Impact of corticosteroids use on midterm sequelae in survivors of COVID-19 admitted to hospital: A prospective cohort study.

An understanding of the midterm sequelae in COVID-19 and their association with corticosteroids use are needed. Between March and July 2020, we evaluated 1227 survivors of COVID-19, 3 months posthospitalization, of whom 213 had received corticosteroids within 7 days of admission. Main outcome was any midterm sequelae (oxygen therapy, shortness of breath, one major clinical sign, two minor clinical signs or three minor symptoms). Association between corticosteroids use and midterm sequelae was assessed using inverse propensity-score weighting models. Our sample included 753 (61%) male patients, and 512 (42%) were older than 65 years. We found a higher rate of sequelae among users than nonusers of corticosteroids (42% vs. 35%, odds ratio [OR] 1.40 [1.16-1.69]). Midterm sequelae were more frequent in users of low-dose corticosteroids than nonusers (64% vs. 51%, OR 1.60 [1.10-2.32]), whereas no association between higher doses (≥20 mg/day equivalent of dexamethasone) and sequelae was evidenced (OR 0.95 [0.56-1.61]). Higher risk of sequelae with corticosteroids use was observed among subjects with propensity score below the 90th percentile. Our study suggest that corticosteroids use during hospitalization for COVID-19 is associated with higher risk of midterm sequelae.

Management of pharmacovigilance during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis by the safety department of an academic sponsor: Lessons learnt and challenges from the EU DisCoVeRy clinical trial.

The current COVID-19 pandemic was an exceptional health situation, including for drug use. As there was no known effective drug for COVID-19 at the beginning of the pandemic, different drug candidates were proposed. In this article, we present the challenges for an academic Safety Department to manage the global safety of a European trial during the pandemic. The National Institute for Health and Medical Research (Inserm) conducted a European multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial involving three repurposed and one-in development drugs (lopinavir/ritonavir, IFN-ß1a, hydroxychloroquine, and remdesivir) in adults hospitalized with COVID-19. From 25 March 2020 to 29 May 2020, the Inserm Safety Department had to manage 585 Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) initial notification and 396 follow-up reports. The Inserm Safety Department's staff was mobilized to manage these SAEs and to report Expedited safety reports to the competent authorities within the legal timeframes. More than 500 queries were sent to the investigators due to a lack of or incoherent information on SAE forms. At the same time, the investigators were overwhelmed by the management of patients suffering from COVID-19 infection. These particular conditions of missing data and lack of accurate description of adverse events made evaluation of the SAEs very difficult, particularly the assessment of the causal role of each investigational medicinal product. In parallel, working difficulties were accentuated by the national lockdown, frequent IT tool dysfunctions, delayed implementation of monitoring and the absence of automatic alerts for SAE form modification. Although COVID-19 is a confounding factor per se, the delay in and quality of SAE form completion and the real-time medical analysis by the Inserm Safety Department were major issues in the quick identification of potential safety signals. To conduct a high-quality clinical trial and ensure patient safety, all stakeholders must take their roles and responsibilities.

