Low rate of daily active tobacco smoking in patients with symptomatic COVID-19

Abstract Importance: As the pandemic of COVID-19 is still under progression, identification of prognostic factors remains a global challenge. The role of smoking has been suggested among the disease risk factors, although it is highly controversial. Objective: To evaluate whether the rate of daily smokers in patients with COVID-19 was different to that in the French population. Participants: COVID-19-infected in- and outpatients in a large French university hospital between February 28, 2020 and March 30, 2020 for outpatients and from March 23, till April 9, 2020 for inpatients. Design: We systematically interviewed the patients on their smoking status, use of e-cigarette and nicotinic substitutes. The rate of daily smokers in inpatients and outpatients were compared to those in the 2018 French general population, after standardization for sex and age. Results: The inpatient group was composed of 340 patients, median age 66 years: 203 men (59.7%, median age 66 years) and 137 women (40.3%, median age 66 years),with a rate of daily smokers of 4.1% CI95% [2.3 – 6.9] (5.4% of men and 2.2% of women). The outpatient group was composed of 139 patients, median age 44 years: 62 men (44.6%, median age 43 years, and 77 women (55.4 %, median age 44 years). The daily smokers' rate was 6.1 % CI95% [2.7 - 11.6] (5.1% of men and 6.8 % of women). In the French population, the daily smokers' rate was 25.4% (28.2% of men and 22.9% of women). The rate of daily smokers was significantly lower in COVID-19 patients, as compared to that in the French general population after standardization by age and sex, with Standardized Incidence Ratios of 0.23 [0.11 - 0.45] for outpatients and 0.23 [0.14 - 0.39] for inpatients. These ratios did not significantly differ between the two groups (P=0.94). Conclusions and relevance: This cross sectional study in both COVID-19 out- and inpatients shows that daily smokers rate in patients with symptomatic COVID-19 is lower as compared to the general population.

Low incidence of daily active tobacco smoking in patients with symptomatic COVID-19

Importance: As the pandemic of COVID-19 is still under progression, identification of prognostic factors remains a global challenge. The role of cigarette smoking has been suggested among the disease's epidemiological risk factors, although it is highly controversial. Objective: To evaluate the correlation of daily smoking with the susceptibility to develop SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants: We estimated the rates of daily current smokers in COVID-19-infected patients in a large French university hospital between February 28th , 2020 and March 30th , 2020 for outpatients and from March 23rd , till April 9th , 2020 for inpatients. Design: The rates from both groups were compared to those of daily current smokers in the 2018 French general population, established in 2018, after standardization of the data for sex and age. Results: The inpatient group was composed of 343 patients, median age 65 yr: 206 men (601%, median age 66 years) and 137 women (39.9%, median age 65 years) with a rate of daily smokers of 4.4% (5.4% of men and 2.9% of women).The outpatient group was composed of 139 patients, median age 44 years: 62 men (44.6 %, median age 43 years, and 77 women (55.4 %, median age 44 years). The daily smokers rate was 5.3% (5.1% of men and 5.5 % of women). In the French population, the daily smokers rate was 25.4% (28.2% of men and 22.9% of women). The rate of current daily smokers was significantly lower in COVID-19 outpatients and inpatients (80.3% and 75.4%, respectively), as compared to that in the French general population with standardized incidence ratios according to sex and age of 0.197 [0.094 - 0.41] and 0.246 [0.148 - 0.408]. These ratios did not significantly differ between the two groups (P=0.63). Conclusions and relevance: Our cross sectional study in both COVID-19 out- and inpatients strongly suggests that daily smokers have a very much lower probability of developing symptomatic or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection as compared to the general population.

