Experiences investigation for COVID-19 vaccination in patients with epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with epilepsy (PWE) and their willingness to undergo vaccination. METHODS: This was a survey study. A questionnaire was completed by patients of the outpatient clinic and hospital ward at The Third Xiangya Hospital in 2021. The survey included general, epilepsy-specific, and COVID-specific questions. RESULTS: In total, 120 valid questionnaires were returned. Eighty-nine of 120 patients (74.2%) were not vaccinated, and 31 (25.8%) received the COVID-19 vaccine. Of the 31 vaccinated PWE, one (3.2%) had worsening of seizures and four (12.9%) had adverse reactions that were characteristic of the COVID-19 vaccine. The other 26 patients (83.9%) reported no adverse reactions, Moreover, there was no significant difference between the 18 PWE with well-controlled seizureand the 13 PWE with poorly-controlled seizure. Of the 89 unvaccinated PWE, 69.7% (62/89) were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, 28.1% (25/89) were unsure, and 2.2% (2/89) declined to be vaccinated. SIGNIFICANCE: Among PWE, few adverse reactions occurred following the COVID-19 vaccination. Most PWE were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19 vaccination is safe for PWE.

Efficacy of umbilical cord mesenchymal stromal cells for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objectives: A major challenge for COVID-19 therapy is dysregulated immune response associated with the disease. Umbilical cord mesenchymal stromal cells (UC-MSCs) may be a promising candidate for COVID-19 treatment owing to their immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory functions. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of UC-MSCs inpatients with COVID-19. Method: Medline, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched to collect clinical trials concerning UC-MSCs for the treatment of COVID-19. After literature screening, quality assessment, and data extraction, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the included study were performed. Results: This systematic review and meta-analysis were prospectively registered on PROSPERO, and the registration number is CRD42022304061. After screening, 10 studies involving 293 patients with COVID-19 were eventually included. Our meta-analysis results showed that UC-MSCs can reduce mortality (relative risk [RR] =0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.38, 0.95], P=0.03) in COVID-19 patients. No significant correlation was observed between adverse events and UC-MSC treatment (RR=0.85, 95% CI: [0.65, 1.10], P=0.22; RR=1.00, 95%CI: [0.64, 1.58], P=1.00). In addition, treatment with UC-MSCs was found to suppress inflammation and improve pulmonary symptoms. Conclusions: UC-MSCs hold promise as a safe and effective treatment for COVID-19. Systematic Review Registartion: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022304061.

J-shaped associations and joint effects of fasting glucose with inflammation and cytokines on COVID-19 mortality.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the dose-response relationship of admission fasting glucose (FBG) with corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality and to further evaluate potential interactions of hyperglycemia with inflammation and hypercoagulation on COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective study included 2555 consecutively hospitalized patients with COVID-19, until death or discharge, in Wuhan Union hospital between January 1 and April 9, 2020. The poor early outcomes included admission to intensive care unit, intubation, and deaths occurring within 28 days. We used splines nested in Cox regression to visualize dose-response associations and generalized additive models to fit three-dimensional (3D) trend plots for joint effects of FBG with markers of inflammation and coagulation. RESULTS: J-shaped associations existed between hospitalized mortality or poor early outcomes and FBG with a nadir at 5 mmol/L, which were more evident in women. 3D plots demonstrated significant joint effect trends, and patients with hyperglycemia and high neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, procalcitonin, d-dimer, and interleukin-6 had 7.4-25.3-fold risks; the proportions of joint associations attributed to additive interactions reached 30% to 54%. CONCLUSIONS: FBG was associated with hospitalized mortality and poor early outcomes in a J-shaped manner, and a combination of hyperglycemia, inflammation, hypercoagulation, and cytokines conferred a dramatically higher risk.

Risk Prediction Model for Esophageal Cancer Among General Population: A Systematic Review.

