Evaluation of the host immune response assay SeptiCyte RAPID for potential triage of COVID-19 patients.

Tools for the evaluation of COVID-19 severity would help clinicians with triage decisions, especially the decision whether to admit to ICU. The aim of this study was to evaluate SeptiCyte RAPID, a host immune response assay (Immunexpress, Seattle USA) as a triaging tool for COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization and potentially ICU care. SeptiCyte RAPID employs a host gene expression signature consisting of the ratio of expression levels of two immune related mRNAs, PLA2G7 and PLAC8, measured from whole blood samples. Blood samples from 146 adult SARS-CoV-2 (+) patients were collected within 48 h of hospital admission in PAXgene blood RNA tubes at Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain, between July 28th and December 1st, 2020. Data on demographics, vital signs, clinical chemistry parameters, radiology, interventions, and SeptiCyte RAPID were collected and analyzed with bioinformatics methods. The performance of SeptiCyte RAPID for COVID-19 severity assessment and ICU admission was evaluated, relative to the comparator of retrospective clinical assessment by the Hospital del Mar clinical care team. In conclusion, SeptiCyte RAPID was able to stratify COVID-19 cases according to clinical severity: critical vs. mild (AUC = 0.93, p < 0.0001), critical vs. moderate (AUC = 0.77, p = 0.002), severe vs. mild (AUC = 0.85, p = 0.0003), severe vs. moderate (AUC = 0.63, p = 0.05). This discrimination was significantly better (by AUC or p-value) than could be achieved by CRP, lactate, creatine, IL-6, or D-dimer. Some of the critical or severe cases had "early" blood draws (before ICU admission; n = 33). For these cases, when compared to moderate and mild cases not in ICU (n = 37), SeptiCyte RAPID had AUC = 0.78 (p = 0.00012). In conclusion, SeptiCyte RAPID was able to stratify COVID-19 cases according to clinical severity as defined by the WHO COVID-19 Clinical Management Living Guidance of January 25th, 2021. Measurements taken early (before a patient is considered for ICU admission) suggest that high SeptiScores could aid in predicting the need for later ICU admission.

Brief Research Report: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunity in Long Lasting Responders to Cancer Immunotherapy Through mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination.

Cancer patients (CPs) have been identified as particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and therefore are a priority group for receiving COVID-19 vaccination. From the patients with advanced solid tumors, about 20% respond very efficiently to immunotherapy with anti-PD1/PD-L1 antibodies and achieve long lasting cancer responses. It is unclear whether an efficient cancer-specific immune response may also correlate with an efficient response upon COVID-19 vaccination. Here, we explored the antiviral immune response to the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 in a group of 11 long-lasting cancer immunotherapy responders. We analysed the development of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG serum antibodies, virus neutralizing capacities and T cell responses. Control groups included patients treated with adjuvant cancer immunotherapy (IMT, cohort B), CPs not treated with immunotherapy (no-IMT, cohort C) and healthy controls (cohort A). The median ELISA IgG titers significantly increased after the prime-boost COVID vaccine regimen in all cohorts (Cohort A: pre-vaccine = 900 (100-2700), 3 weeks (w) post-boost = 24300 (2700-72900); Cohort B: pre-vaccine = 300 (100-2700), 3 w post-boost = 8100 (300-72900); Cohort C: pre-vaccine = 500 (100-2700), 3 w post-boost = 24300 (300-72900)). However, at the 3 w post-prime time-point, only the healthy control group showed a statistically significant increase in antibody levels (Cohort A = 8100 (900-8100); Cohort B = 900 (300-8100); Cohort C = 900 (300-8100)) (P < 0.05). Strikingly, while all healthy controls generated high-level antibody responses after the complete prime-boost regimen (Cohort A = 15/15 (100%), not all CPs behaved alike [Cohort B= 12/14 (84'6%); Cohort C= 5/6 (83%)]. Their responses, including those of the long-lasting immunotherapy responders, were more variable (Cohort A: 3 w post-boost (median nAb titers = 95.32 (84.09-96.93), median Spike-specific IFN-γ response = 64 (24-150); Cohort B: 3 w post-boost (median nAb titers = 85.62 (8.22-97.19), median Spike-specific IFN-γ response (28 (1-372); Cohort C: 3 w post-boost (median nAb titers = 95.87 (11.8-97.3), median Spike-specific IFN-γ response = 67 (20-84)). Two long-lasting cancer responders did not respond properly to the prime-boost vaccination and did not generate S-specific IgGs, neutralizing antibodies or virus-specific T cells, although their cancer immune control persisted for years. Thus, although mRNA-based vaccines can induce both antibody and T cell responses in CPs, the immune response to COVID vaccination is independent of the capacity to develop an efficient anti-cancer immune response to anti PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies.

