ABSTRACT
SARS-CoV-2 is constantly evolving leading to new variants. We analysed data from 4,400 SARS-CoV-2-positive samples in order to continue variant surveillance in Italy to evaluate their epidemiological and relative impact on public health in the period April-December 2021. The main circulating strain (76.2%) was Delta followed by Alpha (13.3%), Omicron (5.3%) and Gamma variants (2.9%). B.1.1 lineages, Eta, Beta, Iota, Mu and Kappa variants represented around 1% of cases. Overall, 48.2% of subjects were not vaccinated with a lower median age compared to vaccinated subjects (47 vs. 61 years). An increasing number of infections in vaccinated subjects was observed overtime, with the highest proportion in November (85.2%). Variants correlated with clinical status; the largest proportion of symptomatic patients (59.6%) was observed among Delta variant, while subjects harboring Gamma variant showed the highest proportion of asymptomatics (21.6%), albeit also of deaths (5.4%). The Omicron variant was only found in vac-cinated subjects, of which 47% were hospitalized. Diffusivity and pathogenicity associated with the different SARS-CoV-2 variants are likely to have relevant public health implications, both at national and international level. Our study pro-vides data on the rapid changes in the epidemiological landscape of SARS-CoV-2 variants in Italy.
ABSTRACT
Background Recent in-vitro data have shown that the activity of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting SARS-CoV-2 varies according to the Variant of Concern (VOC). No studies have compared the clinical efficacy of different mAbs against Omicron VOC. Methods The MANTICO trial is a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical efficacy of bamlanivimab/etesevimab, casirivimab/imdevimab, and sotrovimab in outpatients aged 50 or older with early COVID-19. As the patient enrolment was interrupted for possible futility after the onset of the Omicron wave, the analysis was performed according to the SARS-CoV-2 VOC. The primary outcome was COVID-19 progression (hospitalisation, need of supplemental oxygen therapy, or death through day 14). Secondary outcomes included the time to symptom resolution, assessed using the product-limit method. Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox proportional hazard model were used to assess the association with predictors. Log rank test was used to compare survival functions. Results Overall, 319 patients were included. Among 141 patients infected with Delta, no disease progression was recorded and the time to symptom resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups (Log-rank Chi-square 0.22, p 0.895). Among 170 patients infected with Omicron (80.6% BA.1, 19.4% BA.1.1), two disease progressions were recorded in the bamlanivimab/etesevimab group and the median time to symptom resolution was 5 days shorter in the sotrovimab group compared to bamlanivimab/etesevimab and casirivimab/imdevimab (HR 0.526 and HR 0.451, 95% CI 0.359 - 0.77 and 95% CI 0.303 - 0.669, p 0.001 and 0.0001, respectively). Conclusions These results confirm the in-vitro data of superiority of sotrovimab versus casirivimab/imdevimab and bamlanivimab/etesivamab in reducing the time to recovery in patients infected with Omicron BA.1 and BA.1.1, while no difference was detected in Delta infections. Casirivimab/imdevimab seems to maintain a role in preventing severe COVID-19 in the Omicron population. Adaptive clinical trials comparing mAbs by VOC should be pursued to promptly inform clinical recommendations.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , DeathABSTRACT
Background: Identifying risk factors for severe novel-coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is useful to ascertain which patients may benefit from advanced supportive care. The study offers a description of COVID-19 patients, admitted to a general ward for a non-critical clinical picture, with the aim to analyse the differences between those transferred to the intensive (ICU) and/or sub-intensive care (SICU) units and those who were not. Methods: This observational retrospective study includes all COVID-19 patients admitted to the Infectious Diseases Unit. Clinical, laboratory, radiological and treatment data were collected. The primary outcome was a composite of need of transfer to the ICU and/or SICU during the hospitalization. Patients who did not require to be transferred are defined as Group 1; patients who were transferred to the ICU and/or SICU are defined as Group 2. Demographic, clinical characteristics and laboratory findings at the 1 st , 3 rd and last measurements were compared between the two groups. Results: 303 patients were included. The median age was 62 years. 69 patients (22.8%) met the primary outcome and were defined as Group 2. The overall fatality rate was 6.8%. Group 2 patients were predominantly male (76.8% vs. 55.1%, p<0.01), had a higher fatality rate (14.5% vs. 3.8%, p<0,01), had more hypertension (72.4% vs. 44%, p<0,01) and diabetes (31.9% vs. 21%, p=0.04) and were more likely to present dry cough (49.3% vs. 25.2%, p<0.01). Overall, chest X-ray at admission showed findings suggestive of pneumonia in 63.2%, and Group 2 were more likely to develop pathological findings during the hospitalization (72.7% vs. 17.2%, p=0.01). At admission, Group 2 presented significantly higher neutrophil count, aspartate-transaminase and C-reactive-protein. At the 3 rd measurement, Group 2 presented persistently higher neutrophil count, hepatic inflammation markers and C-reactive-protein. Group 1 presented a shorter duration from admission to negativization of follow-up swabs (20 vs. 35 days, p<0.01). Conclusions: The presence of comorbidities and the persistent observation of abnormal laboratory findings should be regarded as predisposing factors for clinical worsening.