Effects of remdesivir in patients hospitalised with COVID-19: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Interpretation of the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of remdesivir in patients treated in hospital for COVID-19 is conflicting. We aimed to assess the benefits and harms of remdesivir compared with placebo or usual care in these patients, and whether treatment effects differed between prespecified patient subgroups. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane COVID-19 trial registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and preprint servers from Jan 1, 2020, until April 11, 2022, for RCTs of remdesivir in adult patients hospitalised with COVID-19, and contacted the authors of eligible trials to request individual patient data. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at day 28 after randomisation. We used multivariable hierarchical regression-adjusting for respiratory support, age, and enrollment period-to investigate effect modifiers. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021257134. FINDINGS: Our search identified 857 records, yielding nine RCTs eligible for inclusion. Of these nine eligible RCTs, individual data were provided for eight, covering 10 480 patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (99% of such patients included in such RCTs worldwide) recruited between Feb 6, 2020, and April 1, 2021. Within 28 days of randomisation, 662 (12·5%) of 5317 patients assigned to remdesivir and 706 (14·1%) of 5005 patients assigned to no remdesivir died (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·88, 95% CI 0·78-1·00, p=0·045). We found evidence for a credible subgroup effect according to respiratory support at baseline (pinteraction=0·019). Of patients who were ventilated-including those who received high-flow oxygen-253 (30·0%) of 844 patients assigned to remdesivir died compared with 241 (28·5%) of 846 patients assigned to no remdesivir (aOR 1·10 [0·88-1·38]; low-certainty evidence). Of patients who received no oxygen or low-flow oxygen, 409 (9·1%) of 4473 patients assigned to remdesivir died compared with 465 (11·2%) of 4159 patients assigned to no remdesivir (0·80 [0·70-0·93]; high-certainty evidence). No credible subgroup effect was found for time to start of remdesivir after symptom onset, age, presence of comorbidities, enrolment period, or corticosteroid use. Remdesivir did not increase the frequency of severe or serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: This individual patient data meta-analysis showed that remdesivir reduced mortality in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 who required no or conventional oxygen support, but was underpowered to evaluate patients who were ventilated when receiving remdesivir. The effect size of remdesivir in patients with more respiratory support or acquired immunity and the cost-effectiveness of remdesivir remain to be further elucidated. FUNDING: EU-RESPONSE.

Implementation of a centralized pharmacovigilance system in academic pan-European clinical trials: Experience from EU-Response and conect4children consortia.

Setting-up a high quality, compliant and efficient pharmacovigilance (PV) system in multi-country clinical trials can be more challenging for academic sponsors than for companies. To ensure the safety of all participants in academic studies and that the PV system fulfils all regulations, we set up a centralized PV system that allows sponsors to delegate work on PV. This initiative was put in practice by our Inserm-ANRS MIE PV department in two distinct multinational European consortia with 19 participating countries: conect4children (c4c) for paediatrics research and EU-Response for Covid-19 platform trials. The centralized PV system consists of some key procedures to harmonize the complex safety processes, creation of a local safety officer (LSO) network and centralization of all safety activities. The key procedures described the safety management plan for each trial and how tasks were shared and delegated between all stakeholders. Processing of serious adverse events (SAEs) in a unique database guaranteed the full control of the safety data and continuous evaluation of the risk-benefit ratio. The LSO network participated in efficient regulatory compliance across multiple countries. In total, there were 1312 SAEs in EU-Response and 83 SAEs in c4c in the four trials. We present here the lessons learnt from our experience in four clinical trials. We managed heterogeneous European local requirements and implemented efficient communication with all trial teams. Our approach builds capacity for PV that can be used by multiple academic sponsors.

Increased risk of severe COVID-19 in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 Alpha variant infection: a multicentre matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the variant of concern (VOC) Alpha on the severity of COVID-19 has been debated. We report our analysis in France. METHODS: We conducted an exposed/unexposed cohort study with retrospective data collection, comparing patients infected by VOC Alpha to contemporaneous patients infected by historical lineages. Participants were matched on age (± 2.5 years), sex and region of hospitalization. The primary endpoint was the proportion of hospitalized participants with severe COVID-19, defined as a WHO-scale > 5 or by the need of a non-rebreather mask, occurring up to day 29 after admission. We used a logistic regression model stratified on each matched pair and accounting for factors known to be associated with the severity of the disease. RESULTS: We included 650 pairs of patients hospitalized between Jan 1, 2021, and Feb 28, 2021, in 47 hospitals. Median age was 70 years and 61.3% of participants were male. The proportion of participants with comorbidities was high in both groups (85.0% vs 90%, p = 0.004). Infection by VOC Alpha was associated with a higher odds of severe COVID-19 (41.7% vs 38.5%-aOR = 1.33 95% CI [1.03-1.72]). CONCLUSION: Infection by the VOC Alpha was associated with a higher odds of severe COVID-19.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seroprevalence Among HIV-Negative Participants Using Tenofovir/Emtricitabine-Based Preexposure Prophylaxis in 2020: A Substudy of the French National Agency for Research on AIDS and Viral Hepatitis PREVENIR and Inserm SAPRIS-Sero Cohorts.

