Clinical Trends Among U.S. Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19, March to December 2020 : A Cross-Sectional Study

Outcomes and Management After COVID-19 Critical Illness

TOPIC IMPORTANCE

COVID-19 has caused > 7 million deaths worldwide since its onset in 2019. Although the severity of illness has varied throughout the pandemic, critical illness related to COVID-19 persists. Survivors of COVID-19 critical illness can be left with sequelae of both the SARS-CoV-2 virus and long-term effects of critical illness included within post-intensive care syndrome. Given the complexity and heterogeneity of COVID-19 critical illness, the biopsychosocial-ecological model can aid in evaluation and treatment of survivors, integrating interactions among physical, cognitive, and psychological domains, as well as social systems and environments.

REVIEW FINDINGS

Prolonged illness after COVID-19 critical illness generally can be classified into effects on physical, cognitive, and psychosocial function, with much interaction among the various effects, and includes a wide range of symptoms such as ICU-acquired weakness, prolonged respiratory symptoms, cognitive changes, post-traumatic stress disorder post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression. Risk factors for COVID-19 critical illness developing are complex and include preexisting factors, disease course, and specifics of hospitalization in addition to psychological comorbidities and socioenvironmental factors. Recovery trajectories are not well defined, and management requires a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and individualized approach to care.

SUMMARY

The onset of vaccinations, new therapeutics, and new strains of SARS-CoV-2 virus have decreased COVID-19 mortality; however, the number of survivors of COVID-19 critical illness remains high. A biopsychosocial-ecological approach is recommended to guide care of COVID-19 critical illness survivors.

Disparities in COVID-19 Hospitalization at the Intersection of Race and Ethnicity and Income

BACKGROUND

Existing studies have elucidated racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 hospitalizations, but few have examined disparities at the intersection of race and ethnicity and income.

METHODS

We used a population-based probability survey of non-institutionalized adults in Michigan with a polymerase chain reaction-positive SARS-CoV-2 test before November 16, 2020. We categorized respondents by race and ethnicity and annual household income: low-income (< $50,000) Non-Hispanic (NH) Black, high-income (≥ $50,000) NH Black, low-income Hispanic, high-income Hispanic, low-income NH White, and high-income NH White. We used modified Poisson regression models, adjusting for sex, age group, survey mode, and sample wave, to estimate COVID-19 hospitalization prevalence ratios by race and ethnicity and income.

RESULTS

Over half of the analytic sample (n = 1593) was female (54.9%) and age 45 or older (52.5%), with 14.5% hospitalized for COVID-19. Hospitalization was most prevalent among low-income (32.9%) and high-income (31.2%) Non-Hispanic (NH) Black adults, followed by low-income NH White (15.3%), low-income Hispanic (12.9%), high-income NH White (9.6%), and high-income Hispanic adults (8.8%). In adjusted models, NH Black adults, regardless of income (low-income prevalence ratio [PR]: 1.86, 95% CI: 1.36-2.54; high-income PR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.07-2.31), and low-income NH White adults (PR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.12-2.07), had higher prevalence of hospitalization compared to high-income NH White adults. We observed no significant difference in the prevalence of hospitalization among Hispanic adults relative to high-income NH White adults.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed disparities in COVID-19 hospitalization at the intersection of race and ethnicity and income for NH Black adults and low-income NH White adults relative to high-income NH White adults, but not for Hispanic adults.

Therapies for people hospitalized with COVID-19 and alignment with national clinical guidelines in a large hospital, Almaty, Kazakhstan, 2020-2021

Background

Clinical practice guidelines were continually changing during the COVID-19 pandemic to reflect the best available evidence for a novel virus. In Kazakhstan, the national clinical guidelines for COVID-19 patient care were regularly modified and it was not known if and to what extent these guidelines were being followed in practice.

Methods

We conducted a sub-analysis of data collected from an observational study among people hospitalized with COVID-19 in a large infectious disease hospital in Almaty in four cross-sections of increased COVID-19 incidence: T1 (1 June-30 August 2020); T2 (1 October-31 December 2020); T3 (1 April-31 May 2021); and T4 (1 July-26 October 2021). Modifications to the national COVID-19 treatment guidelines were identified and clinical data were abstracted from electronic medical records. We assessed frequency of antibiotic, glucocorticoid, anticoagulant, and antiviral administered in each period and determined if these aligned with national clinical guidelines. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare practices across periods.

Results

Six modifications were made to national COVID-19 treatment guidelines during this study. Of 1,146 people hospitalized with COVID-19, 14% were in T1, 14% in T2, 22% in T3, and 50% in T4. Anticoagulant treatment was administered to 87% (range: 56%-95%), antibiotic treatment to 60% (range: 58%-64%), glucocorticoid to 55% (range: 43%-64%) and antiviral therapy 15% (range: 7%-22%). Majority of treatments were not aligned with national guidelines, including 98% of anticoagulant use, 95% of antibiotic use, 56% of glucocorticoid use, and 56% of antiviral use. There were no significant changes in practice following changes in guidelines for antibiotic use (64% in T1 to 58% in T2, p = 0.30). There was significant increase in use of anticoagulant (84% in T2 vs. 95% in T3, p < 0.01), glucocorticoid (43% in T2 vs. 64% in T3, p < 0.01), and antiviral treatment (7% in T3 vs. 15% in T4, p < 0.01) after guidelines updates.

Conclusion

The majority of treatments administered to people hospitalized with COVID-19 in four periods of high incidence in Almaty were not aligned with updated clinical guidelines. Antibiotic misuse was markedly high throughout. Increased awareness and training on clinical practice guidelines as updates are released may help improve adoption of evidence-based practices.

Vaccination Status and Trends in Adult Coronavirus Disease 2019-Associated Hospitalizations by Race and Ethnicity: March 2020-August 2022

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine whether race/ethnicity disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes persist in the era of vaccination.

METHODS

Population-based age-adjusted monthly rate ratios (RRs) of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were calculated among adult patients from the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network, March 2020 - August 2022 by race/ethnicity. Among randomly sampled patients July 2021 - August 2022, RRs for hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality were calculated for Hispanic, Black, American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN), and Asian/Pacific Islander (API) persons vs White persons.

RESULTS

Based on data from 353 807 patients, hospitalization rates were higher among Hispanic, Black, and AI/AN vs White persons March 2020 - August 2022, yet the magnitude declined over time (for Hispanic persons, RR = 6.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.5-7.1 in June 2020 vs RR < 2.0 after July 2021; for AI/AN persons, RR = 8.4; 95% CI, 8.2-8.7 in May 2020 vs RR < 2.0 after March 2022; and for Black persons RR = 5.3; 95% CI, 4.6-4.9 in July 2020 vs RR < 2.0 after February 2022; all P ≤ .001). Among 8706 sampled patients July 2021 - August 2022, hospitalization and ICU admission RRs were higher for Hispanic, Black, and AI/AN patients (range for both, 1.4-2.4) and lower for API (range for both, 0.6-0.9) vs White patients. All other race and ethnicity groups had higher in-hospital mortality rates vs White persons (RR range, 1.4-2.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Race/ethnicity disparities in COVID-19-associated hospitalizations declined but persist in the era of vaccination. Developing strategies to ensure equitable access to vaccination and treatment remains important.

