Factors Associated With Enrollment into Inpatient Coronavirus Disease 2019 Randomized Controlled Trials: A Cross-sectional Analysis.

Background: Clinical trials for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have struggled to achieve diverse patient enrollment, despite underrepresented groups bearing the largest burden of the disease and, presumably, being most in need of the treatments under investigation. Methods: To assess the willingness of patients to enroll into inpatient COVID-19 clinical trials when invited, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who were approached regarding enrollment. Associations between patient and temporal factors and enrollment were assessed by multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 926 patients were included in this analysis. Overall, Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity was associated with a nearly half-fold decrease in the likelihood to enroll (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.60 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .41-.88]). Greater baseline disease severity (aOR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.17]), age 40-64 years (aOR, 1.83 [95% CI, 1.03-3.25]), and age ≥65 years (aOR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.08-3.42]) were each independently associated with higher likelihood to enroll. Over the course of the pandemic, patients were less likely to enroll during the summer 2021 wave in COVID-19-related hospitalizations (aOR, 0.14 [95% CI, .10-.19]) compared with patients from the first wave in winter 2020. Conclusions: The decision to enroll into clinical trials is multifactorial. Amid a pandemic disproportionately affecting vulnerable groups, Hispanic/Latinx patients were less likely to participate when invited, whereas older adults were more likely. Future recruitment strategies must consider the nuanced perceptions and needs of diverse patient populations to ensure equitable trial participation that advances the quality of healthcare for all.

Effect of Thymalfasin (Thymosin-α-1) on Reversing Lymphocytopenia among Patients with COVID-19

Introduction Thymosin-α-1 (Tα1) elevates lymphocyte counts among patients with COVID-19, but its effect on reversing lymphocytopenia is unknown. Methods 24 patients treated with Tα1 and 100 patients in the control arm were included in this analysis. The incidence rate of reversing lymphocytopenia, overall and stratified by baseline oxygen support, above the threshold for classification of lymphocytopenia (i.e., Total Lymphocyte Count (TLC) < 1.5 x 109/L) and severe lymphocytopenia (i.e., TLC < 1.0 x 109/L) within 3, 5, and 7 days of treatment initiation was calculated, along with incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Compared with the standard of care, the rate of reversing lymphocytopenia (IRR: 2.38, 95% CI: 0.92 – 5.81) and severe lymphocytopenia (IRR: 1.57, 95% CI: 0.59 – 3.72), especially among patients with severe lymphocytopenia on high flow oxygen support (IRR: 3.64, 95% CI: 0.71 – 23.44), was greater for patients treated with Tα1 within 3 days of treatment initiation, although analyses were not significant. Conclusion Among patients with hypoxemia and lymphocytopenia, Tα1 may reverse lymphocytopenia and severe lymphocytopenia, particularly within 3 days of treatment initiation, faster than the standard of care.

A Pilot Trial of Thymalfasin (Tα1) to Treat Hospitalized Patients with Hypoxemia and Lymphocytopenia due to COVID-19 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Thymosin-α-1 (Tα1) may be a treatment option for COVID-19, but efficacy and safety data remain limited. METHODS: Prospective, open-label, randomized trial assessing preliminary efficacy and safety of thymalfasin (synthetic form of Tα1), compared with standard of care, among hospitalized patients with hypoxemia and lymphocytopenia due to COVID-19. RESULTS: 49 patients were included in this analysis. Compared with control patients, the incidence of clinical recovery was higher for treated patients with either baseline low flow oxygen (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]: 1.48; 95% CI: 0.68-3.25) or baseline high flow oxygen (SHR: 1.28; 95% CI: 0.35-4.63), although neither were significant. Among patients with baseline low flow oxygen, treated patients, compared with control patients, had an average difference of 3.84 times more CD4+ T cells on Day 5 than on Day 1 (p = 0.0113). Nine serious adverse events among treated patients were deemed not related to Tα1. CONCLUSION: Tα1 increases CD4+ T cell count among patients with baseline low flow oxygen support faster than standard of care and may have a role in the management of hospitalized patients with hypoxemia and lymphocytopenia due to COVID-19.

