Twelve-month follow-up after hospitalization for SARS-COV-2: Physiology improves, symptoms remain.

OBJECTIVES: Persistent symptoms on short-term follow-up after infection with COVID-19 are common, but long-term consequences have been insufficiently studied. The aim of this study was to characterize pulmonary function and ongoing symptoms 12 months after hospitalization with COVID-19. METHODS: This prospective multicenter study included 222 patients hospitalized with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 in the Central Denmark Region. Disease severity was stratified using WHO Clinical Progression Scale. Clinical characteristics, pulmonary function test (PFT), 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and patient-reported outcome measures were collected at follow-up 3 and 12 months after discharge. Outcome measures from follow-up 3 months after discharge have previously been published. RESULTS: A total of 179 (81%) patients completed the 12-month follow-up. Median age was 60 years (IQR 51, 69) and 58% were male patients. At 12-month follow-up 49.7% had a normal diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), while 39.4% had DLCO < 80%. The 6MWT distance increased significantly (29 m 95% CI 19, 40; p < 0.01). An mMRC score of 0 was reported by 51% and an mMRC ≥ 2 by 20%. The frequency and severity of fatigue, depression, and anxiety did not improve over time. CONCLUSIONS: The study found that impaired DLCO percentage is common 12 months after hospitalization with SARS-CoV-2 and reduction in DLCO percentage is associated to dyspnea.

Fatigue Is a Major Symptom at COVID-19 Hospitalization Follow-Up.

Persistent symptoms after hospitalization with COVID-19 are common, but the frequency and severity of these symptoms are insufficiently understood. We aimed to describe symptoms and pulmonary function after hospitalization with COVID-19. Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Central Denmark Region were invited for follow-up 3 months after discharge. Clinical characteristics, patient reported outcomes (Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAS), anxiety and depression (HADS)), symptoms, pulmonary function test and 6-min walk test were collected. We included 218 patients (mean age 59.9 (95% CI: 58.2, 61.7), 59% males). Fatigue, dyspnea and impaired concentration were the most prevalent symptoms at follow-up. Using FAS, 47% reported mild-to-moderate fatigue and 18% severe fatigue. Mean HADS was 7.9 (95% CI: 6.9, 8.9). FAS was correlated to HADS (ß = 0.52 (95% CI: 0.44, 0.59, p < 0.001)). Mean DLCO was 80.4% (95% CI: 77.8, 83.0) and 45% had DLCO ˂ 80%. Mean DLCO was significantly reduced in patients treated in the ICU (70.46% (95% CI 65.13, 75.79)). The highest FAS and HADS were seen in patients with the shortest period of hospitalization (2.1 days (95% CI: 1.4, 2.7)) with no need for oxygen. In conclusion, fatigue is a common symptom after hospitalization for COVID-19 and ICU treatment is associated to decreased diffusion capacity.

Gut dysbiosis associated with worse disease activity and physical function in axial spondyloarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Based on clinical and genetic associations, axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are suspected to have a linked pathogenesis. Gut dysbiosis, intrinsic to IBD, has also been observed in axSpA. It is, however, not established to what degree gut dysbiosis is associated with axSpA disease severity. The objective of this study was to compare gut dysbiosis frequency between controls, non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients and investigate whether gut dysbiosis is cross-sectionally associated with axSpA disease activity, physical function, mobility, or pain. METHODS: Gut dysbiosis was assessed by 16SrRNA analysis of feces from 44/88 nr-axSpA/AS patients (ASAS/mNY criteria) without inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and 46 controls without IBD or rheumatic disease. The GA-map™ Dysbiosis Test was used, grading gut microbiota aberrations on a 1-5 scale, where ≥3 denotes dysbiosis. Proportions with dysbiosis were compared between the groups. Furthermore, standard axSpA measures of disease activity, function, mobility, and pain were compared between patients (nr-axSpA and AS combined) with and without dysbiosis, univariately, and adjusted for relevant confounders (ANCOVA). RESULTS: Gut dysbiosis was more frequent in AS than controls (36% versus 17%, p=0.023), while nr-axSpA (25% dysbiosis) did not differ significantly from either AS or controls. Univariately, most axSpA measures were significantly worse in patients with dysbiosis versus those without: ASDAS-CRP between-group difference 0.6 (95% CI 0.2-0.9); BASDAI 1.6 (0.8-2.4); evaluator's global disease activity assessment (Likert scale 0-4) 0.3 (0.1-0.5), BASFI 1.5 (0.6-2.4), and VAS pain (cm) 1.3 (0.4-2.2). Differences remained significant after adjustment for demographics, lifestyle factors, treatments, gut inflammation (fecal calprotectin ≥50 mg/kg), and gut symptoms, except for VAS pain. BASMI and CRP were not associated with dysbiosis. CONCLUSION: Gut dysbiosis, more frequent in AS patients than controls, is associated with worse axSpA disease activity and physical function, seemingly irrespective of both gut inflammation and treatments. This provides further evidence for an important link between disturbances in gastrointestinal homeostasis and axSpA.