Brief Research Report: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunity in Long Lasting Responders to Cancer Immunotherapy Through mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination

Cancer patients (CPs) have been identified as particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and therefore are a priority group for receiving COVID-19 vaccination. From the patients with advanced solid tumors, about 20% respond very efficiently to immunotherapy with anti-PD1/PD-L1 antibodies and achieve long lasting cancer responses. It is unclear whether an efficient cancer-specific immune response may also correlate with an efficient response upon COVID-19 vaccination. Here, we explored the antiviral immune response to the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 in a group of 11 long-lasting cancer immunotherapy responders. We analysed the development of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG serum antibodies, virus neutralizing capacities and T cell responses. Control groups included patients treated with adjuvant cancer immunotherapy (IMT, cohort B), CPs not treated with immunotherapy (no-IMT, cohort C) and healthy controls (cohort A). The median ELISA IgG titers significantly increased after the prime-boost COVID vaccine regimen in all cohorts (Cohort A: pre-vaccine = 900 (100-2700), 3 weeks (w) post-boost = 24300 (2700-72900);Cohort B: pre-vaccine = 300 (100-2700), 3 w post-boost = 8100 (300-72900);Cohort C: pre-vaccine = 500 (100-2700), 3 w post-boost = 24300 (300-72900)). However, at the 3 w post-prime time-point, only the healthy control group showed a statistically significant increase in antibody levels (Cohort A = 8100 (900-8100);Cohort B = 900 (300-8100);Cohort C = 900 (300-8100)) (P < 0.05). Strikingly, while all healthy controls generated high-level antibody responses after the complete prime-boost regimen (Cohort A = 15/15 (100%), not all CPs behaved alike [Cohort B= 12/14 (84'6%);Cohort C= 5/6 (83%)]. Their responses, including those of the long-lasting immunotherapy responders, were more variable (Cohort A: 3 w post-boost (median nAb titers = 95.32 (84.09-96.93), median Spike-specific IFN-γ response = 64 (24-150);Cohort B: 3 w post-boost (median nAb titers = 85.62 (8.22-97.19), median Spike-specific IFN-γ response (28 (1-372);Cohort C: 3 w post-boost (median nAb titers = 95.87 (11.8-97.3), median Spike-specific IFN-γ response = 67 (20-84)). Two long-lasting cancer responders did not respond properly to the prime-boost vaccination and did not generate S-specific IgGs, neutralizing antibodies or virus-specific T cells, although their cancer immune control persisted for years. Thus, although mRNA-based vaccines can induce both antibody and T cell responses in CPs, the immune response to COVID vaccination is independent of the capacity to develop an efficient anti-cancer immune response to anti PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies.

Comparison of hospitalized COVID-19 and influenza patients requiring supplemental oxygen in a cohort study: clinical impact and resource consumption.

BACKGROUND: To compare clinical characteristics, outcomes, and resource consumption of patients with COVID-19 and seasonal influenza requiring supplemental oxygen. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study conducted at a tertiary-care hospital. Patients admitted due to seasonal influenza between 2017 and 2019, or with COVID-19 between March and May 2020 requiring supplemental oxygen were compared. Primary outcome: 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes: 90-day mortality and hospitalization costs. Attempted sample size to detect an 11% difference in mortality was 187 patients per group. RESULTS: COVID-19 cases were younger (median years, 67 (IQR 54-78) vs 76 (IQR 64-83); p < 0.001) and more frequently overweight whereas influenza cases had more hypertension, immunosuppression, and chronic heart, respiratory and renal disease. Compared to influenza, COVID-19 cases had more pneumonia (98% vs 60%, <0.001), higher MEWS and CURB-65 scores and were more likely to show worse progression on the WHO ordinal scale (33% vs 4%; p < 0.001). The 30-day mortality rate was higher for COVID-19 than for influenza: 15% vs 5% (p = 0.001). The median age of non-surviving cases was 81 (IQR 74-88) and 77.5 (IQR 65-84) (p = 0.385), respectively. COVID-19 was independently associated with 30-day (HR 4.6, 95%CI, 2-10.4) and 90-day (HR 5.2, 95%CI, 2.4-11.4) mortality. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses, including a subgroup considering only patients with pneumonia, did not show different trends. Regarding resource consumption, COVID-19 patients had longer hospital stays and higher critical care, pharmacy, and complementary test costs. CONCLUSIONS: Although influenza patients were older and had more comorbidities, COVID-19 cases requiring supplemental oxygen on admission had worse clinical and economic outcomes.

Impact of a Nosocomial COVID-19 Outbreak on a Non-COVID-19 Nephrology Ward during the First Wave of the Pandemic in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to analyze a nosocomial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak that occurred on a polyvalent non-COVID-19 ward at a tertiary care university hospital in Spain during the first wave of the pandemic and to describe the containment measures taken. The outbreak affected healthcare workers (HCWs) and kidney disease patients including transplant patients and those requiring maintenance hemodialysis. METHODS: The outbreak investigation and report were conducted in accordance with the Orion statement guidelines. RESULTS: In this study, 15 cases of COVID-19 affecting 10 patients and 5 HCWs were identified on a ward with 31 beds and 43 HCWs. The patients had tested negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection on admission. One of the HCWs was identified as the probable index case. Five patients died (mortality rate, 50%). They were all elderly and had significant comorbidities. The infection control measures taken included the transfer of infected patients to COVID-19 isolation wards, implementation of universal preventive measures, weekly PCR testing of patients and HCWs linked to the ward, training of HCWs on infection control and prevention measures, and enhancement of cleaning and disinfection. The outbreak was contained in 2 weeks, and no new cases occurred. CONCLUSION: Nosocomial COVID-19 outbreaks can have high attack rates involving both patients and HCWs and carry a high risk of patient mortality. Hospitals need to implement effective infection prevention and control strategies to prevent nosocomial COVID-19 spread.