Efficacy and Safety of Ensovibep for Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19 : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ensovibep (MP0420) is a designed ankyrin repeat protein, a novel class of engineered proteins, under investigation as a treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. OBJECTIVE: To investigate if ensovibep, in addition to remdesivir and other standard care, improves clinical outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with standard care alone. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978). SETTING: Multinational, multicenter trial. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: Intravenous ensovibep, 600 mg, or placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Ensovibep was assessed for early futility on the basis of pulmonary ordinal scores at day 5. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery through day 90, defined as 14 consecutive days at home or place of usual residence after hospital discharge. A composite safety outcome that included death, serious adverse events, end-organ disease, and serious infections was assessed through day 90. RESULTS: An independent data and safety monitoring board recommended that enrollment be halted for early futility after 485 patients were randomly assigned and received an infusion of ensovibep (n = 247) or placebo (n = 238). The odds ratio (OR) for a more favorable pulmonary outcome in the ensovibep (vs. placebo) group at day 5 was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.30; P = 0.68; OR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The 90-day cumulative incidence of sustained recovery was 82% for ensovibep and 80% for placebo (subhazard ratio [sHR], 1.06 [CI, 0.88 to 1.28]; sHR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The primary composite safety outcome at day 90 occurred in 78 ensovibep participants (32%) and 70 placebo participants (29%) (HR, 1.07 [CI, 0.77 to 1.47]; HR < 1 would favor ensovibep). LIMITATION: The trial was prematurely stopped because of futility, limiting power for the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Compared with placebo, ensovibep did not improve clinical outcomes for hospitalized participants with COVID-19 receiving standard care, including remdesivir; no safety concerns were identified. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

How Comorbidities Affect Hospitalization from Influenza in the Pediatric Population.

Influenza is a contagious respiratory illness and can lead to hospitalization and even death. Understanding how comorbidities affect the severity of influenza can help clinical management. The aim of this study is to offer more information about comorbidities that might be associated with the severity of influenza in children. We used a statewide network in Rhode Island, USA, to extract data for laboratory-confirmed influenza cases among children 19 years old or younger. We identified 1169 lab-confirmed influenza cases. The most common comorbidities were asthma (17.1%), neurodevelopmental disorders (10.3%), gastrointestinal disorders (7.6%), atopic dermatitis (7%), and endocrine and metabolic diseases (6.8%). Interestingly, 80.8% (63 out of 78) of children who had an influenza-related hospital admission had at least one comorbidity, and among hospitalized children with influenza, the most common comorbidities were neurological diseases (28.2%, 22/78), gastrointestinal disorders (25.6%, 20/78), endocrine and metabolic diseases (24.4%, 19/78), and neurodevelopmental disorders (23.1%, 18/78). Children with endocrine or metabolic diseases were 8.23 times more likely to be admitted to the hospital, and children with neurological disorders were 6.35 times more likely to be admitted (OR: 8.23, 95% CI: 4.42-15.32 and OR: 6.35, 95% CI: 3.60-11.24, respectively). In summary, we identified specific comorbidities associated with influenza hospitalization and length of hospital stay, and these groups should be prioritized for public health interventions.

Clinical Outcomes of Adult Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 after Vaccination.

Vaccination remains the most effective way to prevent COVID-19. The aim of the present study was to assess the incidence of COVID-19 hospitalizations after vaccination, as well as the effect of prior vaccination on hospitalization outcomes among patients with COVID-19. We analyzed and compared all consecutive patients, with or without prior vaccination, who were admitted to our hospital network due to COVID-19 from January to April 2021. Our primary outcome was to identify and describe cases of COVID-19 hospitalized after vaccination. We also utilized a multivariate logistic regression model to investigate the association of previous vaccination with hospitalization outcomes. We identified 915 consecutive patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 with 91/915 (10%) previously vaccinated with at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Utilizing our multivariate logistic regression model, we found that prior vaccination, regardless of the number of doses or days since vaccination, was associated with decreased mortality (aOR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.20-0.98) when compared to unvaccinated individuals. Our study showed that COVID-19 related hospitalization after vaccination may occur to a small percentage of patients, mainly those who are partially vaccinated. However, our findings underline that prior vaccination, even when partial, is associated with a decreased risk of death. Ongoing vaccination efforts should remain an absolute priority.

