ABSTRACT
Background and aims Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) plasma concentration decline is a biomarker for acute inflammatory diseases, including coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Phenotypic changes in LDL during COVID-19 may be equally related to adverse clinical outcomes. Methods Individuals hospitalized due to COVID-19 (n = 40) were enrolled. Blood samples were collected on days 0, 2, 4, 6, and 30 (D0, D2, D4, D6, and D30). Oxidized LDL (ox-LDL), and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) activity were measured. In a consecutive series of cases (n = 13), LDL was isolated by gradient ultracentrifugation from D0 and D6 and was quantified by lipidomic analysis. Association between clinical outcomes and LDL phenotypic changes was investigated. Results In the first 30 days, 42.5% of participants died due to Covid-19. The serum ox-LDL increased from D0 to D6 (p < 0.005) and decreased at D30. Moreover, individuals who had an ox-LDL increase from D0 to D6 to over the 90th percentile died. The plasma Lp-PLA2 activity also increased progressively from D0 to D30 (p < 0.005), and the change from D0 to D6 in Lp-PLA2 and ox-LDL were positively correlated (r = 0.65, p < 0.0001). An exploratory untargeted lipidomic analysis uncovered 308 individual lipids in isolated LDL particles. Paired-test analysis from D0 and D6 revealed higher concentrations of 32 lipid species during disease progression, mainly represented by lysophosphatidyl choline and phosphatidylinositol. In addition, 69 lipid species were exclusively modulated in the LDL particles from non-survivors as compared to survivors. Conclusions Phenotypic changes in LDL particles are associated with disease progression and adverse clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients and could serve as a potential prognostic biomarker.
ABSTRACT
Background The unprecedented public health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has motivated a rapid search for potential therapeutics, with some key successes. However, the potential impact of different treatments, and consequently research and procurement priorities, have not been clear. Methods and Findings We develop a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, COVID-19 disease and clinical care to explore the potential public-health impact of a range of different potential therapeutics, under a range of different scenarios varying: i) healthcare capacity, ii) epidemic trajectories; and iii) drug efficacy in the absence of supportive care. In each case, the outcome of interest was the number of COVID-19 deaths averted in scenarios with the therapeutic compared to scenarios without. We find the impact of drugs like dexamethasone (which are delivered to the most critically-ill in hospital and whose therapeutic benefit is expected to depend on the availability of supportive care such as oxygen and mechanical ventilation) is likely to be limited in settings where healthcare capacity is lowest or where uncontrolled epidemics result in hospitals being overwhelmed. As such, it may avert 22% of deaths in high-income countries but only 8% in low-income countries (assuming R=1.35). Therapeutics for different patient populations (those not in hospital, early in the course of infection) and types of benefit (reducing disease severity or infectiousness, preventing hospitalisation) could have much greater benefits, particularly in resource-poor settings facing large epidemics. Conclusions There is a global asymmetry in who is likely to benefit from advances in the treatment of COVID-19 to date, which have been focussed on hospitalised-patients and predicated on an assumption of adequate access to supportive care. Therapeutics that can feasibly be delivered to those earlier in the course of infection that reduce the need for healthcare or reduce infectiousness could have significant impact, and research into their efficacy and means of delivery should be a priority.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background: The unprecedented public health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has motivated a rapid search for potential therapeutics, with some key successes. However, the potential impact of current and proposed treatments, and consequently research and procurement priorities, have not been clear. Methods: First, we used a model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, COVID-19 disease and clinical care pathways to explore the potential impact of dexamethasone - the main treatment currently for hospitalised COVID-19 patients - under scenarios varying: i) healthcare capacity, ii) epidemic trajectories; and iii) the efficacy of dexamethasone in the absence of supportive care. We then fit the model to the observed epidemic trajectory to-date in 165 countries and analysed the potential future impact of dexamethasone in different countries, regions, and country-income strata. Finally, we constructed hypothetical profiles of novel therapeutics based on current trials, and compared the potential impact of each under different circumstances. In each case, the outcome of interest was the number of COVID-19 deaths averted in scenarios with the therapeutic compared to scenarios without. Findings: We find the potential benefit dexamethasone is severely limited in settings where healthcare capacity is lowest or where uncontrolled epidemics result in hospitals being overwhelmed. As such, it may avert 22% of deaths in high-income countries but only 8% in low-income countries (assuming R=1.35). However, therapeutics for different patient populations (in particular, those not in hospital and early in the course of infection) and types of benefit (in particular, reducing disease severity or infectiousness) could have much greater benefits. Such therapeutics would have particular value in resource-poor settings facing large epidemics, even if the efficacy or achievable coverage of such therapeutics is lower in comparison to other types. Interpretation: People in low-income countries will benefit the least from advances in the treatment of COVID-19 to date, which have focussed on hospitalised-patients with adequate access to supportive care. Therapeutics that can feasibly be delivered to those earlier in the course of infection that reduce the need for healthcare or reduce infectiousness could have much greater impact. Such therapeutics may be feasible and research into their efficacy and means of delivery should be a priority. Funding: None to declare. Declaration of Interest: None to declare.