Symptoms persisting after hospitalisation for COVID-19: 12 months interim results of the CO-FLOW study.

Introduction: A large proportion of patients experience a wide range of sequelae after acute COVID-19, especially after severe illness. The long-term health sequelae need to be assessed. Our objective was to longitudinally assess persistence of symptoms and clusters of symptoms up to 12 months after hospitalisation for COVID-19 and to assess determinants of the main persistent symptoms. Methods: In this multicenter prospective cohort study patients with COVID-19 are followed up for 2 years with measurements at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after hospital discharge. Here, we present interim results regarding persistent symptoms up to 12 months. Results: We included 492 patients; mean±sd age was 60.2±10.7 years, 335 (68.1%) were males, median length of hospital stay was 11 (6.0-27.0) days. At 3 months after discharge 97.0% of the patients had at least one persisting symptom, this declined to 95.5% and 92.0% at 6 and 12 months, respectively (p=0.010). Muscle weakness, exertional dyspnoea, fatigue, and memory and concentration problems were the most prevalent symptoms with rates over 50% during follow-up. Over time, muscle weakness, hair loss and exertional dyspnoea decreased significantly (p<0.001), while other symptoms such as fatigue, concentration and memory problems, anosmia and ageusia persisted. Symptoms from the physical and respiratory cluster declined significantly over time, in contrast to the fatigue and cognitive symptom clusters. Conclusion: The majority of patients experienced COVID-19 sequelae up to 12 months after severe infection. Whereas physical and respiratory symptoms showed slow gradual decline, fatigue and cognitive symptoms did not evidently resolve over time.

Estimated Global Proportions of Individuals With Persistent Fatigue, Cognitive, and Respiratory Symptom Clusters Following Symptomatic COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021.

Importance: Some individuals experience persistent symptoms after initial symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (often referred to as Long COVID). Objective: To estimate the proportion of males and females with COVID-19, younger or older than 20 years of age, who had Long COVID symptoms in 2020 and 2021 and their Long COVID symptom duration. Design, Setting, and Participants: Bayesian meta-regression and pooling of 54 studies and 2 medical record databases with data for 1.2 million individuals (from 22 countries) who had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the 54 studies, 44 were published and 10 were collaborating cohorts (conducted in Austria, the Faroe Islands, Germany, Iran, Italy, the Netherlands, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland, and the US). The participant data were derived from the 44 published studies (10 501 hospitalized individuals and 42 891 nonhospitalized individuals), the 10 collaborating cohort studies (10 526 and 1906), and the 2 US electronic medical record databases (250 928 and 846 046). Data collection spanned March 2020 to January 2022. Exposures: Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of individuals with at least 1 of the 3 self-reported Long COVID symptom clusters (persistent fatigue with bodily pain or mood swings; cognitive problems; or ongoing respiratory problems) 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection in 2020 and 2021, estimated separately for hospitalized and nonhospitalized individuals aged 20 years or older by sex and for both sexes of nonhospitalized individuals younger than 20 years of age. Results: A total of 1.2 million individuals who had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection were included (mean age, 4-66 years; males, 26%-88%). In the modeled estimates, 6.2% (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 2.4%-13.3%) of individuals who had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection experienced at least 1 of the 3 Long COVID symptom clusters in 2020 and 2021, including 3.2% (95% UI, 0.6%-10.0%) for persistent fatigue with bodily pain or mood swings, 3.7% (95% UI, 0.9%-9.6%) for ongoing respiratory problems, and 2.2% (95% UI, 0.3%-7.6%) for cognitive problems after adjusting for health status before COVID-19, comprising an estimated 51.0% (95% UI, 16.9%-92.4%), 60.4% (95% UI, 18.9%-89.1%), and 35.4% (95% UI, 9.4%-75.1%), respectively, of Long COVID cases. The Long COVID symptom clusters were more common in women aged 20 years or older (10.6% [95% UI, 4.3%-22.2%]) 3 months after symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection than in men aged 20 years or older (5.4% [95% UI, 2.2%-11.7%]). Both sexes younger than 20 years of age were estimated to be affected in 2.8% (95% UI, 0.9%-7.0%) of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. The estimated mean Long COVID symptom cluster duration was 9.0 months (95% UI, 7.0-12.0 months) among hospitalized individuals and 4.0 months (95% UI, 3.6-4.6 months) among nonhospitalized individuals. Among individuals with Long COVID symptoms 3 months after symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, an estimated 15.1% (95% UI, 10.3%-21.1%) continued to experience symptoms at 12 months. Conclusions and Relevance: This study presents modeled estimates of the proportion of individuals with at least 1 of 3 self-reported Long COVID symptom clusters (persistent fatigue with bodily pain or mood swings; cognitive problems; or ongoing respiratory problems) 3 months after symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Symptoms persisting after hospitalization for COVID-19: 12 months interim results of the COFLOW study