Convalescent Plasma for Patients With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of convalescent plasma (CP) for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. METHODS: In a matched cohort analysis of hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19, the impact of CP treatment on in-hospital mortality was evaluated using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards models, and the impact of CP treatment on time to hospital discharge was assessed using a stratified log-rank analysis. RESULTS: In total, 64 patients who received CP a median of 7 days after symptom onset were compared to a matched control group of 177 patients. The incidence of in-hospital mortality was 12.5% and 15.8% in the CP and control groups, respectively (P = .52). There was no significant difference in the risk of in-hospital mortality between the 2 groups (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] .39-2.20). The overall rate of hospital discharge was not significantly different between the 2 groups (rate ratio [RR] 1.28, 95% CI .91-1.81), although there was a significantly increased rate of hospital discharge among patients 65-years-old or greater who received CP (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.03-3.36). There was a greater than expected frequency of transfusion reactions in the CP group (2.8% reaction rate observed per unit transfused). CONCLUSIONS: We did not demonstrate a significant difference in risk of mortality or rate of hospital discharge between the CP and control groups. There was a signal for improved outcomes among the elderly, and further adequately powered randomized studies should target this subgroup when assessing the efficacy of CP treatment.

Mortality in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19: a systematic review.

Introduction: The use of mechanical ventilation associated with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, the most common complication in critically ill COVID-19 patients, defines a high risk population that requires specific consideration of outcomes and treatment practices.Areas covered: This review evaluates existing information about mortality rates and effectiveness of antiviral, immune-modulating, and anticoagulation treatments in COVID-19 patients who received mechanical ventilation. The mortality rate and follow-up periods in patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged widely. Antivirals, including remdesivir and convalescent plasma, have shown no definitive mortality benefit in this population despite positive results in other COVID-19 patients. Dexamethasone was associated with an absolute reduction in 28-day mortality by 12.3% (95% CI, 6.3 to 17.6), after adjusting for age. Reduced mortality has been demonstrated with tocilizumab use alongside corticosteroids. Evidence is inconclusive for therapeutic anticoagulation, and further studies are needed to determine the comparative benefit of prophylactic anticoagulation.Expert opinion: Significant variation and high mortality rates in mechanically ventilated patients necessitate more standardized outcome measurements, increased consideration of risk factors to reduce intubation, and improved treatment practices. Anticoagulation and dexamethasone should be incorporated in the treatment of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, while more rigorous studies are required for other potential treatments.

Characteristics and outcomes of Hispanic/Latinx patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) requiring hospitalization in Rhode Island: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Explore potential racial/ethnic differences, describe general clinical characteristic, and severe outcomes (intensive care unit [ICU] admission, mechanical ventilation [intubation], and death) between Hispanic/Latinx (hereafter: Hispanics or Latinx community) and non-Hispanic patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: Retrospective cohort of 326 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 through April 19, 2020. Sociodemographic and hospital course data were collected and analyzed. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was implemented to examine associations. RESULTS: Compared with non-Hispanic Whites (NHW), Hispanics were younger (53 years, median age) and had higher rates of Medicaid and less commercial/HMO/PPO coverage (P < .001). Similarly, in the age sub-grouped multivariate analysis for outcomes, Hispanics ≥65-year-old were 2.66 times more likely to be admitted to ICU (95% CI: 1.07-6.61; P = .03), and 3.67 times more likely to get intubated (95% CI: 1.29-10.36; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized Hispanic patients of ≥65-year-old with COVID-19 were more likely to have higher risk of more severe outcomes (ICU admission and intubation) compared with NHW. Hispanic patient's social determinants of health and underlying medical conditions may explain the heightened risk for severe outcomes. Further studies are necessary to more accurately identify and address health disparities in Hispanics and other vulnerable populations amidst COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Real-Time Spatiotemporal Analysis of Microepidemics of Influenza and COVID-19 Based on Hospital Network Data: Colocalization of Neighborhood-Level Hotspots.