Objective: The risk prediction model is an effective tool for risk stratification and is expected to play an important role in the early detection and prevention of esophageal cancer. This study sought to summarize the available evidence of esophageal cancer risk predictions models and provide references for their development, validation, and application. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for original articles published in English up to October 22, 2021. Studies that developed or validated a risk prediction model of esophageal cancer and its precancerous lesions were included. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics including predictors, model performance and methodology, and assessed risk of bias and applicability with PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool). Results: A total of 20 studies including 30 original models were identified. The median area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of risk prediction models was 0.78, ranging from 0.68 to 0.94. Age, smoking, body mass index, sex, upper gastrointestinal symptoms, and family history were the most commonly included predictors. None of the models were assessed as low risk of bias based on PROBST. The major methodological deficiencies were inappropriate date sources, inconsistent definition of predictors and outcomes, and the insufficient number of participants with the outcome. Conclusions: This study systematically reviewed available evidence on risk prediction models for esophageal cancer in general populations. The findings indicate a high risk of bias due to several methodological pitfalls in model development and validation, which limit their application in practice.

Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China.

BACKGROUND: Since December 2019, when coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) emerged in Wuhan city and rapidly spread throughout China, data have been needed on the clinical characteristics of the affected patients. METHODS: We extracted data regarding 1099 patients with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 from 552 hospitals in 30 provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities in mainland China through January 29, 2020. The primary composite end point was admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), the use of mechanical ventilation, or death. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 47 years; 41.9% of the patients were female. The primary composite end point occurred in 67 patients (6.1%), including 5.0% who were admitted to the ICU, 2.3% who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation, and 1.4% who died. Only 1.9% of the patients had a history of direct contact with wildlife. Among nonresidents of Wuhan, 72.3% had contact with residents of Wuhan, including 31.3% who had visited the city. The most common symptoms were fever (43.8% on admission and 88.7% during hospitalization) and cough (67.8%). Diarrhea was uncommon (3.8%). The median incubation period was 4 days (interquartile range, 2 to 7). On admission, ground-glass opacity was the most common radiologic finding on chest computed tomography (CT) (56.4%). No radiographic or CT abnormality was found in 157 of 877 patients (17.9%) with nonsevere disease and in 5 of 173 patients (2.9%) with severe disease. Lymphocytopenia was present in 83.2% of the patients on admission. CONCLUSIONS: During the first 2 months of the current outbreak, Covid-19 spread rapidly throughout China and caused varying degrees of illness. Patients often presented without fever, and many did not have abnormal radiologic findings. (Funded by the National Health Commission of China and others.).

Myoglobin Offers Higher Accuracy Than Other Cardiac-Specific Biomarkers for the Prognosis of COVID-19.

Although sporadic studies have shown that myoglobin may have better prognostic performance than other cardiac markers in COVID-19, a comprehensive comparative study is lacking. Herein, we retrospectively analyzed the clinical and laboratory data of COVID-19 patients admitted to the Guanggu Campus of Wuhan Tongji Hospital from February 9, 2020 to March 30, 2020, intending to compare the prognostic accuracy of three commonly used cardiac markers on COVID-19 mortality. Our results revealed that abnormal increases in myocardial biomarkers were associated with a significantly increased risk of in-hospital mortality with COVID-19. Interestingly, myoglobin, a non-cardiac-specific biomarker, also expressed in skeletal myocytes, had even higher prognostic accuracy than cardiac-specific biomarkers such as high-sensitivity troponin I (hs-TnI) and creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB). More importantly, multivariate Cox analysis showed that myoglobin, rather than hs-TnI or CK-MB, was independently prognostic for in-hospital mortality in COVID-19. These results were further confirmed by subgroup analyses of patients with severe and critical illnesses and those without a history of cardiovascular disease. Our findings suggest that myoglobin may be a reliable marker of illness reflecting general physiological disturbance and help to assess prognosis and treatment response in patients with COVID-19.

D-Limonene Is a Potential Monoterpene to Inhibit PI3K/Akt/IKK-α/NF-κB p65 Signaling Pathway in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pulmonary Fibrosis.