[LDH-neutrophil-lymphocyte index as a predictor of 28-day mortality in patients with COVID-19]

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represents the greatest health crisis of our times; it was declared by WHO a pandemic in March 2020. The risk of presenting a severe disease is inter-individual, since it varies according to age, comorbidities, and immunological status, in addition to the type of SARS-CoV-2 variant. The neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and lactic dehydrogenase (LDH) are widely used markers to assess the severity and predict the course of the disease in patients with COVID-19, with a direct relationship of higher value-worse prognosis.

Objective

To verify if the LDH-neutrophil-lymphocyte index calculated from laboratory tests taken within the first 24 hours of admission is useful as a predictor of 28-day mortality in adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19.

Material and methods

Retrospective and analytical cohort study. All consecutive patients over 16 years of any gender, admitted to a tertiary care center from March 2020 to March 2021, who had a diagnosis of COVID-19 with a positive PCR for SARS-CoV-2, were included.

Results

Higher levels of the LDHNL index were associated with higher mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 (Q2 vs. Q1: RR 1.52 [1.24-1.87], p < 0.05; Q3 vs. Q1: RR 1.87 [1.55-2.25], p < 0.05; and Q4 vs. Q1: RR 2.74 [2.22-3-39], p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The serum LDHNL index taken in the first 24 hours of admission can help to predict early the risk of mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Impact of changing case definitions for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization on pandemic metrics

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of commonly used case definitions for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations on case counts and outcomes.

DESIGN, PATIENTS, AND SETTING

Retrospective analysis of all adults hospitalized between March 1, 2020, and March 1, 2022, at 5 Massachusetts acute-care hospitals.

INTERVENTIONS

We applied 6 commonly used definitions of COVID-19 hospitalization: positive severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay within 14 days of admission, PCR plus dexamethasone administration, PCR plus remdesivir, PCR plus hypoxemia, institutional COVID-19 flag, or COVID-19 International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes. Outcomes included case counts and in-hospital mortality. Overall, 100 PCR-positive cases were reviewed to determine each definition's accuracy for distinguishing primary or contributing versus incidental COVID-19 hospitalizations.

RESULTS

Of 306,387 hospital encounters, 15,436 (5.0%) met the PCR-based definition. COVID-19 hospitalization counts varied substantially between definitions: 4,628 (1.5% of all encounters) for PCR plus dexamethasone, 5,757 (1.9%) for PCR plus remdesivir, 11,801 (3.9%) for PCR plus hypoxemia, 15,673 (5.1%) for institutional flags, and 15,868 (5.2%) for ICD-10 codes. Definitions requiring dexamethasone, hypoxemia, or remdesivir selected sicker patients compared to PCR alone (mortality rates 12.2%, 10.7%, and 8.8% vs 8.3%, respectively). Definitions requiring PCR plus remdesivir or dexamethasone did not detect a reduction in in-hospital mortality associated with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. ICD-10 codes had the highest sensitivity (98.4%) but low specificity (39.5%) for distinguishing primary or contributing versus incidental COVID-19 hospitalizations. PCR plus dexamethasone had the highest specificity (92.1%) but low sensitivity (35.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Commonly used definitions for COVID-19 hospitalizations generate variable case counts and outcomes and differentiate poorly between primary or contributing versus incidental COVID-19 hospitalizations. Surveillance definitions that better capture and delineate COVID-19-associated hospitalizations are needed.

Associated factors for mortality in a COVID-19 colombian cohort: is the third wave relevant when Mu variant was predominant epidemiologically?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the association between Colombia's third wave when the Mu variant was predominant epidemiologically (until 75%) in Colombia and COVID-19 all-cause in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort, we included hospitalized patients ≥18 years with SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 2020 to September 2021 in ten hospitals from three cities in Colombia. Description analysis, survival, and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between the third epidemic wave and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 25,371 patients were included. The age-stratified time-to-mortality curves showed differences according to epidemic waves in patients ≥75 years (log-rank test p = 0.012). In the multivariate Cox analysis, the third wave was not associated with increased mortality relative to the first wave (aHR 0.95; 95%CI 0.84-1.08), but there was an interaction between age ≥75 years and the third wave finding a lower HR for mortality (aHR 0.56, 95%CI 0.36-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find an increase in in-hospital mortality during the third epidemic wave in which the Mu variant was predominant in Colombia. The reduced hazard in mortality in patients ≥75 years hospitalized in the third wave could be explained by the high coverage of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in this population and patients with underlying conditions.

COVID-19 in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a multicenter analysis by the Czech CLL study group

Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have a high risk of poor outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This multicenter cohort study evaluated the impact of COVID-19 infection on the population of CLL patients in the Czech Republic. Between March 2020 and May 2021, 341 patients (237 males) with CLL and COVID-19 disease were identified. The median age was 69 years (range 38-91). Out of the 214 (63%) patients with the history of therapy for CLL, 97 (45%) were receiving CLL-directed treatment at diagnosis of COVID-19: 29% Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi), 16% chemoimmunotherapy (CIT), 11% Bcl-2 inhibitor, and 4% phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor. Regarding the severity of COVID-19, 60% pts required admission to the hospital, 21% pts were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), and 12% received invasive mechanical ventilation. The overall case fatality rate was 28%. Major comorbidities, age over 72, male gender, CLL treatment in history, CLL-directed treatment at COVID-19 diagnosis were associated with increased risk of death. Of note, concurrent therapy with BTKi compared to CIT was not associated with better outcome of COVID-19.

Acute Cardiac Events During COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is associated with cardiac complications.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes associated with acute cardiac events during COVID-19-associated hospitalizations among adults.

METHODS

During January 2021 to November 2021, medical chart abstraction was conducted on a probability sample of adults hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection identified from 99 U.S. counties in 14 U.S. states in the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network. We calculated the prevalence of acute cardiac events (identified by International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision-Clinical Modification codes) by history of underlying cardiac disease and examined associated risk factors and disease outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 8,460 adults, 11.4% (95% CI: 10.1%-12.9%) experienced an acute cardiac event during a COVID-19-associated hospitalization. Prevalence was higher among adults who had underlying cardiac disease (23.4%; 95% CI: 20.7%-26.3%) compared with those who did not (6.2%; 95% CI: 5.1%-7.6%). Acute ischemic heart disease (5.5%; 95% CI: 4.5%-6.5%) and acute heart failure (5.4%; 95% CI: 4.4%-6.6%) were the most prevalent events; 0.3% (95% CI: 0.1%-0.5%) experienced acute myocarditis or pericarditis. Risk factors varied by underlying cardiac disease status. Patients with ≥1 acute cardiac event had greater risk of intensive care unit admission (adjusted risk ratio: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.8-2.1) and in-hospital death (adjusted risk ratio: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.3-2.1) compared with those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute cardiac events were common during COVID-19-associated hospitalizations, particularly among patients with underlying cardiac disease, and are associated with severe disease outcomes. Persons at greater risk for experiencing acute cardiac events during COVID-19-associated hospitalizations might benefit from more intensive clinical evaluation and monitoring during hospitalization.

