ABSTRACT
Background and aimsTo determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the population with chronic Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection under hospital follow-up in the UK, we quantified the coverage and frequency of measurements of biomarkers used for routine surveillance (ALT and HBV viral load). MethodsWe used anonymised electronic health record data from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Informatics Collaborative (HIC) pipeline representing five UK NHS Trusts. ResultsWe report significant reductions in surveillance of both biomarkers during the pandemic compared to pre-COVID years, both in terms of the proportion of patients who had [≥]1 measurement annually, and the mean number of measurements per patient. ConclusionsFurther investigation is required to determine whether these disruptions will be associated with increased rates of adverse chronic HBV outcomes.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hepatitis BABSTRACT
BackgroundThe success of early dexamethasone therapy for hospitalised COVID-19 cases in treatment of Sars-CoV-2 infection may predominantly reflect its anti-inflammatory action against a hyperinflammation (HI) response. It is likely that there is substantial heterogeneity in HI responses in COVID-19. MethodsBlood CRP, ferritin, neutrophil, lymphocyte and platelet counts were scored to assess HI (HI5) and combined with a validated measure of generalised medical deterioration (NEWS2) before day 2. Our primary outcome was 28 day mortality from early treatment with dexamethasone stratified by HI5-NEWS2 status. FindingsOf 1265 patients, high risk of HI (high HI5-NEWS2) (n=367, 29.0%) conferred a strikingly increased mortality (36.0% vs 7.8%; Age adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 5.9; 95% CI 3.6-9.8, p<0.001) compared to the low risk group (n= 455, 36.0%). An intermediate risk group (n= 443, 35.0%) also showed significantly higher mortality than the low risk group (17.6% vs 7.8%), aHR 2.2, p=0.005). Early dexamethasone treatment conferred a 50.0% reduction in mortality in the high risk group (36.0% to 18.0%, aHR 0.56, p=0.007). The intermediate risk group showed a trend to reduction in mortality (17.8% to 10.3%, aHR 0.82, p=0.46) which was not observed in the low risk group (7.8% to 9.2%, aHR 1.4, p =0.31). InterpretationThe HI5-NEWS2 measured at COVID-19 diagnosis, strongly predicts mortality at 28 days. Significant reduction in mortality with early dexamethasone treatment was only observed in the high risk group. Therefore, the HI5-NEWS2 score could be utilised to stratify randomised clinical trials to test whether intensified anti-inflammatory therapy would further benefit high risk patients and whether alternative approaches would benefit low risk groups. Considering its recognised morbidity, we suggest that early dexamethasone should not be routinely prescribed for HI5-NEWS2 low risk individuals with COVID-19 and clinicians should cautiously assess the risk benefit of this intervention. FundingNo external funding.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background: The success of early dexamethasone therapy for hospitalised COVID-19 cases in treatment of Sars-CoV-2 infection may predominantly reflect its anti-inflammatory action against a hyperinflammation (HI) response. It is likely that there is substantial heterogeneity in HI responses in COVID-19.Methods: Blood CRP, ferritin, neutrophil, lymphocyte and platelet counts were scored to assess HI (HI5) and combined with a validated measure of generalised medical deterioration (NEWS2) before day 2. Our primary outcome was 28 day mortality from early treatment with dexamethasone stratified by HI5-NEWS2 status.Findings: Of 1265 patients, high risk of HI (high HI5-NEWS2) (n=367, 29.0%) conferred a strikingly increased mortality (36.0% vs 7.8%; Age adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 5.9; 95% CI 3.6-9.8, p<0.001) compared to the low risk group (n= 455, 36.0%). An intermediate risk group (n= 443, 35.0%) also showed significantly higher mortality than the low risk group (17.6% vs 7.8%), aHR 2.2, p=0.005). Early dexamethasone treatment conferred a 50.0% reduction in mortality in the high risk group (36.0% to 18.0%, aHR 0.57, p=0.006). The intermediate risk group showed a trend to reduction in mortality (17.8% to 10.3%, aHR 0.82, p=0.46) which was not observed in the low risk group (7.8% to 9.2%, aHR 1.4, p =0.31).Interpretation: The HI5-NEWS2 measured at COVID-19 diagnosis, strongly predicts mortality at 28 days. Significant reduction in mortality with early dexamethasone treatment was only observed in the high risk group. Therefore, the HI5-NEWS2 score could be utilised to stratify randomised clinical trials to test whether intensified anti-inflammatory therapy would further benefit high risk patients and whether alternative approaches would benefit low risk groups. Considering its recognised morbidity, we suggest that early dexamethasone should not be routinely prescribed for HI5-NEWS2 low risk individuals with COVID-19 and clinicians should cautiously assess the risk benefit of this intervention.Clinical Trial Registration Details: Clinicaltraisl.gov ID: NCT04903834Funding Information: No external funding.Declaration of Interests: None of the authors declare any conflicts of interest relevant to this work.Ethics Approval Statement: UK NHS ethical approval from Health and Care Research Wales, IRAS 286016. The study followed the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the National Research Ethics Service (Identification of Novel Factors Leading to Activated Macrophage Expansion in COVID19 and related conditions to guide targeted intervention, INFLAME COVID-19 Study, NRES 286016).
