Management of hypoxemia in SARS-CoV-2 infection: Lessons learned from one year of experience, with a special focus on silent hypoxemia.

Silent hypoxemia is common in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. In this article, the possible pathophysiological mechanisms underlying respiratory symptoms have been reviewed, and the presence of hypoxemia without hypoxia is also discussed. The experience we have gained since the start of the Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed our point of view about which patients with respiratory involvement should be admitted to the intensive care unit/high-dependency unit for mechanical ventilation and monitoring. In patients with clinically well-tolerated mild to moderate hypoxemia (silent hypoxemia), regardless of the extent of pulmonary opacities found in radiological studies, the administration of supplemental oxygen therapy may increase the risk of endothelial damage. The risk of sudden respiratory arrest during emergency intubation, which could expose healthcare workers to infection, should be considered along with the risks of premature intubation. Criteria for intubation need to be revisited based on updated evidence showing that many patients with severe hypoxemia do not show increased work of breathing. This has implications in patient management and may explain in part reports of broad differences in outcomes among intubated patients.

Pre-existing Autoantibodies Neutralizing High Concentrations of Type I Interferons in Almost 10% of COVID-19 Patients Admitted to Intensive Care in Barcelona.

BACKGROUND: It is important to predict which patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 are at higher risk of life-threatening COVID-19. Several studies suggest that neutralizing auto-antibodies (auto-Abs) against type I interferons (IFNs) are predictive of critical COVID-19 pneumonia. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to test for auto-Abs to type I IFN and describe the main characteristics of COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care depending on whether or not these auto-Abs are present. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all COVID-19 patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) in whom samples were available, from March 2020 to March 2021, in Barcelona, Spain. RESULTS: A total of 275 (70.5%) out of 390 patients admitted to ICU were tested for type I IFNs auto-antibodies (α2 and/or ω) by ELISA, being positive in 49 (17.8%) of them. Blocking activity of plasma diluted 1/10 for high concentrations (10 ng/mL) of IFNs was proven in 26 (9.5%) patients. Almost all the patients with neutralizing auto-Abs were men (92.3%). ICU patients with positive results for neutralizing IFNs auto-Abs did not show relevant differences in demographic, comorbidities, clinical features, and mortality, when compared with those with negative results. Nevertheless, some laboratory tests (leukocytosis, neutrophilia, thrombocytosis) related with COVID-19 severity, as well as acute kidney injury (17 [65.4%] vs. 100 [40.2%]; p = 0.013) were significantly higher in patients with auto-Abs. CONCLUSION: Auto-Abs neutralizing high concentrations of type I IFNs were found in 9.5% of patients admitted to the ICU for COVID-19 pneumonia in a hospital in Barcelona. These auto-Abs should be tested early upon diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as they account for a significant proportion of life-threatening cases.

Beneficial and harmful outcomes of tocilizumab in severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The results of studies of tocilizumab (TCZ) in COVID-19 are contradictory. Our study aims to update medical evidence from controlled observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the use of TCZ in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We searched the following databases from January 1, 2020 to April 13, 2021 (date of the last search): MEDLINE database through the PubMed search engine and Scopus, using the terms ("COVID-19" [Supplementary Concept]) AND "tocilizumab" [Supplementary Concept]). RESULTS: Sixty four studies were included in the present study: 54 were controlled observational studies (50 retrospective and 4 prospective) and 10 were RCTs. The overall results provided data from 20,616 hospitalized patients with COVID-19: 7668 patients received TCZ in addition to standard of care (SOC) (including 1915 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with reported mortality) and 12,948 patients only receiving SOC (including 4410 patients admitted to the ICU with reported mortality). After applying the random-effects model, the hospital-wide (including ICU) pooled mortality odds ratio (OR) of patients with COVID-19 treated with TCZ was 0.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.56-0.93). The pooled hospital-wide mortality OR was 1.25 (95% CI = 0.74-2.18) in patients admitted at conventional wards versus 0.66 (95% CI = 0.59-0.76) in patients admitted to the ICU. The pooled OR of hospital-wide mortality (including ICU) of COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ plus corticosteroids (CS) was 0.67 (95% CI = 0.54-0.84). The pooled in-hospital mortality OR was 0.71 (95% CI = 0.35-1.42) when TCZ was early administered (≤10 days from symptom onset) versus 0.83 (95% CI 0.48-1.45) for late administration (>10 days from symptom onset). The meta-analysis did not find significantly higher risk for secondary infections in COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ. CONCLUSIONS: TCZ prevented mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. This benefit was seen to a greater extent in patients receiving concomitant CS and when TCZ administration occurred within the first 10 days after symptom onset.