Codetections of Other Respiratory Viruses Among Children Hospitalized With COVID-19

OBJECTIVES:

To assess the clinical impact of respiratory virus codetections among children hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

METHODS:

During March 2020 to February 2022, the US coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) identified 4372 children hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted primarily for fever, respiratory illness, or presumed COVID-19. We compared demographics, clinical features, and outcomes between those with and without codetections who had any non-SARS-CoV-2 virus testing. Among a subgroup of 1670 children with complete additional viral testing, we described the association between presence of codetections and severe respiratory illness using age-stratified multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS:

Among 4372 children hospitalized, 62% had non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory virus testing, of which 21% had a codetection. Children with codetections were more likely to be &lt;5 years old (yo), receive increased oxygen support, or be admitted to the ICU (P &lt; .001). Among children &lt;5 yo, having any viral codetection (&lt;2 yo: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.1 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5–3.0]; 2–4 yo: aOR 1.9 [95% CI 1.2–3.1]) or rhinovirus/enterovirus codetection (&lt;2 yo: aOR 2.4 [95% CI 1.6–3.7]; 2-4: aOR 2.4 [95% CI 1.2–4.6]) was significantly associated with severe illness. Among children &lt;2 yo, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) codetections were also significantly associated with severe illness (aOR 1.9 [95% CI 1.3–2.9]). No significant associations were seen among children ≥5 yo.

CONCLUSIONS:

Respiratory virus codetections, including RSV and rhinovirus/enterovirus, may increase illness severity among children &lt;5 yo hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Predisposing factors for admission to intensive care units of patients with COVID-19 infection-Results of the German nationwide inpatient sample

Background

Intensive care units (ICU) capacities are one of the most critical determinants in health-care management of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, we aimed to analyze the ICU-admission and case-fatality rate as well as characteristics and outcomes of patient admitted to ICU in order to identify predictors and associated conditions for worsening and case-fatality in this critical ill patient-group.

Methods

We used the German nationwide inpatient sample to analyze all hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis in Germany between January and December 2020. All hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection during the year 2020 were included in the present study and were stratified according ICU-admission.

Results

Overall, 176,137 hospitalizations of patients with COVID-19-infection (52.3% males; 53.6% aged ≥70 years) were reported in Germany during 2020. Among them, 27,053 (15.4%) were treated in ICU. COVID-19-patients treated on ICU were younger [70.0 (interquartile range (IQR) 59.0-79.0) vs. 72.0 (IQR 55.0-82.0) years, P < 0.001], more often males (66.3 vs. 48.8%, P < 0.001), had more frequently cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and cardiovascular risk-factors with increased in-hospital case-fatality (38.4 vs. 14.2%, P < 0.001). ICU-admission was independently associated with in-hospital death [OR 5.49 (95% CI 5.30-5.68), P < 0.001]. Male sex [OR 1.96 (95% CI 1.90-2.01), P < 0.001], obesity [OR 2.20 (95% CI 2.10-2.31), P < 0.001], diabetes mellitus [OR 1.48 (95% CI 1.44-1.53), P < 0.001], atrial fibrillation/flutter [OR 1.57 (95% CI 1.51-1.62), P < 0.001], and heart failure [OR 1.72 (95% CI 1.66-1.78), P < 0.001] were independently associated with ICU-admission.

Conclusion

During 2020, 15.4% of the hospitalized COVID-19-patients were treated on ICUs with high case-fatality. Male sex, CVD and cardiovascular risk-factors were independent risk-factors for ICU admission.

Astegolimab or Efmarodocokin Alfa in Patients With Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Randomized, Phase 2 Trial

OBJECTIVES

Severe cases of COVID-19 pneumonia can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Release of interleukin (IL)-33, an epithelial-derived alarmin, and IL-33/ST2 pathway activation are linked with ARDS development in other viral infections. IL-22, a cytokine that modulates innate immunity through multiple regenerative and protective mechanisms in lung epithelial cells, is reduced in patients with ARDS. This study aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of astegolimab, a human immunoglobulin G2 monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits the IL-33 receptor, ST2, or efmarodocokin alfa, a human IL-22 fusion protein that activates IL-22 signaling, for treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

DESIGN

Phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (COVID-astegolimab-IL).

SETTING

Hospitals.

PATIENTS

Hospitalized adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive IV astegolimab, efmarodocokin alfa, or placebo, plus standard of care. The primary endpoint was time to recovery, defined as time to a score of 1 or 2 on a 7-category ordinal scale by day 28.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The study randomized 396 patients. Median time to recovery was 11 days (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01 d; p = 0.93) and 10 days (HR, 1.15 d; p = 0.38) for astegolimab and efmarodocokin alfa, respectively, versus 10 days for placebo. Key secondary endpoints (improved recovery, mortality, or prevention of worsening) showed no treatment benefits. No new safety signals were observed and adverse events were similar across treatment arms. Biomarkers demonstrated that both drugs were pharmacologically active.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with astegolimab or efmarodocokin alfa did not improve time to recovery in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Ocular manifestations of COVID-19 in pediatric patients

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) infection may remain asymptomatic or may have several different presentations. Although this disease primarily affects the respiratory system, systemic manifestations affecting the gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, neurological, otorhinolaryngologic, and ophthalmic systems have been reported. Ophthalmic signs may be the first and only sign of COVID-19 infection in children. In the current narrative review, we report the ophthalmic manifestations of COVID-19 in the pediatric age cohort. We performed a comprehensive literature search for the publications on ophthalmic manifestations of COVID-19 in children between 1 March 2020 and 1 January 2022 and compiled the ophthalmic manifestations of this entity among the pediatric population. Conjunctivitis is the most common ophthalmic manifestation in children and can develop at any stage of the disease. Ophthalmic manifestations are seen more commonly in children with severe systemic disease. Long-term and indirect consequence of the COVID-19 disease is the rise of myopia among children. Ophthalmic signs may be the first and only sign of COVID-19 infection in children. Pediatricians, as well as ophthalmologists, must keep observing all children with COVID-19 closely for ophthalmic signs.

