Treatment effect modifiers in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 receiving remdesivir and dexamethasone.

BACKGROUND: The combined effectiveness of remdesivir and dexamethasone in subgroups of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 is poorly investigated. METHODS: In this nationwide retrospective cohort study, we included 3826 patients with COVID-19 hospitalised between February 2020 and April 2021. The primary outcomes were use of invasive mechanical ventilation and 30-day mortality, comparing a cohort treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone with a previous cohort treated without remdesivir and dexamethasone. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting logistic regression to assess associations with progression to invasive mechanical ventilation and 30-day mortality between the two cohorts. The analyses were conducted overall and by subgroups based on patient characteristics. RESULTS: Odds ratio for progression to invasive mechanical ventilation and 30-day mortality in individuals treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone compared to treatment with standard of care alone was 0.46 (95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.57) and 0.47 (95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.56), respectively. The reduced risk of mortality was observed in elderly patients, overweight patients and in patients requiring supplemental oxygen at admission, regardless of sex, comorbidities and symptom duration. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone had significantly improved outcomes compared to patients treated with standard of care alone. These effects were observed in most patient subgroups.

High mortality among patients with severe COVID-19 and Do Not Intubate orders.

INTRODUCTION: Moderate to severe respiratory distress among patients with COVID-19 is associated with a high mortality. This study evaluated ventilator support and mortality by Do Intubate (DI) or Do Not Intubate (DNI) orders. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients with COVID-19 and a supplemental oxygen requirement of ≥ 15 l/min. The patients were divided into two groups corresponding to the first and second wave of COVID-19 and were subsequently further divided according to DI and DNI orders and analysed regarding need of ventilator support and mortality. RESULTS: The study included 178 patients. The mortality was 24% for patients with DI orders (n = 115) and 81% for patients with DNI orders (n = 63) increasing to 98% (n = 46) for patients with DNI orders and very high flow oxygen requirements (≥ 30 l/min.). From the first to the second wave of COVID-19, the use of constant continuous positive airway pressure (cCPAP) increased from 71% to 91% (p less-than 0.001), whereas the use of mechanical ventilation decreased from 54% to 28% (odds ratio = 0.38 (95% confidence interval: 0.17-0.85)). CONCLUSION: The mortality was high for patients with DNI orders and respiratory distress with very high levels in supplemental oxygen in both the first and second wave of COVID-19 despite an increase in use of cCPAP and treatment with dexamethasone and remdesivir during the second wave. Hence, careful evaluation on transition to palliative care must be considered for these patients. FUNDING: none. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the Danish Patient Safety Authority (record no. 31-1521-309) and the Regional Data Protection Centre (record no. P-2020-492).

A randomized placebo-controlled trial of convalescent plasma for adults hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Passive immunotherapy with convalescent plasma may be the only available agent during the early phases of a pandemic. Here, we report safety and efficacy of high-titer convalescent plasma for COVID-19 pneumonia. Double-blinded randomized multicenter placebo-controlled trial of adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. The intervention was COVID-19 convalescent plasma and placebo was saline allocated 2:1. The primary outcome was clinical status 14 days after the intervention evaluated on a clinical ordinal scale. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov, NCT04345289, 14/04/2020. The CCAP-2 trial was terminated prematurely due to futility. Of 147 patients randomized, we included 144 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population. The ordinal clinical status 14 days post-intervention was comparable between treatment groups (odds ratio (OR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-2.09). Results were consistent when evaluating clinical progression on an individual level 14 days after intervention (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.46-1.73). No significant differences in length of hospital stay, admission to ICU, frequency of severe adverse events or all-cause mortality during follow-up were found between the intervention and the placebo group. Infusion of convalescent plasma did not influence clinical progression, survival or length of hospitalization in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Venous Thromboembolism and Major Bleeding in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Nationwide, Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a potentially fatal complication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and thromboprophylaxis should be balanced against risk of bleeding. This study examined risks of VTE and major bleeding in hospitalized and community-managed SARS-CoV-2 patients compared with control populations. METHODS: Using nationwide population-based registries, 30-day risks of VTE and major bleeding in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were compared with those of SARS-CoV-2 test-negative patients and with an external cohort of influenza patients. Medical records of all COVID-19 patients at 6 departments of infectious diseases in Denmark were reviewed in detail. RESULTS: The overall 30-day risk of VTE was 0.4% (40/9460) among SARS-CoV-2 patients (16% hospitalized), 0.3% (649/226 510) among SARS-CoV-2 negative subjects (12% hospitalized), and 1.0% (158/16 281) among influenza patients (59% hospitalized). VTE risks were higher and comparable in hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 positive (1.5%), SARS-CoV-2 negative (1.8%), and influenza patients (1.5%). Diagnosis of major bleeding was registered in 0.5% (47/9460) of all SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals and in 2.3% of those hospitalized. Medical record review of 582 hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients observed VTE in 4% (19/450) and major bleeding in 0.4% (2/450) of ward patients, of whom 31% received thromboprophylaxis. Among intensive care patients (100% received thromboprophylaxis), risks were 7% (9/132) for VTE and 11% (15/132) for major bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Among people with SARS-CoV-2 infection in a population-based setting, VTE risks were low to moderate and were not substantially increased compared with SARS-CoV-2 test-negative and influenza patients. Risk of severe bleeding was low for ward patients, but mirrored VTE risk in the intensive care setting.