High-Dose Methylprednisolone Pulses for 3 Days vs. Low-Dose Dexamethasone for 10 Days in Severe, Non-Critical COVID-19: A Retrospective Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

Corticosteroids are largely recommended in patients with severe COVID-19. However, evidence to support high-dose methylprednisolone (MP) pulses is not as robust as that demonstrated for low-dose dexamethasone (DXM) in the RECOVERY trial. This is a retrospective cohort study on severe, non-critically ill patients with COVID-19, comparing 3-day MP pulses ≥ 100 mg/day vs. DXM 6 mg/day for 10 days. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and the secondary outcomes were need of intensive care unit (ICU) admission or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis was applied. From March 2020 to April 2021, a total of 2,284 patients were admitted to our hospital due to severe, non-critically ill COVID-19, and of these, 189 (8.3%) were treated with MP, and 493 (21.6%) with DXM. The results showed that patients receiving MP showed higher in-hospital mortality (31.2% vs. 17.8%, p < 0.001), need of ICU admission (29.1% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.017), need of IMV (25.9% vs. 13.8, p < 0.001), and median hospital length of stay (14 days vs. 11 days, p < 0.001). Our results suggest that treatment with low-dose DXM for 10 days is superior to 3 days of high-dose MP pulses in preventing in-hospital mortality and need for ICU admission or IMV in severe, non-critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Genetic Screening for TLR7 Variants in Young and Previously Healthy Men With Severe COVID-19.

Introduction: Loss-of-function TLR7 variants have been recently reported in a small number of males to underlie strong predisposition to severe COVID-19. We aimed to determine the presence of these rare variants in young men with severe COVID-19. Methods: We prospectively studied males between 18 and 50 years-old without predisposing comorbidities that required at least high-flow nasal oxygen to treat COVID-19. The coding region of TLR7 was sequenced to assess the presence of potentially deleterious variants. Results: TLR7 missense variants were identified in two out of 14 patients (14.3%). Overall, the median age was 38 (IQR 30-45) years. Both variants were not previously reported in population control databases and were predicted to be damaging by in silico predictors. In a 30-year-old patient a maternally inherited variant [c.644A>G; p.(Asn215Ser)] was identified, co-segregating in his 27-year-old brother who also contracted severe COVID-19. A second variant [c.2797T>C; p.(Trp933Arg)] was found in a 28-year-old patient, co-segregating in his 24-year-old brother who developed mild COVID-19. Functional testing of this variant revealed decreased type I and II interferon responses in peripheral mononuclear blood cells upon stimulation with the TLR7 agonist imiquimod, confirming a loss-of-function effect. Conclusions: This study supports a rationale for the genetic screening for TLR7 variants in young men with severe COVID-19 in the absence of other relevant risk factors. A diagnosis of TLR7 deficiency could not only inform on treatment options for the patient, but also enables pre-symptomatic testing of at-risk male relatives with the possibility of instituting early preventive and therapeutic interventions.

Methylprednisolone Pulses Plus Tacrolimus in Addition to Standard of Care vs. Standard of Care Alone in Patients With Severe COVID-19. A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Introduction: Severe lung injury is triggered by both the SARS-CoV-2 infection and the subsequent host-immune response in some COVID-19 patients. Methods: We conducted a randomized, single-center, open-label, phase II trial with the aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone pulses and tacrolimus plus standard of care (SoC) vs. SoC alone, in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The primary outcome was time to clinical stability within 56 days after randomization. Results: From April 1 to May 2, 2020, 55 patients were prospectively included for subsequent randomization; 27 were assigned to the experimental group and 28 to the control group. The experimental treatment was not associated with a difference in time to clinical stability (hazard ratio 0.73 [95% CI 0.39-1.37]) nor most secondary outcomes. Median methylprednisolone cumulative doses were significantly lower (360 mg [IQR 360-842] vs. 870 mg [IQR 364-1451]; p = 0.007), and administered for a shorter time (median of 4.00 days [3.00-17.5] vs. 18.5 days [3.00-53.2]; p = 0.011) in the experimental group than in the control group. Although not statistically significant, those receiving the experimental therapy showed a numerically lower all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC, especially at day 10 [2 (7.41%) vs. 5 (17.9%); OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.05-2.1); p = 0.282]. The total number of non-serious adverse events was 42 in each the two groups. Those receiving experimental treatment had a numerically higher rate of non-serious infectious adverse events [16 (38%) vs. 10 (24%)] and serious infectious adverse events [7 (35%) vs. 3 (23%)] than those receiving SoC. Conclusions: The combined use of methylprednisolone pulses plus tacrolimus, in addition to the SoC, did not significantly improve the time to clinical stability or other secondary outcomes compared with the SoC alone in severe COVID-19. Although not statistically significant, patients receiving the experimental therapy had numerically lower all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC, supporting recent non-randomized studies with calcineurin inhibitors. It is noteworthy that the present trial had a limited sample size and several other limitations. Therefore, further RCTs should be done to assess the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus to tackle the inflammatory stages of COVID-19. Clinical Trial Registration: Identifier [NCT04341038/EudraCT: 2020-001445-39].