Population Risk Factors for Severe Disease and Mortality in COVID-19 in the United States during the Pre-Vaccine Era: A Retrospective Cohort Study of National Inpatient Sample

Background-Previous studies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were limited to specific geographical locations and small sample sizes. Therefore, we used the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2020 database to determine the risk factors for severe outcomes and mortality in COVID-19. Methods-We included adult patients with COVID-19. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the predictors of severe outcomes and mortality in COVID-19. Results-1,608,980 (95% CI 1,570,803-1,647,156) hospitalizations with COVID-19 were included. Severe complications occurred in 78.3% of COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and 25% of COVID-19 pneumonia patients. The mortality rate for COVID-19 ARDS was 54% and for COVID-19 pneumonia was 16.6%. On multivariate analysis, age > 65 years, male sex, government insurance or no insurance, residence in low-income areas, non-white races, stroke, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, malnutrition, primary immunodeficiency, long-term steroid/immunomodulatory use, complicated diabetes mellitus, and liver disease were associated with COVID-19 related complications and mortality. Cardiac arrest, septic shock, and intubation had the highest odds of mortality. Conclusions-Socioeconomic disparities and medical comorbidities were significant determinants of mortality in the US in the pre-vaccine era. Therefore, aggressive vaccination of high-risk patients and healthcare policies to address socioeconomic disparities are necessary to reduce death rates in future pandemics.

Temporal Improvements in COVID-19 Outcomes for Hospitalized Adults: A Post Hoc Observational Study of Remdesivir Group Participants in the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 standard of care (SOC) evolved rapidly during 2020 and 2021, but its cumulative effect over time is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether recovery and mortality improved as SOC evolved, using data from ACTT (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial).

DESIGN

ACTT is a series of phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated COVID-19 therapeutics from February 2020 through May 2021. ACTT-1 compared remdesivir plus SOC to placebo plus SOC, and in ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, remdesivir plus SOC was the control group. This post hoc analysis compared recovery and mortality between these comparable sequential cohorts of patients who received remdesivir plus SOC, adjusting for baseline characteristics with propensity score weighting. The analysis was repeated for participants in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4 who received remdesivir plus dexamethasone plus SOC. Trends in SOC that could explain outcome improvements were analyzed. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04280705 [ACTT-1], NCT04401579 [ACTT-2], NCT04492475 [ACTT-3], and NCT04640168 [ACTT-4]).

SETTING

94 hospitals in 10 countries (86% U.S. participants).

PARTICIPANTS

Adults hospitalized with COVID-19.

INTERVENTION

SOC.

MEASUREMENTS

28-day mortality and recovery.

RESULTS

Although outcomes were better in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were close to 1 (HR for recovery, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.17]; HR for mortality, 0.90 [CI, 0.56 to 1.40]). Comparable patients were less likely to be intubated in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1 (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.53 to 0.97]), and hydroxychloroquine use decreased. Outcomes improved from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3 (HR for recovery, 1.43 [CI, 1.24 to 1.64]; HR for mortality, 0.45 [CI, 0.21 to 0.97]). Potential explanatory factors (SOC trends, case surges, and variant trends) were similar between ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, except for increased dexamethasone use (11% to 77%). Outcomes were similar in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4. Antibiotic use decreased gradually across all stages.

LIMITATION

Unmeasured confounding.

CONCLUSION

Changes in patient composition explained improved outcomes from ACTT-1 to ACTT-2 but not from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3, suggesting improved SOC. These results support excluding nonconcurrent controls from analysis of platform trials in rapidly changing therapeutic areas.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccine in lung cancer patients receiving anticancer treatment: A prospective multicenter cohort study

This study assessed the immunogenicity and safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in lung cancer patients receiving anticancer treatment. We enrolled lung cancer patients receiving anticancer treatment and non-cancer patients; all participants were fully vaccinated with the BNT162b2 vaccine. Blood samples were collected before the first and second vaccinations and 4 ± 1 weeks after the second vaccination. Anti-severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein S1 subunit receptor-binding domain antibody titers were measured using the Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assays. Fifty-five lung cancer patients and 38 non-cancer patients were included in the immunogenicity analysis. Lung cancer patients showed significant increase in the geometric mean antibody concentration, which was significantly lower than that in the non-cancer patients after the first (30 vs. 121 AU/mL, p < .001 on Architect; 4.0 vs 1.2 U/mL, p < .001 on Elecsys) and second vaccinations (1632 vs. 3472 AU/mL, p = .005 on Architect; 213 vs 573 A/mL, p = .002 on Elecsys). The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for seroprotection was significantly lower (p < .05) in lung cancer patients than that in non-cancer patients. Analysis of the anticancer treatment types showed that the aOR for seroprotection was significantly lower (p < .05) in lung cancer patients receiving cytotoxic agents. They showed no increase in adverse reactions. BNT162b2 vaccination in lung cancer patients undergoing anticancer treatment significantly increased (p < .05) antibody titers and showed acceptable safety. Immunogenicity in these patients could be inadequate compared with that in non-cancer patients.

Gender and Race-Based Health Disparities in COVID-19 Outcomes among Hospitalized Patients in the United States: A Retrospective Analysis of a National Sample

COVID-19 has brought the disparities in health outcomes for patients to the forefront. Racial and gender identity are associated with prevalent healthcare disparities. In this study, we examine the health disparities in COVID-19 hospitalization outcome from the intersectional lens of racial and gender identity. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) 2020 NIS dataset for hospitalizations from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2020 was analyzed for primary outcome of in-patient mortality and secondary outcomes of intubation, acute kidney injury (AKI), AKI requiring hemodialysis (HD), cardiac arrest, stroke, and vasopressor use. A multivariate regression model was used to identify associations. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant. Men had higher rates of adverse outcomes. Native American men had the highest risk of in-hospital mortality (aOR 2.0, CI 1.7−2.4) and intubation (aOR 1.8, CI 1.5−2.1), Black men had highest risk of AKI (aOR 2.0, CI 1.9−2.0). Stroke risk was highest in Asian/Pacific Islander women (aOR 1.5, p = 0.001). We note that the intersection of gender and racial identities has a significant impact on outcomes of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in the United States with Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) men have higher risks of adverse outcomes.

COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations Among Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Adults 18 Years or Older in 13 US States, January 2021 to April 2022

Importance

Understanding risk factors for hospitalization in vaccinated persons and the association of COVID-19 vaccines with hospitalization rates is critical for public health efforts to control COVID-19.

Objective

To determine characteristics of COVID-19-associated hospitalizations among vaccinated persons and comparative hospitalization rates in unvaccinated and vaccinated persons.

Design, Setting, and Participants

From January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022, patients 18 years or older with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified from more than 250 hospitals in the population-based COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network. State immunization information system data were linked to cases, and the vaccination coverage data of the defined catchment population were used to compare hospitalization rates in unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals. Vaccinated and unvaccinated patient characteristics were compared in a representative sample with detailed medical record review; unweighted case counts and weighted percentages were calculated.

Exposures

Laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalization, defined as a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result within 14 days before or during hospitalization.

Main Outcomes and Measures

COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates among vaccinated vs unvaccinated persons and factors associated with COVID-19-associated hospitalization in vaccinated persons were assessed.

