Viral load decrease in SARS-CoV-2 BA.1 and BA.2 Omicron sublineages infection after treatment with monoclonal antibodies and direct antiviral agents.

The efficacy on the Omicron variant of the approved early coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) therapies, especially monoclonal antibodies, has been challenged by in vitro neutralization data, while data on in vivo antiviral activity are lacking. We assessed potential decrease from Day 1 to Day 7 viral load (VL) in nasopharyngeal swabs of outpatients receiving Sotrovimab, Molnupiravir, Remdesivir, or Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 due to sublineages BA.1 or BA.2, and average treatment effect by weighted marginal linear regression models. A total of 521 patients (378 BA.1 [73%], 143 [27%] BA.2) received treatments (Sotrovimab 202, Molnupiravir 117, Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir 84, and Remdesivir 118): median age 66 years, 90% vaccinated, median time from symptoms onset 3 days. Day 1 mean VL was 4.12 log2 (4.16 for BA.1 and 4.01 for BA.2). The adjusted analysis showed that Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir significantly reduced VL compared to all the other drugs, except versus Molnupiravir in BA.2. Molnupiravir was superior to Remdesivir in both BA.1 and BA.2, and to Sotrovimab in BA.2. Sotrovimab had better activity than Remdesivir only against BA.1. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir showed the greatest antiviral activity against Omicron variant, comparable to Molnupiravir only in the BA.2 subgroup. VL decrease could be a valuable surrogate of drug activity in the context of the high prevalence of vaccinated people and low probability of hospital admission.

Do All Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19 Disease Benefit from Adding Tocilizumab to Glucocorticoids? A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment guidelines recommend the tocilizumab use in patients with a CRP of >7.5 mg/dL. We aimed to estimate the causal effect of glucocorticoids + tocilizumab on mortality overall and after stratification for PaO2/FiO2 ratio and CRP levels. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. The primary endpoint was day 28 mortality. Survival analysis was conducted to estimate the conditional and average causal effect of glucocorticoids + tocilizumab vs. glucocorticoids alone using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models with a time-varying variable for the intervention. The hypothesis of the existence of effect measure modification by CRP and PaO2/FiO2 ratio was tested by including an interaction term in the model. RESULTS: In total, 992 patients, median age 69 years, 72.9% males, 597 (60.2%) treated with monotherapy, and 395 (31.8%), adding tocilizumab upon respiratory deterioration, were included. At BL, the two groups differed for median values of CRP (6 vs. 7 mg/dL; p < 0.001) and PaO2/FiO2 ratio (276 vs. 235 mmHg; p < 0.001). In the unadjusted analysis, the mortality was similar in the two groups, but after adjustment for key confounders, a significant effect of glucocorticoids + tocilizumab was observed (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.38-0.90). Although the study was not powered to detect interactions (p = 0.41), there was a signal for glucocorticoids + tocilizumab to have a larger effect in subsets, especially participants with high levels of CRP at intensification. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm that glucocorticoids + tocilizumab vs. glucocorticoids alone confers a survival benefit only in patients with a CRP > 7.5 mg/dL prior to treatment initiation and the largest effect for a CRP > 15 mg/dL. Large randomized studies are needed to establish an exact cut-off for clinical use.

SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal viral load in individuals infected with BA.2, compared to Alpha, Gamma, Delta and BA.1 variants: A single-center comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 has evolved, leading to the emergence of new Variants Of Concern (VOCs) with significant impact on transmissibility. Although the transmission process is complex, higher nasopharyngeal viral load (NP-VL) can be considered as a proxy for greater transmissibility. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this analysis was to compare NP-VL across a set of representative VOCs observed in mildly symptomatic patients. STUDY DESIGN: Observational single-center comparative analysis of patients with early mild-to-moderate COVID-19, enrolled within the early treatment access program of Lazzaro Spallanzani Institute (March 2021-March 2022). NP-VL before drug administration was estimated through RT-PCR, based on cycle threshold values (CTs); VOCs were identified by Sanger sequencing. VOCs' average treatment effect (ATE) was estimated on the CTs fitted in the log2 scale, controlling for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 707 patients were included. VOCs were: 10% Alpha, 3% Gamma, 34% Delta, 34% BA.1, 19% BA.2. Mean CTs for BA.1 and BA.2 were lower than Delta and BA.1, respectively. After adjusting for calendar time, age, immunodeficiency and vaccination, CTs for Gamma were lower than those seen for Alpha and higher than Delta, for Delta were similar to BA.1, for BA.2 were lower than Delta and BA.1. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows higher NP-VL of BA.2 compared to previously circulating VOCs, even after controlling for factors potentially contributing to the amount of nasopharyngeal viral RNA, included vaccination, supporting the increased transmissibility of BA.2. Further studies are necessary to clarify this mechanism and to provide guidance for public health measures.

