Self-reported real-world safety and reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines: An international vaccine-recipient survey. (preprint)

BackgroundThe safety of COVID-19 vaccines has been demonstrated in selected populations in recent studies, but more data in specific groups is needed to inform vaccine choice and health policy. ObjectivesAn international, online survey was conducted to compare the safety, tolerability and reactogenicity of available COVID-19 vaccines in different recipient groups. MethodsThis survey was launched in February 2021, for 11 days. Recipients of a first COVID-19 vaccine dose [≥]7 days prior to survey completion were eligible. The incidence and severity of vaccination side effects were assessed. ResultsSurvey was completed by 2,002 respondents, of whom 26.6% had prior COVID-19 infection (68.8% laboratory confirmed). Prior COVID-19 infection was associated with increased risk of any side effect (risk ratio 1.08, 95% confidence intervals [1.05-1.11]), fever (2.24 [1.86-2.70]), breathlessness (2.05 [1.28-3.29]), flu-like illness (1.78 [1.51-2.10]), fatigue (1.34 [1.20-1.49]) and local reactions (1.10 [1.06-1.15]). It was also associated with increased risk of severe side effects, leading to hospital care (1.56 [1.14-2.12]). While mRNA vaccines were associated with a higher incidence of any side effect (1.06 [1.01-1.11]) compared to viral vector-based vaccines, these were generally milder (p<0.001), mostly local reactions. Importantly, mRNA vaccine-recipients reported considerably lower incidence of systemic reactions (RR<0.6) including anaphylaxis, swelling, flu-like illness, breathlessness and fatigue, and of side effects requiring hospital care (0.42 [0.31-0.58]). ConclusionFor the first time, our study links prior COVID-19 illness with increased incidence of vaccination side effects and demonstrates that mRNA vaccines cause milder, less frequent systemic side effects, but more local reactions. Key messages- People with prior COVID-19 illness appear to experience significantly increased incidence and severity of side effects after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. - In this first head-to-head comparison of the safety and reactogenicity of different types of vaccines, it was demonstrated that mRNA vaccines cause milder, less frequent systemic side effects, compared to viral vector vaccines, but more local reactions. Tweetable SummaryA survey of >2000 COVID-19 vaccine-recipients links prior COVID-19 illness with increased incidence of vaccination side effects; mRNA vaccines cause milder, less frequent systemic side effects, but more local reactions.

Azithromycin in Hospitalised Patients with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (preprint)

BackgroundAzithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatory actions. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of azithromycin in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. MethodsIn this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial, several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once daily by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or one of the other treatment arms). Patients were twice as likely to be randomised to usual care as to any of the active treatment groups. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04381936). FindingsBetween 7 April and 27 November 2020, 2582 patients were randomly allocated to receive azithromycin and 5182 patients to receive usual care alone. Overall, 496 (19%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 997 (19%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 1{middle dot}00; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0{middle dot}90-1{middle dot}12; p=0{middle dot}99). Consistent results were seen in all pre-specified subgroups of patients. There was no difference in duration of hospitalisation (median 12 days vs. 13 days) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days (60% vs. 59%; rate ratio 1{middle dot}03; 95% CI 0{middle dot}97-1{middle dot}10; p=0{middle dot}29). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, there was no difference in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (21% vs. 22%; risk ratio 0{middle dot}97; 95% CI 0{middle dot}89-1{middle dot}07; p=0{middle dot}54). InterpretationIn patients hospitalised with COVID-19, azithromycin did not provide any clinical benefit. Azithromycin use in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 should be restricted to patients where there is a clear antimicrobial indication. FundingUK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research (Grant ref: MC_PC_19056).

Recovery of monocyte exhaustion is associated with resolution of lung injury in COVID-19 convalescence. (preprint)

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection resulting in the clinical syndrome COVID-19 is associated with an exaggerated immune response and monocyte infiltrates in the lungs and other peripheral tissues. It is now increasingly recognised that chronic morbidity persists in some patients. We recently demonstrated profound alterations of monocytes in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. It is currently unclear whether these abnormalities resolve or progress following patient discharge. We show here that blood monocytes in convalescent patients at their 12 week follow up, have a greater propensity to produce pro-inflammatory cytokines TNF and IL-6, which was consistently higher in patients with resolution of lung injury as indicated by a normal chest X-ray and no shortness of breath (a key symptom of lung injury). Furthermore, monocytes from convalescent patients also displayed enhanced levels of molecules involved in leucocyte migration, including chemokine receptor CXCR6, adhesion molecule CD31/PECAM and integrins VLA-4 and LFA-1. Expression of migration molecules on monocytes was also consistently higher in convalescent patients with a normal chest X-ray. These data suggest persistent changes in innate immune function following recovery from COVID-19 and indicate that immune modulating therapies targeting monocytes and leucocyte migration may be useful in recovering COVID-19 patients with persistent symptoms.

Tocilizumab in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Pneumonia (preprint)