Results

Using representative data from 192 509 hospitalizations (see Table 1 for demographic information), monthly COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates ranged from 3.5 times to 17.7 times higher in unvaccinated persons than vaccinated persons regardless of booster dose status. From January to April 2022, when the Omicron variant was predominant, hospitalization rates were 10.5 times higher in unvaccinated persons and 2.5 times higher in vaccinated persons with no booster dose, respectively, compared with those who had received a booster dose. Among sampled cases, vaccinated hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were older than those who were unvaccinated (median [IQR] age, 70 [58-80] years vs 58 [46-70] years, respectively; P < .001) and more likely to have 3 or more underlying medical conditions (1926 [77.8%] vs 4124 [51.6%], respectively; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of US adults hospitalized with COVID-19, unvaccinated adults were more likely to be hospitalized compared with vaccinated adults; hospitalization rates were lowest in those who had received a booster dose. Hospitalized vaccinated persons were older and more likely to have 3 or more underlying medical conditions and be long-term care facility residents compared with hospitalized unvaccinated persons. The study results suggest that clinicians and public health practitioners should continue to promote vaccination with all recommended doses for eligible persons.

Descriptive epidemiology of COVID-19 in Japan 2020: insights from a multihospital database

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological data are essential for developing strategies against the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Data on COVID-19 epidemiology in Japan are limited owing to a focus on specific regions and patient groups, particularly in the early phase of the pandemic.

METHODS

We investigated COVID-19 epidemiology in Japan in 2020 using a large nationwide multihospital database containing insurance claim records and medical records. Inclusion criteria were inpatient and outpatient referrals for COVID-19 in 2020. We analyzed demographic data, comorbidities, drug use, severe COVID-19 risk, and clinical course of hospitalized patients (including death).

RESULTS

We identified 11,868 COVID-19 cases from 56 institutions: 6,440 outpatients and 5,428 inpatients. Of the patients, 53.2% had comorbid conditions, the most common of which was tumor (22.1%), and 56.4% were classed as having a high risk of COVID-19. Pharmacological management patterns were generally consistent between the first and second half of 2020, except for glucocorticoid use. The use of unauthorized medications (hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, and favipiravir) was infrequent. For hospitalized patients, the median length of stay was 10 days, and 2.4% of patients were admitted to intensive care units. Post-COVID-19 all-cause mortality, all-cause 30-day mortality, and in-hospital deaths were recorded for 7.9%, 5.4%, and 4.6% of patients, respectively. Patients with high-risk conditions had a lower survival probability.

CONCLUSIONS

This descriptive study of COVID-19 in 2020 identified differences in care across outpatient and inpatient settings and changes in care delivery as the pandemic progressed. These findings could inform strategies for future infectious disease pandemics.

Correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease

Antibodies against epitopes in S1 give the most accurate CoP against infection by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. Measurement of those antibodies by neutralization or binding assays both have predictive value, with binding antibody titers giving the highest statistical correlation. However, the protective functions of antibodies are multiple. Antibodies with multiple functions other than neutralization influence efficacy. The role of cellular responses can be discerned with respect to CD4+ T cells and their augmentation of antibodies, and with respect to CD8+ cells with regard to control of viral replication, particularly in the presence of insufficient antibody. More information is needed on mucosal responses.

The impact of variants and vaccination on the mortality and resource utilization of hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Background

COVID-19 outcomes among hospitalized patients may have changed due to new variants, therapies and vaccine availability. We assessed outcomes of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 from March 2020–February 2022.

Methods

Data were retrieved from electronic health medical records of adult COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a large community health system. Duration was split into March 2020–June 2021 (pre-Delta period), July–November 2021 (Delta period), and December 2021–February 2022 (Omicron period).

Results

Of included patients (n = 9582), 75% were admitted during pre-Delta, 9% during Delta, 16% during Omicron period. The COVID-positive inpatients were oldest during Omicron period but had lowest rates of COVID pneumonia and resource utilization (p < 0.0001); 46% were vaccinated during Delta and 61% during Omicron period (p < 0.0001). After adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, vaccination was associated with lower inpatient mortality (OR = 0.47 (0.34–0.65), p < 0.0001). The Omicron period was independently associated with lower risk of inpatient mortality (OR = 0.61 (0.45–0.82), p = 0.0010). Vaccination and Omicron period admission were also independently associated with lower healthcare resource utilization (p < 0.05). Magnitudes of associations varied between age groups with strongest protective effects seen in younger patients.

Conclusion

Outcomes of COVID-19 inpatients were evolving throughout the pandemic and were affected by changing demographics, virus variants, and vaccination.

Key point

In this observational study of almost 10,000 patients hospitalized from March 2020–February 2022 with COVID-19, age and having multiple comorbidities remained consistent risk factors for mortality regardless of the variant. Vaccination was high in our hospitalized patients. Vaccination conveyed less severe illness and was associated with lower inpatient mortality.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07657-z.

Do social determinants of health explain racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 infection?

Racial/ethnic minorities have experienced higher COVID-19 infection rates than whites, but it is unclear how individual-level housing, occupational, behavioral, and socioeconomic conditions contribute to these disparities in a nationally representative sample. In this study, we assess the extent to which social determinants of health contribute to racial/ethnic differences in COVID-19 infection. Data are from the Understanding America Study's Understanding Coronavirus in America survey (UAS COVID-19 waves 7-29). UAS COVID-19 is one of the only nationally representative longitudinal data sources that collects information on household, work, and social behavioral context during the pandemic. We analyze onset of COVID-19 cases, defined as a positive test or a diagnosis of COVID-19 from a healthcare provider since the previous survey wave, over a year of follow-up (June 2020-July 2021). We consider educational attainment, economic resources, work arrangements, household size, and social distancing as key social factors that may be structured by racism. Cox hazard models indicate that Hispanic people have 48% higher risk of experiencing a COVID-19 infection than whites after adjustment for age, sex, local infection rate, and comorbidities, but we do not observe a higher risk of COVID-19 among Black respondents. Controlling for engagement in any large or small social gathering increases the hazard ratio for Hispanics by 9%, suggesting that had Hispanics had the same social engagement patterns as whites, they may have had even higher risk of COVID-19. Other social determinants-lower educational attainment, working away from home, and number of coresidents-all independently predict higher risk of COVID-19, but do not explain why Hispanic Americans have higher COVID-19 infection risk than whites.

COVID-19 Severity and Mortality in Two Pandemic Waves in Poland and Predictors of Poor Outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Hospitalized Young Adults

SARS-CoV-2 variants pose a significant threat to global public health. However, their influence on disease severity, especially among young adults who may exhibit different clinical characteristics, is debatable. In this retrospective study of 229 young adults hospitalized with COVID-19, we investigated the differences between Poland's second and third waves of the pandemic. To identify potential predictors of severe COVID-19 in young adults, we analyzed patient characteristics and laboratory findings between survivors and non-survivors and we performed logistic regression to assess the risk of death, mechanical ventilation, and intensive care unit treatment. We found no increase in COVID-19 severity comparing the third and second waves of the pandemic, indicating that the alpha variant had no influence on disease severity. In addition, we found that factors, such as obesity, comorbidities, lung involvement, leukocytosis, neutrophilia, lymphopenia, higher IG count, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, interleukin-6, D-Dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, high-sensitive troponin I, creatine kinase-myocardial band, myoglobin, N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, creatinine, urea and gamma-glutamyl transferase, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, albumin, calcium and vitamin D3, possibly a decrease in red blood cell counts, hemoglobin and hematocrit, and an increase in creatine kinase during hospitalization may be associated with poor outcomes of COVID-19.