Strategies to safely rule out pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 outpatients: a multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to define a safe strategy to exclude pulmonary embolism (PE) in COVID-19 outpatients, without performing CT pulmonary angiogram (CTPA). METHODS: COVID-19 outpatients from 15 university hospitals who underwent a CTPA were retrospectively evaluated. D-Dimers, variables of the revised Geneva and Wells scores, as well as laboratory findings and clinical characteristics related to COVID-19 pneumonia, were collected. CTPA reports were reviewed for the presence of PE and the extent of COVID-19 disease. PE rule-out strategies were based solely on D-Dimer tests using different thresholds, the revised Geneva and Wells scores, and a COVID-19 PE prediction model built on our dataset were compared. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC), failure rate, and efficiency were calculated. RESULTS: In total, 1369 patients were included of whom 124 were PE positive (9.1%). Failure rate and efficiency of D-Dimer > 500 µg/l were 0.9% (95%CI, 0.2-4.8%) and 10.1% (8.5-11.9%), respectively, increasing to 1.0% (0.2-5.3%) and 16.4% (14.4-18.7%), respectively, for an age-adjusted D-Dimer level. D-dimer > 1000 µg/l led to an unacceptable failure rate to 8.1% (4.4-14.5%). The best performances of the revised Geneva and Wells scores were obtained using the age-adjusted D-Dimer level. They had the same failure rate of 1.0% (0.2-5.3%) for efficiency of 16.8% (14.7-19.1%), and 16.9% (14.8-19.2%) respectively. The developed COVID-19 PE prediction model had an AUC of 0.609 (0.594-0.623) with an efficiency of 20.5% (18.4-22.8%) when its failure was set to 0.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The strategy to safely exclude PE in COVID-19 outpatients should not differ from that used in non-COVID-19 patients. The added value of the COVID-19 PE prediction model is minor. KEY POINTS: • D-dimer level remains the most important predictor of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients. • The AUCs of the revised Geneva and Wells scores using an age-adjusted D-dimer threshold were 0.587 (95%CI, 0.572 to 0.603) and 0.588 (95%CI, 0.572 to 0.603). • The AUC of COVID-19-specific strategy to rule out pulmonary embolism ranged from 0.513 (95%CI: 0.503 to 0.522) to 0.609 (95%CI: 0.594 to 0.623).

Lower Rate of Daily Smokers With Symptomatic COVID-19: A Monocentric Self-Report of Smoking Habit Study.

Background: Identification of prognostic factors in COVID-19 remains a global challenge. The role of smoking is still controversial. Methods: PCR-positive in- and outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19 from a large French University hospital were systematically interviewed for their smoking status, use of e-cigarette, and nicotinic substitutes. The rates of daily smokers in in- and outpatients were compared using the same smoking habit questionnaire to those in the 2019 French general population, after standardisation for sex and age. Results: The inpatient group was composed of 340 patients, median age of 66 years: 203 men (59.7%) and 137 women (40.3%), median age of both 66 years, with a rate of 4.1% daily smokers (CI 95% [2.3-6.9]) (5.4% of men and 2.2% of women). The outpatient group was composed of 139 patients, median age of 44 years: 62 men (44.6%, median age of 43 years) and 77 women (55.4%, median age of 44 years). The daily smoker rate was 6.1% (CI 95% [2.7-11.6], 5.1% of men and 6.8% of women). Amongst inpatients, daily smokers represented 2.2 and 3.4% of the 45 dead patients and of the 29 patients transferred to ICU, respectively. The rate of daily smokers was significantly lower in patients with symptomatic COVID-19, as compared to that in the French general population after standardisation by age and sex, with standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) of 0.24 [0.12-0.48] for outpatients and 0.24 [0.14-0.40] for inpatients. Conclusions: Daily smoker rate in patients with symptomatic COVID-19 is lower as compared to the French general population.

Cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated risk factors among frontline health care workers in Paris: the SEROCOV cohort study.

With the COVID-19 pandemic, documenting whether health care workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 contamination and identifying risk factors is of major concern. In this multicenter prospective cohort study, HCWs from frontline departments were included in March and April 2020 and followed for 3 months. SARS-CoV-2 serology was performed at month 0 (M0), M1, and M3 and RT-PCR in case of symptoms. The primary outcome was laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at M3. Risk factors of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at M3 were identified by multivariate logistic regression. Among 1062 HCWs (median [interquartile range] age, 33 [28-42] years; 758 [71.4%] women; 321 [30.2%] physicians), the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at M3 was 14.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] [12.5; 16.9]). Risk factors were the working department specialty, with increased risk for intensive care units (odds ratio 1.80, 95% CI [0.38; 8.58]), emergency departments (3.91 [0.83; 18.43]) and infectious diseases departments (4.22 [0.92; 18.28]); current smoking was associated with reduced risk (0.36 [0.21; 0.63]). Age, sex, professional category, number of years of experience in the job or department, and public transportation use were not significantly associated with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at M3. The rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection in frontline HCWs was 14.6% at the end of the first COVID-19 wave in Paris and occurred mainly early. The study argues for an origin of professional in addition to private life contamination and therefore including HCWs in the first-line vaccination target population. It also highlights that smokers were at lower risk.Trial registration The study has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04304690 first registered on 11/03/2020.

