Bacillus Calmette-Guérin vaccine to reduce healthcare worker absenteeism in COVID-19 pandemic, a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic increases healthcare worker (HCW) absenteeism. The bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine may provide non-specific protection against respiratory infections through enhancement of trained immunity. We investigated the impact of BCG vaccination on HCW absenteeism during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: HCWs exposed to COVID-19 patients in nine Dutch hospitals were randomized to BCG vaccine or placebo in a 1:1 ratio, and followed for one year using a mobile phone application. The primary endpoint was the self-reported number of days of unplanned absenteeism for any reason. Secondary endpoints included documented COVID-19, acute respiratory symptoms or fever. This was an investigator-funded study, registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03987919). RESULTS: In March/April 2020, 1511 HCWs were enrolled. The median duration of follow-up was 357 person-days (interquartile range [IQR], 351 to 361). Unplanned absenteeism for any reason was observed in 2.8% of planned working days in the BCG group and 2.7% in the placebo group (adjusted relative risk 0.94; 95% credible interval, 0.78-1.15). Cumulative incidences of documented COVID-19 were 14.2% in the BCG and 15.2% in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-1.24). First episodes of self-reported acute respiratory symptoms or fever occurred in 490 (66.2%) and 443 (60.2%) participants, respectively (aHR: 1.13; 95% CI, 0.99-1.28). Thirty-one serious adverse events were reported (13 after BCG, 18 after placebo), none considered related to study medication. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, BCG-vaccination of HCW exposed to COVID-19 patients did not reduce unplanned absenteeism nor documented COVID-19.

Few bacterial co-infections but frequent empiric antibiotic use in the early phase of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: results from a multicentre retrospective cohort study in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge on bacterial co-infections in COVID-19 is crucial to use antibiotics appropriately. Therefore, we aimed to determine the incidence of bacterial co-infections, antibiotic use and application of antimicrobial stewardship principles in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational study in four hospitals (1 university, 2 non-university teaching, 1 non-teaching hospital) in the Netherlands from March to May 2020 including consecutive patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19. Data on first microbiological investigations obtained at the discretion of the physician and antibiotic use in the first week of hospital admission were collected. RESULTS: Twelve (1.2%) of the 925 patients included had a documented bacterial co-infection (75.0% pneumonia) within the first week. Microbiological testing was performed in 749 (81%) patients: sputum cultures in 105 (11.4%), blood cultures in 711 (76.9%), pneumococcal urinary antigen testing in 202 (21.8%), and Legionella urinary antigen testing in 199 (21.5%) patients, with clear variation between hospitals. On presentation 556 (60.1%; range 33.3-73.4%) patients received antibiotics for a median duration of 2 days (IQR 1-4). Intravenous to oral switch was performed in 41 of 413 (9.9%) patients who received intravenous treatment >48 h. Mean adherence to the local guideline on empiric antibiotic therapy on day 1 was on average 60.3% (range 45.3%-74.7%). CONCLUSIONS: On presentation to the hospital bacterial co-infections are rare, while empiric antibiotic use is abundant. This implies that in patients with COVID-19 empiric antibiotic should be withheld. This has the potential to dramatically reduce the current overuse of antibiotics in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Immunosuppressive Drugs and COVID-19: A Review.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is currently unknown whether immunosuppressive drugs are advantageous or detrimental in patients with COVID-19. Immunosuppressive drugs could be harmful in the initial phase of COVID-19. In this phase, the host immune response is necessary to inhibit viral replication. However, immunosuppressive drugs might have a beneficial effect in the later, more severe phase of COVID-19. In this phase, an overshoot of the host immune response (the "cytokine storm") can cause ARDS, multiorgan failure and mortality. AIM: To summarize the available evidence on the effect of immunosuppressive drugs on infection with SARS-CoV-2. The effects of immunosuppressive drugs on similar pandemic coronaviruses may resemble the effects on SARS-CoV-2. Thus, we also included studies on the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). METHODS: The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42020181137). We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies with a control group and case-control studies concerning humans ≥ 18 years old. We also included in-vitro studies and animal studies with a control group. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Sixty-nine studies were included. Interestingly, MPA inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication in-vitro. Clinical studies are needed to confirm the inhibitory effect of MPA on SARS-CoV-2 replication in-vivo. There are indications that corticosteroids and IL-6 inhibitors, like tocilizumab, can reduce mortality and prevent mechanical ventilation in patients with COVID-19. However, observational studies have contradictory results and the risk of bias is high. Thus, these results have to be confirmed in high-quality clinical trials before these drugs can be implemented as standard care. Based on the positive results of CNIs, mTOR inhibitors and thiopurine analogues in in-vitro studies with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, it would be interesting to investigate their effects on SARS-CoV-2 replication.