The potential preventive efficacy of tenofovir/emtricitabine on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was assessed in human immunodeficiency virus preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) users. Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G between May and October 2020 was similar in PrEP users and in a matched population-based cohort, suggesting that tenofovir/emtricitabine has no role in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition.

SARS CoV-2 Seroprevalence Among HIV-Negative Participants Using Tenofovir/Emtricitabine Based PrEP in 2020 – A Sub-study of ANRS PREVENIR and INSERM SAPRIS-Sero Cohorts

The potential preventive efficacy of tenofovir/emtricitabine on SARS-CoV-2 infection was assessed in HIV pre-exposition prophylaxis (PrEP) users. Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG between May and October 2020 was similar in PrEP users and in a matched population-based cohort suggesting that tenofovir/emtricitabine has no role in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition.

Effect of remdesivir on viral dynamics in COVID-19 hospitalized patients: a modelling analysis of the randomized, controlled, open-label DisCoVeRy trial.

BACKGROUND: The antiviral efficacy of remdesivir in COVID-19 hospitalized patients remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effect of remdesivir in blocking viral replication. METHODS: We analysed nasopharyngeal normalized viral loads from 665 hospitalized patients included in the DisCoVeRy trial (NCT04315948; EudraCT 2020-000936-23), randomized to either standard of care (SoC) or SoC + remdesivir. We used a mathematical model to reconstruct viral kinetic profiles and estimate the antiviral efficacy of remdesivir in blocking viral replication. Additional analyses were conducted stratified on time of treatment initiation (≤7 or >7 days since symptom onset) or viral load at randomization (< or ≥3.5 log10 copies/104 cells). RESULTS: In our model, remdesivir reduced viral production by infected cells by 2-fold on average (95% CI: 1.5-3.2-fold). Model-based simulations predict that remdesivir reduced time to viral clearance by 0.7 days compared with SoC, with large inter-individual variabilities (IQR: 0.0-1.3 days). Remdesivir had a larger impact in patients with high viral load at randomization, reducing viral production by 5-fold on average (95% CI: 2.8-25-fold) and the median time to viral clearance by 2.4 days (IQR: 0.9-4.5 days). CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir halved viral production, leading to a median reduction of 0.7 days in the time to viral clearance compared with SoC. The efficacy was larger in patients with high viral load at randomization.

Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Paris/Ile-de-France area.

This st udy aims to evaluate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in locked-down family households to determine viral dynamics and immunity acquisition. COVID-19 individuals and their households in lockdown under the same roof during early spring 2020 were interviewed and tested using rapid immunochromatographic lateral flow antibodies assays (LFA) between July and September 2020. Outcomes were secondary infection rate (SIR) among contacts, household infection rate, and predictors of transmission. We enrolled 87 households including 87 COVID-19 index cases (female 78.2%; median age: 47.0 years, IQR: 42.0-51.5) and 255 contacts (males: 52.9%; median age: 19.0 years, IQR: 11.0-43.5) consisting of their children (42%) or spouses/partners (28.2%). A total of 95/255 contacts were SARS-CoV-2 antibody positive leading to a SIR of 37.3% (95% confidence interval (CI): 31.3-43.5%). Viral transmission was observed in 54 households (62%). SARS-CoV-2 infection was asymptomatic in 33/95 (34.7%) of SARS-CoV-2-positive contacts. Independent predictors of virus transmission from index to contacts were housing surface area < 60 m2 (OR: 5.6 [1.1; 28.2] and a four-member family compared to five (OR: 3.6 [1.2; 10.3]). Households represent a high-risk setting for SARS-CoV-2 transmission through close contact within the family amplified by the number of family members and the housing surface area.

A new SARS-CoV-2 variant with high lethality poorly detected by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples: an observational study.

