse effects of remdesivir included lower heart rates (83 vs. 96 bpm; p < 0.001) and decreased hemoglobin levels (9.5 vs. 10.2 g/dL; p = 0.003) without fatal consequences. No statistically significant difference between remdesivir recipients and nonrecipients in hospitalization duration, intubation rates, or mortality rates was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Remdesivir is safe for treating COVID-19 in patients with liver cirrhosis. Although remdesivir recipients exhibited trends toward improved outcomes in our study, large-scale studies are required to confirm its efficacy in this population.

COVID-19 pulmonary phenotypes and longitudinal patterns in the first wave of the pandemic

BACKGROUND

The long-term evolution of COVID-19 in patients hospitalized during the pandemic's first wave remains largely unexplored. This study aimed to identify COVID-19 pulmonary phenotypes and their longitudinal patterns over a 12-month follow-up.

METHODS

COVID-19 patients discharged from Pisa University Hospital (Italy) between March-September 2020, were evaluated at T3, T12, and T24 months post-discharge. Assessments included spirometry, lung volumes, DLCO, and chest CT for those with persistent pneumonia signs (PS). Latent transition analysis (LTA) identified COVID-19 phenotypes and longitudinal patterns based on PS and lung function (PFTs). Risk factors for these patterns were evaluated using multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 307 discharged patients, 175, 136, and 33 were followed-up at T3, T12, and T24, respectively. At T12, 21.6 % had impaired DLCO, 4.4 % a restrictive ventilatory pattern, and 31,6 % still had PS, persisting until T24. LTA identified three cross-sectional phenotypes at both T3 and T12 (no PS with normal PFTs; PS with normal PFTs; PS with impaired PFTs), and four longitudinal patterns from T3 to T12: persistence of no PS with normal PFTs (47.9 %); resolution of both PS and PFTs (15.4 %); persistent PS (36.7 %), either with (11 %) or without (25.7 %) impaired PFTs. The last two patterns correlated significantly with longer hospitalization, more comorbidities, and severe COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort of COVID-19 patients hospitalized during the pandemic's first wave, we observed distinct pulmonary phenotypes and longitudinal recovery patterns. More comorbidities and severe acute disease correlated with worse progression up to 24 months, suggesting long-term monitoring for such patients.

Longitudinal Study of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccinations and Infections in Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer: Stabilizing Immune Responses and Neutralizing Emerging Variants with Variant-Adapted Antigen Exposures

This longitudinal study examined how active gastrointestinal (GI) cancer types affect immune responses to SARS-CoV-2, focusing on the ability to neutralize the Omicron variants. Patients with GI cancer (n = 168) were categorized into those with hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatic metastatic GI cancer, non-hepatic metastatic GI cancer, and two control groups of patients with and without underlying liver diseases. Humoral and cellular immune responses were evaluated before and after Omicron antigen exposures. In the pre-Omicron era, humoral SARS-CoV-2 immunity decreased after three antigen contacts without further antigen exposure. While Omicron neutralization was significantly lower than wildtype neutralization (p < 0.01), Omicron infections were yet mild to moderate. Additional Omicron exposures improved IgG levels (p < 0.01) and Omicron neutralization (p < 0.01). However, this effect was significantly less intense in patients with active GI cancer, particularly in patients with pancreaticobiliary neoplasms (PBN; p = 0.04), with underlying immunodeficiency (p = 0.05), and/or under conventional chemotherapy (p = 0.05). Pre-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 immunity prevented severe clinical courses of infections with Omicron variants in patients with GI cancer. However, in patients with PBN, with underlying immunodeficiency, and/or under conventional chemotherapy initial contacts with Omicron antigens triggered only reduced immune responses. Thus, subgroups could be identified for whom booster vaccinations are of special clinical significance.

Use of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 treatment: is clinical severity more important than the intervention?

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the outcomes of two cohorts of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who received COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusions between 2020 and 2021.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. We included a retrospective cohort of patients who received convalescent compassionate plasma, and another group of patients from a previous clinical study. We collected clinical and laboratory data on the day of and 5 days after transfusion. Patients with hematological or immunological conditions were excluded. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.

RESULTS

COVID-19 convalescent plasma did not affect the outcomes of patients with severe COVID-19 when comparing the two cohorts transfused with different volumes and titers of neutralizing antibodies. Despite improvements in some laboratory parameters, no effect on clinical outcomes was observed. Dialysis negatively affected the length of intensive care unit stay, hospitalization, and mechanical ventilation use. Each higher point on the day 0 World Health Organization scale reduced the probability of hospital and intensive care unit discharge and the risk of mechanical ventilation discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

Dialysis and the assessed clinical severity represented by the World Health Organization scale on day 0 influenced the outcomes, whereas COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion did not.

Comparison of Standard and Extended Dexamethasone Duration on Mortality in Patients with Severe COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

Current guidelines recommend dexamethasone 6 mg/day for up to 10 days in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring supplemental oxygenation or mechanical ventilation. The practice has significant variation, however, and dexamethasone has been used for >10 days for many patients with severe COVID-19. The aim of this study was to assess the benefits and risks associated with standard versus extended use of dexamethasone in patients with severe COVID-19.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2021 to December 2021. All of the consecutive patients with severe COVID-19 receiving 6 mg/day dexamethasone were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was the incidence of in-hospital mortality for patients treated with dexamethasone 6 mg/day for the standard duration of 10 days versus an extended duration of >10 days.

RESULTS

A total of 1294 patients met the inclusion criteria: 803 received the standard duration of dexamethasone and 491 received the extended duration. The incidence of in-hospital mortality was significantly higher (P = 0.003) in the extended duration group (36.5%) compared with the standard duration group (28.5%), with no significant difference in in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (16.1% for extended vs 13.2% for the standard duration; P = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that extended duration of dexamethasone compared with standard duration is associated with a significant increase in in-hospital mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. These findings need to be confirmed in well-designed and performed randomized controlled trials.

Outpatient remdesivir treatment program for hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019: Patient perceptions, process and economic impact

BACKGROUND

Remdesivir is FDA-approved for the treatment of hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. Many patients improve clinically to allow for hospital dismissal before completing the 5-day course. In a prior work, patients who continued remdesivir in an outpatient setting experienced better 28-day clinical outcomes. Here, we assessed patients' perspectives and the economic impact of this outpatient practice.

METHODS

Hospitalized patients who received remdesivir for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, from 11/6/2020 to 11/5/2021 and were dismissed to continue remdesivir in the outpatient setting were surveyed. The cost of care was compared between those who remained hospitalized versus those who were dismissed.

RESULTS

93 (19.8 %) among 470 eligible patients responded to the electronic survey. Responders were older than non-responders. The majority (70.5 %) had symptoms resolved by the time of the survey. Ten (11.4 %) patients had persistent symptoms attributed to long COVID-19. The majority were satisfied with the quality of care (82.3 %) and overall experience (76.0 %) in the infusion clinic. After adjusting for gender, comorbidity score, and WHO severity scale, the predicted costs for the groups were $16,544 (inpatient) and $9,097 (outpatient) per patient (difference of $7,447; p < .01). An estimate of 1,077 hospital bed-days were made available to other patients as a result of this transition to outpatient.