Immunogenicity to COVID-19 mRNA vaccine third dose in people living with HIV.

In order to investigate safety and immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine third dose in people living with HIV (PLWH), we analyze anti-RBD, microneutralization assay and IFN-γ production in 216 PLWH on ART with advanced disease (CD4 count <200 cell/mm3 and/or previous AIDS) receiving the third dose of a mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) after a median of 142 days from the second dose. Median age is 54 years, median CD4 nadir 45 cell/mm3 (20-122), 93% HIV-RNA < 50 c/mL. In 68% of PLWH at least one side-effect, generally mild, is recorded. Humoral response after the third dose was strong and higher than that achieved with the second dose (>2 log2 difference), especially when a heterologous combination with mRNA-1273 as third shot is used. In contrast, cell-mediated immunity remain stable. Our data support usefulness of third dose in PLWH currently receiving suppressive ART who presented with severe immune dysregulation.

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Neutralization after Third Dose Vaccination in PLWH.

The aim was to measure neutralizing antibody levels against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (BA.1) variant in serum samples obtained from vaccinated PLWH and healthcare workers (HCW) and compare them with those against the Wuhan-D614G (W-D614G) strain, before and after the third dose of a mRNA vaccine. We included 106 PLWH and 28 HCWs, for a total of 134 participants. Before the third dose, the proportion of participants with undetectable nAbsT against BA.1 was 88% in the PLWH low CD4 nadir group, 80% in the high nadir group and 100% in the HCW. Before the third dose, the proportion of participants with detectable nAbsT against BA.1 was 12% in the PLWH low nadir group, 20% in the high nadir group and 0% in HCW, respectively. After 2 weeks from the third dose, 89% of the PLWH in the low nadir group, 100% in the high nadir group and 96% of HCW elicited detectable nAbsT against BA.1. After the third dose, the mean log2 nAbsT against BA.1 in the HCW and PLWH with a high nadir group was lower than that seen against W-D614G (6.1 log2 (±1.8) vs. 7.9 (±1.1) and 6.4 (±1.3) vs. 8.6 (±0.8)), respectively. We found no evidence of a different level of nAbsT neutralization by BA.1 vs. W-D614G between PLWH with a high CD4 nadir and HCW (0.40 (-1.64, 2.43); p = 0.703). Interestingly, in PLWH with a low CD4 nadir, the mean log2 difference between nAbsT against BA.1 and W-D614G was smaller in those with current CD4 counts 201-500 vs. those with CD4 counts < 200 cells/mm3 (-0.80 (-1.52, -0.08); p = 0.029), suggesting that in this target population with a low CD4 nadir, current CD4 count might play a role in diversifying the level of SARS-CoV-2 neutralization.

Humoral and Cellular Immune Response Elicited by mRNA Vaccination Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in People Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus Receiving Antiretroviral Therapy Based on Current CD4 T-Lymphocyte Count.

BACKGROUND: Data on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity in PLWH are currently limited. Aim of the study was to investigate immunogenicity according to current CD4 T-cell count. METHODS: PLWH on ART attending a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination program, were included in a prospective immunogenicity evaluation after receiving BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. Participants were stratified by current CD4 T-cell count (poor CD4 recovery, PCDR: <200/mm3; intermediate CD4 recovery, ICDR: 200-500/mm3; high CD4 recovery, HCDR: >500/mm3). RBD-binding IgG, SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) and IFN-γ release were measured. As control group, HIV-negative healthcare workers (HCWs) were used. FINDINGS: Among 166 PLWH, after 1 month from the booster dose, detectable RBD-binding IgG were elicited in 86.7% of PCDR, 100% of ICDR, 98.7% of HCDR, and a neutralizing titre ≥1:10 elicited in 70.0%, 88.2%, and 93.1%, respectively. Compared to HCDR, all immune response parameters were significantly lower in PCDR. After adjusting for confounders, current CD4 T-cell <200/mm3 significantly predicted a poor magnitude of anti-RDB, nAbs and IFN-γ response. As compared with HCWs, PCDR elicited a consistently reduced immunogenicity for all parameters, ICDR only a reduced RBD-binding antibody response, whereas HCDR elicited a comparable immune response for all parameters. CONCLUSION: Humoral and cell-mediated immune response against SARS-CoV-2 were elicited in most of PLWH, albeit significantly poorer in those with CD4 T-cell <200/mm3 versus those with >500 cell/mm3 and HIV-negative controls. A lower RBD-binding antibody response than HCWs was also observed in PLWH with CD4 T-cell 200-500/mm3, whereas immune response elicited in PLWH with a CD4 T-cell >500/mm3 was comparable to HIV-negative population.