Hospital-at-Home Expands Hospital Capacity During COVID-19 Pandemic.

A Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-specific Hospital-at-Home was implemented in a 400-bed tertiary hospital in Barcelona, Spain. Senior or immune-compromised physicians oversaw patient care. The alternative to inpatient care more than doubled beds available for hospitalization and decreased the risk of transmission among patients and health care professionals. Mild cases from either the emergency department or after hospital discharge were deemed suitable for admission to the Hospital-at-Home. More than half of all patients had pneumonia. Standardized protocols and management criteria were provided. Only 6% of cases required referral for inpatient hospitalization. These results are promising and may provide valuable insight for centers undertaking Hospital-at-Home initiatives or in the case of new COVID-19 outbreaks.

COVID-19 in Grade 4-5 Chronic Kidney Disease Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increases the risk of mortality during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) episodes, and some reports have underlined the high incidence and severity of this infection in dialysis patients. Information on COVID-19 in nondialysis CKD patients is not available yet. CASE REPORTS: Here we present 7 patients with grade 4-5 CKD who developed symptomatic COVID-19; they comprise 2.6% of our 267 advanced CKD patients. The estimated GFR was between 12 and 20 mL/min during the month prior to COVID-19. The 3 major symptoms were fever, cough, and dyspnea, and 5 patients showed bilateral pneumonia. Hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, ceftriaxone, and steroids were the most frequently prescribed drugs. Two patients needed noninvasive mechanical ventilation. All patients showed minimal to moderate kidney function deterioration during admission, with an eGFR decline below 5 mL/min in 6 cases. No patient required acute dialysis. Six patients were discharged alive and remained dialysis free athe t the time of reporting, and one 76-year-old patient died. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 affects grade 4-5 CKD patients, but prognosis may be acceptable if prompt supportive measures are applied. These findings should be confirmed in larger cohorts, and further observations will be needed to understand the full spectrum of clinical features and the optimal approach to COVID-19 in patients with advanced CKD.

Clinical Profiles in Renal Patients with COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to frequent referrals to the emergency department on suspicion of this infection in maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) and kidney transplant (KT) patients. We aimed to describe their clinical features comparing confirmed and suspected non-confirmed COVID-19 cases during the Spanish epidemic peak. Confirmed COVID-19 ((+)COVID-19) corresponds to patient with positive RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 assay. Non-confirmed COVID-19 ((-)COVID-19) corresponds to patients with negative RT-PCR. COVID-19 was suspected in 61 patients (40/803 KT (4.9%), 21/220 MHD (9.5%)). Prevalence of (+)COVID-19 was 3.2% in KT and 3.6% in MHD patients. Thirty-four (26 KT and 8 MHD) were (+)COVID-19 and 27 (14 KT and 13 MHD) (-)COVID-19. In comparison with (-)COVID-19 patients, (+)COVID-19 showed higher frequency of typical viral symptoms (cough, dyspnea, asthenia and myalgias), pneumonia (88.2% vs. 14.3%) and LDH and CRP while lower phosphate levels, need of hospital admission (100% vs. 63%), use of non-invasive mechanical ventilation (36% vs. 11%) and mortality (38% vs. 0%) (p < 0.001). Time from symptoms onset to admission was longer in patients who finally died than in survivors (8.5 vs. 3.8, p = 0.007). In KT and MHD patients, (+)COVID-19 shows more clinical severity than suspected non-confirmed cases. Prompt RT-PCR is mandatory to confirm COVID-19 diagnosis.

COVID-19 in elderly kidney transplant recipients.

The SARS-Cov-2 infection disease (COVID-19) pandemic has posed at risk the kidney transplant (KT) population, particularly the elderly recipients. From March 12 until April 4, 2020, we diagnosed COVID-19 in 16 of our 324 KT patients aged ≥65 years old (4.9%). Many of them had had contact with healthcare facilities in the month prior to infection. Median time of symptom onset to admission was 7 days. All presented with fever and all but one with pneumonia. Up to 33% showed renal graft dysfunction. At infection diagnosis, mTOR inhibitors or mycophenolate were withdrawn. Tacrolimus was withdrawn in 70%. The main treatment combination was hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. A subset of patients was treated with anti-retroviral and tocilizumab. Short-term fatality rate was 50% at a median time since admission of 3 days. Those who died were more frequently obese, frail, and had underlying heart disease. Although a higher respiratory rate was observed at admission in nonsurvivors, symptoms at presentation were similar between both groups. Patients who died were more anemic, lymphopenic, and showed higher D-dimer, C-reactive protein, and IL-6 at their first tests. COVID-19 is frequent among the elderly KT population and associates a very early and high mortality rate.