Introduction A large proportion of patients experiences a wide range of sequelae after acute COVID-19, especially after severe illness. The long-term health sequelae need to be assessed. Our objective was to longitudinally assess persistence of symptoms and clusters of symptoms up to 12 months after hospitalization for COVID-19, and to assess determinants of the main persistent symptoms. Methods In this multicenter prospective cohort study patients with COVID-19 are followed up for 2 years with measurements at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after hospital discharge. Here, we present interim results regarding persistent symptoms up to 12 months. Results We included 492 patients;mean age was 60.2±10.7 years, 335 (68.1%) males, median length of hospital stay 11 (6.0–27.0) days. At 3 months after discharge 97.0% of the patients had at least 1 persisting symptom, this declined to 95.5% and 92.0% at 6 and 12 months, respectively (p=0.010). Muscle weakness, exertional dyspnea, fatigue, and memory and concentration problems were the most prevalent symptoms with rates over 50% during follow-up. Over time, muscle weakness, hair loss, and exertional dyspnea decreased significantly (p<0.001), while other symptoms, such as fatigue, concentration and memory problems, anosmia, and ageusia persisted. Symptoms from the physical and respiratory cluster declined significantly over time, in contrast to the fatigue and cognitive symptomclusters. Conclusion The majority of patients experienced COVID-19 sequelae up to 12 months after severe infection. Whereas physical and respiratory symptoms showed slow gradual decline, fatigue and cognitive symptoms did not evidently resolve over time.

Physical recovery across care pathways up to 12 months after hospitalization for COVID-19: A multicenter prospective cohort study (CO-FLOW).

Backgroud: The sudden COVID-19 pandemic forced quick development of care pathways for patients with different needs. Trajectories of physical recovery in hospitalized patients for COVID-19 following different care pathways are unknown. We aimed to assess trajectories of physical recovery and levels of physical function reached within the different care pathways. Additionally, we assessed differences in physical function across care pathways at follow-up visits. Methods: This multicenter prospective cohort study of adults who had been hospitalized for COVID-19 was performed in 10 centers, including 7 hospitals (1 academic and 6 regional hospitals) and 3 rehabilitation centers (1 medical rehabilitation center and 2 skilled nursing facilities), located in the Netherlands. Study visits were performed at 3, 6, and 12 months post-hospital discharge and included assessment of cardiorespiratory fitness (6 min walk test [6MWT], 1 min sit-to-stand test [1MSTST]), muscle strength (maximum handgrip strength [HGS]) and mobility (de Morton Mobility Index [DEMMI]). Findings: We report findings for 582 patients who had been discharged from hospital between March 24, 2020 and June 17, 2021. Patients had a median age of 60·0 years, 68·9% (401/582) were male, 94·6% (561/582) had received oxygen therapy, and 35·2% (205/582) mechanical ventilation. We followed patients across four different rehabilitation settings: no rehabilitation (No-rehab, 19·6% [114/582]), community-based rehabilitation (Com-rehab, 54·1% [315/582]), medical rehabilitation (Med-rehab, 13·7% [80/582]), and rehabilitation in a skilled nursing facility (SNF-rehab, 12·5% [73/582]). Overall, outcomes in 6MWT (14·9 meters [95% CI 7·4 to 22·4]), 1MSTST (2·2 repetitions [1·5 to 2·8]), and HGS (3·5 kg [2·9 to 4·0]) improved significantly (p<0·001) from 3 to 6 months and only HGS from 6 to 12 months (2·5 kg [1·8 to 3·1]; p<0·001). DEMMI scores did not significantly improve over time. At 3 months, percentage of normative values reached in 1MSTST differed significantly (p<0.001) across care pathways, with largest impairments in Med- and SNF-rehab groups. At 12 months these differences were no longer significant, reaching, overall, 90·5% on 6MWD, 75·4% on 1MSTST, and 106·9% on HGS. Interpretation: Overall, physical function improved after hospitalization for COVID-19, with largest improvement within 6 months post-discharge. Patients with rehabilitation after hospital discharge improved in more than one component of physical function, whereas patients without rehabilitation improved solely in muscle strength. Patients who received rehabilitation, and particularly patients with Med- and SNF-rehab, had more severe impairment in physical function at 3 months, but reached equal levels at 12 months compared to patients without follow-up treatment. Our findings indicate the importance of rehabilitation. Funding: ZonMw, Rijndam Rehabilitation, Laurens (The Netherlands).

