Favipiravir for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia; a propensity score-matched cohort study

We retrospectively investigated the clinical outcomes of favipiravir in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients who between 23 May 2020 and 18 July 2020 received ≥ 24 h of favipiravir were assigned to the favipiravir group, while those who did not formed the non-favipiravir group. The primary outcome was 28-day clinical improvement, defined as two-category improvement from baseline on an 8-point ordinal scale. Propensity scores (PS) for favipiravir therapy were used for 1:1 matching. The unmatched cohort included 1493 patients, of which 51.7% were in the favipiravir group, and 48.3% were not receiving supplemental oxygen at baseline. Significant baseline differences between the two unmatched groups existed, but not between the PS-matched groups (N = 774). After PS-matching, there were no significant differences between the two groups in the proportion with 28-day clinical improvement (93.3% versus 92.8%, P 0.780), or 28-day all-cause mortality (2.1% versus 3.1%, P 0.360). Favipiravir was associated with more viral clearance by day 28 (79.8% versus 64.1%, P < 0.001). Adverse events were common in both groups, but the 93.9% were Grades 1-3. Favipiravir therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia is well tolerated but is not associated with an increased likelihood of clinical improvement or reduced all-cause mortality by 28 days.

Soluble ACE2 and angiotensin II levels are modulated in hypertensive COVID-19 patients treated with different antihypertension drugs

PURPOSE

This study examines the effect of antihypertensive drugs on ACE2 and Angiotensin II levels in hypertensive COVID-19 patients.

INTRODUCTION

Hypertension is a common comorbidity among severe COVID-19 patients. ACE2 expression can be modulated by antihypertensive drugs such as ACEis and ARBs, which may affect COVID-19's prognosis. BB and CCB reduce mortality, according to some evidence. Their effect on circulating levels of ACE2 and angiotensin II, as well as the severity of COVID-19, is less well studied.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The clinical data were collected from 200 patients in four different antihypertensive medication classes (ACEi, ARB, BB, and CCB). Angiotensin II and ACE2 levels were determined using standard ELISA kits. ACE2, angiotensin II, and other clinical indices were evaluated by linear regression models.

RESULTS

Patients on ACEi (n = 57), ARB (n = 68), BB (n = 15), or CCB (n = 30) in this study had mild (n = 76), moderate (n = 76), or severe (n = 52) COVID-19. ACE2 levels were higher in COVID-19 patients with severe disease (p = 0.04) than mild (p = 0.07) and moderate (p = 0.007). The length of hospital stay is correlated with ACE2 levels (r = 0.3, p = 0.003). Angiotensin II levels decreased with severity (p = 0.04). Higher ACE2 levels are associated with higher CRP and D-dimer levels. Elevated Angiotensin II was associated with low levels of CRP, D-dimer, and troponin. ACE2 levels increase with disease severity in patients taking an ARB (p = 0.01), patients taking ACEi, the degree of disease severity was associated with a decrease in angiotensin II. BB patients had the lowest disease severity.

CONCLUSION

We found different levels of soluble ACE2, and angiotensin II are observed among COVID-19 patients taking different antihypertensive medications and exhibiting varying levels of disease severity. COVID-19 severity increases with elevated ACE2 levels and lower angiotensin II levels indicating that BB treatment reduces severity regardless of levels of ACE2 and angiotensin II.

508. Title Favipiravir for the Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019; A Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study

Background

We investigated clinical outcomes of favipiravir in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Methods

Patients who between 23 May 2020 and 18 July 2020 received ≥24 hours of favipiravir were assigned to the favipiravir group, while those who did not formed the non-favipiravir group. The primary outcome was 28-day clinical improvement, defined as two-category improvement from baseline on an 8-point ordinal scale. Propensity scores (PS) for favipiravir therapy were used for 1:1 matching. Cox regression was used to examine associations with the primary endpoint.