At the time of the prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), pulmonary fibrosis (PF) related to COVID-19 has become the main sequela. However, the mechanism of PF related to COVID (COVID-PF) is unknown. This study aimed to explore the key targets in the development of COVID-PF and the mechanism of d-limonene in the COVID-PF treatment. The differentially expressed genes of COVID-PF were downloaded from the GeneCards database, and their pathways were analyzed. d-Limonene was molecularly docked with related proteins to screen its pharmacological targets, and a rat lung fibrosis model was established to verify d-limonene's effect on COVID-PF-related targets. The results showed that the imbalance between collagen breakdown and metabolism, inflammatory response, and angiogenesis are the core processes of COVID-PF; and PI3K/AKT signaling pathways are the key targets of the treatment of COVID-PF. The ability of d-limonene to protect against PF induced by bleomycin in rats was reported. The mechanism is related to the binding of PI3K and NF-κB p65, and the inhibition of PI3K/Akt/IKK-α/NF-κB p65 signaling pathway expression and phosphorylation. These results confirmed the relationship between the PI3K-Akt signaling pathway and COVID-PF, showing that d-limonene has a potential therapeutic value for COVID-PF.

Earlier diagnosis improves COVID-19 prognosis: a nationwide retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Risk of adverse outcomes in COVID-19 patients by stratifying by the time from symptom onset to confirmed diagnosis status is still uncertain. METHODS: We included 1,590 hospitalized COVID-19 patients confirmed by real-time RT-PCR assay or high-throughput sequencing of pharyngeal and nasal swab specimens from 575 hospitals across China between 11 December 2019 and 31 January 2020. Times from symptom onset to confirmed diagnosis, from symptom onset to first medical visit and from first medical visit to confirmed diagnosis were described and turned into binary variables by the maximally selected rank statistics method. Then, survival analysis, including a log-rank test, Cox regression, and conditional inference tree (CTREE) was conducted, regarding whether patients progressed to a severe disease level during the observational period (assessed as severe pneumonia according to the Chinese Expert Consensus on Clinical Practice for Emergency Severe Pneumonia, admission to an intensive care unit, administration of invasive ventilation, or death) as the prognosis outcome, the dependent variable. Independent factors included whether the time from symptom onset to confirmed diagnosis was longer than 5 days (the exposure) and other demographic and clinical factors as multivariate adjustments. The clinical characteristics of the patients with different times from symptom onset to confirmed diagnosis were also compared. RESULTS: The medians of the times from symptom onset to confirmed diagnosis, from symptom onset to first medical visit, and from first medical visit to confirmed diagnosis were 6, 3, and 2 days. After adjusting for age, sex, smoking status, and comorbidity status, age [hazard ratio (HR): 1.03; 95% CI: 1.01-1.04], comorbidity (HR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.23-2.73), and a duration from symptom onset to confirmed diagnosis of >5 days (HR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.10-2.60) were independent predictors of COVID-19 prognosis, which echoed the CTREE models, with significant nodes such as time from symptom onset to confirmed diagnosis, age, and comorbidities. Males, older patients with symptoms such as dry cough/productive cough/shortness of breath, and prior COPD were observed more often in the patients who procrastinated before initiating the first medical consultation. CONCLUSIONS: A longer time from symptom onset to confirmed diagnosis yielded a worse COVID-19 prognosis.

Inflammation-associated factors for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19.