CONCLUSION

An outpatient remdesivir program that allowed for early dismissal was perceived favorably by patients. The program resulted in significant cost and resource savings, the latter in terms of the availability of hospital beds for other patients needing critical services.

Altered gut microbiome in convalescent patients with coronavirus disease 2019

Introduction

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) alters the gut microbiome. This study aimed to assess the association between the disease severity of COVID-19 and changes in stool microbes through a seven-month follow-up of stool collection.

Methods

We conducted a multicentre, prospective longitudinal study of 58 COVID-19 patients and 116 uninfected controls. Differences in the gut microbiota were analysed using 16S ribosomal RNA sequencing. The first stool samples were collected at an early convalescent phase of COVID-19, and the second sample was collected at least seven months after COVID-19 infection.

Results and discussion

At the order level, Eubacteriales and Bifidobacteriales decreased, while Bacteroidales and Burkholderiales increased in the COVID-19 group compared to the controls. Alpha diversity also decreased in COVID-19 patients compared to controls, with imperfect recovery of the gut microbiome after seven months. The compositional change in the gut microbiome between the early and late convalescent phases was largest in the moderate and severe groups. The severity of COVID-19 was the most influential clinical variable for microbiome composition (Sum of Sqs = 0.686, P = 0.006), and its effect persisted even after partialling out other effects such as antibiotic use and age. Thus, our study indicates a possible interaction between respiratory viral infection and the composition of the gut microbiota community, warranting future mechanistic and prospective longitudinal studies. Additionally, we were able to detect microbiome changes in patients who were re-infected with SARS-CoV-2. Notably, the dominant bacteria in the re-infected group were Lachnospiraceae and Faecalimonas umbilicata, compared to the one-time infected group.

Analyzing prognosis and comparing predictive scoring systems for mortality of COVID-19 patients with liver cirrhosis: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Limited research suggested that liver cirrhosis is an independent risk factor for severe COVID-19, leading to higher hospitalization and mortality rates. This study aimed to identify the prognostic factors and validate scoring systems for predicting mortality in COVID-19 patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study extracted electronic health records of patients with COVID-19 who visited the emergency department between April 2021 and September 2022. Adult COVID-19 patients with liver cirrhosis were included, excluding those aged < 18 years and who did not require hospitalization. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The effectiveness of the scoring systems were analyzed for COVID-19 in-house mortality prediction.

RESULTS

A total of 1,368 adult COVID-19 patients with liver cirrhosis were included in this study. Compared with the survival group, the non-survival group had lower vital signs such as systolic blood pressure and blood oxygen saturation, higher levels of white blood cells, creatinine, bilirubin, and C-reactive protein, and longer prothrombin time. Higher rates of intubation, oxygen use, and dexamethasone use were observed in the non-survivor group. The WHO ordinal scale, MELD, and MELD-Na scores showed good predictive ability for in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The WHO ordinal scale showed the best performance in predicting mortality in patients with cirrhosis and COVID-19. MELD and MELD-Na scores were also found good performance for mortality prediction. Coagulation function, intubation, and dexamethasone administration were the most significant prognostic factors.

Insights into cancer characteristics among SARS-CoV-2 infected hospitalized patients: a comprehensive analysis from the National Clinical Registry for COVID-19

PURPOSE

Cancer outcome is dependent on multiple predetermining factors including cancer, type of cancer and its related factors. This study aims to investigate the association between COVID-19 & cancer/cancer types, focusing on risk of in-hospital mortality within 30 days of hospitalization of COVID-19 patients with cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We did a registry (National Clinical Registry for COVID-19) based retrospective observational study including 51,544 patients, of whom 976 were patients with cancer, admitted with COVID-19 between August 2020 and August 2023 across 42 hospitals of India.

RESULTS

Out of 51,544 patients, 976 (1.8%) had cancer. Hematological malignancies made up 15.06% (147 cases), while solid cancers accounted for 29.5% (288 cases), with genitourinary (18.4%, 80 cases), gastrointestinal (15.2%, 49 cases), and lung cancers (10.1%, 34 cases) being the most common. Solid cancers had the highest in-hospital mortality rate at 25%. Survival analysis showed that cancer-related hazards were highest at admission but decreased to levels comparable with other morbidities within nine to ten days. For each cancer type, the hazard was significantly elevated compared to that of the cancer-free (Other Comorbidities and No Comorbiditiy) groups during the initial period of hospitalization. The use of Remdesivir, steroids, and anticoagulants reduced mortality risk, and prior COVID-19 vaccination was protective against mortality across all cancer types.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that both cancer in general and specific cancer types significantly increase the risk of severe outcomes among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, especially immediately after hospitalization. The findings highlight the need for close monitoring and personalized interventions for COVID-19 patients with cancer for at least 10 days post-hospitalization, with a more specific high-risk period ranging from 7 to 18 days depending on the type of cancer.

Disease progression associated cytokines in COVID-19 patients with deteriorating and recovering health conditions

Understanding the immune response to COVID-19 is challenging due to its high variability among individuals. To identify differentially expressed cytokines between the deteriorating and recovering phases, we analyzed the Electronic Health Records (EHR) and cytokine profile data in a COVID-19 cohort of 444 infected patients and 145 non-infected healthy individuals. We categorized each patient's progression into Deterioration Phase (DP) and Recovery Phase (RP) using longitudinal neutrophil, lymphocyte and lactate dehydrogenase levels. A random forest model was built using healthy and severe patients to compute the contribution of each cytokine toward disease progression using Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP). SHAP values were used for supervised clustering to identify DP and RP-related samples and their associated cytokines. The identified clusters effectively discriminated DP and RP samples, suggesting that the cytokine profiles differed between deteriorating and recovering health conditions. Especially, CXCL10, GDF15, PTX3, and TNFSF10 were differentially expressed between the DP and RP samples, which are involved in the JAK-STAT, NF- κ B, and MAPK signaling pathways contributing to the inflammatory response. Collectively, we characterized the immune response in terms of disease progression of COVID-19 with deteriorating and recovering health conditions.

Association Between Serum Zinc Concentration Levels And Severity Of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) In Japanese Inpatients

Background

It has been reported that zinc deficiency is related to severe inflammatory conditions especially those of respiratory diseases. However, studies that have examined the association between the serum zinc concentration and the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are still limited. The aim of this study was to assess that association in Japanese inpatients with COVID-19.

Methods

This cross-sectional study, conducted from April 2020 to August 2021, included 467 eligible adult inpatients with COVID-19 whose serum zinc concentration was measured. Serum zinc concentration categories were defined as deficiency (< 60 μg/dL), marginal deficiency (≥ 60 to < 80 μg/dL), and normal (≥ 80 μg/dL). Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association between serum zinc deficiency and severe COVID-19. Serum zinc concentration levels were compared between mild and other severities of COVID-19 by Dunnett's method. The P for trend was estimated using the Jonckheere-Terpstra test.

Results

The proportions of subjects with serum zinc deficiency (< 60 μg/dL) and marginal zinc deficiency (≥ 60 to < 80 μg/dL) were 39.5% and 54.3% in women, and 36.4% and 57.0% in men, respectively. Serum zinc deficiency was significantly associated with severe COVID-19 compared to marginal deficiency and normal (odds ratio = 3.60, 95% confidence interval = 1.60-8.13, P < 0.01) after adjusting for confounders. An increase in severity of COVID-19 was inversely related to increases in serum zinc concentration levels (P < 0.01 for trend). Each serum zinc concentration of moderate and severe cases was also significantly lower compared with mild cases (P < 0.01).