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , White Coat HypertensionABSTRACT
Objective: It has been assumed that a significant proportion of COVID-19 patients show evidence of hyperinflammation of which secondary haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (sHLH) is the most severe manifestation. To facilitate diagnosis of sHLH the HScore has been developed and validated. We set out to examine the prevalence of sHLH-like hyperinflammation in COVID-19. Methods: We retrospectively examined HScore parameters in 626 COVID-19 cases admitted to our institute of which 567 were suitable for analysis and compared these to a cohort of confirmed infection associated sHLH cases. To account for missing data, we calculated the maximum possible HScore of the recorded parameters (%HScore). Results: Early measurement of HScore parameters (day -1 to 4 from diagnosis) strongly predicted the %HScore over the course of the admission (p <0.0001). The retrospective cohort of sHLH showed significantly higher %HScores as compared to COVID-19 (median 73.47 vs 18.13 respectively, p <0.0001). The overall prevalence of individuals with an 80% probability of sHLH in our COVID-19 cohort was 1.59% on admission and only rose to 4.05% during the whole disease course. In the small cohort with scores suggestive of sHLH, there was no excess mortality compared with the whole cohort. %HScores were higher in younger patients (p<0.0001) and did not reliably predict outcome at any cut-off value (AUROC 0.533, p=0.211; OR 0.99). Conclusion: Surprisingly, these findings show that sHLH-type hyperinflammation is not prevalent in COVID-19, and %HScores do not predict outcome. Therefore, new algorithms are required to optimise case selection for clinical trials of targeted anti-inflammatory interventions.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Lymphohistiocytosis, HemophagocyticABSTRACT
Background: The management of the COVID-19 pandemic is hampered by the long delays associated with centralised laboratory PCR testing. In hospitals this leads to poor patient flow and nosocomial transmission. Rapid, accurate tests are therefore urgently needed for the next wave. Methods: We performed a prospective, interventional, non-randomised, controlled study of molecular point-of-care testing (POCT) in adults presenting to hospital with suspected COVID-19. Intervention group patients were tested using the QIAstat-Dx Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel at the point-of-care and control patients were tested using laboratory PCR. The primary outcome was time to results. Secondary outcomes included infection control and diagnostic accuracy measures. Findings: 499 patients were tested by POCT and 555 control patients were tested using laboratory PCR. Median (IQR) time to results with POCT was 1.7 (1.6 to 1.9) hours versus 21.3 (16.0 to 27.9) hours in the control group (difference of 19.6 hours, 95%CI 19.0 to 20.3; p<0.0001). Median (IQR) time to arrival in definitive clinical area (i.e. COVID-19 positive or negative ward) was 8.0 (6.0 to 15.0) hours in the POCT group versus 28.8 (23.5 to 38.9) hours in the control group, difference of 20.8 hours (96%CI 18.4 to 21.2; p<0.0001). Sensitivity of the QIAstat-Dx SARS-CoV-2 assay was 99.4% (95%CI 96.9 to 100) compared to 88.1% (95%CI 82.4 to 92.5) with laboratory PCR.Interpretation: POCT was associated with large reductions in time to results and improvements in infection control measures, and had high diagnostic accuracy.Trial Registration: This study is registered ISRCTN:14966673 and has completed.Funding: University Hospitals Southampton NHS Foundation TrustDeclaration of Interests: TWC has received speaker fees, honoraria, travel reimbursement, and equipment and consumables free of charge for the purposes of research outside of this submitted study, from BioFire diagnostics LLC and BioMerieux. TWC has received consultancy fees from Synairgen research Ltd, Randox laboratories Ltd and Cidara therapeutics. He a member of an advisory board for Roche and a member of two independent data monitoring committees for trials sponsored by Roche. He has acted as the UK chief investigator for an IMP study sponsored by Janssen. All other authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years, no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. Ethics Approval Statement: The study was approved by the South Central - Hampshire A Research Ethics Committee: REC reference 20/SC/0138, on the 16th March 2020.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hemoglobin SC DiseaseABSTRACT