Factors Associated with Severe Outcomes Among Immunocompromised Adults Hospitalized for COVID-19 - COVID-NET, 10 States, March 2020-February 2022

Immunocompromised persons are at increased risk for severe COVID-19-related outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death (1). Data on adults aged ≥18 years hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from 10 U.S. states in the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) were analyzed to assess associations between immunocompromise and ICU admission and in-hospital death during March 1, 2020-February 28, 2022. Associations of COVID-19 vaccination status with ICU admission and in-hospital death were also examined during March 1, 2021-February 28, 2022. During March 1, 2020-February 28, 2022, among a sample of 22,345 adults hospitalized for COVID-19, 12.2% were immunocompromised. Among unvaccinated patients, those with immunocompromise had higher odds of ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.08-1.49) and in-hospital death (aOR = 1.34; 95% CI = 1.05-1.70) than did nonimmunocompromised patients. Among vaccinated patients,* those with immunocompromise had higher odds of ICU admission (aOR = 1.40; 95% CI = 1.01-1.92) and in-hospital death (aOR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.28-2.75) than did nonimmunocompromised patients. During March 1, 2021-February 28, 2022, among nonimmunocompromised patients, patients who were vaccinated had lower odds of death (aOR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.39-0.86) than did unvaccinated patients; among immunocompromised patients, odds of death between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients did not differ. Immunocompromised persons need additional protection from COVID-19 and using multiple known COVID-19 prevention strategies,^† including nonpharmaceutical interventions, up-to-date vaccination of immunocompromised persons and their close contacts,^§ early testing, and COVID-19 prophylactic (Evusheld) and early antiviral treatment,^¶ can help prevent hospitalization and subsequent severe COVID-19 outcomes among immunocompromised persons.

Predictors of Mortality in Tocilizumab-Treated Severe COVID-19

Purpose: Tocilizumab is associated with positive outcomes in severe COVID-19. We wanted to describe the characteristics of nonresponders to treatment. Methods: This was a retrospective multicenter study in two respiratory departments investigating adverse outcomes at 90 days from diagnosis in subjects treated with tocilizumab (8 mg/kg intravenously single dose) for severe progressive COVID-19. Results: Of 121 subjects, 62% were males, and 9% were fully vaccinated. Ninety-six (79.4%) survived, and 25 died (20.6%). Compared to survivors (S), nonsurvivors (NS) were older (median 57 versus 75 years of age), had more comorbidities (Charlson comorbidity index 2 versus 5) and had higher rates of intubation/mechanical ventilation (p < 0.05). On admission, NS had a lower PO2/FiO2 ratio, higher blood ferritin, and higher troponin, and on clinical progression (day of tocilizumab treatment), NS had a lower PO2/FiO2 ratio, decreased lymphocytes, increased neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, increased ferritin and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), disease located centrally on computed tomography scan, and increased late c-reactive protein. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis identified age and LDH on deterioration as predictors of death; admission PO2/FiO2 ratio and LDH as predictors of intubation; PO2/FiO2 ratios, LDH, and central lung disease on radiology as predictors of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) (a < 0.05). The log-rank test of mortality yielded the same results (p < 0.001). ROC analysis of the above predictors in a separate validation cohort yielded significant results. Conclusions: Older age and high serum LDH levels are predictors of mortality in tocilizumab-treated severe COVID-19 patients. Hypoxia levels, LDH, and central pulmonary involvement radiologically are associated with intubation and NIV.

Co-Infections, Secondary Infections, and Antimicrobial Use in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 during the First Five Waves of the Pandemic in Pakistan; Findings and Implications

Background: COVID-19 patients are typically prescribed antibiotics empirically despite concerns. There is a need to evaluate antibiotic use among hospitalized COVID-19 patients during successive pandemic waves in Pakistan alongside co-infection rates. Methods: A retrospective review of patient records among five tertiary care hospitals during successive waves was conducted. Data were collected from confirmed COVID-19 patients during the first five waves. Results: 3221 patients were included. The majority were male (51.53%), residents from urban areas (56.35%) and aged >50 years (52.06%). Cough, fever and a sore throat were the clinical symptoms in 20.39%, 12.97% and 9.50% of patients, respectively. A total of 23.62% of COVID-19 patients presented with typically mild disease and 45.48% presented with moderate disease. A high prevalence of antibiotic prescribing (89.69%), averaging 1.66 antibiotics per patient despite there only being 1.14% bacterial co-infections and 3.14% secondary infections, was found. Antibiotic use significantly increased with increasing severity, elevated WBCs and CRP levels, a need for oxygen and admittance to the ICU; however, this decreased significantly after the second wave (p < 0.001). Commonly prescribed antibiotics were piperacillin plus an enzyme inhibitor (20.66%), azithromycin (17.37%) and meropenem (15.45%). Common pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus (24.19%) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (20.96%). The majority of the prescribed antibiotics (93.35%) were from the WHO’s “Watch” category. Conclusions: Excessive prescribing of antibiotics is still occurring among COVID-19 patients in Pakistan; however, rates are reducing. Urgent measures are needed for further reductions.

Perspectives of Latinx Individuals Who Were Unvaccinated And Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Qualitative Study

IMPORTANCE

Latinx individuals in the United States have lower COVID-19 vaccination rates and higher rates of COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, and deaths than non-Latinx White individuals. Little is known about the perspectives of Latinx adults who had not received the COVID-19 vaccination and were hospitalized for COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the perspectives of Latinx individuals who were unvaccinated and subsequently hospitalized for COVID-19.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study was conducted using semistructured phone interviews with 25 Latinx adults who were unvaccinated and survived a COVID-19 hospitalization in a public safety net hospital in Colorado from February to November 2021. Interviews were audio recorded, and transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Themes and subthemes of perspectives on vaccination.

RESULTS

Among 25 adults (14 [56.0%] women, 11 [44.0%] men; mean [SD] age, 51 [15] years) who participated, all participants self-identified as Latino, Latina, or Latinx or Hispanic. There were 11 individuals who relied on emergency Medicaid (hospital coverage for Denver residents who are undocumented), while 10 individuals (40.0%) were essential workers and 13 individuals (52.0%) were unemployed. In interviews, 3 themes (with subthemes) were identified: factors associated with vaccination after hospitalization (subthemes: fear of death, avoiding hospitalization and reinfection, convinced COVID-19 is real, and responded to pressure from others), concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine (subthemes: experimental status and short timeline for production, contents of vaccine unknown or concerning, vaccine considered ineffective, worrisome immediate and long-term adverse effects, mixed and conflicting information, and government aimed to control or mark population through vaccination), and opportunities to improve vaccine uptake (subthemes; sharing personal experiences through social media, testimonials about minimal vaccine adverse effects, connecting with friends and family about the hospitalization experience, making the vaccine more accessible, and connecting with trusted sources of information).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that Latinx individuals who were unvaccinated and subsequently hospitalized for COVID-19 were motivated to engage in advocacy to encourage vaccination in their communities. These findings suggest that supporting patient advocacy after hospital discharge and continued efforts to create low-barrier, patient-informed public health strategies may be associated with increased vaccine uptake in Latinx communities.