Emulation of a Target Trial From Observational Data to Compare Effectiveness of Casirivimab/Imdevimab and Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab for Early Treatment of Non-Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

Objectives: Comparative analysis between different monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 are lacking. We present an emulation trial from observational data to compare effectiveness of Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab (BAM/ETE) and Casirivimab/Imdevimab (CAS/IMD) in outpatients with early mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in a real-world scenario of variants of concern (VoCs) from Alpha to Delta. Methods: Allocation to treatment was subject to mAbs availability, and the measured factors were not used to determine which combination to use. Patients were followed through day 30. Viral load was measured by cycle threshold (CT) on D1 (baseline) and D7.Primary outcome was time to COVID-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause over days 0-30. Weighted pooled logistic regression and marginal structural Cox model by inverse probability weights were used to compare BAM/ETE vs. CAS/IMD. ANCOVA was used to compare mean D7 CT values by intervention. Models were adjusted for calendar month, MASS score and VoCs. We evaluated effect measure modification by VoCs, vaccination, D1 CT levels and enrolment period. Results: COVID19-related hospitalization or death from any cause occurred in 15 of 237 patients in the BAM/ETE group (6.3%) and in 4 of 196 patients in the CAS/IMD group (2.0%) (relative risk reduction [1 minus the relative risk] 72%; p=0.024). Subset analysis carried no evidence that the effect of the intervention was different across stratification factors. There was no evidence in viral load reduction from baseline through day 7 across the two groups (+0.17, 95% -1.41;+1.74, p=0.83). Among patients who experienced primary outcome, none showed a negative RT-PCR test in nasopharyngeal swab (p=0.009) and 82.4% showed still high viral load (p<0.001) on D7. Conclusions: In a pre-Omicron epidemiologic scenario, CAS/IMD reduced risk of clinical progression of COVID-19 compared to BAM/ETE. This effect was not associated with a concomitant difference in virological response.

Plasma Cytokine Atlas Reveals the Importance of TH2 Polarization and Interferons in Predicting COVID-19 Severity and Survival.

Although it is now widely accepted that host inflammatory response contributes to COVID-19 immunopathogenesis, the pathways and mechanisms driving disease severity and clinical outcome remain poorly understood. In the effort to identify key soluble mediators that characterize life-threatening COVID-19, we quantified 62 cytokines, chemokines and other factors involved in inflammation and immunity in plasma samples, collected at hospital admission, from 80 hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 disease who were stratified on the basis of clinical outcome (mechanical ventilation or death by day 28). Our data confirm that age, as well as neutrophilia, lymphocytopenia, procalcitonin, D-dimer and lactate dehydrogenase are strongly associated with the risk of fatal COVID-19. In addition, we found that cytokines related to TH2 regulations (IL-4, IL-13, IL-33), cell metabolism (lep, lep-R) and interferons (IFNα, IFNß, IFNγ) were also predictive of life-threatening COVID-19.

Real World Estimate of Vaccination Protection in Individuals Hospitalized for COVID-19.