Results

The unmatched cohort included 1,493 patients, of which 51.7% were in the favipiravir group, and 48.3% were not receiving supplemental oxygen at baseline (table 1). Favipiravir was started within a median of 5 days from symptoms onset. Significant baseline differences between the two unmatched groups existed, but not between the PSmatched groups (N = 774) (table 1). After PS-matching, there were no significant differences between the two groups in the proportion with 28-day clinical improvement (93.3% versus 92.8%, P 0.780), or 28-day all-cause mortality (2.1% versus 3.1%, P 0.360) (Table 2). Favipiravir was associated with more viral clearance by day 28 (79.8% versus 64.1%, P < 0.001) (table 2). In the adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, favipiravir therapy was not associated 28-day clinical improvement (adjusted hazard ratio 0.978, 95% confidence interval 0.862 –1.109, P 0.726) (Table 3).

Conclusion

Favipiravir therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia is well tolerated but is not associated with an increased likelihood of clinical improvement or reduced all-cause mortality by 28 days.

Disclosures

All Authors: No reported disclosures

The first consecutive 5000 patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 from Qatar; a nation-wide cohort study

Background

There are limited data on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes at a national level, and none after 60 days of follow up. The aim of this study was to describe national, 60-day all-cause mortality associated with COVID-19, and to identify risk factors associated with admission to an intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study including the first consecutive 5000 patients with COVID-19 in Qatar who completed 60 days of follow up by June 17, 2020. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 60 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. In addition, we explored risk factors for admission to ICU.

Results

Included patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 28 and April 17, 2020. The majority (4436, 88.7%) were males and the median age was 35 years [interquartile range (IQR) 28–43]. By 60 days after COVID-19 diagnosis, 14 patients (0.28%) had died, 10 (0.2%) were still in hospital, and two (0.04%) were still in ICU. Fatal COVID-19 cases had a median age of 59.5 years (IQR 55.8–68), and were mostly males (13, 92.9%). All included pregnant women (26, 0.5%), children (131, 2.6%), and healthcare workers (135, 2.7%) were alive and not hospitalized at the end of follow up.

A total of 1424 patients (28.5%) required hospitalization, out of which 108 (7.6%) were admitted to ICU. Most frequent co-morbidities in hospitalized adults were diabetes (23.2%), and hypertension (20.7%). Multivariable logistic regression showed that older age [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.041, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.022–1.061 per year increase; P < 0.001], male sex (aOR 4.375, 95% CI 1.964–9.744; P < 0.001), diabetes (aOR 1.698, 95% CI 1.050–2.746; P 0.031), chronic kidney disease (aOR 3.590, 95% CI 1.596–8.079, P 0.002), and higher BMI (aOR 1.067, 95% CI 1.027–1.108 per unit increase; P 0.001), were all independently associated with increased risk of ICU admission.

Conclusions

In a relatively younger national cohort with a low co-morbidity burden, COVID-19 was associated with low all-cause mortality. Independent risk factors for ICU admission included older age, male sex, higher BMI, and co-existing diabetes or chronic kidney disease.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s12879-020-05511-8.

Convalescent plasma for the treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019: A preliminary report

BACKGROUND

The role of convalescent plasma therapy for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared outcomes in a cohort of critical COVID-19 patients who received standard care (SC Group) and those who, in addition, received convalescent plasma (CP Group).

RESULTS

In total, 40 patients were included in each group. The median patient age was 53.5 years (interquartile range [IQR] 42-60.5), and the majority of patients required invasive ventilation (69, 86.2%). Plasma was harvested from donors after a median of 37 days (IQR 31-46) from the first positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) result and 26 days (IQR 21-32) after documented viral clearance; it was administered after a median of 10 days (IQR 9-10) from the onset of symptoms and 2.5 days (IQR 2-4) from admission to intensive care unit. The primary endpoint of improvement in respiratory support status within 28 days was achieved in 26 patients (65%) in the SC Group and 31 patients (77.5%) in the CP Group (p = .32). The 28-day all-cause mortality (12.5% vs. 2.5%; p = .22) and viral clearance (65% vs. 55%; p = .49) were not significantly different between the two groups. Convalescent plasma was not significantly associated with the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.51-1.49; p = .62). Adverse events were balanced between the two study groups.

CONCLUSION

In severe COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy was not associated with clinical benefits. Randomized trials are required to confirm our findings.