The aim is to explore the relation between inflammation-associated factors and in-hospital mortality and investigate which factor is an independent predictor of in-hospital death in patients with coronavirus disease-2019. This study included patients with coronavirus disease-2019, who were hospitalized between February 9, 2020, and March 30, 2020. Univariate Cox regression analysis and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression (LASSO) were used to select variables. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was applied to identify independent risk factors in coronavirus disease-2019. A total of 1135 patients were analyzed during the study period. A total of 35 variables were considered to be risk factors after the univariate regression analysis of the clinical characteristics and laboratory parameters (p < .05), and LASSO regression analysis screened out seven risk factors for further study. The six independent risk factors revealed by multivariate Cox regression were myoglobin (HR, 5.353; 95% CI, 2.633-10.882; p < .001), C-reactive protein (HR, 2.063; 95% CI, 1.036-4.109; p = .039), neutrophil count (HR, 2.015; 95% CI, 1.154-3.518; p = .014), interleukin 6 (Il-6; HR, 9.753; 95% CI, 2.952-32.218; p < .001), age (HR, 2.016; 95% CI, 1.077-3.773; p = .028), and international normalized ratio (HR, 2.595; 95% CI, 1.412-4.769; p = .002). Our results suggested that inflammation-associated factors were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality in coronavirus disease-2019 patients. C-reactive protein, neutrophil count, and interleukin 6 were independent factors for predicting in-hospital mortality and had a better independent predictive ability. We believe these findings may allow early identification of the patients at high risk for death, and can also assist in better management of these patients.

A snapshot of public knowledge of novel coronavirus disease 2019: a web-based national survey.

BACKGROUND: Although the number of existing cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China has been decreasing since late February 2020, the number of confirmed cases abroad is surging. Improving public knowledge of COVID-19 is critical to controlling the pandemic. This study aimed to determine China's public knowledge of COVID-19 and the attitudes towards control measures. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted over 48 h from 22:30 29 February 2020 to 22:30 2 March 2020 based on a self-administered web-based questionnaire. The survey was conducted on the WeChat network. Exponential non-discriminative snowball sampling was applied. The questionnaire was voluntarily completed by WeChat users. The questionnaire covered basic demographic information, public knowledge of the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of COVID-19, psychological state, and attitudes towards the overall control measures. The primary outcome was the China's public knowledge of COVID-19 and the attitudes towards control measures and secondary outcome was the psychological state of the public during this pandemic. RESULTS: The study included 10,905 participants and 10,399 valid questionnaires were included for analysis. Participants with tertiary education, younger participants and healthcare workers had better overall knowledge than other participants (all P < 0.05). Approximately 91.9% of the participants believed in person-to-person transmission and 39.1% believed in animal-to-person transmission. No significant correlation between anxiety and the number of regional existing confirmed cases was found, while participants in Hubei were more anxious than those in other regions. In general, 74.1% of the participants acknowledged the effectiveness of the overall control measures, and the percentage of participants with agreement with the overall control measures was negatively correlated with the number of regional existing confirmed cases (r = - 0.492, P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the survey revealed that the Chinese public had overall good knowledge of COVID-19 except for those indeterminate knowledges. With dynamic changes in the global pandemic situation and more research, further studies should be conducted to explore changes in public knowledge and attitudes towards COVID-19 in the future. The media could be used in a strict and regular manner to publicize knowledge of such pandemics to halt their spread.

Clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with rheumatic diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis of global data.

OBJECTIVES: The impact of rheumatic diseases on COVID-19 infection remains poorly investigated. Here we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with rheumatic diseases. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus and preprint database up to 29th August 2020, for publications with confirmed COVID-19 infection in patients with rheumatic diseases. The primary outcomes were the rates of hospitalization, oxygen support, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death. A meta-analysis of effect sizes using the random-effects models was performed, and meta-regression analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity. The data from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician registry (the COVID-19 GRA) was used as a reference. RESULTS: A total of 31 articles involving 1138 patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The publications were from Europe, Asia and North America, but none from other continents. The overall rates of hospitalization, oxygen support, ICU admission and fatality among COVID-19 infected patients with rheumatic diseases were 0.58 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.67), 0.33 (95% CI 0.21-0.47), 0.09 (95% CI 0.05-0.15) and 0.07 (95% CI 0.03-0.11), respectively. The rate of oxygen support in Europe (0.48, 95% CI 0.4-0.57) was higher than that in other continents. Among all hospitalized patients, the rates of oxygen support, ICU admission and fatality were 0.61 (95% CI 0.48-0.73), 0.13 (95% CI 0.07-0.21) and 0.13 (95% CI 0.09-0.18), respectively. The fatality rate was highest in Europe (0.19, 95% CI 0.15-0.24). The fatality rate was higher both in this meta-analysis and the COVID-19 GRA (7.0% and 6.7%, respectively) than that (3.4%) in WHO database, although the age, gender and comorbidity were not matched. CONCLUSION: Patients with rheumatic diseases remain vulnerable with substantial rates of severe outcomes and a geographic variation. More studies were urgently needed to elucidate the risk factors of severe outcomes in this population.