Conclusion

The severity of COVID-19 was significantly related to serum zinc concentration levels. These results suggest the importance of considering the serum zinc concentration when treating patients with COVID-19.

The Effectiveness and Safety of Remdesivir Use in COVID-19 Patients with Neutropenia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic poses severe risks for immunocompromised patients, especially those with neutropenia due to chemotherapy. This study evaluates the safety and effectiveness of remdesivir use in COVID-19 patients with neutropenia.

METHODS

This retrospective study used the Chang Gung Research Database (CGRD) and extracted data from 98,763 patients with COVID-19 diagnosed between April 2021 and September 2022. The patients were divided into groups based on their remdesivir use and the presence of neutropenia. The adverse effects of remdesivir and their outcomes were analyzed after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

We compared common adverse effects of remdesivir in neutropenic patients before and after a 5-day regimen. A slight decrease in heart rate was observed but lacked clinical significance. There were no significant differences observed in hemoglobin, liver function tests, and blood glucose levels. After propensity score matching of COVID-19 patients with neutropenia according to gender, age, dexamethasone use, oxygen use, MASCC score, and WHO ordinal scale, no significant differences were found in length of stay, intubation rate, or ICU admission rate between the matched patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found remdesivir to be safe for COVID-19 patients with neutropenia, with no common adverse reactions observed. However, its effectiveness for these patients remains uncertain.

Use of defibrotide in COVID-19 pneumonia: comparison of a phase II study and a matched real-world cohort control

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to an unprecedented burden on healthcare systems around the world and a severe global socioeconomic crisis, with more than 750 million confirmed cases and at least 7 million deaths reported by December 31, 2023. The DEFI-VID19 study (clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: NCT04335201), a phase II, single-arm, multicenter, open-label trial was designed in mid-2020 to assess the safety and efficacy of defibrotide in treating patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Defibrotide was administered at a dose of 25 mg/kg intravenously, divided into four daily doses over a planned 14-day period for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia receiving non-invasive ventilation. The primary endpoint was respiratory failure-free survival (RFFS). Overall survival (OS), the number of post-recovery days, and adverse events were the secondary endpoints. For comparison, a contemporaneous control cohort receiving standard of care only was retrospectively selected by applying the eligibility criteria of the DEFI-VID19 trial. To adjust for the imbalance between the two cohorts in terms of baseline variable distributions, an outcome regression analysis was conducted. In adjusted analysis, patients receiving defibrotide reported a trend towards higher RFFS (hazard ratio [HR]=0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-1.29; P=0.138) and OS (HR=0.78; 95% CI: 0.33-1.53; P=0.248]) and showed a significantly increased number of post-recovery days (difference in means =3.61; 95% CI: 0.97-6.26; P=0.0037). Despite concomitant thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin, the safety profile of defibrotide proved to be favorable. Taken together, our findings suggest that defibrotide may represent a valuable addition to the COVID-19 therapeutic options.

A spatially resolved single-cell lung atlas integrated with clinical and blood signatures distinguishes COVID-19 disease trajectories

COVID-19 is characterized by a broad range of symptoms and disease trajectories. Understanding the correlation between clinical biomarkers and lung pathology during acute COVID-19 is necessary to understand its diverse pathogenesis and inform more effective treatments. Here, we present an integrated analysis of longitudinal clinical parameters, peripheral blood markers, and lung pathology in 142 Brazilian patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We identified core clinical and peripheral blood signatures differentiating disease progression between patients who recovered from severe disease compared with those who succumbed to the disease. Signatures were heterogeneous among fatal cases yet clustered into two patient groups: "early death" (<15 days until death) and "late death" (>15 days). Progression to early death was characterized systemically and in lung histopathological samples by rapid endothelial and myeloid activation and the presence of thrombi associated with SARS-CoV-2+ macrophages. In contrast, progression to late death was associated with fibrosis, apoptosis, and SARS-CoV-2+ epithelial cells in postmortem lung tissue. In late death cases, cytotoxicity, interferon, and T helper 17 (TH17) signatures were only detectable in the peripheral blood after 2 weeks of hospitalization. Progression to recovery was associated with higher lymphocyte counts, TH2 responses, and anti-inflammatory-mediated responses. By integrating antemortem longitudinal blood signatures and spatial single-cell lung signatures from postmortem lung samples, we defined clinical parameters that could be used to help predict COVID-19 outcomes.

Efficacy of corticosteroid therapy for oxygen-free coronavirus disease 2019-derived pneumonia

Corticosteroid therapy for oxygen-free coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is not recommended due to its negative prognostic impact, but the efficacy of corticosteroids when limited to COVID-19 pneumonia is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of corticosteroid monotherapy for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia without supplemental oxygen. We retrospectively reviewed patients with oxygen-free COVID-19 pneumonia at our institute between September 2020 and August 2021 and assessed the use of corticosteroids and the timing of initiation. We classified the patients into the following 2 groups: those who were initiated corticosteroids without developing respiratory failure (early steroid group) and those who were not (standard of care [SOC] group). We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPW) to balance between the groups. The primary outcome was the incidence of respiratory failure. A total of 144 patient records were reviewed; 63 patients were in the early steroid group and 81 patients were in the SOC group. Of all patients, 14 (22.2%) and 27 (33.3%) patients in the early steroid and SOC group, respectively, required supplemental oxygen (P = .192). After adjusted by the IPW method, 10 (16.0%) and 32 (40.1%) patients in the early steroid and SOC groups, respectively, required supplemental oxygen (P = .004). The logistic regression analysis indicated that early corticosteroid use was significantly associated with a decreased incidence of respiratory failure (odds ratio; 0.17, 95% confidence intervals; 0.06-0.46, P < .001). Corticosteroid monotherapy may suppress the development of exacerbation requiring oxygen supply in patients with oxygen-free COVID-19 pneumonia.

Identification of risk factors of Long COVID and predictive modeling in the RECOVER EHR cohorts

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2-infected patients may develop new conditions in the period after the acute infection. These conditions, the post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC, or Long COVID), involve a diverse set of organ systems. Limited studies have investigated the predictability of Long COVID development and its associated risk factors.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we used electronic healthcare records from two large-scale PCORnet clinical research networks, INSIGHT (~1.4 million patients from New York) and OneFlorida+ (~0.7 million patients from Florida), to identify factors associated with having Long COVID, and to develop machine learning-based models for predicting Long COVID development. Both SARS-CoV-2-infected and non-infected adults were analysed during the period of March 2020 to November 2021. Factors associated with Long COVID risk were identified by removing background associations and correcting for multiple tests.

RESULTS

We observed complex association patterns between baseline factors and a variety of Long COVID conditions, and we highlight that severe acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, being underweight, and having baseline comorbidities (e.g., cancer and cirrhosis) are likely associated with increased risk of developing Long COVID. Several Long COVID conditions, e.g., dementia, malnutrition, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, PASC diagnosis U099, and acute kidney failure are well predicted (C-index > 0.8). Moderately predictable conditions include atelectasis, pulmonary embolism, diabetes, pulmonary fibrosis, and thromboembolic disease (C-index 0.7-0.8). Less predictable conditions include fatigue, anxiety, sleep disorders, and depression (C-index around 0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

This observational study suggests that association patterns between investigated factors and Long COVID are complex, and the predictability of different Long COVID conditions varies. However, machine learning-based predictive models can help in identifying patients who are at risk of developing a variety of Long COVID conditions.