OBJECTIVES: In early January 2021 an outbreak of nosocomial cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in Western France; RT-PCR tests were repeatedly negative on nasopharyngeal samples but positive on lower respiratory tract samples. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) revealed a new variant, currently defining a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) lineage B.1.616. In March, the WHO classified this as a 'variant under investigation' (VUI). We analysed the characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 cases related to this new variant. METHODS: Clinical, virological, and radiological data were retrospectively collected from medical charts in the two hospitals involved. We enrolled those inpatients with: (a) positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on a respiratory sample, (b) seroconversion with anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM, or (c) suggestive symptoms and typical features of COVID-19 on a chest CT scan. Cases were categorized as B.1.616, a variant of concern (VOC), or unknown. RESULTS: From 1st January to 24th March 2021, 114 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria: B.1.616 (n = 39), VOC (n = 32), and unknown (n = 43). B.1.616-related cases were older than VOC-related cases (81 years, interquartile range (IQR) 73-88 versus 73 years, IQR 67-82, p < 0.05) and their first RT-PCR tests were rarely positive (6/39, 15% versus 31/32, 97%, p < 0.05). The B.1.616 variant was independently associated with severe disease (multivariable Cox model HR 4.0, 95%CI 1.5-10.9) and increased lethality (28-day mortality 18/39 (46%) for B.1.616 versus 5/32 (16%) for VOC, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: We report a nosocomial outbreak of COVID-19 cases related to a new variant, B.1.616, which is poorly detected by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples and is associated with high lethality.

Remdesivir plus standard of care versus standard of care alone for the treatment of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (DisCoVeRy): a phase 3, randomised, controlled, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: The antiviral efficacy of remdesivir against SARS-CoV-2 is still controversial. We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of remdesivir plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, with indication of oxygen or ventilator support. METHODS: DisCoVeRy was a phase 3, open-label, adaptive, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial conducted in 48 sites in Europe (France, Belgium, Austria, Portugal, Luxembourg). Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness of any duration were eligible if they had clinical evidence of hypoxaemic pneumonia, or required oxygen supplementation. Exclusion criteria included elevated liver enzymes, severe chronic kidney disease, any contraindication to one of the studied treatments or their use in the 29 days before random assignment, or use of ribavirin, as well as pregnancy or breastfeeding. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1) to receive standard of care alone or in combination with remdesivir, lopinavir-ritonavir, lopinavir-ritonavir and interferon beta-1a, or hydroxychloroquine. Randomisation used computer-generated blocks of various sizes; it was stratified on severity of disease at inclusion and on European administrative region. Remdesivir was administered as 200 mg intravenous infusion on day 1, followed by once daily, 1-h infusions of 100 mg up to 9 days, for a total duration of 10 days. It could be stopped after 5 days if the participant was discharged. The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15 measured by the WHO seven-point ordinal scale, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population and was one of the secondary outcomes. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT2020-000936-23, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04315948. FINDINGS: Between March 22, 2020, and Jan 21, 2021, 857 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to remdesivir plus standard of care (n=429) or standard of care only (n=428). 15 participants were excluded from analysis in the remdesivir group, and ten in the control group. At day 15, the distribution of the WHO ordinal scale was: (1) not hospitalised, no limitations on activities (61 [15%] of 414 in the remdesivir group vs 73 [17%] of 418 in the control group); (2) not hospitalised, limitation on activities (129 [31%] vs 132 [32%]); (3) hospitalised, not requiring supplemental oxygen (50 [12%] vs 29 [7%]); (4) hospitalised, requiring supplemental oxygen (76 [18%] vs 67 [16%]); (5) hospitalised, on non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen devices (15 [4%] vs 14 [3%]); (6) hospitalised, on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (62 [15%] vs 79 [19%]); (7) death (21 [5%] vs 24 [6%]). The difference between treatment groups was not significant (odds ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·77-1·25]; p=0·85). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of serious adverse events between treatment groups (remdesivir, 135 [33%] of 406 vs control, 130 [31%] of 418; p=0·48). Three deaths (acute respiratory distress syndrome, bacterial infection, and hepatorenal syndrome) were considered related to remdesivir by the investigators, but only one by the sponsor's safety team (hepatorenal syndrome). INTERPRETATION: No clinical benefit was observed from the use of remdesivir in patients who were admitted to hospital for COVID-19, were symptomatic for more than 7 days, and required oxygen support. FUNDING: European Union Commission, French Ministry of Health, Domaine d'intérêt majeur One Health Île-de-France, REACTing, Fonds Erasme-COVID-Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre, Austrian Group Medical Tumor, European Regional Development Fund, Portugal Ministry of Health, Portugal Agency for Clinical Research and Biomedical Innovation. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

COVID-19: individual and herd immunity.