Improved Survival Among Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treated With Remdesivir and Dexamethasone. A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on outcomes of moderate to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among patients treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone in a real-world setting. We sought to compare the effectiveness of standard of care (SOC) alone versus SOC plus remdesivir and dexamethasone. METHODS: Two population-based nationwide cohorts of individuals hospitalized with COVID-19 during February through December 2020 were studied. Death within 30 days and need of mechanical ventilation (MV) were compared by inverse probability of treatment weighted (ITPW) logistic regression analysis and shown as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The 30-days mortality rate of 1694 individuals treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone in addition to SOC was 12.6% compared to 19.7% for 1053 individuals receiving SOC alone. This corresponded to a weighted OR of 30-day mortality of 0.47 (95% CI: .38-.57) for patients treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone compared to patients receiving SOC alone. Similarly, progression to MV was reduced (OR 0.36; 95% CI: .29-.46). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of moderate to severe COVID-19 during June through December that included remdesivir and dexamethasone was associated with reduced 30-day mortality and need of MV compared to treatment in February through May.

The Association of Low Vitamin K Status with Mortality in a Cohort of 138 Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

It has recently been hypothesized that vitamin K could play a role in COVID-19. We aimed to test the hypotheses that low vitamin K status is a common characteristic of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared to population controls and that low vitamin K status predicts mortality in COVID-19 patients. In a cohort of 138 COVID-19 patients and 138 population controls, we measured plasma dephosphorylated-uncarboxylated Matrix Gla Protein (dp-ucMGP), which reflects the functional vitamin K status in peripheral tissue. Forty-three patients died within 90 days from admission. In patients, levels of dp-ucMGP differed significantly between survivors (mean 877; 95% CI: 778; 995) and non-survivors (mean 1445; 95% CI: 1148; 1820). Furthermore, levels of dp-ucMGP (pmol/L) were considerably higher in patients (mean 1022; 95% CI: 912; 1151) compared to controls (mean 509; 95% CI: 485; 540). Cox regression survival analysis showed that increasing levels of dp-ucMGP (reflecting low vitamin K status) were associated with higher mortality risk (sex- and age-adjusted hazard ratio per doubling of dp-ucMGP was 1.49, 95% CI: 1.03; 2.24). The association attenuated and became statistically insignificant after adjustment for co-morbidities (sex, age, CVD, diabetes, BMI, and eGFR adjusted hazard ratio per doubling of dp-ucMGP was 1.22, 95% CI: 0.82; 1.80). In conclusion, we found that low vitamin K status was associated with mortality in patients with COVID-19 in sex- and age-adjusted analyses, but not in analyses additionally adjusted for co-morbidities. Randomized clinical trials would be needed to clarify a potential role, if any, of vitamin K in the course of COVID-19.

Proton Pump Inhibitor Use Is Not Strongly Associated With SARS-CoV-2 Related Outcomes: A Nationwide Study and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use has been associated with increased risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe outcomes. However, meta-analyses show unclear results, leading to uncertainty regarding the safety of PPI use during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide observational study including all SARS-CoV-2 cases (n = 83,224) in Denmark as of December 1, 2020. The association of current PPI use with risk of infection was examined in a case-control design. We investigated the risk of severe outcomes, including mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, or death, in current PPI users (n = 4473) compared with never users. Propensity score matching was applied to control for confounding. Finally, we performed an updated meta-analysis on risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 mortality attributable to PPI use. RESULTS: Current PPI use was associated with increased risk of infection; adjusted odds ratio, 1.08 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.13). Among SARS-CoV-2 cases, PPI use was associated with increased risk of hospital admission; adjusted relative risk, 1.13 (1.03-1.24), but not with other severe outcomes. The updated meta-analysis showed no association between PPI use and risk of infection or mortality; pooled odds ratio, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.75-1.32) and relative risk, 1.33 (95% CI, 0.71-2.48). CONCLUSIONS: Current PPI use may be associated with an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospital admission, but these results with minimally elevated estimates are most likely subject to residual confounding. No association was found for severe outcomes. The results from the meta-analysis indicated no impact of current PPI use on COVID-19 outcomes.