Microfluidic Immunoarray for Point-of-Care Detection of Cytokines in COVID-19 Patients

The "cytokine storm" often induced in COVID-19 patients contributes to the onset of "acute respiratory distress syndrome" (ARDS) accompanied by lung infection and damage, multiorgan failure, and even death. This large increase in pro-inflammatory cytokines in blood may be related to severity. Rapid, on-demand cytokine analyses can thus be critical to inform treatment plans and improve survival rates. Here, we report a sensitive, low-cost, semiautomated 3D-printed microfluidic immunoarray to detect 2 cytokines and CRP simultaneously in a single 10 μL serum sample in 25 min. Accuracy was validated by analyzing 80 COVID-19 patient serum samples, with results well correlated to a commercial Meso Scale protein immunoassay. Capture antibodies immobilized in detection microwells in a flat well plate-type flow chamber facilitate the immunoassay, with a programmable syringe pump automatically delivering reagents. Chemiluminescence signals were captured in a dark box with a CCD camera integrated for 30 s. This system was optimized to detect inflammation biomarkers IL-6, IFN-γ, and CRP simultaneously in blood serum. Ultralow limits of detection (LODs) of 0.79 fg/mL for IL-6, 4.2 fg/mL for CRP, and 2.7 fg/mL for IFN-γ with dynamic ranges of up to 100 pg/mL were achieved. ROC statistical analyses showed a relatively good diagnostic value related to the samples assigned WHO COVID-19 scores for disease severity, with the best results for IL-6 and CRP. Monitoring these biomarkers for coronavirus severity may allow prediction of disease severity as a basis for critical treatment decisions and better survival rates.

Invasive Fungal Infections in Inpatient Solid Organ Transplant Recipients With COVID-19: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort

BACKGROUND

The prevalence and outcomes of COVID-19-associated invasive fungal infections (CAIFIs) in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) remain poorly understood.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of SOTRs with COVID-19 admitted to 5 hospitals within Johns Hopkins Medicine was performed between March 2020 and March 2022. Cox regression multilevel mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression was used.

RESULTS

In the cohort of 276 SOTRs, 22 (8%) developed IFIs. The prevalence of CAIFIs was highest in lung transplant recipients (20%), followed by recipients of heart (2/28; 7.1%), liver (3/46; 6.5%), and kidney (7/149; 4.7%) transplants. In the overall cohort, only 42 of 276 SOTRs (15.2%) required mechanical ventilation; these included 11 of 22 SOTRs (50%) of the CAIFI group and 31 of 254 SOTRs (12.2%) of the no-CAIFI group. Compared with those without IFIs, SOTs with IFIs had worse outcomes and required more advanced life support (high-flow oxygen, vasopressor, and dialysis). SOTRs with CAIFIs had higher 1-y death-censored allograft failure (hazard ratio 1.6 5.1 16.4 , P  = 0.006) and 1-y mortality adjusting for oxygen requirement (adjusted hazard ratio 1.1 2.4 5.1 , P  < 0.001), compared with SOTRs without CAIFIs.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of CAIFIs in inpatient SOTRs with COVID-19 is substantial. Clinicians should be alert to the possibility of CAIFIs in SOTRs with COVID-19, particularly those requiring supplemental oxygen, regardless of their intubation status.

Complexity and Diversity of the Neurological Spectrum of SARS-CoV-2 over Three Waves of COVID-19

Background/Objectives: SARS-CoV-2 continually mutates, with five identified variants. Many neurological manifestations were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic, with differences between virus variants. The aim of this study is to assess the frequency and characteristics of neurological manifestations during COVID-19 in hospitalized patients over three waves in Poland with comparison and analysis correlation with the course of infection. Methods: This retrospective single-center study included 600 consecutive adults with confirmed COVID-19, hospitalized during 3 waves (pre-Delta, Delta and Omicron) in Poland. Demographic and clinical information and neurological manifestations were collected and compared across three periods. Results: The median age of the study group was 68, lower during the Delta wave. In the Omicron period, the disease severity at admission and inflammatory markers concentration were the lowest. Neurological manifestations were observed in 49%. The most common were altered mentation, headache, myalgia, mood disorder, ischemic stroke and encephalopathy. Smell and taste disturbances (STDs) were less frequent in the Omicron period. Neurological complications were predominant in the pre-Delta and Omicron periods. Ischemic stroke was observed more often in pre-Delta period. Altered mentation was related to higher severity at admission, worse lab test results, higher admission to ICU and mortality, while headache reduced mortality. Pre-existing dementia was related to higher mortality. Conclusions: Neurological manifestations of COVID-19 are frequent, with a lower rate of STDs in the Omicron period and more often cerebrovascular diseases in the pre-Delta period. Headache improves the course of COVID-19, while altered mentation, stroke and neurological comorbidities increase severity and mortality.

Early combination therapy of COVID-19 in high-risk patients

PURPOSE

Prolonged shedding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been observed in immunocompromised hosts. Early monotherapy with direct-acting antivirals or monoclonal antibodies, as recommended by the international guidelines, does not prevent this with certainty. Dual therapies may therefore have a synergistic effect.

METHODS

This retrospective, multicentre study compared treatment strategies for corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) with combinations of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, remdesivir, molnupiravir, and/ or mABs during the Omicron surge. Co-primary endpoints were prolonged viral shedding (≥ 106 copies/ml at day 21 after treatment initiation) and days with SARS-CoV-2 viral load ≥ 106 copies/ml. Therapeutic strategies and risk groups were compared using odds ratios and Fisher's tests or Kaplan-Meier analysis and long-rank tests. Multivariable regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

144 patients were included with a median duration of SARS-CoV-2 viral load ≥ 106 copies/ml of 8.0 days (IQR 6.0-15.3). Underlying haematological malignancies (HM) (p = 0.03) and treatment initiation later than five days after diagnosis (p < 0.01) were significantly associated with longer viral shedding. Prolonged viral shedding was observed in 14.6% (n = 21/144), particularly in patients with underlying HM (OR 3.5; 95% CI 1.2-9.9; p = 0.02). Clinical courses of COVID-19 were mild to moderate with only few adverse effects potentially related to combination treatment.

CONCLUSION

Early combination treatment of COVID-19 effectively prevented prolonged viral shedding in 85.6% of cases. Considering the rapid viral clearance rates and low toxicity, individualized dual therapy approaches may be beneficial in high-risk patients.

Remdesivir versus Favipiravir in Hospitalized Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Remdesivir treatment was associated with a reduced 28-day mortality and recovery time among patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19. Favipiravir is broadly used to treat COVID-19. However, various studies have had conflicting results on the efficacy of favipiravir for COVID-19. We hypothesized that remdesivir is more effective in clinical outcomes regarding the 29-day mortality rates, length of stay, and recovery rate than favipiravir in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study that included adult hospitalized COVID-19 pneumonia patients with hypoxemia. Patients were classified into two groups according to the antiviral drugs. Age, oxygen saturation, fraction of inspired oxygen, and Charlson comorbidity index were used for propensity score matching. The primary objective was to determine whether the type of antiviral agent is associated with 29-day mortality. Other outcomes were the 15-day recovery rate and the length of intensive care unit or hospital stay.