Cardiac Biomarker Levels and Their Prognostic Values in COVID-19 Patients With or Without Concomitant Cardiac Disease.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a global threat. Increases in cardiac biomarkers are common and are associated with adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Although these increases are more likely to occur in cases with concomitant cardiac disease, the differences in cardiac biomarker levels between patients with and without cardiac disease and their associations with in-hospital mortality are largely unknown. A consecutive serial of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases was retrospectively enrolled. Clinical characteristics, laboratory results, and outcome data were collected. The levels of cardiac biomarkers were evaluated and compared by stratifying patients according to concomitant cardiac conditions and clinical classifications. The prognostic efficacy of cardiac biomarker levels on admission was also assessed. Among the overall study population and survived patients, the cardiac biomarker levels at both the early and late stages in cardiac patients were significantly higher than those in non-cardiac patients. However, their concentrations in cardiac patients were comparable to non-cardiac ones among non-survivors. The cardiac biomarker levels at the late stage of the disease were significantly decreased compared to those at the early stage among patients who were alive. Whereas, the late-stage biomarker levels were significantly increased in patients who ultimately died. Subgroup analysis illustrated that increases in cardiac biomarkers were closely related to the severity of the disease, and were prognostic for high risks of in-hospital mortality in non-cardiac, rather than in cardiac patients. Myo and NT-proBNP, rather than Hs-TnI and CK-MB, were independently associated with in-hospital mortality in the overall population and non-cardiac patients. However, these associations were not significant among cardiac patients. In conclusion, our results helped better understand the release pattern and prognostic performance of cardiac biomarkers in patients with COVID-19. Increased levels of Myo and NT-proBNP on admission could be useful markers for early identifying high-risk patients. However, special attention must be paid when implementing the prognostic function for cardiac patients.

A new rapid screening program based on risk scores for COVID-19 patients.

We aimed at establishing a new COVID-19 risk scores, serving as a guide for rapidly screening the COVID-19 patients in order to reduce the risk of COVID-19 hospital-related transmission. As the COVID-19 disease is breaking out across the world, hospital-related transmission is one of the main factors accountable for the spread of COVID-19. For COVID-19 prevention it is urgent to establish a fast and efficient screening strategy for the COVID-19 patients. We analyzed 335 patients (including 124 patients with COVID-19). Five significant clinical attributes were selected as the components for establishing a COVID-19 risk score system, and every attribute was assigned a specific score according to their respective odds ratio values. We also compared three different screening schemes (Scheme I: temperature higher than 37.2 °C on admission, Scheme II: exposure to a source of transmission within 14 days in addition to fever, Scheme III: our new COVID-19 risk score) in terms of their respective receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, so as to evaluate their respective screening effectiveness. Five significant risk factors, which were exposed to a source of transmission (9 points), cluster onset (6 points), history of fever or temperature higher than 37.2 °C on admission (4 points), cough (1 point) and other atypical symptoms (1 point), were ultimately selected from many candidates to construct the new rapid COVID-19 screening program. Based on the screening scheme, the patients were quickly divided into three subgroups according to their respective COVID-19 risk scores: low risk (≤ 6 points, risk < 10%), medium risk (7-13 points) and high risk (≥ 14 points, risk > 80%). When the score of 10 points was selected as a cut-off point for differentiating the patients with COVID-19 from all of the other patients, the sensitivity was 93.6%, with a specificity of 86.3%. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of COVID-19 risk score system was 0.96 (P = 0.000), much higher than the AUCs of Scheme I (0.56, P = 0.000) and Scheme II (0.85, P = 0.000), respectively. Our COVID-19 risk score system can help the clinicians effectively and rapidly identify and differentiate the patients with COVID-19 infections, to be mainly used in those areas where COVID-19 still exhibits epidemiological characteristics.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 treated in Hubei (epicentre) and outside Hubei (non-epicentre): a nationwide analysis of China.