Home monitoring of lung function, symptoms and quality of life after admission with COVID-19 infection: The HOMECOMIN' study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To develop targeted and efficient follow-up programmes for patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), structured and detailed insights in recovery trajectory are required. We aimed to gain detailed insights in long-term recovery after COVID-19 infection, using an online home monitoring programme including home spirometry. Moreover, we evaluated patient experiences with the home monitoring programme. METHODS: In this prospective multicentre study, we included adults hospitalized due to COVID-19 with radiological abnormalities. For 6 months after discharge, patients collected weekly home spirometry and pulse oximetry measurements, and reported visual analogue scales on cough, dyspnoea and fatigue. Patients completed the fatigue assessment scale (FAS), global rating of change (GRC), EuroQol-5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L) and online tool for the assessment of burden of COVID-19 (ABCoV tool). Mixed models were used to analyse the results. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients were included in this study (70.1% male, mean age 60 years [SD 10.54]). Patients had a mean baseline forced vital capacity of 3.25 L (95% CI: 2.99-3.44 L), which increased linearly in 6 months with 19.1% (Δ0.62 L, p < 0.005). Patients reported substantial fatigue with no improvement over time. Nevertheless, health status improved significantly. After 6 months, patients scored their general well-being almost similar as before COVID-19. Overall, patients considered home spirometry useful and not burdensome. CONCLUSION: Six months after hospital admission for COVID-19, patients' lung function and quality of life were still improving, although fatigue persisted. Home monitoring enables detailed follow-up for patients with COVID-19 at low burden for patients and for the healthcare system.

Persistent Health Problems beyond Pulmonary Recovery up to 6 Months after Hospitalization for COVID-19: A Longitudinal Study of Respiratory, Physical, and Psychological Outcomes.

Rationale: Data on longitudinal recovery after hospitalization for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) currently remain scarce, just as outcomes beyond 3 months of follow-up do. Objectives: To evaluate the sequelae up to 6 months after hospitalization for COVID-19 by considering 1) recovery as it relates to pulmonary function, radiological abnormalities, physical and mental health status, and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) and 2) the predictors of the most clinically relevant sequelae. Methods: Patients were evaluated at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months after hospitalization by using pulmonary function testing, radiological evaluation, and online questionnaires on the physical and mental health status and HR-QoL. Outcomes were analyzed using repeated-measurement analyses. Results: Ninety-two patients were included (mean age, 58.2 ± 12.3 yr; 58 [63.0%] men). The estimated percentage of patients with impaired forced vital capacity improved from 25% at 6 weeks to 11% at 6 months; for impaired diffusion capacity, this percentage improved from 63% to 46%. Radiologically, ground-glass opacity decreased but fibrosis persisted. The majority of patients (89.1%) still reported one or more symptoms 6 months after discharge. Fatigue decreased significantly over time (P = 0.006). Nonetheless, fatigue remained in 51% of the patients at 6 months. HR-QoL (nearly) normalized in most domains at 6 months, except for physical role functioning, with persistent fatigue and the length of hospitalization being the most important predictors. Conclusions: During the first 6 months after hospitalization for COVID-19, most patients demonstrated continuing recovery across all health domains, but persistent sequelae were frequent. Fatigue was the most frequent residual and persistent symptom up to 6 months after hospitalization, importantly impacting HR-QoL.

CO-FLOW: COvid-19 Follow-up care paths and Long-term Outcomes Within the Dutch health care system: study protocol of a multicenter prospective cohort study following patients 2 years after hospital discharge.

BACKGROUND: First studies indicate that up to 6 months after hospital discharge, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes severe physical, cognitive, and psychological impairments, which may affect participation and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). After hospitalization for COVID-19, a number of patients are referred to medical rehabilitation centers or skilled nursing facilities for further treatment, while others go home with or without aftercare. The aftercare paths include 1] community-based rehabilitation; 2] in- and outpatient medical rehabilitation; 3] inpatient rehabilitation in skilled nursing facilities; and 4] sheltered care (inpatient). These aftercare paths and the trajectories of recovery after COVID-19 urgently need long-term in-depth evaluation to optimize and personalize treatment. CO-FLOW aims, by following the outcomes and aftercare paths of all COVID-19 patients after hospital discharge, to systematically study over a 2-year period: 1] trajectories of physical, cognitive, and psychological recovery; 2] patient flows, healthcare utilization, patient satisfaction with aftercare, and barriers/facilitators regarding aftercare as experienced by healthcare professionals; 3] effects of physical, cognitive, and psychological outcomes on participation and HRQoL; and 4] predictors for long-term recovery, health care utilization, and patient satisfaction with aftercare. METHODS: CO-FLOW is a multicenter prospective cohort study in the mid-west of the Netherlands with a 2-year follow-up period. Measurements comprise non-invasive clinical tests and patient reported outcome measures from a combined rehabilitation, pulmonary, and intensive care perspective. Measurements are performed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after hospital discharge and, if applicable, at rehabilitation discharge. CO-FLOW aims to include at least 500 patients who survived hospitalization for COVID-19, aged ≥18 years. DISCUSSION: CO-FLOW will provide in-depth knowledge on the long-term sequelae of COVID-19 and the quality of current aftercare paths for patients who survived hospitalization. This knowledge is a prerequisite to facilitate the right care in the right place for COVID-19 and comparable future infectious diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), https://www.trialregister.nl . Registered: 12-06-2020, CO-FLOW trialregister no. NL8710.