Efficacy and safety of risankizumab for active psoriatic arthritis: 24-week results from the randomised, double-blind, phase 3 KEEPsAKE 1 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate risankizumab, a biological therapy that inhibits interleukin 23, in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who have responded inadequately or are intolerant to ≥1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD). METHODS: In the randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind KEEPsAKE 1 trial, 964 patients with active PsA were randomised (1:1) to receive risankizumab 150 mg or placebo at weeks 0, 4 and 16. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 24. Here, we report the results from the 24-week double-blind period; the open-label period with all patients receiving risankizumab is ongoing. RESULTS: At week 24, a significantly greater proportion of patients receiving risankizumab achieved the primary endpoint of ACR20 (57.3% vs placebo, 33.5%; p<0.001). Significant differences were also observed for risankizumab versus placebo for the first eight ranked secondary endpoints, including skin and nail psoriasis endpoints, minimal disease activity and resolution of enthesitis and dactylitis (p<0.001). Adverse events and serious adverse events were reported at similar rates in the risankizumab and placebo groups. Serious infections were reported for 1.0% and 1.2% of patients receiving risankizumab and placebo, respectively. There was one death in the risankizumab group (urosepsis deemed unrelated to the study drug). CONCLUSIONS: Risankizumab treatment results in significantly greater improvement of signs and symptoms of PsA compared with placebo and is well tolerated in patients with active PsA who have responded inadequately or are intolerant to ≥1 csDMARD. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03675308.

Triage Strategies Based on C-Reactive Protein Levels and SARS-CoV-2 Tests among Individuals Referred with Suspected COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study.

C-reactive protein (CRP) has prognostic value in hospitalized patients with COVID-19; the importance of CRP in pre-hospitalized patients remains to be tested. Methods: Individuals with symptoms of COVID-19 had a SARS-CoV-2 PCR oropharyngeal swab test, and a measurement of CRP was performed at baseline, with an upper reference range of 10 mg/L. After 28 days, information about possible admissions, oxygen treatments, transfers to the ICU, or deaths was obtained from the patient files. Using logistic regression, the prognostic value of the CRP and SARS-CoV-2 test results was evaluated. Results: Among the 1006 patients included, the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test was positive in 59, and the CRP level was elevated (>10 mg/L) in 131. In total, 59 patients were hospitalized, only 3 of whom were SARS-CoV-2 positive, with elevated CRP (n = 2) and normal CRP (n = 1). The probability of being hospitalized with elevated CRP was 4.21 (95%CI 2.38-7.43, p < 0.0001), while the probability of being hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 positivity alone was 0.85 (95%CI 0.26-2.81, p = 0.79). Conclusions: CRP is not a reliable predictor for the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pre-hospitalized patients. CRP, while not a SARS-CoV-2 positive test, had prognostic value in the total population of patients presenting with COVID-19-related symptoms.