Risk Categories in COVID-19 Based on Degrees of Inflammation: Data on More Than 17,000 Patients from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: The inflammation or cytokine storm that accompanies COVID-19 marks the prognosis. This study aimed to identify three risk categories based on inflammatory parameters on admission. (2) Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with COVID-19, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The three categories of low, intermediate, and high risk were determined by taking into consideration the terciles of the total lymphocyte count and the values of C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, and D-dimer taken at the time of admission. (3) Results: A total of 17,122 patients were included in the study. The high-risk group was older (57.9 vs. 64.2 vs. 70.4 years; p < 0.001) and predominantly male (37.5% vs. 46.9% vs. 60.1%; p < 0.001). They had a higher degree of dependence in daily tasks prior to admission (moderate-severe dependency in 10.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 17%; p < 0.001), arterial hypertension (36.9% vs. 45.2% vs. 52.8%; p < 0.001), dyslipidemia (28.4% vs. 37% vs. 40.6%; p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (11.9% vs. 17.1% vs. 20.5%; p < 0.001), ischemic heart disease (3.7% vs. 6.5% vs. 8.4%; p < 0.001), heart failure (3.4% vs. 5.2% vs. 7.6%; p < 0.001), liver disease (1.1% vs. 3% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.002), chronic renal failure (2.3% vs. 3.6% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001), cancer (6.5% vs. 7.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.7% vs. 5.4% vs. 7.1%; p < 0.001). They presented more frequently with fever, dyspnea, and vomiting. These patients more frequently required high flow nasal cannula (3.1% vs. 4.4% vs. 9.7%; p < 0.001), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs. 3% vs. 6.3%; p < 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (0.6% vs. 2.7% vs. 8.7%; p < 0.001), and ICU admission (0.9% vs. 3.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001), and had a higher percentage of in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 6.2% vs. 23.9%; p < 0.001). The three risk categories proved to be an independent risk factor in multivariate analyses. (4) Conclusion: The present study identifies three risk categories for the requirement of high flow nasal cannula, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality based on lymphopenia and inflammatory parameters.

Clinical Significance of Indeterminate QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus Assay Results in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients with Severe Hyperinflammatory Syndrome.

Performance of the QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) assay could be affected by conditions of immune dysregulation. Little is known about the reliability of QTF-Plus in COVID-19 patients. Our aim was to determine the prevalence and the factors related to an indeterminate QFT-Plus test in COVID-19 hospitalized patients, and to analyze its relationship with in-hospital mortality. A retrospective analysis of all hospitalized COVID-19 patients on whom a QTF-Plus assay was performed in a tertiary care public hospital during the first epidemic wave in Spain (March-April 2020). Out of a total of 96 patients included, 34 (35.4%) had an indeterminate result, in all cases due to a lack of response in the mitogen control. Factors related to COVID-19 severity, such as higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (odds ratio [OR] 1.005 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.002-1.008]) and previous administration of corticosteroids (OR 4.477 [95% CI 1.397-14.345]), were independent predictors for indeterminate QFT-Plus assay. Furthermore, indeterminate results were more frequent among COVID-19 patients who died during hospitalization (29.1% vs. 64.7%; p = 0.005). We conclude that QFT-Plus assay yielded an unexpected, high prevalence of indeterminate results in severe COVID-19 patients. Factors related to worse COVID-19 outcome, such as LDH, as well as corticosteroid use before the QFT-Plus assay, seem to be predictors for an indeterminate result. The role of an indeterminate QFT-Plus result in predicting COVID-19 severity and mortality should be evaluated.