Results

A total of 249 patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia were included. With an adjustment for propensity score-matched, there were 204 patients for further analysis (102 patients in each antiviral drug group). Remdesivir patients had higher Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema (RALE) scores on Chest X-ray (14.32±9.08 vs 11.34±8.46; standardized mean difference =33.9%). The Charlson Comorbidity Index Scores were comparable. The prevalences of diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and non-HIV immunocompromised state were higher in the remdesivir group. Regarding the primary outcomes, after adjusting by diabetes, obesity, and RALE score, there was no difference in the 29-day mortality rate between both groups [26 patients (25.5%) in the remdesivir group vs 28 patients (27.5%) in the favipiravir group]. The Kaplan-Meier curve analysis at 29 days indicated no significant difference in cumulative survival rate. The two groups' adjusted hazard ratio was 0.72; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.25, p=0.24. A Kaplan-Meier analysis on the 15-day cumulative survival rate observed a trend towards a higher survival rate in the remdesivir group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.84; p= 0.02) The proportion of patients who recovered on day 15, the length of intensive care unit(ICU) stays, and the hospital stay were not different between remdesivir and favipiravir groups (62 patients (60.8%) vs 56 patients (54.9%), p=0.39; 11.48 ± 11.88 days vs 10.87 ± 9.31 days, p=0.69; and 16.64±14.28 days vs 16.59 ±11.31 days, p=0.98, respectively).

Conclusion

In patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia, Remdesivir did not demonstrate superior benefits over Favipiravir regarding 29-day mortality, 15-day recovery rates, or hospital and ICU stay lengths. However, further investigation into the 15-day cumulative survival rate revealed a trend towards improved survival in the Remdesivir group.

A supervised Bayesian factor model for the identification of multi-omics signatures

MOTIVATION

Predictive biological signatures provide utility as biomarkers for disease diagnosis and prognosis, as well as prediction of responses to vaccination or therapy. These signatures are identified from high-throughput profiling assays through a combination of dimensionality reduction and machine learning techniques. The genes, proteins, metabolites, and other biological analytes that compose signatures also generate hypotheses on the underlying mechanisms driving biological responses, thus improving biological understanding. Dimensionality reduction is a critical step in signature discovery to address the large number of analytes in omics datasets, especially for multi-omics profiling studies with tens of thousands of measurements. Latent factor models, which can account for the structural heterogeneity across diverse assays, effectively integrate multi-omics data and reduce dimensionality to a small number of factors that capture correlations and associations among measurements. These factors provide biologically interpretable features for predictive modeling. However, multi-omics integration and predictive modeling are generally performed independently in sequential steps, leading to suboptimal factor construction. Combining these steps can yield better multi-omics signatures that are more predictive while still being biologically meaningful.

RESULTS

We developed a supervised variational Bayesian factor model that extracts multi-omics signatures from high-throughput profiling datasets that can span multiple data types. Signature-based multiPle-omics intEgration via lAtent factoRs (SPEAR) adaptively determines factor rank, emphasis on factor structure, data relevance and feature sparsity. The method improves the reconstruction of underlying factors in synthetic examples and prediction accuracy of coronavirus disease 2019 severity and breast cancer tumor subtypes.

AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION

SPEAR is a publicly available R-package hosted at https://bitbucket.org/kleinstein/SPEAR.

Addressing ethnic disparities in neurological research in the United Kingdom: An example from the prospective multicentre COVID-19 Clinical Neuroscience Study

BACKGROUND

Minority ethnic groups have often been underrepresented in research, posing a problem in relation to external validity and extrapolation of findings. Here, we aimed to assess recruitment and retainment strategies in a large observational study assessing neurological complications following SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

Participants were recruited following confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 and hospitalisation. Self-reported ethnicity was recorded alongside other demographic data to identify potential barriers to recruitment.

RESULTS

807 participants were recruited to COVID-CNS, and ethnicity data were available for 93.2%. We identified a proportionate representation of self-reported ethnicity categories, and distribution of broad ethnicity categories mirrored individual centres' catchment areas. White ethnicity within individual centres ranged between 44.5% and 89.1%, with highest percentage of participants with non-White ethnicity in London-based centres. Examples are provided how to reach potentially underrepresented minority ethnic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Recruitment barriers in relation to potentially underrepresented ethnic groups may be overcome with strategies identified here.

Lung outcomes and related risk factors in patients after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a hospitalised single-centre cohort from Johannesburg, South Africa

Background

Sequelae post-SARS-CoV-2 infection, including lung and functional impairment, pose a significant challenge post-recovery. We explored the burden and risk factors for post-COVID-19 sequelae in an African population with prevalent comorbidities including tuberculosis (TB) and HIV.

Methods

We conducted an observational cohort study on hospitalised adults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from 20 March to 06 October 2021 at Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital, South Africa. We collected data on comorbidities, and COVID-19 severity using the World Health Organization (WHO) clinical progression scale. Prospectively, we followed up all participants within 40-days post-discharge to assess body mass index (BMI), COVID-19 symptoms and quality of life using St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), 6-min walking-test (6MWT), and spirometry. A subsequent in-depth visit assessed plethysmography, diffusing capacity for the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO), and high-resolution chest-CT.

Findings

We followed up 111 participants, where 65.8% were female, median age 50.5 years, and predominantly black-African (92.8%). Relevant comorbidities included TB disease (18.9%) and HIV infection (36%). SGRQ total scores were elevated in 78.9%, median 6MWT distance was reduced at 300 m (IQR 210-400), and nearly half (49.5%) exhibited spirometry findings below the lower limit of normal (LLN). In-depth pulmonary assessment for 61 participants revealed abnormalities in total lung capacity (31.6% <80% predicted), DLCO (53.4% <80% predicted), and chest-CT (86.7% abnormal). Significant risk factors for individual abnormal outcomes, adjusted for age and sex, were TB disease, HIV with CD4 <200 cells/mm3, BMI <18.5 kg/m2 and >35 kg/m2, and initial COVID-19 severity.

Interpretation

This study demonstrates substantial lung and functional morbidity within the first weeks post-COVID-19, particularly in individuals with pre-existing comorbidities including TB, HIV, and low or high BMI. Chest-CT and DLCO show best early potential at reflecting COVID-19-related pathologies.

Funding

The Bavarian State Ministry of Science and Arts.

