Adaptation and Response of a Major Parisian Referral Hospital to the COVID-19 Surge: A Qualitative Study.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, few studies have focused on crisis management of multiple services within one hospital over several waves of the pandemic. The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of the COVID-19 crisis response of a Parisian referral hospital which managed the first three COVID cases in France and to analyze its resilience capacities. Between March 2020 and June 2021, we conducted observations, semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and lessons learned workshops. Data analysis was supported by an original framework on health system resilience. Three configurations emerged from the empirical data: 1) reorganization of services and spaces; 2) management of professionals' and patients' contamination risk; and 3) mobilization of human resources and work adaptation. The hospital and its staff mitigated the effects of the pandemic by implementing multiple and varied strategies, which the staff perceived as having positive and/or negative consequences. We observed an unprecedented mobilization of the hospital and its staff to absorb the crisis. Often the mobilization fell on the shoulders of the professionals, adding to their exhaustion. Our study demonstrates the capacity of the hospital and its staff to absorb the COVID-19 shock by putting in place mechanisms for continuous adaptation. More time and insight will be needed to observe whether these strategies and adaptations will be sustainable over the coming months and years and to assess the overall transformative capacities of the hospital.

Contributions and challenges of community pharmacists during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare services across the world have been deeply impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. In primary care, community pharmacists have had an important role in the frontline healthcare response to the pandemic. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the experiences, contributions and perceived challenges of community pharmacists regarding the provision of healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with community pharmacists in France. Participants were recruited through a professional organization of pharmacists combined with a snowballing technique. Interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 16 community pharmacists participated in the interviews. Study participants described providing a range of novel services in response to the pandemic on top of continuing their usual services. All participants described providing preventative services to reduce and mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2, such as education on hygiene and social distancing, delivery of face masks and hand sanitizer and adjusting pharmacy premises. Most respondents also described being involved in SARS-CoV-2 detection through screening and performing antigen testing in pharmacies. Participants reported being actively involved in COVID-19 vaccination by educating the general public about vaccines, facilitating their distribution to general practitioners as well as administering vaccines. Over half the respondents described rapidly changing guidelines and service users' anxiety as challenges to the provision of healthcare services during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that community pharmacists have significantly contributed to the response to the COVID-19 pandemic by ensuring continuity of pharmaceutical services and providing novel screening, testing and vaccination services. Their roles and responsibilities during the COVID-19 health crisis indicate that they can play an important role in the management of emerging infectious diseases.

Characteristics and outcomes of asthmatic outpatients with COVID-19 who receive home telesurveillance.

Background: The prognosis of asthmatic outpatients with COVID-19 needs to be clarified. The objectives of this study were: 1) to investigate the characteristics and outcomes of asthmatic patients receiving initial ambulatory care and home monitoring for COVID-19 with Covidom, a telesurveillance solution; and 2) to compare the characteristics and outcomes between asthmatic and non-asthmatic patients. Methods: Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis allowing initial ambulatory care, registration in Covidom between March 2020 and April 2021 and completion of the initial medical questionnaire. We compared clinical characteristics and outcomes between asthmatic and non-asthmatic patients, and we evaluated whether asthma was independently associated with clinical worsening (hospitalisation or death) within 30 days follow-up using a multivariate logistic regression model. Results: 33 815 patients met the inclusion criteria. Asthma was reported in 4276 (12.6%). The main comorbidities among asthmatic patients were obesity (23.1%), hypertension (12.7%) and diabetes (4.5%). As compared with non-asthmatic patients, asthmatic patients were more often female (70.0 versus 62.1%, p<0.001), of younger age (42.2 versus 43.8 years, p<0.001) and obese (23.1 versus 17.6%, p<0.001). The rate of hospitalisation did not differ significantly (4.7 versus 4.2%, p=0.203) and no asthmatic patient died during follow-up (versus 25 non-asthmatic patients, 0.1%; p=0.109). In multivariate analysis, asthma was independently associated with higher risk of clinical worsening (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.44, p=0.013). Conclusion: In a large French cohort of patients receiving initial ambulatory care and home monitoring for COVID-19, asthma was independently associated with higher risk of clinical worsening although no asthmatic patient died within the 30 days follow-up.

