Interplay between demographic, clinical and polygenic risk factors for severe COVID-19

The impact of smoking on COVID-19-related mortality: a Brazilian national cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Current evidence suggests the potential heightened vulnerability of smokers to severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outcomes.

AIMS

This study aimed to analyze the clinical outcomes and mortality related to tobacco use in a cohort of hospitalized Brazilian COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed adults hospitalized for COVID-19 in Brazil using the SIVEP-Gripe database (official data reported by public and private healthcare facilities for monitoring severe acute respiratory syndrome cases in Brazil). The inclusion criteria were patients over 18 years of age with a positive RT-qPCR test for SARS-CoV-2. The analysis focused on in-hospital mortality, considering smoking as an exposure variable, and included covariates such as age, gender, and comorbidities. Smoking history was collected from the self-reported field in the database. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, crude Odds Ratios, and multivariable binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

This study included 2,124,285 COVID-19 patients, among whom 44,774 (2.1 %) were smokers. The average age of the smokers was higher than that of the never-smokers (65.3 years vs. 59.7 years). The clinical outcomes revealed that smokers had higher rates of intensive care unit admission (51.6 % vs. 37.2 % for never-smokers), invasive ventilatory support (31.5 % vs. 20.2 % for never-smokers), and higher mortality (42.7 % vs. 31.8 % for never smokers). In the multivariable analysis, smokers demonstrated a heightened risk of death (aOR 1.23; 95 % CI 1.19-1.25).

CONCLUSIONS

This large populational-based cohort study confirms the current evidence and underscore the critical importance of recognizing smoking as a substantial risk factor for adverse outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

Oral VV116 versus placebo in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in China: a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3, randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

Spread of SARS-CoV-2 led to a global pandemic, and there remains unmet medical needs in the treatment of Omicron infections. VV116, an oral antiviral agent that has potent activity against SARS-CoV-2, was compared with a placebo in this phase 3 study to investigate its efficacy and safety in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

METHODS

This multicentre, double-blind, phase 3, randomised controlled study enrolled adults in hospitals for infectious diseases and tertiary general hospitals in China. Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio using permuted block randomisation to receive oral VV116 (0·6 g every 12 h on day 1 and 0·3 g every 12 h on days 2-5) or oral placebo (on the same schedule as VV116) for 5 days. Randomisation stratification factors included SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status and the presence of high-risk factors for progression to severe COVID-19. Inclusion criteria were a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, an initial onset of COVID-19 symptoms 3 days or less before the first study dose, and a score of 2 or more for any target COVID-19-related symptoms in the 24 h before the first dose. Patients who had severe or critical COVID-19 or who had taken any antiviral drugs were excluded from the study. The primary endpoint was the time to clinical symptom resolution for 2 consecutive days. Efficacy analyses were performed on a modified intention-to-treat population, comprising all patients who received at least one dose of VV116 or placebo, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid, and did not test positive for influenza virus before the first dose. Safety analyses were done on all participants who received at least one dose of VV116 or placebo. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05582629, and has been completed.

FINDINGS

A total of 1369 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups and 1347 received either VV116 (n=674) or placebo (n=673). At the interim analysis, VV116 was superior to placebo in reducing the time to sustained clinical symptom resolution among 1229 patients (hazard ratio [HR] 1·21, 95% CI 1·04-1·40; p=0·0023). At the final analysis, a substantial reduction in time to sustained clinical symptom resolution was observed for VV116 compared with placebo among 1296 patients (HR 1·17, 95% CI 1·04-1·33; p=0·0009), consistent with the interim analysis. The incidence of adverse events was similar between groups (242 [35·9%] of 674 patients vs 283 [42·1%] of 673 patients).

INTERPRETATION

Among patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, VV116 significantly reduced the time to sustained clinical symptom resolution compared with placebo, with no observed safety concerns.

FUNDING

Shanghai Vinnerna Biosciences, Shanghai Science and Technology Commission, and the National Key Research and Development Program of China.

TRANSLATION

For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Immunohematologic Biomarkers in COVID-19: Insights into Pathogenesis, Prognosis, and Prevention

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had profound effects on the health of individuals and on healthcare systems worldwide. While healthcare workers on the frontlines have fought to quell multiple waves of infection, the efforts of the larger research community have changed the arch of this pandemic as well. This review will focus on biomarker discovery and other efforts to identify features that predict outcomes, and in so doing, identify possible effector and passenger mechanisms of adverse outcomes. Identifying measurable soluble factors, cell-types, and clinical parameters that predict a patient's disease course will have a legacy for the study of immunologic responses, especially stimuli, which induce an overactive, yet ineffectual immune system. As prognostic biomarkers were identified, some have served to represent pathways of therapeutic interest in clinical trials. The pandemic conditions have created urgency for accelerated target identification and validation. Collectively, these COVID-19 studies of biomarkers, disease outcomes, and therapeutic efficacy have revealed that immunologic systems and responses to stimuli are more heterogeneous than previously assumed. Understanding the genetic and acquired features that mediate divergent immunologic outcomes in response to this global exposure is ongoing and will ultimately improve our preparedness for future pandemics, as well as impact preventive approaches to other immunologic diseases.

Genetic Determinants of the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening lung condition that arises from multiple causes, including sepsis, pneumonia, trauma, and severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given the heterogeneity of causes and the lack of specific therapeutic options, it is crucial to understand the genetic and molecular mechanisms that underlie this condition. The identification of genetic risks and pharmacogenetic loci, which are involved in determining drug responses, could help enhance early patient diagnosis, assist in risk stratification of patients, and reveal novel targets for pharmacological interventions, including possibilities for drug repositioning. Here, we highlight the basis and importance of the most common genetic approaches to understanding the pathogenesis of ARDS and its critical triggers. We summarize the findings of screening common genetic variation via genome-wide association studies and analyses based on other approaches, such as polygenic risk scores, multi-trait analyses, or Mendelian randomization studies. We also provide an overview of results from rare genetic variation studies using Next-Generation Sequencing techniques and their links with inborn errors of immunity. Lastly, we discuss the genetic overlap between severe COVID-19 and ARDS by other causes.

Combined effects of inflammation and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the risks of anxiety and depression: A cross-sectional study based on UK Biobank

Infection-induced perturbation of immune homeostasis could promote psychopathology. Psychiatric sequelae have been observed after previous coronavirus outbreaks. However, limited studies were conducted to explore the potential interaction effects of inflammation and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the risks of anxiety and depression. In this study, first, polygenic risk scores (PRS) were calculated for eight COVID-19 clinical phenotypes using individual-level genotype data from the UK Biobank. Then, linear regression models were developed to assess the effects of COVID-19 PRS, C-reactive protein (CRP), systemic immune inflammation index (SII), and their interaction effects on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7, 104 783 individuals) score and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9, 104 346 individuals) score. Several suggestive interactions between inflammation factors and COVID-19 clinical phenotypes were detected for PHQ-9 score, such as CRP/SII × Hospitalized/Not_Hospitalized in women group and CRP × Hospitalized/Unscreened in age >65 years group. For GAD-7 score, we also found several suggestive interactions, such as CRP × Positive/Unscreened in the age ≤65 years group. Our results suggest that not only COVID-19 and inflammation have important effects on anxiety and depression but also the interactions of COVID-19 and inflammation have serious risks for anxiety and depression.