Identification of Factors Associated with Mortality in the Elderly Population with SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Results from a Longitudinal Observational Study from Romania

The progression of SARS-CoV-2 infection has been linked to a hospitalization rate of 20%. The susceptibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection increases with age, resulting in severe and atypical clinical forms of the disease. The severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the elderly population can be attributed to several factors, including the overexpression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors, immunosenescence, and alterations in the intestinal microbiota that facilitate the cytokine storm. In light of these observations, we conducted a retrospective analysis based on prospectively collected data between 23 December 2021 and 30 April 2022 (the fourth wave of SARS-CoV-2 infection). We analyzed patients aged over 60 years who were hospitalized in a county hospital in Romania. The primary objective of our study was to assess the risk factors for an unfavorable outcome, while the secondary objective was to assess the clinical and baseline characteristics of the enrolled patients. We included 287 cases with a complete electronic medical record from this available cohort of patients. We aimed to retrospectively evaluate a group of 127 patients that progressed, unfortunately, toward an unfavorable outcome versus 160 patients with a favorable outcome. We used the Combined Ordinal Scale of Severity that combines the WHO ordinal scale and the degrees of inflammation to assess the severity of the patients at the time of the initial assessment. The age group between 70 and 79 years had the highest percentage, accounting for 48.0%-61 patients, of the deceased patients. We noted statistically significant differences between groups related to other cardiovascular diseases, nutritional status, hematological diseases, other neurological/mental or digestive disorders, and other comorbidities. Regarding the nutritional status of the patients, there was a statistically significant unfavorable outcome for all the age groups and the patients with a BMI > 30 kg/m2, p = 0.004. The presence of these factors was associated with an unfavorable outcome. Our results indicate that with the presence of cough, there was a statistically significant favorable outcome in the age group over 80 years, p ≤ 0.049. In terms of the presence of dyspnea in all groups of patients, it was associated with an unfavorable outcome, p ≤ 0.001. In our study, we analyzed laboratory test results to assess the level of inflammation across various WHO categories, focusing on the outcome groups determined by the average values of specific biomarkers. Our findings show that, with the exception of IL-6, all other biomarkers tend to rise progressively with the severity of the disease. Moreover, these biomarkers are significantly higher in patients experiencing adverse outcomes. The differences among severity categories and the outcome group are highly significant (p-values < 0.001). CART algorithm revealed a specific cut-off point for the WHO ordinal scale of 4 to stand out as an important reference value for patients at a high risk of developing critical forms of COVID-19. The high death rate can be attributed to proinflammatory status, hormonal changes, nutritional and vitamin D deficiencies, comorbidities, and atypical clinical pictures.

Safety and effectiveness of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19 patients with end-stage renal disease: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Remdesivir has been used to treat severe coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19); however, its safety and effectiveness in patients remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the safety and effectiveness of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19 with end-stage renal disease (ESRD).

METHODS

This retrospective study used the Chang Gung Research Database (CGRD) and extracted data from 21,621 adult patients with COVID-19 diagnosed between April 2021 and September 2022. The patients were divided into groups based on their remdesivir use and the presence of ESRD. The adverse effects of remdesivir and their outcomes were analyzed after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

To compare the adverse effects of remdesivir, propensity scores were used for one-to-one matching between patients with and without ESRD treated with remdesivir (N = 110). There were no statistically significant differences in heart rates, blood glucose levels, variations in hemoglobin levels before and after remdesivir use, or liver function between the two groups after remdesivir use. A comparison was made between patients with ESRD using remdesivir and those not using remdesivir after propensity score matching (N = 44). Although a shorter length of stay (LOS), lower intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate, and lower intubation rate were noted in the ESRD group treated with remdesivir, the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Remdesivir is safe for use in patients with COVID-19 and ESRD; no increased adverse effects were noted compared with patients without ESRD. However, the effectiveness of remdesivir use in patients with COVID-19 and ESRD remains uncertain.

Serum C-reactive protein greater than 75 mg/dL as an early available laboratory predictor of severe COVID-19: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Severe COVID-19 management is still challenging. Having a laboratory factor to predict the severity of a patient's condition can be very useful in how to approach each patient. There have been studies concentrating on the correlation between serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level and COVID-19 severity but we aim to reach a threshold for CRP in disease severity determination.

METHODS

We conducted a thorough search on PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases from early 2019 to October 2021, and 323 studies were assessed for eligibility in three phases. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to examine the validity of the studies. The t-test was applied for the CRP level cutoffs.

RESULTS

Eventually, 11 articles and 1615 patients were included in this systematic review. Our analysis evaluated combined mean, median, and standard deviation of severe patients' CRP to be respectively 73.37, 53.80, and 47.936. Based on the combined mean, 75 mg/dL was suggested as an initial threshold for baseline CRP in hospitalized patients for developing severe conditions.

CONCLUSION

This study recommends that COVID-19 patients with on-admission serum CRP levels of 75 mg/dL and more are likely associated with severe conditions. Thus, anti-inflammatory agents and further following may be helpful in these patients.

COVID-19 outcome is not affected by anti-CD20 or high-titer convalescent plasma in immunosuppressed patients

The role of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) convalescent plasma in the treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in immunosuppressed individuals remains controversial. We describe the course of COVID-19 in patients who had received anti-CD20 therapy within the 3 years prior to infection. We compared outcomes between those treated with and those not treated with high titer SARS-CoV2 convalescent plasma. We identified 144 adults treated at Mayo clinic sites who had received anti-CD20 therapies within a median of 5.9 months prior to the COVID-19 index date. About one-third (34.7%) were hospitalized within 14 days and nearly half (47.9%) within 90 days. COVID-19 directed therapy included anti-spike monoclonal antibodies (n = 30, 20.8%), and, among those hospitalized within 14 days (n = 50), remdesivir (n = 45, 90.0%), glucocorticoids (n = 36, 72.0%) and convalescent plasma (n = 24, 48.0%). The duration from receipt of last dose of anti-CD20 therapy did not correlate with outcomes. The overall 90-day mortality rate was 14.7%. Administration of convalescent plasma within 14 days of the COVID-19 diagnosis was not significantly associated with any study outcome. Further study of COVID-19 in CD20-depleted individuals is needed focusing on the early administration of new and potentially combination antiviral agents, associated or not with vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in multiple sclerosis: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The use and potential benefit of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for the treatment of mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in people living with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) remains poorly studied. The objective of this study is to describe the therapeutic use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAbs among pwMS.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used electronic medical records data from the TriNetX Dataworks USA Network and included adult pwMS, diagnosed with COVID-19, who received anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAbs in the outpatient setting between November 2020 and April 2022. We analyzed COVID-19 severity at anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAb initiation and up to 30 days, stratified by before/after emergence of Omicron variant and by disease-modifying therapy (DMT).

RESULTS

The study included 434 pwMS treated with anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAbs for mild-to-moderate COVID-19, including 270 patients before and 174 after Omicron emergence. Most pwMS were female (80.2%), mean age (SD) was 51.5 (12.5) years. Two-hundred-and-five patients were on DMTs, 51% of whom received anti-CD20s. One patient with moderate COVID-19 was hospitalized whilst receiving glatiramer acetate. No patients required intensive care and there were no deaths. COVID-19 outcomes were comparable following anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAb therapy in patients receiving different DMTs.

CONCLUSION

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAb treatment for pwMS with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 may reduce the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death.

Post COVID sequelae among COVID-19 survivors: insights from the Indian National Clinical Registry for COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

The effects of COVID-19 infection persist beyond the active phase. Comprehensive description and analysis of the post COVID sequelae in various population groups are critical to minimise the long-term morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19. This analysis was conducted with an objective to estimate the frequency of post COVID sequelae and subsequently, design a framework for holistic management of post COVID morbidities.