Increased risk of severe COVID-19 in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 Alpha variant infection: a multicentre matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the variant of concern (VOC) Alpha on the severity of COVID-19 has been debated. We report our analysis in France. METHODS: We conducted an exposed/unexposed cohort study with retrospective data collection, comparing patients infected by VOC Alpha to contemporaneous patients infected by historical lineages. Participants were matched on age (± 2.5 years), sex and region of hospitalization. The primary endpoint was the proportion of hospitalized participants with severe COVID-19, defined as a WHO-scale > 5 or by the need of a non-rebreather mask, occurring up to day 29 after admission. We used a logistic regression model stratified on each matched pair and accounting for factors known to be associated with the severity of the disease. RESULTS: We included 650 pairs of patients hospitalized between Jan 1, 2021, and Feb 28, 2021, in 47 hospitals. Median age was 70 years and 61.3% of participants were male. The proportion of participants with comorbidities was high in both groups (85.0% vs 90%, p = 0.004). Infection by VOC Alpha was associated with a higher odds of severe COVID-19 (41.7% vs 38.5%-aOR = 1.33 95% CI [1.03-1.72]). CONCLUSION: Infection by the VOC Alpha was associated with a higher odds of severe COVID-19.

Innate immune deficiencies are associated with severity and poor prognosis in patients with COVID-19.

COVID-19 can cause acute respiratory distress syndrome, leading to death in many individuals. Evidence of a deleterious role of the innate immune system is accumulating, but the precise mechanisms involved remain unclear. In this study, we investigated the links between circulating innate phagocytes and severity in COVID-19 patients. We performed in-depth phenotyping of neutrophil and monocyte subpopulations and measured soluble activation markers in plasma. Additionally, anti-microbial functions (phagocytosis, oxidative burst, and NETosis) were evaluated on fresh cells from patients. Neutrophils and monocytes had a strikingly disturbed phenotype, and elevated concentrations of activation markers (calprotectin, myeloperoxidase, and neutrophil extracellular traps) were measured in plasma. Critical patients had increased CD13low immature neutrophils, LOX-1 + and CCR5 + immunosuppressive neutrophils, and HLA-DRlow downregulated monocytes. Markers of immature and immunosuppressive neutrophils were strongly associated with severity. Moreover, neutrophils and monocytes of critical patients had impaired antimicrobial functions, which correlated with organ dysfunction, severe infections, and mortality. Together, our results strongly argue in favor of a pivotal role of innate immunity in COVID-19 severe infections and pleads for targeted therapeutic options.

COVID-19 : les thérapeutiques Therapeutic options for COVID-19 patients

Les thérapeutiques en cours d’évaluation pour la COVID-19 interviennent à différents stades de la maladie. Alors que la prophylaxie à large échelle en population générale fait désormais appel à la vaccination, des molécules antivirales sont en cours d’évaluation pour la prophylaxie post-exposition, dont les anticorps monoclonaux, notamment chez les patients à haut risque d’évolution vers une forme sévère de COVID-19. La phase précoce de la maladie, symptomatique ou non, pourrait bénéficier d'une stimulation de l'immunité antivirale naturelle, comme les interférons de type 1 ou de l'administration de traitements antiviraux, et notamment les anticorps monoclonaux. À une phase plus avancée de la maladie, la corticothérapie a montré un bénéfice sur la mortalité chez des patients en hospitalisation conventionnelle ou en réanimation nécessitant un support en oxygène. Malgré de nombreux échecs de traitements antiviraux, des molécules antivirales ainsi que des thérapies ciblées anti-inflammatoires sont encore en cours d’évaluation.

COVID-19 : les thérapeutiques

Résumé Les thérapeutiques en cours d’évaluation pour la COVID-19 interviennent à différents stades de la maladie. Alors que la prophylaxie à large échelle en population générale fait désormais appel à la vaccination, des molécules antivirales sont en cours d’évaluation pour la prophylaxie post-exposition, dont les anticorps monoclonaux, notamment chez les patients à haut risque d’évolution vers une forme sévère de COVID-19. La phase précoce de la maladie, symptomatique ou non, pourrait bénéficier d'une stimulation de l'immunité antivirale naturelle, comme les interférons de type 1 ou de l'administration de traitements antiviraux, et notamment les anticorps monoclonaux. À une phase plus avancée de la maladie, la corticothérapie a montré un bénéfice sur la mortalité chez des patients en hospitalisation conventionnelle ou en réanimation nécessitant un support en oxygène. Malgré de nombreux échecs de traitements antiviraux, des molécules antivirales ainsi que des thérapies ciblées anti-inflammatoires sont encore en cours d’évaluation. There are different therapeutics options to treat COVID-19 at different stages of the disease. While large-scale prophylaxis in the general population now relies on vaccination, antiviral molecules such as monoclonal antibodies are being evaluated for post-exposure prophylaxis, particularly in patients at high risk of severe forms of COVID-19. The early phase of the disease, whether symptomatic or not, could benefit from stimulation of natural antiviral immunity such as type 1 interferons and/or from the administration of antiviral treatments including monoclonal antibodies. In more advanced stages of the disease, corticosteroid therapy has shown a benefit on mortality in hospitalized patients requiring oxygen support. Despite numerous disappointments of antiviral treatments, antiviral molecules are still being evaluated as well as targeted anti-inflammatory therapies.

Sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. METHODS: We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04327388; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. FINDINGS: Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference -1·7 [-9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [-6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI -7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group. INTERPRETATION: This trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

Added value of rapid respiratory syndromic testing at point of care versus central laboratory testing: a controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Virus-associated respiratory infections are in the spotlight with the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and the expanding use of multiplex PCR (mPCR). The impact of molecular testing as a point-of-care test (POCT) in the emergency department (ED) is still unclear. OBJECTIVES: To compare the impact of a syndromic test performed in the ED as a POCT and in the central laboratory on length of stay (LOS), antibiotic use and single-room assignment. METHODS: From 19 November 2019 to 9 March 2020, adults with acute respiratory illness seeking care in the ED of a large hospital were enrolled, with mPCR performed with a weekly alternation in the ED as a POCT (week A) or in the central laboratory (week B). RESULTS: 474 patients were analysed: 275 during A weeks and 199 during B weeks. Patient characteristics were similar. The hospital LOS (median 7 days during week A versus 7 days during week B, P = 0.29), the proportion of patients with ED-LOS <1 day (63% versus 60%, P = 0.57) and ED antibiotic prescription (59% versus 58%, P = 0.92) were not significantly different. Patients in the POCT arm were more frequently assigned a single room when having a positive PCR for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus and metapneumovirus [52/70 (74%) versus 19/38 (50%) in the central testing arm, P = 0.012]. CONCLUSIONS: Syndromic testing performed in the ED compared with the central laboratory failed to reduce the LOS or antibiotic consumption in patients with acute respiratory illness, but was associated with an increased single-room assignment among patients in whom a significant respiratory pathogen was detected.

Impact of ICU transfers on the mortality rate of patients with COVID-19: insights from comprehensive national database in France.

BACKGROUND: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic confronted healthcare systems around the world with unprecedented organizational challenges, particularly regarding the availability of intensive care unit (ICU) beds. One strategy implemented in France to alleviate healthcare pressure during the first COVID-19 wave was inter-hospital transfers of selected ICU patients from overwhelmed areas towards less saturated ones. At the time, the impact of this transfer strategy on patient mortality was unknown. We aimed to compare in-hospital mortality rates among ICU patients with COVID-19 who were transferred to another healthcare facility and those who remained in the hospital where they were initially admitted to. METHOD: A prospective observational study was performed from 1 March to 21 June 2020. Data regarding hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were collected from the Ministry of Health-affiliated national SI-VIC registry. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: In total, 93,351 hospital admissions of COVID-19 patients were registered, of which 18,348 (19.6%) were ICU admissions. Transferred patients (n = 2228) had a lower mortality rate than their non-transferred counterparts (n = 15,303), and the risk decreased with increasing transfer distance (odds ratio (OR) 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6-0.9, p = 0.001 for transfers between 10 and 50 km, and OR 0.3, 95% CI: 0.2-0.4, p < 0.0001 for transfer distance > 200 km). Mortality decreased overall over the 3-month study period. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that the mortality rates were lower for patients with severe COVID-19 who were transferred between ICUs across regions, or internationally, during the first pandemic wave in France. However, the global mortality rate declined overall during the study. Transferring selected patients with COVID-19 from overwhelmed regions to areas with greater capacity may have improved patient access to ICU care, without compounding the short-term mortality risk of transferred patients.