Long-term evolution of humoral immune response after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to characterize the evolution of humoral immune response up to 1 year after SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers (HCWs) during the first wave of COVID-19 in Paris. METHODS: Serum samples from 92 HCWs were tested at month 0 (M0), M6, and M12 after SARS-CoV-2 infection for IgG targeting the nucleocapsid (N), IgG targeting the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of spike (S) protein, IgA targeting S, and anti-RBD neutralizing antibodies. After M6, 46 HCWs received a single dose of COVID-19 vaccine. RESULTS: We observed a significant decrease in all SARS-CoV-2 immunologic markers at M6 post-infection: median decreases were 0.26 log binding antibody units/mL (M0: 1.9 (interquartile range (IQR) 1.47-2.27); M6: 1.64 (IQR 1.22-1.92)) for anti-RBD IgG; 4.10 (index) (M0: 4.94 (IQR 2.72-6.82); M6: 0.84 (IQR 0.25-1.55)) for anti-N IgG; 0.64 (index) (M0: 2.50 (IQR 1.18-4.62); M6: 1.86 (IQR 0.85-3.54)) for anti-S IgA; and 24.4% (M0: 66.4 (IQR 39.7-82.5); M6: 42.0 (IQR 16.8-68.8)) inhibition activity for the RBD neutralizing antibodies. Between M6 and M12, anti-RBD IgG level, anti-S IgA index, and anti-RBD neutralizing activity significantly increased among COVID-19 vaccinated HCWs, whereas they remained stable among unvaccinated HCWs. Anti-N IgG index significantly decreased between M6 and M12 among both vaccinated (median: 0.73 (IQR 0.23-1.11) at M6 and 0.52 (IQR 0.20-0.73) at M12) and unvaccinated HCWs (median: 0.79 (IQR 0.21-4.67) at M6 and 0.34 (IQR 0.24-2.78) at M12). DISCUSSION: A steady decline in the anti-N IgG response was observed during the first year after SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs, whereas the anti-RBD IgG and the anti-S IgA responses remained stable and could be enhanced by COVID-19 vaccination.

Identifying SARS-COV-2 infected patients through canine olfactive detection on axillary sweat samples; study of observed sensitivities and specificities within a group of trained dogs.

There is an increasing need for rapid, reliable, non-invasive, and inexpensive mass testing methods as the global COVID-19 pandemic continues. Detection dogs could be a possible solution to identify individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2. Previous studies have shown that dogs can detect SARS-CoV-2 on sweat samples. This study aims to establish the dogs' sensitivity (true positive rate) which measures the proportion of people with COVID-19 that are correctly identified, and specificity (true negative rate) which measures the proportion of people without COVID-19 that are correctly identified. Seven search and rescue dogs were tested using a total of 218 axillary sweat samples (62 positive and 156 negative) in olfaction cones following a randomised and double-blind protocol. Sensitivity ranged from 87% to 94%, and specificity ranged from 78% to 92%, with four dogs over 90%. These results were used to calculate the positive predictive value and negative predictive value for each dog for different infection probabilities (how likely it is for an individual to be SARS-CoV-2 positive), ranging from 10-50%. These results were compared with a reference diagnostic tool which has 95% specificity and sensitivity. Negative predictive values for six dogs ranged from ≥98% at 10% infection probability to ≥88% at 50% infection probability compared with the reference tool which ranged from 99% to 95%. Positive predictive values ranged from ≥40% at 10% infection probability to ≥80% at 50% infection probability compared with the reference tool which ranged from 68% to 95%. This study confirms previous results, suggesting that dogs could play an important role in mass-testing situations. Future challenges include optimal training methods and standardisation for large numbers of detection dogs and infrastructure supporting their deployment.

Co-infection of SARS-CoV-2 with other respiratory viruses and performance of lower respiratory tract samples for the diagnosis of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: This study was performed during the early outbreak period of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the seasonal epidemics of other respiratory viral infections, in order to describe the extent of co-infections of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with other respiratory viruses. It also compared the diagnostic performances of upper respiratory tract (URT) and lower respiratory tract (LRT) samples for SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: From 25 January to 29 March 2020, all URT and LRT samples collected from patients with suspected COVID-19 received in the virology laboratory of Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital (Paris, France) were simultaneously tested for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses. RESULTS: A total of 1423 consecutive patients were tested: 677 (47.6%) males, 746 (52.4%) females, median age 50 (range, 1-103) years. Twenty-one (1.5%) patients were positive for both SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses. The detection rate of SARS-CoV-2 was significantly higher in LRT than in URT (53.6% vs. 13.4%; p<0.0001). The analysis of paired samples from 117 (8.2%) patients showed that SARS-CoV-2 load was lower in URT than in LRT samples in 65% of cases. CONCLUSION: The detection of other respiratory viruses in patients during this epidemic period could not rule out SARS-CoV-2 co-infection. Furthermore, LRT samples increased the accuracy of diagnosis of COVID-19.