ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs) are characterized by immune dysfunction and associated with an increased risk of infections, which were of significant concern during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Variable rates of COVID-19 incidence have been reported in patients with ARDs; however, the true effect of this infection on this patient population is still unclear. We, therefore, aimed to evaluate the COVID-19 prevalence among a multiethnic cohort of patients with ARDs in Qatar. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used telephonic surveys to collect demographic and clinical information of patients with ARD in Qatar between April 1 and July 31, 2020, including any close contact with a COVID-19 case at home or work and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. An electronic medical records review was conducted to verify pertinent data collected through the surveys. Prevalence with 95% confidence interval (CI), Student's t-tests, and chi-square/Fisher's exact tests were used for univariate analyses, whereas multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with COVID-19. RESULTS: The study included 700 patients with ARD (mean age, 43.2 ± 12.3 years), and 73% were female. Until July 2020, 75 (11%, 95% CI 9%-13%) patients had COVID-19. Factors associated with COVID-19 included being a man (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.56, 95% CI 1.35-4.88, p = 0.01) and having close contact with a COVID-19 case (aOR 27.89, 95% CI 14.85-52.38, p = 0.01). Disease severity and rheumatic medications had no significant association with the odds of contracting COVID-19. In the 86 patients with ARD having close contact, the frequency of hydroxychloroquine utilization was lower in patients who contracted COVID-19 than in those who did not (35% vs 72.5%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In Qatar, patients with ARDs had an overall higher prevalence of COVID-19 than global estimates. Being male and having close contact with a COVID-19 case were strongly associated with COVID-19 as reported globally. The presence of comorbid conditions, disease-specific factors, and rheumatic medications had no significant effect on the risk of COVID-19 in our study suggesting alternative mechanisms to the increased prevalence.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs) are at a higher risk of poor outcomes from a SARS-CoV-2 infection. We evaluated whether patients with an ARDs infected with SARS-CoV-2 were at a higher risk of a poorer outcome than those without an ARDs. METHODS: Patients with an ARDs infected with SARS-CoV-2 were matched to control patients without a known ARDs. Matching was performed according to age ( ± 6 years) and sex at a case-to-control ratio of 1:3. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from the databases and were compared between the two groups. Severe SARS-CoV-2 infection was the primary outcome and was defined as the requirement for oxygen therapy support, the need for invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation, or the use of glucocorticoids. RESULTS: A total of 141 patients with an ARDs were matched to 398 patients who formed the control group. The mean ages (SD) of the ARDs and non-ARDs groups were 44.4 years (11.4) and 43.4 years (12.2). Women accounted for 58.8% of the ARDs group and 56.3% of the control group (p = 0.59). Demographics and comorbidities were balanced between the groups. ARDs included connective tissue disease in 43 (30.3%) patients, inflammatory arthritis in 92 (65.2%), and other ARDs in 8 (5.7%). ARDs medications included biological/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/ts-DMARDs) in 28 (15.6%) patients, conventional synthetic DMARDs in 95 (67.4%), and immunosuppressive antimetabolites in 13 (9.2%). The ARDs group had more respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection than the control group (24.8% and 20.6% vs. 10% and 5.3%, respectively; p < 0.001 for both). Severe SARS-CoV-2 infection was more common in the ARDs group than in the control group (14.9% vs. 5.8%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center matched cohort study, patients with an ARDs experienced more respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection and had more severe infection than those from the control group. Therefore, patients with an ARDs require close observation during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Severe COVID-19 is thought to be caused by immune overdrive and cytokine storm. One of the cytokine storm syndromes frequently induced by infections is secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) which can be assessed using H-score. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the rate of patients with COVID-19 who meet HLH criteria based on H-score and the association of H-score with poor outcomes. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study of 19 patients with COVID-19 requiring ICU stay from March to May, 2020, we collected demographic and clinical data that focused on H-score's variables and COVID-19 outcomes. H-score ≥ 169 was used to determine the percentage of patients who met the HLH criteria. Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, and Spearman rho tests and multiple regression analyses were carried out to evaluate the associated factors. The optimal H-score cut-off to predict poor COVID-19 outcome (need for intubation ± ECMO) was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: In 669 patients with severe COVID-19 with a mean ± SD age of 50.3 ± 12.8 years, which comprised 95% men; 66% required intubation, 4% ECMO, and 16% died. Only 2% had an H-score ≥ 169. Patients with poor outcomes had a higher mean (SD) H-score than those without; intubation (96.0 [50.0] vs 75.0 [35.0], p < 0.01), ECMO (113.0 [25.0] vs 93.0 [50.0], p < 0.01) and death (98.0 [62.0] vs 93.0 [48.0], p < 0.01). Factors associated with H-score were diabetes (ß coeff = - 10.4, p < 0.01), abdominal pain (ß coeff = 19.1, p < 0.01), duration of COVID-19 symptoms (ß coeff = - 0.7, p = 0.049), and days before ICU admission (ß coeff = - 1.2, p = 0.01). H-score showed a fair ability to discriminate COVID-19 outcomes (AUC 0.61, 95% CI 0.54-0.67). An H-score of 85 was the optimal cut-off with a sensitivity 69% and 1-specificity 53%. CONCLUSION: Despite its association with severity in COVID-19, H-score's ability to predict poor outcomes was only fair, indicating differences in the cytokine storm faced in COVID-19 compared with that during secondary HLH.