Whether vaccination confers a protective effect against progression after hospital admission for COVID-19 remains to be elucidated. Observational study including all the patients admitted to San Paolo Hospital in Milan for COVID-19 in 2021. Previous vaccination was categorized as: none, one dose, full vaccination (two or three doses >14 days before symptoms onset). Data were collected at hospital admission, including demographic and clinical variables, age-unadjusted Charlson Comorbidity index (CCI). The highest intensity of ventilation during hospitalization was registered. The endpoints were in-hospital death (primary) and mechanical ventilation/death (secondary). Survival analysis was conducted by means of Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models. Effect measure modification by age was formally tested. We included 956 patients: 151 (16%) fully vaccinated (18 also third dose), 62 (7%) one dose vaccinated, 743 (78%) unvaccinated. People fully vaccinated were older and suffering from more comorbidities than unvaccinated. By 28 days, the risk of death was of 35.9% (95%CI: 30.1-41.7) in unvaccinated, 41.5% (24.5-58.5) in one dose and 28.4% (18.2-38.5) in fully vaccinated (p = 0.63). After controlling for age, ethnicity, CCI and month of admission, fully vaccinated participants showed a risk reduction of 50% for both in-hospital death, AHR 0.50 (95%CI: 0.30-0.84) and for mechanical ventilation or death, AHR 0.49 (95%CI: 0.35-0.69) compared to unvaccinated, regardless of age (interaction p > 0.56). Fully vaccinated individuals in whom vaccine failed to keep them out of hospital, appeared to be protected against critical disease or death when compared to non-vaccinated. These data support universal COVID-19 vaccination.

First and second waves among hospitalised patients with COVID-19 with severe pneumonia: a comparison of 28-day mortality over the 1-year pandemic in a tertiary university hospital in Italy.

OBJECTIVE: The first COVID-19-19 epidemic wave was over the period of February-May 2020. Since 1 October 2020, Italy, as many other European countries, faced a second wave. The aim of this analysis was to compare the 28-day mortality between the two waves among COVID-19 hospitalised patients. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. Standard survival analysis was performed to compare all-cause mortality within 28 days after hospital admission in the two waves. Kaplan-Meier curves as well as Cox regression model analysis were used. The effect of wave on risk of death was shown by means of HRs with 95% CIs. A sensitivity analysis around the impact of the circulating variant as a potential unmeasured confounder was performed. SETTING: University Hospital of Modena, Italy. Patients admitted to the hospital for severe COVID-19 pneumonia during the first (22 February-31 May 2020) and second (1 October-31 December 2020) waves were included. RESULTS: During the two study periods, a total of 1472 patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia were admitted to our hospital, 449 during the first wave and 1023 during the second. Median age was 70 years (IQR 56-80), 37% women, 49% with PaO2/FiO2 <250 mm Hg, 82% with ≥1 comorbidity, median duration of symptoms was 6 days. 28-day mortality rate was 20.0% (95% CI 16.3 to 23.7) during the first wave vs 14.2% (95% CI 12.0 to 16.3) in the second (log-rank test p value=0.03). After including key predictors of death in the multivariable Cox regression model, the data still strongly suggested a lower 28-day mortality rate in the second wave (aHR=0.64, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.90, p value=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In our hospitalised patients with COVID-19 with severe pneumonia, the 28-day mortality appeared to be reduced by 36% during the second as compared with the first wave. Further studies are needed to identify factors that may have contributed to this improved survival.

Signals were broadly positive for months, but never definitive: the tocilizumab story.

BACKGROUND: Most treatment guidelines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) currently recommend tocilizumab in combination with dexamethasone in critically ill patients who are exhibiting rapid respiratory decompensation. AIMS: To produce a critical review and summary of the pathway which led to the repurposing of tocilizumab for COVID-19 treatment, from in vitro observations to guidelines recommendations. SOURCES: All studies evaluating the effectiveness of tocilizumab to treat COVID-19 disease published between July 2020 and July 2021. CONTENT: Two large and methodologically well conducted observational studies, the TESEO and the STOP COVID cohorts, showed a reduction in the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation or death in patients treated with tocilizumab as compared to standard of care in 2020. Concomitantly, and up to February 2021, a number of randomized trials (RCTs) with small sample sizes were showing discrepant results. These RCTs had a number of issues: small sample size, various designs and inclusion criteria, and different dosages of tocilizumab used. The confidence interval of the meta-analytic estimate for the RCT results was consistent with the hypothesis of no efficacy of tocilizumab. In our opinion, this was mainly because the meta-analysis included small and heterogeneous studies. These results led to a delay in the inclusion of tocilizumab in guidelines which occurred only in the summer of 2021. IMPLICATIONS: Although observational studies are unable to control for unmeasured confounding, they can be put together quickly during a pandemic and promptly provide important information. The large sample size allows us to investigate effect measure modifiers and to better target interventions. It is key that the effect size is somewhat large (RR > 2), all sources of bias are properly accounted for, and the direct evidence is weighted against these factors. It appears to us that for tocilizumab, not having dismissed the results of carefully designed and analysed observational studies in 2020 could have prevented many deaths over those months.