BackgroundThe National Early Warning Score (NEWS2) is currently recommended in the United Kingdom for risk stratification of COVID outcomes, but little is known about its ability to detect severe cases. We aimed to evaluate NEWS2 for severe COVID outcome and identify and validate a set of routinely-collected blood and physiological parameters taken at hospital admission to improve the score. MethodsTraining cohorts comprised 1276 patients admitted to Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust with COVID-19 disease from 1st March to 30th April 2020. External validation cohorts included 5037 patients from four UK NHS Trusts (Guys and St Thomas Hospitals, University Hospitals Southampton, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, University College London Hospitals), and two hospitals in Wuhan, China (Wuhan Sixth Hospital and Taikang Tongji Hospital). The outcome was severe COVID disease (transfer to intensive care unit or death) at 14 days after hospital admission. Age, physiological measures, blood biomarkers, sex, ethnicity and comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular, respiratory and kidney diseases) measured at hospital admission were considered in the models. ResultsA baseline model of NEWS2 + age had poor-to-moderate discrimination for severe COVID infection at 14 days (AUC in training sample = 0.700; 95% CI: 0.680, 0.722; Brier score = 0.192; 95% CI: 0.186, 0.197). A supplemented model adding eight routinely-collected blood and physiological parameters (supplemental oxygen flow rate, urea, age, oxygen saturation, CRP, estimated GFR, neutrophil count, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio) improved discrimination (AUC = 0.735; 95% CI: 0.715, 0.757) and these improvements were replicated across five UK and non-UK sites. However, there was evidence of miscalibration with the model tending to underestimate risks in most sites. ConclusionsNEWS2 score had poor-to-moderate discrimination for medium-term COVID outcome which raises questions about its use as a screening tool at hospital admission. Risk stratification was improved by including readily available blood and physiological parameters measured at hospital admission, but there was evidence of miscalibration in external sites. This highlights the need for a better understanding of the use of early warning scores for COVID. KO_SCPLOWEYC_SCPLOWO_SCPCAP C_SCPCAPO_SCPLOWMESSAGESC_SCPLOWO_LIThe National Early Warning Score (NEWS2), currently recommended for stratification of severe COVID-19 disease in the UK, showed poor-to-moderate discrimination for medium-term outcomes (14-day transfer to ICU or death) among COVID-19 patients. C_LIO_LIRisk stratification was improved by the addition of routinely-measured blood and physiological parameters routinely at hospital admission (supplemental oxygen, urea, oxygen saturation, CRP, estimated GFR, neutrophil count, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio) which provided moderate improvements in a risk stratification model for 14-day ICU/death. C_LIO_LIThis improvement over NEWS2 alone was maintained across multiple hospital trusts but the model tended to be miscalibrated with risks of severe outcomes underestimated in most sites. C_LIO_LIWe benefited from existing pipelines for informatics at KCH such as CogStack that allowed rapid extraction and processing of electronic health records. This methodological approach provided rapid insights and allowed us to overcome the complications associated with slow data centralisation approaches. C_LI