Sociodemographic characteristics and transmission risk factors in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 before and during the lockdown in France.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of lockdown in containing the COVID-19 pandemic has been reported in different studies. However, the impact on sociodemographic characteristics of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 has not been evaluated. The aim of this study was to describe the changes in sociodemographic characteristics of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and to compare the transmission risk factors of COVID-19 before and during lockdown in France. METHODS: An observational retrospective study was conducted in a University Hospital in Paris, France. Data from patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in the Infectious Diseases Department between February 26 and May 11, 2020 were collected. The study population was divided into 2 groups: group A of patients infected before lockdown, and group B of patients infected during lockdown, considering a maximum incubation period of 14 days. Sociodemographic characteristics and transmission risk factors were compared between the 2 groups using Student's t-test for continuous variables and Chi-2 test or Fisher exact test for categorical variables. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-three patients were included in the study, 305 (79.6%) in group A and 78 (20.4%) in group B. Patients in group A were significantly younger (60.0 versus (vs) 66.5 years (p = 0.03)). The professionally active population was larger in group A (44.3% vs 24.4%). There were significantly more non-French-speaking people in group B (16.7% vs 6.6%, p <  0.01). Most patients from group A had individual accommodation (92.8% vs 74.4%, p <  0.01). Contact with a relative was the main transmission risk factor in both groups (24.6% vs 33.3%, p = 0.16). Recent travel and large gathering were found only in group A. The proportion of people living in disadvantaged conditions, such as homeless people or people living in social housing, was significantly higher in group B (11.5% vs 4.3%, p = 0.03) as was the proportion of institutionalized individuals (14.1% vs 3.0%, p <  0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this study conducted in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in Paris, France, the likelihood of being infected despite the lockdown was higher for people who do not speak French, live in social housing, are homeless or institutionalized. Targeted measures have to be implemented to protect these populations.

A new SARS-CoV-2 variant with high lethality poorly detected by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples: an observational study.

OBJECTIVES: In early January 2021 an outbreak of nosocomial cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in Western France; RT-PCR tests were repeatedly negative on nasopharyngeal samples but positive on lower respiratory tract samples. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) revealed a new variant, currently defining a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) lineage B.1.616. In March, the WHO classified this as a 'variant under investigation' (VUI). We analysed the characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 cases related to this new variant. METHODS: Clinical, virological, and radiological data were retrospectively collected from medical charts in the two hospitals involved. We enrolled those inpatients with: (a) positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on a respiratory sample, (b) seroconversion with anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM, or (c) suggestive symptoms and typical features of COVID-19 on a chest CT scan. Cases were categorized as B.1.616, a variant of concern (VOC), or unknown. RESULTS: From 1st January to 24th March 2021, 114 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria: B.1.616 (n = 39), VOC (n = 32), and unknown (n = 43). B.1.616-related cases were older than VOC-related cases (81 years, interquartile range (IQR) 73-88 versus 73 years, IQR 67-82, p < 0.05) and their first RT-PCR tests were rarely positive (6/39, 15% versus 31/32, 97%, p < 0.05). The B.1.616 variant was independently associated with severe disease (multivariable Cox model HR 4.0, 95%CI 1.5-10.9) and increased lethality (28-day mortality 18/39 (46%) for B.1.616 versus 5/32 (16%) for VOC, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: We report a nosocomial outbreak of COVID-19 cases related to a new variant, B.1.616, which is poorly detected by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples and is associated with high lethality.

Cholangitis in three critically ill patients after a severe CoVID-19 infection.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19) is a viral disease. Although the predominant presentation is respiratory disease, other manifestations such as gastrointestinal manifestations are commonly reported. Nevertheless, it has not been associated with chronic cholangitis or hepatic injury. In this study, we report three cases of severe CoVID-19 infection that required ICU admission, intubation, and sedation with ketamine. All three patients had abnormal liver function despite recovery and were diagnosed with cholangitis in the context of CoVID-19.

Fourteen-day survival among older adults with severe infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 treated with corticosteroid: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids among older adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia requiring oxygen. METHODS: We used routine care data from 36 hospitals in France and Luxembourg to assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids with at least 0.4 mg/kg/day equivalent prednisone (treatment group) versus standard of care (control group). Participants were adults aged 80 years or older with PCR-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or CT scan images typical of COVID-19 pneumonia, requiring oxygen ≥3 L/min, and with an inflammatory syndrome (C-reactive protein ≥40 mg/L). The primary outcome was overall survival at day 14. In our main analysis, characteristics of patients at baseline (i.e. time when patients met all inclusion criteria) were balanced by using propensity-score inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: Among the 267 patients included in the analysis, 98 were assigned to the treatment group. Their median age was 86 years (interquartile range 83-90 years) and 95% had a SARS-CoV-2 PCR-confirmed diagnosis. In total, 43/98 (43.9%) patients in the treatment group and 84/166 (50.6%) in the control group died before day 14 (weighted hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.99). The treatment and control groups did not differ significantly for the proportion of patients discharged to home/rehabilitation at day 14 (weighted relative risk 1.12, 95% CI 0.68-1.82). Twenty-two (16.7%) patients receiving corticosteroids developed adverse events, but only 11 (6.4%) from the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroids were associated with a significant increase in the overall survival at day 14 of patients aged 80 years and older hospitalized for severe COVID-19.