BACKGROUND COVID-19 is associated with immune dysregulation and hyperinflammation. Tocilizumab is an anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody. METHODS Patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 pneumonia receiving standard care were randomized (2:1) to double-blinded intravenous tocilizumab 8 mg/kg or placebo. The primary outcome measure was clinical status on a 7-category ordinal scale at day 28 (1, discharged/ready for discharge; 7, death). RESULTS Overall, 452 patients were randomized; the modified-intention-to-treat population included 294 tocilizumab-treated and 144 placebo-treated patients. Clinical status at day 28 was not statistically significantly improved for tocilizumab versus placebo (P=0.36). Median (95% CI) ordinal scale values at day 28: 1.0 (1.0 to 1.0) for tocilizumab and 2.0 (1.0 to 4.0) for placebo (odds ratio, 1.19 [0.81 to 1.76]). There was no difference in mortality at day 28 between tocilizumab (19.7%) and placebo (19.4%) (difference, 0.3% [95% CI, -7.6 to 8.2]; nominal P=0.94). Median time to hospital discharge was 8 days shorter with tocilizumab than placebo (20.0 and 28.0, respectively; nominal P=0.037; hazard ratio 1.35 [95% CI 1.02 to 1.79]). Median duration of ICU stay was 5.8 days shorter with tocilizumab than placebo (9.8 and 15.5, respectively; nominal P=0.045). In the safety population, serious adverse events occurred in 34.9% of 295 patients in the tocilizumab arm and 38.5% of 143 in the placebo arm. CONCLUSIONS In this randomized placebo-controlled trial in hospitalized COVID-19 pneumonia patients, tocilizumab did not improve clinical status or mortality. Potential benefits in time to hospital discharge and duration of ICU stay are being investigated in ongoing clinical trials.

Effect of Hydroxychloroquine in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Preliminary results from a multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial. (preprint)

Background: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been proposed as treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the basis of in vitro activity, uncontrolled data, and small randomized studies. Methods: The Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 therapy (RECOVERY) trial is a randomized, controlled, open-label, platform trial comparing a range of possible treatments with usual care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We report the preliminary results for the comparison of hydroxychloroquine vs. usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Results: 1561 patients randomly allocated to receive hydroxychloroquine were compared with 3155 patients concurrently allocated to usual care. Overall, 418 (26.8%) patients allocated hydroxychloroquine and 788 (25.0%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96 to 1.23; P=0.18). Consistent results were seen in all pre-specified subgroups of patients. Patients allocated to hydroxychloroquine were less likely to be discharged from hospital alive within 28 days (60.3% vs. 62.8%; rate ratio 0.92; 95% CI 0.85-0.99) and those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline were more likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (29.8% vs. 26.5%; risk ratio 1.12; 95% CI 1.01-1.25). There was no excess of new major cardiac arrhythmia. Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, hydroxychloroquine was not associated with reductions in 28-day mortality but was associated with an increased length of hospital stay and increased risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death.

Effect of Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Preliminary Report (preprint)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Corticosteroids may modulate immune-mediated lung injury and reducing progression to respiratory failure and death. Methods: The Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 therapy (RECOVERY) trial is a randomized, controlled, open-label, adaptive, platform trial comparing a range of possible treatments with usual care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We report the preliminary results for the comparison of dexamethasone 6 mg given once daily for up to ten days vs. usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Results: 2104 patients randomly allocated to receive dexamethasone were compared with 4321 patients concurrently allocated to usual care. Overall, 454 (21.6%) patients allocated dexamethasone and 1065 (24.6%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (age-adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74 to 0.92; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute mortality rate reductions varied significantly depending on level of respiratory support at randomization (test for trend p<0.001): Dexamethasone reduced deaths by one-third in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.0% vs. 40.7%, RR 0.65 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.82]; p<0.001), by one-fifth in patients receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (21.5% vs. 25.0%, RR 0.80 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.92]; p=0.002), but did not reduce mortality in patients not receiving respiratory support at randomization (17.0% vs. 13.2%, RR 1.22 [95% CI 0.93 to 1.61]; p=0.14). Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, dexamethasone reduced 28-day mortality among those receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen at randomization, but not among patients not receiving respiratory support.

Longitudinal immune profiling reveals distinct features of COVID-19 pathogenesis (preprint)

Background The pathogenesis of COVID-19, caused by a novel strain of coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), involves a complex host-virus interaction and is characterised by an exaggerated immune response, the specific components of which are poorly understood. Here we report the outcome of a longitudinal immune profiling study in hospitalised patients during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK and show the relationship between immune responses and severity of the clinical presentation. Methods The Coronavirus Immune Response and Clinical Outcomes (CIRCO) study was conducted at four hospitals in Greater Manchester. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, recruited as close to admission as possible, provided peripheral blood samples at enrolment and sequentially thereafter. Fresh samples were assessed for immune cells and proteins in whole blood and serum. Some samples were also stimulated for 3 hours with LPS and analysed for intracellular proteins. Results were stratified based on patient-level data including severity of symptoms and date of reported symptom onset. Findings Longitudinal analysis showed a very high neutrophil to T cell ratio and abnormal activation of monocytes in the blood, which displayed high levels of the cell cycle marker, Ki67 and low COX-2. These properties all reverted in patient with good outcome. Unexpectedly, multiple aspects of inflammation were diminished as patients progressed in severity and time, even in ITU patients not recovering. Interpretation This is the first detailed longitudinal analysis of COVID-19 patients of varying severity and outcome, revealing common features and aspects that track with severity. Patients destined for a severe outcome can be identified at admission when still displaying mild-moderate symptoms. We provide clues concerning pathogenesis that should influence clinical trials and therapeutics. Targeting pathways involved in neutrophil and monocyte release from the bone marrow should be tested in patients with COVID-19. Funding: The Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research, The Wellcome Trust, The Royal Society, The BBSRC, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centres (BRC).

Using statistics and mathematical modelling to understand infectious disease outbreaks: COVID-19 as an example (preprint)

During an infectious disease outbreak, biases in the data and complexities of the underlying dynamics pose significant challenges in mathematically modelling the outbreak and designing policy. Motivated by the ongoing response to COVID-19, we provide a toolkit of statistical and mathematical models beyond the simple SIR-type differential equation models for analysing the early stages of an outbreak and assessing interventions. In particular, we focus on parameter estimation in the presence of known biases in the data, and the effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions in enclosed subpopulations, such as households and care homes. We illustrate these methods by applying them to the COVID-19 pandemic.