METHODS

Follow-up data collected as part of a registry-based observational study in 31 hospitals across India since September 2020-October 2022 were used for analysis. All consenting hospitalised patients with COVID-19 are telephonically followed up for up to 1 year post-discharge, using a prestructured form focused on symptom reporting.

RESULTS

Dyspnoea, fatigue and mental health issues were reported among 18.6%, 10.5% and 9.3% of the 8042 participants at first follow-up of 30-60 days post-discharge, respectively, which reduced to 11.9%, 6.6% and 9%, respectively, at 1-year follow-up in 2192 participants. Patients who died within 90 days post-discharge were significantly older (adjusted OR (aOR): 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.03), with at least one comorbidity (aOR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.31, 2.35), and a higher proportion had required intensive care unit admission during the initial hospitalisation due to COVID-19 (aOR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.08, 2.06) and were discharged at WHO ordinal scale 6-7 (aOR: 49.13 95% CI: 25.43, 94.92). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (at least one dose) was protective against such post-discharge mortality (aOR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Hospitalised patients with COVID-19 experience a variety of long-term sequelae after discharge from hospitals which persists although in reduced proportions until 12 months post-discharge. Developing a holistic management framework with engagement of care outreach workers as well as teleconsultation is a way forward in effective management of post COVID morbidities as well as reducing mortality.

A supervised Bayesian factor model for the identification of multi-omics signatures

MOTIVATION

Predictive biological signatures provide utility as biomarkers for disease diagnosis and prognosis, as well as prediction of responses to vaccination or therapy. These signatures are iden-tified from high-throughput profiling assays through a combination of dimensionality reduction and machine learning techniques. The genes, proteins, metabolites, and other biological analytes that compose signatures also generate hypotheses on the underlying mechanisms driving biological responses, thus improving biological understanding. Dimensionality reduction is a critical step in signature discovery to address the large number of analytes in omics datasets, especially for multi-omics profiling studies with tens of thousands of measurements. Latent factor models, which can account for the structural heterogeneity across diverse assays, effectively integrate multi-omics data and reduce dimensionality to a small number of factors that capture correlations and associations among measurements. These factors provide biologically interpretable features for predictive model-ing. However, multi-omics integration and predictive modeling are generally performed independent-ly in sequential steps, leading to suboptimal factor construction. Combining these steps can yield better multi-omics signatures that are more predictive while still being biologically meaningful.

RESULTS

We developed a supervised variational Bayesian factor model that extracts multi-omics signatures from high-throughput profiling datasets that can span multiple data types. Signature-based multiPle-omics intEgration via lAtent factoRs (SPEAR) adaptively determines factor rank, emphasis on factor structure, data relevance and feature sparsity. The method improves the recon-struction of underlying factors in synthetic examples and prediction accuracy of COVID-19 severity and breast cancer tumor subtypes.

AVAILABILITY

SPEAR is a publicly available R-package hosted at https://bitbucket.org/kleinstein/SPEAR.

Remdesivir for Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in the United States: Optimization of Health Care Resources

INTRODUCTION

In addition to significant morbidity and mortality, the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has strained health care systems globally. This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of remdesivir + standard of care (SOC) for hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the USA.

METHODS

This cost-effectiveness analysis considered direct and indirect costs of remdesivir + SOC versus SOC alone among hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the US. Patients entered the model stratified according to their baseline ordinal score. At day 15, patients could transition to another health state, and on day 29, they were assumed to have either died or been discharged. Patients were then followed over a 1-year time horizon, where they could transition to death or be rehospitalized.

RESULTS

Treatment with remdesivir + SOC avoided, per patient, a total of 4 hospitalization days: two general ward days and a day for both the intensive care unit and the intensive care unit plus invasive mechanical ventilation compared to SOC alone. Treatment with remdesivir + SOC presented net cost savings due to lower hospitalization and lost productivity costs compared to SOC alone. In increased and decreased hospital capacity scenarios, remdesivir + SOC resulted in more beds and ventilators being available versus SOC alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Remdesivir + SOC alone represents a cost-effective treatment for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. This analysis can aid in future decisions on the allocation of healthcare resources.

The pathophysiology of postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC): Possible role for persistent inflammation

As the SARS-CoV-2-induced pandemic wanes, a substantial number of patients with acute Corona Virus-induced disease (COVID-19 continue to have symptoms for a prolonged time after initial infection. These patients are said to have postacute sequelae of COVID (PASC) or "long COVID". The underlying pathophysiology of this syndrome is poorly understood and likely quite heterogeneous. The role of persistent, possibly deviant inflammation as a major factor in comorbidity is suspected.

Objective

To review data that address the relative importance of inflammation in the pathophysiology spectrum of PASC and to address how this would impact diagnosis and approach to therapy in patients identified as having such inflammatory abnormalities.

Methods

A review of public databases, including PubMed, MeSH, NLM catalog, and clinical trial databases such as clinicaltrials.gov.

Results

The literature supports a prominent role for various forms and types of inflammation in the pathophysiologic spectrum of PASC. Such inflammation can be persistent ant CoV-2-specific responses, new onset autoimmune responses, or a loss of normal immunoregulation resulting in widespread, sustained inflammatory pathologies that can affect both broad constitutional symptoms (such as fatigue, neurocognitive dysfunction, and anxiety/depression) and organ-specific dysfunction and/or failure.

Conclusions

PASC is a significant clinical entity with similarities to and differences from other postviral syndromes. Significant research efforts are ongoing to better understand specific aberrant inflammatory pathways present in individual patients for the purpose of developing and implementing effective therapies and ultimately prophylaxis strategies to prevent the progression of COVID-19 as well as likely future viral illnesses and pandemics.

Adjunctive therapy with lipid-lowering agents in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Many commonly used drugs were evaluated as repurposed treatment options since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. The benefit of lipid-lowering agents has been controversial in this regard. In this systematic review, we assessed the effect of these medications as adjunctive therapy in COVID-19 by the inclusion of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We searched four international databases including PubMed, the Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase for RCTs in April 2023. The primary outcome was mortality, while other efficacy indices were considered secondary outcomes. In order to estimate the pooled effect size of the outcomes, considering the odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI), random-effect meta-analyses was conducted.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 2,167 COVID-19 patients using statins, omega-3 fatty acids, fenofibrate, PCSK9 inhibitors, and nicotinamide as intervention compared to control or placebo, were included. No significant difference was found in terms of mortality (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.59, p-value = 0.86, I2 = 20.4%) or length of hospital stay (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.59, p-value = 0.78, I2 = 92.4%) by adding a statin to the standard of care. The trend was similar for fenofibrate and nicotinamide. PCSK9 inhibition, however, led to decreased mortality and an overall better prognosis. Omega-3 supplementation showed contradicting results in two trials, suggesting the need for further evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Although some observational studies found improved outcomes in patients using lipid-lowering agents, our study found no benefit in adding statins, fenofibrate, or nicotinamide to COVID-19 treatment. On the other hand, PCSK9 inhibitors can be a good candidate for further assessment. Finally, there are major limitations in the use of omega-3 supplements in treating COVID-19 and more trials are warranted to evaluate this efficacy.

Corticosteroid outcome may be dependent of duration of use in severe COVID-19

BACKGROUND/AIMS

For patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who require supplemental oxygen, the evidence of the optimal duration of corticosteroid is limited. This study aims to identify whether long-term use of corticosteroids is associated with decreased mortality.