An open-label randomized controlled trial of the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir plus IFN-ß-1a and hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the clinical, virological and safety outcomes of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-interferon (IFN)-ß-1a, hydroxychloroquine or remdesivir in comparison to standard of care (control) in coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) inpatients requiring oxygen and/or ventilatory support. METHODS: We conducted a phase III multicentre, open-label, randomized 1:1:1:1:1, adaptive, controlled trial (DisCoVeRy), an add-on to the Solidarity trial (NCT04315948, EudraCT2020-000936-23). The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15, measured by the WHO seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes included quantification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in respiratory specimens and pharmacokinetic and safety analyses. We report the results for the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms and for the hydroxychloroquine arm, trials of which were stopped prematurely. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 583 participants-lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 145), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-ß-1a (n = 145), hydroxychloroquine (n = 145), control (n = 148)-among whom 418 (71.7%) were male, the median age was 63 years (IQR 54-71), and 211 (36.2%) had a severe disease. The day-15 clinical status was not improved with the investigational treatments: lopinavir/ritonavir versus control, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.83, (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.26, p 0.39), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-ß-1a versus control, aOR 0.69 (95%CI 0.45-1.04, p 0.08), and hydroxychloroquine versus control, aOR 0.93 (95%CI 0.62-1.41, p 0.75). No significant effect of investigational treatment was observed on SARS-CoV-2 clearance. Trough plasma concentrations of lopinavir and ritonavir were higher than those expected, while those of hydroxychloroquine were those expected with the dosing regimen. The occurrence of serious adverse events was significantly higher in participants allocated to the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms. CONCLUSION: In adults hospitalized for COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-ß-1a and hydroxychloroquine improved neither the clinical status at day 15 nor SARS-CoV-2 clearance in respiratory tract specimens.

Long-Term Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infectiousness Among Three Immunocompromised Patients: From Prolonged Viral Shedding to SARS-CoV-2 Superinfection.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for stopping coronavirus disease 2019 patient isolation are mainly symptom-based, with isolation for 10 to 20 days depending on their condition. METHODS: In this study, we describe 3 deeply immunocompromised patients, each with different clinical evolutions. We observed (1) the patients' epidemiological, clinical, and serological data, (2) infectiousness using viral culture, and (3) viral mutations accumulated over time. RESULTS: Asymptomatic carriage, symptom resolution, or superinfection with a second severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 strain were observed, all leading to prolonged infectious viral shedding for several months. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding underlying mechanisms and frequency of prolonged infectiousness is crucial to adapt current guidelines and strengthen the use of systematic polymerase chain reaction testing before stopping isolation in immunocompromised populations.

Residual ground glass opacities three months after Covid-19 pneumonia correlate to alteration of respiratory function: The post Covid M3 study.

INTRODUCTION: Lung function in survivors of SARS-Co-V2 pneumonia is poorly known, but concern over the possibility of sequelae exists. METHODS: Retrospective study on survivors with confirmed infection and pneumonia on chest-CT. Correlations between PFT and residual radiologic anomalies at three months taking into account initial clinical and radiological severity and steroid use during acute phase. RESULTS: 137 patients (69 men, median age 59 (Q1 50; Q3 68), BMI 27.5 kg/m2 (25.1; 31.7)) were assessed. Only 32.9% had normal PFT, 75 had altered DLCO. Median (Q1; Q3) values were: VC 79 (66; 92) % pred, FEV1 81 (68; 89), TLC 78 (67; 85), DLCO 60 (44; 72), and KCO 89 (77; 105). Ground glass opacities (GGO) were present in 103 patients (75%), reticulations in 42 (30%), and fibrosis in 18 (13%). There were significantly lower FEV1 (p = 0.0089), FVC (p = 0.0010), TLC (p < 0.0001) and DLCO (p < 0.0001) for patients with GGO, lower TLC (p = 0.0913) and DLCO (p = 0.0181) between patients with reticulations and lower FVC (p = 0.0618), TLC (p = 0.0742) DLCO (p = 0.002) and KCO (p = 0.0114) between patients with fibrosis. Patients with initial ≥50% lung involvement had significantly lower FEV1 (p = 0.0019), FVC (p = 0.0033), TLC (p = 0.0028) and DLCO (p = 0.0003) compared to patients with ≤10%. There was no difference in PFT and residual CT lesions between patients who received steroids and those who did not. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients have altered PFT at three months, even in patients with mild initial disease, with significantly lower function in patients with residual CT lesions. Steroids do not seem to modify functional and radiological recovery. Long-term follow-up is needed.