Herpes Simplex Virus Re-Activation in Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia: A Prospective, Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Herpes simplex 1 co-infections in patients with COVID-19 are considered relatively uncommon; some reports on re-activations in patients in intensive-care units were published. The aim of the study was to analyze herpetic re-activations and their clinical manifestations in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, performing HSV-1 PCR on plasma twice a week. METHODS: we conducted a prospective, observational, single-center study involving 70 consecutive patients with severe/critical SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia tested for HSV-1 hospitalized at Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria of Modena. RESULTS: of these 70 patients, 21 (30.0%) showed detectable viremia and 13 (62%) had clinically relevant manifestations of HSV-1 infection corresponding to 15 events (4 pneumonia, 5 herpes labialis, 3 gingivostomatitis, one encephalitis and two hepatitis). HSV-1 positive patients were more frequently treated with steroids than HSV-1 negative patients (76.2% vs. 49.0%, p = 0.036) and more often underwent mechanical ventilation (IMV) (57.1% vs. 22.4%, p = 0.005). In the unadjusted logistic regression analysis, steroid treatment, IMV, and higher LDH were significantly associated with an increased risk of HSV1 re-activation (odds ratio 3.33, 4.61, and 16.9, respectively). The association with the use of steroids was even stronger after controlling for previous use of both tocilizumab and IMV (OR = 5.13, 95% CI:1.36-19.32, p = 0.016). The effect size was larger when restricting to participants who were treated with high doses of steroids while there was no evidence to support an association with the use of tocilizumab Conclusions: our study shows a high incidence of HSV-1 re-activation both virologically and clinically in patients with SARS-CoV-2 severe pneumonia, especially in those treated with steroids.

A Quantitative Estimate of the Expected Shortening of the Median Isolation Period of Patients With COVID-19 After the Adoption of a Symptom-Based Strategy.

A long period of isolation was observed in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in Milan over March-September 2020 (45; IQR: 37-54 days). A significantly shorter period would have been observed by the application of May-WHO (22, IQR: 17-30 days, P < 0.001) and October-Italian (26, IQR: 21-34 days, P < 0.001) Guidelines. The adoption of the new symptom-based criteria is likely to lead to a significant reduction in the length of the isolation period with potential social, economic and psychological benefits, particularly in the younger population with mild/moderate disease and no comorbidities. In our opinion, the release from isolation after 21 days from symptoms onset, even without a PCR diagnostic test, in most cases seems the most adequate strategy that could balance precautions to prevent SARS CoV-2 transmission and unnecessary prolonged isolation or overuse of diagnostic testing.

Prophylactic heparin and risk of orotracheal intubation or death in patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 pneumonia.

Prophylactic low molecular weight heparin (pLMWH) is currently recommended in COVID-19 to reduce the risk of coagulopathy. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the antinflammatory effects of pLMWH could translate in lower rate of clinical progression in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients admitted to a COVID-hospital in Rome with SARS-CoV-2 infection and mild/moderate pneumonia were retrospectively evaluated. The primary endpoint was the time from hospital admission to orotracheal intubation/death (OTI/death). A total of 449 patients were included: 39% female, median age 63 (IQR, 50-77) years. The estimated probability of OTI/death for patients receiving pLMWH was: 9.5% (95% CI 3.2-26.4) by day 20 in those not receiving pLMWH vs. 10.4% (6.7-15.9) in those exposed to pLMWH; p-value = 0.144. This risk associated with the use of pLMWH appeared to vary by PaO2/FiO2 ratio: aHR 1.40 (95% CI 0.51-3.79) for patients with an admission PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg and 0.27 (0.03-2.18) for those with PaO2/FiO2 > 300 mmHg; p-value at interaction test 0.16. pLMWH does not seem to reduce the risk of OTI/death mild/moderate COVID-19 pneumonia, especially when respiratory function had already significantly deteriorated. Data from clinical trials comparing the effect of prophylactic vs. therapeutic dosage of LMWH at various stages of COVID-19 disease are needed.

No Efficacy of the Combination of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Plus Hydroxychloroquine Versus Standard of Care in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Non-Randomized Comparison.

