Antidepressant Use and Its Association with 28-Day Mortality in Inpatients with SARS-CoV-2: Support for the FIASMA Model against COVID-19.

To reduce Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related mortality and morbidity, widely available oral COVID-19 treatments are urgently needed. Certain antidepressants, such as fluvoxamine or fluoxetine, may be beneficial against COVID-19. We included 388,945 adult inpatients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at 36 AP-HP (Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris) hospitals from 2 May 2020 to 2 November 2021. We compared the prevalence of antidepressant use at admission in a 1:1 ratio matched analytic sample with and without COVID-19 (N = 82,586), and assessed its association with 28-day all-cause mortality in a 1:1 ratio matched analytic sample of COVID-19 inpatients with and without antidepressant use at admission (N = 1482). Antidepressant use was significantly less prevalent in inpatients with COVID-19 than in a matched control group of inpatients without COVID-19 (1.9% versus 4.8%; Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.38; 95%CI = 0.35-0.41, p < 0.001). Antidepressant use was significantly associated with reduced 28-day mortality among COVID-19 inpatients (12.8% versus 21.2%; OR = 0.55; 95%CI = 0.41-0.72, p < 0.001), particularly at daily doses of at least 40 mg fluoxetine equivalents. Antidepressants with high FIASMA (Functional Inhibitors of Acid Sphingomyelinase) activity seem to drive both associations. These treatments may reduce SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19-related mortality in inpatients, and may be appropriate for prophylaxis and/or COVID-19 therapy for outpatients or inpatients.

Association between antidepressant use and ED or hospital visits in outpatients with SARS-CoV-2.

Antidepressants have previously been associated with better outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, but their effect on clinical deterioration among ambulatory patients has not been fully explored. The objective of this study was to assess whether antidepressant exposure was associated with reduced emergency department (ED) or hospital visits among ambulatory patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. This retrospective cohort study included adult patients (N = 25 034) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test performed in a non-hospital setting. Logistic regression analyses tested associations between home use of antidepressant medications and a composite outcome of ED visitation or hospital admission within 30 days. Secondary exposures included individual antidepressants and antidepressants with functional inhibition of acid sphingomyelinase (FIASMA) activity. Patients with antidepressant exposure were less likely to experience the primary composite outcome compared to patients without antidepressant exposure (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.79-0.99, p = 0.04). This association was only observed with daily doses of at least 20 mg fluoxetine-equivalent (aOR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.99, p = 0.04), but not with daily doses lower than 20 mg fluoxetine-equivalent (aOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80-1.11, p = 0.48). In exploratory secondary analyses, the outcome incidence was also reduced with exposure to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (aOR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-0.99, p = 0.04), bupropion (aOR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55-0.90, p = 0.005), and FIASMA antidepressant drugs (aOR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.99, p = 0.03). Antidepressant exposure was associated with a reduced incidence of emergency department visitation or hospital admission among SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, in a dose-dependent manner. These data support the FIASMA model of antidepressants' effects against COVID-19.

Unprovoked serotonin syndrome-like presentation of SARS-CoV-2 infection: A small case series.

Clinicians and researchers have reported an array of neurological abnormalities in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and while serotonin excess has been observed we are unaware of reports of central nervous system serotonin toxicity in COVID-19. We present two cases that resemble serotonin syndrome in COVID-19, but without identifiable inciting medications. A 54-year-old with multiple sclerosis and diabetes mellitus presented with altered mental status. His altered sensorium was attributed to diabetic ketoacidosis, but his condition quickly deteriorated with fever to 105 degrees Fahrenheit, rigidity in all extremities, inducible clonus, and hyperreflexia. He was intubated and was treated for possible meningitis and seizure. Neurologic workup was negative for acute pathology. Despite acetaminophen, his core temperature remained elevated to 105 degrees Fahrenheit. He was treated with external cooling and cyproheptadine and within 48 h, his fever, rigidity, hyperreflexia, and clonus resolved. He was extubated and discharged home on day 14. A 72-year-old with hyperlipidemia was admitted with tremors, 4 days after testing positive for COVID-19. His symptoms rapidly worsened, and he was transferred to the Intensive Care Unit on day 3 in extremis, febrile to 104.4 degrees Fahrenheit, heart rate of 180 beats per minute, and apparent whole body myoclonus. He was intubated and developed fever refractory to acetaminophen requiring external cooling. Extensive neurologic workup was negative. He received cyproheptadine and slowly improved. He was extubated and discharged to rehab on day 11. These cases represent a unique presentation in COVID-19 that must be considered and requires a high index of suspicion.

Routine Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis May Be Inadequate in the Hypercoagulable State of Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of venous thromboembolism in critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients and associate a degree of inflammatory marker elevation to venous thromboembolism development. DESIGN: An observational study that identified patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 between March 12, 2020, and March 31, 2020. Data reported are those available through May 6, 2020. SETTING: A multicenter study including three Indianapolis area academic hospitals. PATIENTS: Two-hundred forty consecutive patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were admitted to one of three hospitals. One-hundred nine critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients admitted to the ICU were included in the analysis. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received routine subcutaneous chemical venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome of this study was to determine the frequency of venous thromboembolism and the degree of inflammatory and coagulation marker elevation associated with venous thromboembolism development. Descriptive statistics outlined the frequency of venous thromboembolism at any time during severe coronavirus disease 2019. Clinical course and laboratory metrics were compared between patients that developed venous thromboembolism and patients that did not develop venous thromboembolism. Hypercoagulable thromboelastography was defined as two or more hypercoagulable parameters. MAIN RESULTS: One-hundred nine patients developed severe coronavirus disease 2019 requiring ICU care. The mean (± SD) age was 61 ± 16 years and 57% were male. Seventy-five patients (69%) were discharged home, 7 patients (6%) remain in the hospital, and 27 patients (25%) died. Venous thromboembolism was diagnosed in 31 patients (28%) 8 ± 7 days after hospital admission, including two patients diagnosed with venous thromboembolism at presentation to the hospital. Elevated admission D-dimer and peak D-dimer were associated with venous thromboembolism development (p < 0.05). D-dimer greater than 2,600 ng/mL predicted venous thromboembolism with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.760 (95% CI, 0.661-0.858; p < 0.0001), sensitivity of 89.7%, and specificity of 59.5%. Twelve patients (11%) had thromboelastography performed and 58% of these patients had a hypercoagulable study. The calculated coagulation index was hypercoagulable in 50% of patients with thromboelastography. CONCLUSIONS: These data show that coronavirus disease 2019 results in a hypercoagulable state. Routine chemical venous thromboembolism prophylaxis may be inadequate in preventing venous thromboembolism in severe coronavirus disease 2019.