Hospitalization and survival of solid organ transplant recipients with coronavirus disease 2019: A propensity matched cohort study

Clinical Outcomes of Hospitalized Immunocompromised Patients With COVID-19 and the Impact of Hyperinflammation: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose

Immunocompromised patients are at increased risk for severe outcomes from COVID-19 due to their altered immune responses, yet their inflammatory profiles and the interplay between immunosuppression remain poorly understood. We aimed to illustrate the inflammation profile and clinical outcomes of hospitalized immunocompromised patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study using a multicenter database and included adult hospitalized patients with Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China's late 2022 COVID-19 wave. Crude and adjusted 28- and 60-day mortality was compared between the two groups. Inflammatory phenotypes were evaluated by serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP) level. The interplay between overt inflammation and immunosuppression was analyzed.

Results

Among the 4078 included patients, 348 (8.5%) were immunocompromised. Immunocompromised patients had lower crude mortality but higher adjusted mortality at 28-day (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.55; 95% CI 1.08 to 2.23) and 60-day (HR = 1.47; 95% CI 1.05 to 2.06). Besides, immunocompromised patients had a higher risk of developing hyperinflammation (odd ratio [OR] =1.92; 95% CI 1.47 to 2.50, p <0.001). Moreover, hyperinflammation mediated a major part of the deleterious survival effect of immunosuppression on COVID-19.

Conclusion

Immunodeficiency not only increases short-term mortality risk but also predisposes patients to hyperinflammation. The complex interplay between immunosuppression, hyperinflammation, and COVID-19 outcomes warrants more detailed profiling of inflammation and immunity in this population.

Disparities in COVID-19 mortality amongst the immunosuppressed: A systematic review and meta-analysis for enhanced disease surveillance

BACKGROUND

Effective disease surveillance, including that for COVID-19, is compromised without a standardised method for categorising the immunosuppressed as a clinical risk group.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate whether excess COVID-associated mortality compared to the immunocompetent could meaningfully subdivide the immunosuppressed. Our study adhered to UK Immunisation against infectious disease (Green Book) criteria for defining and categorising immunosuppression. Using OVID (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Transplant Library, and Global Health), PubMed, and Google Scholar, we examined relevant literature between the entirety of 2020 and 2022. We selected for cohort studies that provided mortality data for immunosuppressed subgroups and immunocompetent comparators. Meta-analyses, grey literature and any original works that failed to provide comparator data or reported all-cause or paediatric outcomes were excluded. Odds Ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of COVID-19 mortality were meta-analysed by immunosuppressed category and subcategory. Subgroup analyses differentiated estimates by effect measure, country income, study setting, level of adjustment, use of matching and publication year. Study screening, extraction and bias assessment were performed blinded and independently by two researchers; conflicts were resolved with the oversight of a third researcher. PROSPERO registration number is CRD42022360755.

FINDINGS

We identified 99 unique studies, incorporating data from 1,542,097 and 56,248,181 unique immunosuppressed and immunocompetent patients with COVID-19 infection, respectively. Compared to immunocompetent people (pooled OR, 95%CI), solid organ transplants (2.12, 1.50-2.99) and malignancy (2.02, 1.69-2.42) patients had a very high risk of COVID-19 mortality. Patients with rheumatological conditions (1.28, 1.13-1.45) and HIV (1.20, 1.05-1.36) had just slightly higher risks than the immunocompetent baseline. Case type, setting income and mortality data matching and adjustment were significant modifiers of excess immunosuppressed mortality for some immunosuppressed subgroups.

INTERPRETATION

Excess COVID-associated mortality among the immunosuppressed compared to the immunocompetent was seen to vary significantly across subgroups. This novel means of subdivision has prospective benefit for targeting patient triage, shielding and vaccination policies during periods of high disease transmission.

Direct and indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the survival of kidney transplant recipients: A national observational study in France

During the pandemic period, health care systems were substantially reorganized for managing COVID-19 cases. Corresponding consequences on persons with chronic diseases remain insufficiently documented. This observational cohort study investigated the direct and indirect impact of the pandemic period on the survival of kidney transplant recipients (KTR). Using the French National Health Data System, incident persons with end-stage kidney disease between 2015 and 2020, and who received a kidney transplant during this period were included and followed up from their transplantation date to December 31, 2021. The survival of KTR during the prepandemic and pandemic periods was investigated using Cox models with time-dependent covariates. There were 10 637 KTR included in the study, with 324 and 430 deaths observed during the prepandemic and pandemic periods, respectively. The adjusted risk of death during the pandemic period was similar to that observed during the prepandemic period (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval]: 0.92 [0.77-1.11]), COVID-19-related hospitalization was associated with an increased risk of death (HR: 10.62 [8.46-13.33]), and a third vaccine dose was associated with a lower risk of death (HR: 0.42 [0.30-0.57]). The pandemic period was not associated with an indirect higher risk of death in KTR with no COVID-19-related hospitalization.

Geography, inequities, and the social determinants of health in transplantation

Among the causes of inequity in organ transplantation, geography is oft-cited but rarely defined with precision. Traditionally, geographic inequity has been characterized by variation in distance to transplant centers, availability of deceased organ donors, or the consequences of allocation systems that are inherently geographically based. Recent research has begun to explore the use of measures at various geographic levels to better understand how characteristics of a patient's geographic surroundings contribute to a broad range of transplant inequities. Within, we first explore the relationship between geography, inequities, and the social determinants of health. Next, we review methodologic considerations essential to geographic health research, and critically appraise how these techniques have been applied. Finally, we propose how to use geography to improve access to and outcomes of transplantation.