Objectives: No specific treatment has been approved for COVID-19. Lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been used with poor results, and a trial showed advantages of combined antiviral therapy vs. single antivirals. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of the combination of antivirals (LPV/r and HCQ) or their single use in COVID-19 hospitalized patients vs. standard of care (SoC). Methods: Patients ≥18 years with SARS-CoV-2 infection, defined as positive RT-PCR from nasal/oropharyngeal (NP/OP) swab or positive serology, admitted at L. Spallanzani Institute (Italy) were included. Primary endpoint: time to invasive ventilation/death. Secondary endpoint: time to two consecutive negative SARS-CoV-2 PCRs in NP/OP swabs. In order to control for measured confounders, a marginal Cox regression model with inverse probability weights was used. Results: A total of 590 patients were included in the analysis: 36.3% female, 64 years (IQR 51-76), and 91% with pneumonia. Cumulative probability of invasive ventilation/death at 14 days was 21.2% (95% CI 17.6, 24.7), without difference between SOC, LPV/r, hydroxychloroquine, HCQ + LPV/r, and SoC. The risk of invasive ventilation/death in the groups appeared to vary by baseline ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2). Overall cumulative probability of confirmed negative nasopharyngeal swabs at 14 days was 44.4% (95% CI 38.9, 49.9), without difference between groups. Conclusion: In this retrospective analysis, we found no difference in the rate of invasive ventilation/death or viral shedding by different strategies, as in randomized trials performed to date. Moreover, even the combination HCQ + LPV/r did not show advantages vs. SoC.

Development and validation of a prediction model for tocilizumab failure in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this secondary analysis of the TESEO cohort is to identify, early in the course of treatment with tocilizumab, factors associated with the risk of progressing to mechanical ventilation and death and develop a risk score to estimate the risk of this outcome according to patients' profile. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 severe pneumonia receiving standard of care + tocilizumab who were alive and free from mechanical ventilation at day 6 after treatment initiation were included in this retrospective, multicenter cohort study. Multivariable logistic regression models were built to identify predictors of mechanical ventilation or death by day-28 from treatment initiation and ß-coefficients were used to develop a risk score. Secondary outcome was mortality. Patients with the same inclusion criteria as the derivation cohort from 3 independent hospitals were used as validation cohort. RESULTS: 266 patients treated with tocilizumab were included. By day 28 of hospital follow-up post treatment initiation, 40 (15%) underwent mechanical ventilation or died [26 (10%)]. At multivariable analysis, sex, day-4 PaO2/FiO2 ratio, platelets and CRP were independently associated with the risk of developing the study outcomes and were used to generate the proposed risk score. The accuracy of the score in AUC was 0.80 and 0.70 in internal validation and test for the composite endpoint and 0.92 and 0.69 for death, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our score could assist clinicians in identifying, early after tocilizumab administration, patients who are likely to progress to mechanical ventilation or death, so that they could be selected for eventual rescue therapies.

Better prognosis in females with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: possible role of inflammation as potential mediator.

OBJECTIVES: Sex differences in COVID-19 severity and mortality have been described. Key aims of this analysis were to compare the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and mortality by sex and to explore whether variation in specific biomarkers could mediate this difference. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study among patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. A survival analysis was conducted to compare time to the composite endpoint of IMV or death according to sex. Interaction was formally tested to compare the risk difference by sex in sub-populations. Mediation analysis with a binary endpoint IMV or death (yes/no) by day 28 of follow-up for a number of inflammation/coagulation biomarkers in the context of counterfactual prediction was also conducted. RESULTS: Among 415 patients, 134 were females (32%) and 281 males (67%), median age 66 years (IQR 54-77). At admission, females showed a significantly less severe clinical and respiratory profiles with a higher PaO2/FiO2 (254 mmHg vs. 191 mmHg; p 0.023). By 28 days from admission, 49.2% (95% CI 39.6-58.9%) of males vs. 31.7% (17.9-45.4%) of females underwent IMV or death (log-rank p < 0.0001) and this amounted to a difference in terms of HR of 0.40 (0.26-0.63, p 0.0001). The area under the curve in C-reactive protein (CRP) over the study period appeared to explain 85% of this difference in risk by sex. DISCUSSION: Our analysis confirms a difference in the risk of COVID-19 clinical progression by sex and provides a hypothesis for potential mechanisms leading to this. Specifically, CRP showed a predominant role to mediate the difference in risk by sex.