Blood test dynamics in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: Potential utility of D-dimer for pulmonary embolism diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: A higher incidence of thrombotic events, mainly pulmonary embolism (PE), has been reported in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The main objective was to assess clinical and laboratory differences in hospitalized COVID-19 patients according to occurrence of PE. METHODS: This retrospective study included all consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who underwent a computed tomography (CT) angiography for PE clinical suspicion. Clinical data and median blood test results distributed into weekly periods from COVID-19 symptoms onset, were compared between PE and non-PE patients. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients were included, 29 (32%) had PE. PE patients were younger (63.9 (SD 13.7) vs 69.9 (SD 12.5) years). Clinical symptoms and COVID-19 CT features were similar in both groups. PE was diagnosed after a mean of 20.0 (SD 8.6) days from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. Corticosteroid boluses were more frequently used in PE patients (62% vs. 43%). No patients met ISTH DIC criteria. Any parameter was statistically significant or clinically relevant except for D-Dimer when comparing both groups. Median values [IQR] of D-dimer in PE vs non-PE patients were: week 2 (2010.7 [770.1-11208.9] vs 626.0 [374.0-2382.2]; p = 0.004); week 3 (3893.1 [1388.2-6694.0] vs 1184.4 [461.8-2447.8]; p = 0.003); and week 4 (2736.3 [1202.1-8514.1] vs 1129.1 [542.5-2834.6]; p = 0.01). Median fold-increase of D-dimer between week 1 and 2 differed between groups (6.64 [3.02-23.05] vs 1.57 [0.64-2.71], p = 0.003); ROC curve AUC was 0.879 (p = 0.003) with a sensitivity and specificity for PE of 86% and 80%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, D-dimer levels are higher at weeks 2, 3 and 4 after COVID-19 symptom onset in patients who develop PE. This difference is more pronounced when the fold increase between weeks 1 and 2 is compared.

Predicting Clinical Outcome with Phenotypic Clusters in COVID-19 Pneumonia: An Analysis of 12,066 Hospitalized Patients from the Spanish Registry SEMI-COVID-19.

(1) Background: Different clinical presentations in COVID-19 are described to date, from mild to severe cases. This study aims to identify different clinical phenotypes in COVID-19 pneumonia using cluster analysis and to assess the prognostic impact among identified clusters in such patients. (2) Methods: Cluster analysis including 11 phenotypic variables was performed in a large cohort of 12,066 COVID-19 patients, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish Society of Internal Medicine (SEMI)-COVID-19 Registry. (3) Results: Of the total of 12,066 patients included in the study, most were males (7052, 58.5%) and Caucasian (10,635, 89.5%), with a mean age at diagnosis of 67 years (standard deviation (SD) 16). The main pre-admission comorbidities were arterial hypertension (6030, 50%), hyperlipidemia (4741, 39.4%) and diabetes mellitus (2309, 19.2%). The average number of days from COVID-19 symptom onset to hospital admission was 6.7 (SD 7). The triad of fever, cough, and dyspnea was present almost uniformly in all 4 clinical phenotypes identified by clustering. Cluster C1 (8737 patients, 72.4%) was the largest, and comprised patients with the triad alone. Cluster C2 (1196 patients, 9.9%) also presented with ageusia and anosmia; cluster C3 (880 patients, 7.3%) also had arthromyalgia, headache, and sore throat; and cluster C4 (1253 patients, 10.4%) also manifested with diarrhea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. Compared to each other, cluster C1 presented the highest in-hospital mortality (24.1% vs. 4.3% vs. 14.7% vs. 18.6%; p < 0.001). The multivariate study identified age, gender (male), body mass index (BMI), arterial hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ischemic cardiopathy, chronic heart failure, chronic hepatopathy, Charlson's index, heart rate and respiratory rate upon admission >20 bpm, lower PaO2/FiO2 at admission, higher levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and the phenotypic cluster as independent factors for in-hospital death. (4) Conclusions: The present study identified 4 phenotypic clusters in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, which predicted the in-hospital prognosis of clinical outcomes.

Beneficial effect of corticosteroids in preventing mortality in patients receiving tocilizumab to treat severe COVID-19 illness.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the characteristics and risk factors for mortality in patients with severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) treated with tocilizumab (TCZ), alone or in combination with corticosteroids (CS). METHODS: From March 17 to April 7, 2020, a real-world observational retrospective analysis of consecutive hospitalized adult patients receiving TCZ to treat severe COVID-19 was conducted at our 750-bed university hospital. The main outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1,092 patients with COVID-19 were admitted during the study period. Of them, 186 (17%) were treated with TCZ, of which 129 (87.8%) in combination with CS. Of the total 186 patients, 155 (83.3 %) patients were receiving noninvasive ventilation when TCZ was initiated. Mean time from symptoms onset and hospital admission to TCZ use was 12 (±4.3) and 4.3 days (±3.4), respectively. Overall, 147 (79%) survived and 39 (21%) died. By multivariate analysis, mortality was associated with older age (HR = 1.09, p < 0.001), chronic heart failure (HR = 4.4, p = 0.003), and chronic liver disease (HR = 4.69, p = 0.004). The use of CS, in combination with TCZ, was identified as a protective factor against mortality (HR = 0.26, p < 0.001) in such severe COVID-19 patients receiving TCZ. No serious superinfections were observed after a 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe COVID-19 receiving TCZ due to systemic host-immune inflammatory response syndrome, the use of CS in addition to TCZ therapy, showed a beneficial effect in preventing in-hospital mortality.