Immunity to the SARS-CoV-2 virus ensures protection against reinfection by this virus thanks to the combined action of neutralizing antibodies and T lymphocytes specific to viral proteins, in particular the Spike protein. It must be distinguished from the immune response that ensures healing of the infection following contamination that involves innate immunity, particularly type 1 interferons, and which is followed by adaptive cellular and humoral immunity. The importance of the effect of interferons is highlighted by the occurrence of severe forms of the disease in genetically deficient subjects or in patients with antibodies neutralizing type 1 interferon. Herd immunity is not an individual biological property. It is a mathematical property that qualifies the fact that when the proportion of subjects with individual immunity is high enough, there is little chance that an epidemic can occur. The level of that proportion-the herd immunity of the population can be computed under theoretical, often unrealistic, hypotheses, and is difficult to assess in natural conditions.

L'immunité individuelle contre le virus SARS-CoV-2 assure la protection contre la réinfection par ce virus grâce à l'action conjuguée des anticorps neutralisants et des lymphocytes T spécifiques des protéines virales, notamment la protéine Spike (spicule). Il faut la distinguer de la réponse immunitaire qui assure la guérison de l'infection dans les jours suivant la contamination. Celle-ci fait intervenir l'immunité innée et tout particulièrement les interférons de type 1 puis l'immunité adaptative cellulaire et humorale. L'importance de l'effet des interférons est soulignée par la survenue de formes graves chez des sujets génétiquement déficients dans leur synthèse ou encore des patients présentant des anticorps neutralisant l'interféron de type 1. L'immunité collective caractérise la faible probabilité de développement d'une épidémie dans une population ayant un pourcentage élevé de sujets présentant une immunité individuelle. Le taux d'immunité collective nécessaire pour faire disparaître l'épidémie a été calculé dans des modèles mathématiques supposant la panmixie ; il est difficile à évaluer dans les populations réelles.

Chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers and mortality in COVID-19: A multicenter prospective cohort and literature review.

AIMS: The role of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockers on the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is debated. We assessed the association between chronic use of RAAS blockers and mortality among inpatients with COVID-19 and explored reasons for discrepancies in the literature. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included adult hypertensive patients from a prospective nationwide cohort of 3512 inpatients with COVID-19 up to June 30, 2020. Cox proportional hazard models with various adjustment or propensity weighting methods were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) of 30-day mortality for chronic users versus non-users of RAAS blockers. We analyzed data of 1160 hypertensive patients: 719 (62%) were male and 777 (67%) were older than 65 years. The main comorbidities were diabetes (n = 416, 36%), chronic cardiac disease (n = 401, 35%), and obesity (n = 340, 29%); 705 (61%) received oxygen therapy. We recorded 135 (11.6%) deaths within 30 days of diagnosis. We found no association between chronic use of RAAS blockers and mortality (unadjusted HR = 1.13, 95% CI [0.8-1.6]; propensity inverse probability treatment weighted HR = 1.09 [0.86-1.39]; propensity standardized mortality ratio weighted HR = 1.08 [0.79-1.47]). Our comprehensive review of previous studies highlighted that significant associations were mostly found in unrestricted populations with inappropriate adjustment, or with biased in-hospital exposure measurement. CONCLUSION: Our results do not support previous concerns regarding these drugs, nor a potential protective effect as reported in previous poorly designed studies and meta-analyses. RAAS blockers should not be discontinued during the pandemic, while in-hospital management of these drugs will be clarified by randomized trials. NCT04262921.