METHODS

Between February 10, 2020 and October 31, 2021, we analyzed consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19 with severe hypoxemia. The patients were divided into short-term (≤ 14 days) and long-term (> 14 days) corticosteroid users. The primary outcome was 60-day mortality. We performed propensity score (PS) analysis to mitigate the effect of confounders and conducted Kaplan-Meier curve analysis.

RESULTS

There were 141 (52%) short-term users and 130 (48%) long-term corticosteroid users. The median age was 68 years and the median PaO2/FiO2 at admission was 158. Of the patients, 40.6% required high-flow nasal cannula, 48.3% required mechanical ventilation, and 11.1% required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The overall 60-day mortality rate was 23.2%, and that of patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) was 22.9%. The Kaplan-Meier curve for 60- day survival in the PS-matched cohort showed that corticosteroid for > 14 days was associated with decreased mortality (p = 0.0033). There were no significant differences in bacteremia and HAP between the groups. An adjusted odds ratio for the risk of 60-day mortality in short-term users was 5.53 (95% confidence interval, 1.90-18.26; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

For patients with severe COVID-19, long-term use of corticosteroids was associated with decreased mortality, with no increase in nosocomial complications. Corticosteroid use for > 14 days can benefit patients with severe COVID-19.

Evaluating chest pain in patients with post COVID conditions permission to think outside of the box

Chest pain is among the most common symptoms of post-COVID-19 Conditions (PCC) that prompts medical attention. Because the SARS-CoV-2 virus has proclivity for many organs and organ systems in the chest, ranging from the heart, lungs, great vessels, lymphatics, and peripheral nerves, clinicians evaluating patients with chest pain must consider a broad differential diagnosis and take a comprehensive approach to management.

Co-administration of AYUSH 64 as an adjunct to standard of care in mild and moderate COVID-19: A randomized, controlled, multicentric clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the efficacy of AYUSH 64, a standard polyherbal Ayurvedic drug in COVID-19.

METHODS

During the first pandemic wave, 140 consenting and eligible hospitalized adult participants with mild-moderate symptomatic disease (specific standard RT-PCR assay positive) were selected as per a convenience sample, and randomized (1:1 ratio) to an open-label (assessor blind) two-arm multicentric drug trial; standard of care (SOC as per Indian guidelines) versus AYUSH 64 combined with SOC (AYUSH plus). Participants were assessed daily and discharged once clinical recovery (CR, primary efficacy) was achieved which was based on a predetermined set of criteria (resolution of symptoms, normal peripheral oximetry, and negative specific RT-PCR assay). Each participant was followed using an indigenous software program(mobile phone) and completed a 12-week study period. The dose of AYUSH 64 was 2 tablets oral, 500 mg each, bid for 12 weeks (AYUSH plus only). Significant P was <0.05 (two-sided). On randomization, the groups were found well matched.

RESULTS

The mean interval time from randomization to CR was significantly superior in the AYUSH plus group [mean 6.45 days versus 8.26 days, 95% Confidence Interval of the difference -3.02 to -0.59 (P = 0.003, Student's 't test] as per-protocol analysis (134 participants); significant (P = 0.002) on an intention to treat analysis. 70% of the participants in AYUSH plus recovered during the first week (P = 0.046, Chi-square) and showed a significantly better change in physical health, fatigue, and quality of life measures. 48 adverse events, mostly mild and gut related, were reported by each group. There were 20 patient withdrawals (8 in AYUSH plus) but none due to an AE. There were no deaths. Daily assessment (hospitalization) and supervised drug intake ensured robust efficacy data. The open-label design was a concern (study outcome).

CONCLUSIONS

AYUSH 64 in combination with SOC hastened recovery, reduced hospitalization, and improved health in COVID-19. It was considered safe and well-tolerated. Further clinical validation (Phase III) is required.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CTRI/2020/06/025557.

The Efficacy and Safety of Imusil® Tablets in the Treatment of Adult Patients With Mild COVID-19: A Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Study

Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a serious concern of the new era. Along with antiviral synthetic medications, there is a need to discover efficacious herbal antiviral medicines with minimum side effects in patients against COVID-19. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of Imusil® among patients with mild COVID-19. Methods A prospective, randomized, multicenter, open-label, interventional study was conducted in patients with mild COVID-19 infection. Patients received either Imusil one tablet four times a day (seven days) along with the standard of care (SoC) or only SoC. The study endpoints were reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) negativity, changes in cycle threshold (CT), clinical improvement, change in blood inflammatory indexes, and safety assessment. Results A total of 100 patients were enrolled, and 98 received at least one dose of treatment. The median age of patients was 36.0 years, and 58 were males. By day 4, 85.4% of patients in the Imusil+SoC group tested negative for RT-PCR compared to 64% of patients exhibiting the same outcome in the SoC group (P=0.0156). After eight days, clinical improvement was observed in all patients from the Imusil+SoC group, while in the SoC group, clinical improvement was observed in 94.0% of patients (P=0.4947). During follow-up visits, the average C-reactive protein (CRP) levels decreased from baseline in both treatment groups. The decrease in the levels of CRP (-7.3 mg/dL versus -5.5 mg/dL), D-dimer (-231.0 ng/mL versus -151.6 ng/mL), and interleukin 6 (IL-6) (-2.3 pg/mL versus -2.0 pg/mL) at eight days was comparatively higher in the Imusil+SoC group versus the SoC group. There were no serious treatment-emergent adverse events in the drug arm. Conclusion Imusil provides effective antiviral activity and safety in mild COVID-19 patients. Imusil ensures faster RT-PCR negativity and clinical improvement and ensures effective reduction of inflammatory markers such as CRP, D-dimer and interleukin 6.

Predictors of Mortality among COVID-19 Patients Admitted to Intensive Care Units: A Single-Center Study in Tehran, Iran

BACKGROUND

Iran was one of the first countries to become an epicenter of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. However, there is a dearth of data on the outcomes of COVID-19 and predictors of death in intensive care units (ICUs) in Iran. We collected extensive data from patients admitted to the ICUs of the one of the tertiary referral hospitals in Tehran, Iran, to investigate the predictors of ICU mortality.

METHODS

The study population included 290 COVID-19 patients who were consecutively admitted to the ICUs of the Sina hospital from May 5, 2021, to December 6, 2021, a period that included the peak of the epidemic of the delta (δ) variant. Demographic data, history of prior chronic diseases, laboratory data (including markers of inflammation), radiologic data, and medication data were collected.

RESULTS

Of the 290 patients admitted to the ICUs, 187 (64.5%) died and 103 (35.5%) survived. One hundred forty-one (141, 48.6%) were men, and the median age (10th percentile, 90th percentile) was 60 (41, 80). Using logistic regression models, older age, history of hypertension, high levels of inflammatory markers, low oxygen saturation, substantial lung involvement in computed tomography (CT) scans, and gravity of the disease as indicated by the WHO 8-point ordinal scale were primary predictors of mortality at ICU. The use of remdesivir and imatinib was associated with a statistically non-significant reduction in mortality. The use of tocilizumab had almost no effect on mortality.

CONCLUSION

The findings are consistent with and add to the currently existing international literature. The findings may be used to predict risk of mortality from COVID-19 and provide some guidance on potential treatments.