BACKGROUND: During the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), consistent and considerable differences in disease severity and mortality rate of patients treated in Hubei province compared to those in other parts of China have been observed. We sought to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients being treated inside and outside Hubei province, and explore the factors underlying these differences. METHODS: Collaborating with the National Health Commission, we established a retrospective cohort to study hospitalised COVID-19 cases in China. Clinical characteristics, the rate of severe events and deaths, and the time to critical illness (invasive ventilation or intensive care unit admission or death) were compared between patients within and outside Hubei. The impact of Wuhan-related exposure (a presumed key factor that drove the severe situation in Hubei, as Wuhan is the epicentre as well the administrative centre of Hubei province) and the duration between symptom onset and admission on prognosis were also determined. RESULTS: At the data cut-off (31 January 2020), 1590 cases from 575 hospitals in 31 provincial administrative regions were collected (core cohort). The overall rate of severe cases and mortality was 16.0% and 3.2%, respectively. Patients in Hubei (predominantly with Wuhan-related exposure, 597 (92.3%) out of 647) were older (mean age 49.7 versus 44.9 years), had more cases with comorbidity (32.9% versus 19.7%), higher symptomatic burden, abnormal radiologic manifestations and, especially, a longer waiting time between symptom onset and admission (5.7 versus 4.5 days) compared with patients outside Hubei. Patients in Hubei (severe event rate 23.0% versus 11.1%, death rate 7.3% versus 0.3%, HR (95% CI) for critical illness 1.59 (1.05-2.41)) have a poorer prognosis compared with patients outside Hubei after adjusting for age and comorbidity. However, among patients outside Hubei, the duration from symptom onset to hospitalisation (mean 4.4 versus 4.7 days) and prognosis (HR (95%) 0.84 (0.40-1.80)) were similar between patients with or without Wuhan-related exposure. In the overall population, the waiting time, but neither treated in Hubei nor Wuhan-related exposure, remained an independent prognostic factor (HR (95%) 1.05 (1.01-1.08)). CONCLUSION: There were more severe cases and poorer outcomes for COVID-19 patients treated in Hubei, which might be attributed to the prolonged duration of symptom onset to hospitalisation in the epicentre. Future studies to determine the reason for delaying hospitalisation are warranted.

Comorbidity and its impact on 1590 patients with COVID-19 in China: a nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak is evolving rapidly worldwide. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of serious adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 by stratifying the comorbidity status. METHODS: We analysed data from 1590 laboratory confirmed hospitalised patients from 575 hospitals in 31 provinces/autonomous regions/provincial municipalities across mainland China between 11 December 2019 and 31 January 2020. We analysed the composite end-points, which consisted of admission to an intensive care unit, invasive ventilation or death. The risk of reaching the composite end-points was compared according to the presence and number of comorbidities. RESULTS: The mean age was 48.9 years and 686 (42.7%) patients were female. Severe cases accounted for 16.0% of the study population. 131 (8.2%) patients reached the composite end-points. 399 (25.1%) reported having at least one comorbidity. The most prevalent comorbidity was hypertension (16.9%), followed by diabetes (8.2%). 130 (8.2%) patients reported having two or more comorbidities. After adjusting for age and smoking status, COPD (HR (95% CI) 2.681 (1.424-5.048)), diabetes (1.59 (1.03-2.45)), hypertension (1.58 (1.07-2.32)) and malignancy (3.50 (1.60-7.64)) were risk factors of reaching the composite end-points. The hazard ratio (95% CI) was 1.79 (1.16-2.77) among patients with at least one comorbidity and 2.59 (1.61-4.17) among patients with two or more comorbidities. CONCLUSION: Among laboratory confirmed cases of COVID-19, patients with any comorbidity yielded poorer clinical outcomes than those without. A greater number of comorbidities also correlated with poorer clinical outcomes.