Comparable COVID-19 outcomes with current use of GLP-1 receptor agonists, DPP-4 inhibitors or SGLT-2 inhibitors among patients with diabetes who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Incretin-based therapies, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), have been hypothesized to exert beneficial effects on COVID-19 outcomes due to anti-inflammatory properties. In this population-based cohort study, we retrieved data from nationwide registries on all individuals diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection up to 1 November 2020. For individuals with diabetes, we examined the impact of use of GLP-1 RAs (n = 370) and DPP-4i (n = 284) compared with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) (n = 342) on risk of hospital admission and severe outcomes. Relative risks (RRs) were calculated after applying propensity score weighted methods to control for confounding. Current users of GLP-1 RAs had an adjusted RR of 0.89 (95% confidence interval 0.34-2.33), while users of DPP-4i had an adjusted RR of 2.42 (95% confidence interval 0.99-5.89) for 30-day mortality compared with SGLT-2i use. Further, use of GLP-1 RAs or DPP-4i compared with SGLT-2i was not associated with decreased risk of hospital admission. Thus, use of incretin-based therapies in individuals with diabetes and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was not associated with improved clinical outcomes.

First wave of COVID-19 hospital admissions in Denmark: a Nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its associated disease coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is a worldwide emergency. Demographic, comorbidity and laboratory determinants of death and of ICU admission were explored in all Danish hospitalised patients. METHODS: National health registries were used to identify all hospitalized patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis. We obtained demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and laboratory results on admission and explored prognostic factors for death using multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression and competing risk survival analysis. RESULTS: Among 2431 hospitalised patients with COVID-19 between February 27 and July 8 (median age 69 years [IQR 53-80], 54.1% males), 359 (14.8%) needed admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and 455 (18.7%) died within 30 days of follow-up. The seven-day cumulative incidence of ICU admission was lower for females (7.9%) than for males (16.7%), (p < 0.001). Age, high CCI, elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), urea, creatinine, lymphopenia, neutrophilia and thrombocytopenia within ±24-h of admission were independently associated with death within the first week in the multivariate analysis. Conditional upon surviving the first week, male sex, age, high CCI, elevated CRP, LDH, creatinine, urea and neutrophil count were independently associated with death within 30 days. Males presented with more pronounced laboratory abnormalities on admission. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced age, male sex, comorbidity, higher levels of systemic inflammation and cell-turnover were independent factors for mortality. Age was the strongest predictor for death, moderate to high level of comorbidity were associated with a nearly two-fold increase in mortality. Mortality was significantly higher in males after surviving the first week.

Characteristics of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at Hvidovre Hospital, March-April 2020.

INTRODUCTION: The first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 occurred in Denmark on 27 February 2020. On 10 March, the first case of COVID-19 pneumonia was admitted to Hvidovre Hospital. METHODS: Retrospective case review of individuals 18 years or older who were admitted consecutively to Hvidovre Hospital from 10 March through 23 April 2020. RESULTS: A total of 175 individuals were admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia. The median age was 71 years, 48.6% were male and 71% had at least one co-morbidity. The most commonly presenting symptoms were dyspnoea, dry cough, and fever. The majority of patients had lymphopenia, elevated liver function tests and C-reactive protein. Nearly two in three presented with multilobar infiltration by chest X-ray. Respiratory failure leading to invasive mechanical ventilation developed in 27 patients (15.4%). By 20 April, 23 of 175 (13.1%) patients remained hospitalised, 43 (24.6%) had died and 109 (62.3%) had been discharged. CONCLUSIONS: The manifestations of COVID-19 at presentation were similar to those seen in other reports. Our population was older, slightly overrepresented by women and had a high level of co-morbidity. COVID-19 admittance was associated with frequent need of intensive care and mechanical ventilation that was associated with a very high mortality. FUNDING: none. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.