Emerging Viral Infections and the Potential Impact on Hypertension, Cardiovascular Disease, and Kidney Disease

Viruses are ubiquitous in the environment and continue to have a profound impact on human health and disease. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted this with impressive morbidity and mortality affecting the world's population. Importantly, the link between viruses and hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and kidney disease has resulted in a renewed focus and attention on this potential relationship. The virus responsible for COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, has a direct link to one of the major enzymatic regulatory systems connected to blood pressure control and hypertension pathogenesis, the renin-angiotensin system. This is because the entry point for SARS-CoV-2 is the ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2) protein. ACE2 is one of the main enzymes responsible for dampening the primary effector peptide Ang II (angiotensin II), metabolizing it to Ang-(1-7). A myriad of clinical questions has since emerged and are covered in this review. Several other viruses have been linked to hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and kidney health. Importantly, patients with high-risk apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) alleles are at risk for developing the kidney lesion of collapsing glomerulopathy after viral infection. This review will highlight several emerging viruses and their potential unique tropisms for the kidney and cardiovascular system. We focus on SARS-CoV-2 as this body of literature in regards to cardiovascular disease has advanced significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic.

Age, Sex, and Race/Ethnicity in Clinical Outcomes Among Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19, 2020

The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the disproportionate risk of poor clinical outcomes among population subgroups. The study investigates length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital death across age, sex, and race among patients hospitalized with COVID-19. A pooled cross-sectional study analyzed hospital discharge data of state-licensed hospitals in Texas from April to December 2020. Of 98,879 patients, males accounted for 52.3%. The age distribution was 31.9% for the 65-79 age group, 29.6% for those aged 50-64, and 16.3% for those older than 79. Whites constituted the largest proportion (42.6%), followed by Hispanics (36.2%) and Blacks (13.1%). Higher in-hospital death rates were found among patients aged 80 and over (Adjusted Risk Ratio (aRR) 1.12, 95%CI 1.11-1.13) and patients aged 65-79 (aRR 1.08, 95%CI 1.07-1.09) compared to patients aged 19 and below. Hispanics (aRR 1.03, 95%CI 1.02-1.03) and other minorities (aRR 1.02, 95%CI 1.02-1.03) exhibited higher in-hospital death rates than whites, and these patients also had longer LOS and higher ICU admission rates. Patients aged 65-79, 50-64, and 80 and over all had longer hospital stays and higher ICU admission rates. Males experienced poor health outcomes in all assessed outcomes. Findings showed that disparities in clinical outcomes among population subgroups existed and remained throughout 2020. While the nation has to continue practicing public health measures to minimize the harm caused by the novel virus, serious consideration must be given to improving the health of marginalized populations during and beyond the pandemic.

Interaction of Vitamin D and Corticosteroid Use in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Potential Explanation for Inconsistent Findings in the Literature

Vitamin D is an important immune-modulator with anti-inflammatory properties. While this prohormone has been studied extensively in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, findings have been inconsistent regarding its overall benefit in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Most studies to date have been observational in nature, not accounting for the use of corticosteroids. Furthermore, the few randomized clinical trials designed to examine the effect of vitamin D supplementation on COVID-19 outcomes have been relatively small and thus insufficiently powered to assure a balance of corticosteroid use between study arms. The current perspective addresses the interaction of vitamin D and corticosteroids as a potential explanation for the divergent results reported in the literature. Future research on vitamin D and COVID-19 will benefit by considering this interaction, especially among hospitalized patients requiring oxygen and mechanical ventilation.

Hidradenitis suppurativa: racial and socioeconomic considerations in management

Studies on hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) have found an increased prevalence of HS in skin of color and lower socioeconomic status patients, although the reasons for these differences are unclear. Demographic and therapeutic studies of HS originate primarily from developed Western countries, and data from low- and medium-income countries (LMIC) remain comparatively limited. In this review paper, we discuss differences in clinical presentation and comorbidities between racial and socioeconomic subpopulations and describe the genetic, biomedical, psychosocial, and ecological factors that may explain the associations between HS and skin of color and socioeconomic status. We highlight biomedical treatment considerations for LMIC including cost effective and less complex treatment strategies. We touch on population-based strategies to address the social determinants of health in HS management and discuss additional challenges arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Comparative Effectiveness of an Automated Text Messaging Service for Monitoring COVID-19 at Home

BACKGROUND

Although most patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection can be safely managed at home, the need for hospitalization can arise suddenly.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether enrollment in an automated remote monitoring service for community-dwelling adults with COVID-19 at home ("COVID Watch") was associated with improved mortality.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort analysis.

SETTING

Mid-Atlantic academic health system in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Outpatients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 23 March and 30 November 2020.

INTERVENTION

The COVID Watch service consists of twice-daily, automated text message check-ins with an option to report worsening symptoms at any time. All escalations were managed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by dedicated telemedicine clinicians.

MEASUREMENTS

Thirty- and 60-day outcomes of patients enrolled in COVID Watch were compared with those of patients who were eligible to enroll but received usual care. The primary outcome was death at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations. Treatment effects were estimated with propensity score-weighted risk adjustment models.

RESULTS

A total of 3488 patients enrolled in COVID Watch and 4377 usual care control participants were compared with propensity score weighted models. At 30 days, COVID Watch patients had an odds ratio for death of 0.32 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.72), with 1.8 fewer deaths per 1000 patients (CI, 0.5 to 3.1) (P = 0.005); at 60 days, the difference was 2.5 fewer deaths per 1000 patients (CI, 0.9 to 4.0) (P = 0.002). Patients in COVID Watch had more telemedicine encounters, ED visits, and hospitalizations and presented to the ED sooner (mean, 1.9 days sooner [CI, 0.9 to 2.9 days]; all P < 0.001).

LIMITATION

Observational study with the potential for unobserved confounding.

CONCLUSION

Enrollment of outpatients with COVID-19 in an automated remote monitoring service was associated with reduced mortality, potentially explained by more frequent telemedicine encounters and more frequent and earlier presentation to the ED.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

A Tale of Two Surges: Differences in Outcomes in the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Community Teaching Hospital in Massachusetts

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged the scientific community in the prompt implementation of therapies. We report and contrast characteristics and outcomes from two COVID-19 surges in March 2020 and December 2020 in patients at MetroWest Medical Center in Framingham.