Antibodies Against Angiotensin II Receptor Type 1 and Endothelin A Receptor Are Associated With an Unfavorable COVID19 Disease Course.

Background: Lung histopathology demonstrates vasculopathy in a subset of deceased COVID19 patients, which resembles histopathology observed in antibody-mediated lung transplant rejection. Autoantibodies against angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) and Endothelin receptor Type A (ETAR) have been demonstrated in antibody-mediated rejection and may also be associated with severe COVID19 infection. Objective To assess AT1R and ETAR auto-antibodies in COVID19 patients and controls, and explore their association with disease course. Methods: 65 hospitalized patients with COVID19 infection were included. Clinical and laboratory findings were retrospectively assessed. Patients with unfavorable disease course, admitted at the intensive care unit and/or deceased during hospital admission (n=33) were compared to admitted COVID19 patients with favorable disease course (n=32). The presence of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and auto-antibodies against AT1R or ETAR in peripheral blood were compared between COVID19 with unfavorable and favorable disease course and age matched controls (n=20). Results: The presence of ANA was not significantly different between COVID19 patients with unfavorable (n=7/33; 21%) and favorable disease course (n=6/32; 19%) (p= 0.804) and controls (n=3/20; 15%). Auto-antibodies against AT1R were significantly increased in unfavorable disease course (median 14.59 U/mL, IQR 11.28 - 19.89) compared to favorable disease course (median 10.67 U/mL, IQR 8.55 - 13.0, p< 0.01). ETAR antibody titers were also significantly increased in unfavorable disease course (median 7.21, IQR 5.0 - 10.45) as compared to favorable disease course (median 4.0, IQR 3.0 - 6.0, p <0.05). Conclusion: Auto-antibodies against AT1R and ETAR are significantly increased in COVID19 patients with an unfavorable disease course.

Do-not-intubate status and COVID-19 mortality in patients admitted to Dutch non-ICU wards.

Mortality from COVID-19 has been particularly high in elderly patients on mechanical ventilation. Treatment outcomes for patients with do-not-intubate (DNI) status are unknown. One hundred patients admitted to the non-ICU ward during the "first wave" were retrospectively analyzed. Mortality rate was 49% in patients with a DNI order. This subgroup was characterized by significantly higher age, more comorbidity, and care dependency. Mortality among DNI patients was three times higher than other patients, but not higher than some of the published mortality rates for elderly mechanically ventilated patients. Advanced care planning is essential in COVID-19 to assist patient autonomy and prevent non-beneficial medical interventions.

Treatment guidance for lung cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic

The global COVID-19 pandemic continues to escalate at a rapid pace inundating medical facilities and creating significant challenges globally. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients appears to be higher especially as they are more likely to present with an immunocompromised condition, either from the cancer itself or from the treatments they receive. A major consideration in the delivery of cancer care during the pandemic is to balance the risk of patient exposure and infection with the need to provide effective cancer treatment. Many aspects of the SARS-CoV-2 infection remain poorly characterized currently and even less is known about the course of infection in the context of a patient with cancer. As SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious, the risk of infection directly affects the cancer patient being treated, other cancer patients in close proximity, and health care providers. Infection at any level for patients or providers can cause significant disruption to even the most effective treatment plans. Lung cancer patients, especially those with reduced lung function and cardiopulmonary co-morbidities are more likely to have increased risk and mortality from COVID-19 as one of its common manifestation is as an acute respiratory illness. The purpose of this manuscript is to present a practical multidisciplinary and international overview to assist in treatment for lung cancer patients during this pandemic, with the caveat that evidence is lacking in many areas. It is expected that firmer recommendations can be developed as more evidence becomes available.