Methods

The study was conducted at MetroWest Medical Center. We extracted the data of 315 patients from March 17, 2020, to June 30, 2020, and 104 patients from November 19, 2020, to December 30, 2020. All patients were inpatients and had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We extracted the patient’s demographic information, clinical data, and given treatments. We also examined comorbidities and categorized them by the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The primary endpoints were intensive care unit (ICU) level of care, mechanical ventilation, or death.

Results

A total of 419 patients were studied. The median age was 76. During the first surge (S1), 150 (47%) were from nursing homes and 133 (42%) were from independent living. More than half (72) of the independent living patients had a primary language other than English. During the second surge (S2), 12% (13) were from nursing homes. The most common comorbidities were similar for both groups and included obesity, diabetes, and chronic lung disease. However, during the first surge, 33% (104) of the patients had dementia. The median Charlson Comorbidity Index score was worse in the first surge; the predicted 10-year survival was 21% versus 53%. The treatments given included remdesivir in 5% (16) in the first surge versus 60% (62) in the second surge. Dexamethasone was given only in the second surge in 69% (72) of the patients.

Outcomes

The reported outcomes are contrasted by the first versus the second surge. Admission to the intensive care unit was required in 83 (27%) of the patients during the first surge versus 15 (14%) of the patients during the second surge. Mechanical ventilation was required in 33 (11%) of the patients during the first surge versus 5 (11%) of the patients during the second surge. The overall mortality was 25% during the first surge (79) versus 9% (9) during the second surge.

Conclusion

Among patients with COVID-19 infection admitted to a community teaching hospital during the second Massachusetts surge, there was a significant improvement in clinical outcomes, particularly mortality, compared with patients admitted during the early pandemic. It is tempting to attribute the improved outcomes to the implementation of treatment with corticosteroids and more use of antiviral therapy. However, the patients admitted during the larger first surge were more likely to have a do not resuscitate (DNR) status on admission, be from a nursing home, have dementia, and have poorer predicted survival.

The Interaction of Vitamin D and Corticosteroids: A Mortality Analysis of 26,508 Veterans Who Tested Positive for SARS-CoV-2

This data-based cohort consisted of 26,508 (7%) United States veterans out of the 399,290 who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from 1 March to 10 September 2020. We aimed to assess the interaction of post-index vitamin D (Vit D) and corticosteroid (CRT) use on 30-day mortality among hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Combination Vit D and CRT drug use was assessed according to four multinomial pairs (-|+, -|-, +|+, +|-). Respective categorical effects were computed on a log-binomial scale as adjusted relative risk (aRR). Approximately 6% of veterans who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 died within 30 days of their index date. Among hospitalized patients, a significantly decreased aRR was observed for the use of Vit D in the absence of CRTs relative to patients who received CRTs but not Vit D (aRR = 0.30; multiplicity corrected, p = 0.0004). Among patients receiving systemically administered CRTs (e.g., dexamethasone), the use of Vit D was associated with fewer deaths in hospitalized patients (aRR = 0.51) compared with non-hospitalized patients (aRR = 2.5) (P-for-Interaction = 0.0071). Evaluating the effect of modification of these compounds in the context of hospitalization may aid in the management of COVID-19 and provide a better understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying this and future infectious disease outbreaks.

Prognostic factors associated with COVID-19 related severity in sickle cell disease

BACKGROUND

Equipoise exists regarding sickle cell disease (SCD) as a risk factor for COVID-19 disease severity and variables that increase risk of COVID-19 severity in SCD. Given our health system's large SCD patient catchment, we analyzed our own experience in this regard.

STUDY METHODS

Retrospective analysis of the clinical course and factors associated with need for hospitalization and ICU admission of SCD patients diagnosed with COVID-19 through the Northwell Health system from March 1 to Dec 31, 2020.

RESULTS

Of 1098 patients with SCD, 3.3% were diagnosed with COVID-19. Overall rates of hospitalization, ICU admission, cohort mortality, and in-hospital mortality were 80%, 19%, 2.5%,and 3.1%, respectively. By multivariable analysis, hospitalization risk was decreased by 60% for every 1 g/dL increase in admission Hb. ICU admission risk was increased by 84% as a health care worker; increased by 45% for every 1000/uL increase in admission immature granulocyte count; and decreased by 17% with hydroxyurea use.

DISCUSSION

High hospitalization rates are compatible with worsened severity upon COVID-19 infection in SCD compared to the general population. Patients should be placed on hydroxyurea to increase their Hb and perhaps lower their neutrophil counts. Health care workers with SCD may warrant special safety precautions.

Effect of Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonist Treatment on ACE2 Expression and SARS-CoV-2 Replication in Primary Airway Epithelial Cells

Rationale: SARS-CoV-2 gains entrance to airway epithelial cells (AECs) through binding of the viral spike protein to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) on the cell surface. However, ACE2 also converts angiotensin II into angiotensin-(1-7) and counterbalances the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, with resultant protective effects in the cardiovascular system. Some data suggest that two common antihypertension medications (angiotensin II receptor antagonists, ARBs; and angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, ACEIs) may increase ACE2 expression in heart and kidney cells, fueling debate about how these widely used medications may modulate SARS-CoV-2 infectivity and risk of COVID-19. Aim: Determine whether exposure of bronchial AECs to the ARB losartan or the ACEI captopril modulate expression of ACE2 by AECs, SARS CoV2 replication, or expression of proinflammatory cytokines and type I and III interferon (IFN) responses. Methods: Primary bronchial AECs from children and adults (n = 19; Ages 8-75 yrs) were differentiated ex vivo at an air-liquid interface to generate organotypic cultures. Cultures were treated with captopril (1 μM) or losartan (2 μM) with culture media changes starting 72 h before infection with SARS-CoV-2. In a biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) facility, cultures were infected with SARS-CoV-2 isolate USA-WA1/2020 at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 0.5. At 96 h following infection, RNA and protein were isolated. SARS-CoV-2 replication in cultures was assessed with quantitative PCR (qPCR). ACE2, IL-6, IL-1B, IFNB1, and IFNL2 expression were assessed by qPCR. Results: Neither captopril nor losartan treatment significantly changed ACE2, IL-6, IL-1B, IFNB1, or IFNL2 expression by AECs as compared to SARS-CoV-2 infected AEC cultures without captopril or losartan treatment. At 96 h following infection, SARS-CoV-2 copy number/ng RNA was not significantly different between untreated AEC cultures, cultures treated with captopril, or cultures treated with losartan. Conclusion: These findings suggest that at the level of the airway epithelium neither the ACEI captopril or ARB losartan significantly modify expression of the SARS-CoV-2 entry factor ACE2, nor does either medication increase replication SARS-CoV-2 replication. This ex vivo data is reassuring and is consistent with evolving clinical data suggesting ACEIs and ARBs do not increase the risk for poor prognosis with COVID-19 and may actually reduce the risk of COVID-19 disease.