Objectives. To identify spatiotemporal patterns of epidemic spread at the community level.Methods. We extracted influenza cases reported between 2016 and 2019 and COVID-19 cases reported in March and April 2020 from a hospital network in Rhode Island. We performed a spatiotemporal hotspot analysis to simulate a real-time surveillance scenario.Results. We analyzed 6527 laboratory-confirmed influenza cases and identified microepidemics in more than 1100 neighborhoods, and more than half of the neighborhoods that had hotspots in a season became hotspots in the next season. We used data from 731 COVID-19 cases, and we found that a neighborhood was 1.90 times more likely to become a COVID-19 hotspot if it had been an influenza hotspot in 2018 to 2019.Conclusions. The use of readily available hospital data allows the real-time identification of spatiotemporal trends and hotspots of microepidemics.Public Health Implications. As local governments move to reopen the economy and ease physical distancing, the use of historic influenza hotspots could guide early prevention interventions, while the real-time identification of hotspots would enable the implementation of interventions that focus on small-area containment and mitigation.

Clinical Presentation, Course, and Risk Factors Associated with Mortality in a Severe Outbreak of COVID-19 in Rhode Island, USA, April-June 2020.

Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) have had a disproportionally high mortality rate due to COVID-19. We describe a rapidly escalating COVID-19 outbreak among 116 LTCF residents in Rhode Island, USA. Overall, 111 (95.6%) residents tested positive and, of these, 48 (43.2%) died. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (84.7%) and cardiovascular disease (84.7%). A small percentage (9%) of residents were asymptomatic, while 33.3% of residents were pre-symptomatic, with progression to symptoms within a median of three days following the positive test. While typical symptoms of fever (80.2%) and cough (43.2%) were prevalent, shortness of breath (14.4%) was rarely found despite common hypoxemia (95.5%). The majority of patients demonstrated atypical symptoms with the most common being loss of appetite (61.3%), lethargy (42.3%), diarrhea (37.8%), and fatigue (32.4%). Many residents had increased agitation (38.7%) and anxiety (5.4%), potentially due to the restriction measures or the underlying mental illness. The fever curve was characterized by an intermittent low-grade fever, often the first presenting symptom. Mortality was associated with a disease course beginning with a loss of appetite and lethargy, as well as one more often involving fever greater than 38 °C, loss of appetite, altered mental status, diarrhea, and respiratory distress. Interestingly, no differences in age or comorbidities were noted between survivors and non-survivors. Taking demographic factors into account, treatment with anticoagulation was still associated with reduced mortality (adjusted OR 0.16; 95% C.I. 0.06-0.39; p < 0.001). Overall, the clinical features of the disease in this population can be subtle and the symptoms are commonly atypical. However, clinical decline among those who did not survive was often rapid with patients expiring within 10 days from disease detection. Further studies are needed to better explain the variability in clinical course of COVID-19 among LTCF residents, specifically the factors affecting mortality, the differences observed in symptom presentation, and rate of clinical decline.

Clinical Presentation, Course, and Risk Factors Associated with Mortality in a Severe Outbreak of COVID-19 in Rhode Island, USA, April–June 2020

Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) have had a disproportionally high mortality rate due to COVID-19. We describe a rapidly escalating COVID-19 outbreak among 116 LTCF residents in Rhode Island, USA. Overall, 111 (95.6%) residents tested positive and, of these, 48 (43.2%) died. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (84.7%) and cardiovascular disease (84.7%). A small percentage (9%) of residents were asymptomatic, while 33.3% of residents were pre-symptomatic, with progression to symptoms within a median of three days following the positive test. While typical symptoms of fever (80.2%) and cough (43.2%) were prevalent, shortness of breath (14.4%) was rarely found despite common hypoxemia (95.5%). The majority of patients demonstrated atypical symptoms with the most common being loss of appetite (61.3%), lethargy (42.3%), diarrhea (37.8%), and fatigue (32.4%). Many residents had increased agitation (38.7%) and anxiety (5.4%), potentially due to the restriction measures or the underlying mental illness. The fever curve was characterized by an intermittent low-grade fever, often the first presenting symptom. Mortality was associated with a disease course beginning with a loss of appetite and lethargy, as well as one more often involving fever greater than 38 °C, loss of appetite, altered mental status, diarrhea, and respiratory distress. Interestingly, no differences in age or comorbidities were noted between survivors and non-survivors. Taking demographic factors into account, treatment with anticoagulation was still associated with reduced mortality (adjusted OR 0.16;95% C.I. 0.06–0.39;p <0.001). Overall, the clinical features of the disease in this population can be subtle and the symptoms are commonly atypical. However, clinical decline among those who did not survive was often rapid with patients expiring within 10 days from disease detection. Further studies are needed to better explain the variability in clinical course of COVID-19 among LTCF residents, specifically the factors affecting mortality, the differences observed in symptom presentation, and rate of clinical decline.

Statin Use Is Associated with Decreased Risk of Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19 Patients: A Preliminary Study.

COVID-19 disproportionately affects patients with medical comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease (CVD). Patients with CVD are widely prescribed 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutayl-CoA (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins), a class of lipid-lowering medications known for their pleiotropic anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects. However, the relationship between statin use and COVID-19 outcomes is not fully understood. In this preliminary study, we explored the association between statin use and severe COVID-19 outcomes in hospitalized patients, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission, the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and in-hospital death. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 249 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from 3 March 2020 to 10 April 2020 in Rhode Island, USA. Patient demographics, past medical history, current medications, and hospital course were recorded and analyzed. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine associations. After adjusting for age, sex, race, cardiovascular disease, chronic pulmonary disease, diabetes, and obesity, statin use was significantly associated with decreased risk for IMV (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) = 0.45, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.20-0.99). Our results support the continued use of statins among COVID-19 patients and could have implications for future prospective studies on the management of COVID-19.

Readmissions among patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions are associated with poor patient outcomes and increased health resource utilisation. The need to study readmission patterns is even bigger during a pandemic because the burden is further stretching the healthcare system. METHODS: We reviewed the initial hospitalisation and subsequent readmission for 19 patients with confirmed COVID-19 in the largest statewide hospital network in Rhode Island, US, from March 1st through April 19th, 2020. We also compared the characteristics and clinical outcomes between readmitted and non-readmitted patients. RESULTS: Of the 339 hospitalised patients with COVID-19, 279 discharged alive. Among them, 19/279 were readmitted (6.8%) after a median of 5 days. There was a significantly higher rate of hypertension, diabetes, chronic pulmonary disease, liver disease, cancer and substance abuse among the readmitted compared with non-readmitted patients. The most common reasons of readmissions happening within 12 days from discharge included respiratory distress and thrombotic episodes, while those happening at a later time included psychiatric illness exacerbations and falls. The length of stay during readmission was longer than during index admission and more demanding on healthcare resources. CONCLUSION: Among hospitalised patients with COVID-19, those readmitted had a higher burden of comorbidities than the non-readmitted. Within the first 12 days from discharge, readmission reasons were more likely to be associated with COVID-19, while those happening later were related to other reasons. Readmissions characterisation may help in defining optimal timing for patient discharge and ensuring safe care transition.

Hydroxychloroquine use in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: An observational matched cohort study.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin) in hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We utilized a hospital based prospective data registry. The primary end point was to assess the impact of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin, on outcome, length of hospitalization, and time to clinical improvement. We utilized treatment effects with inverse-probability-weighting and Cox proportional hazards models. All analyses accounted for age, gender, race, severity on admission, days from symptoms onset and chronic comorbidities. RESULTS: 36 patients received hydroxychloroquine and were age- and sex-matched to 72 patients with COVID-19 who received supportive care. Compared to supportive care, the use of HCQ did not shorten the time to clinical improvement (+0.23 days; 95% CI: -1.8-2.3 days) nor did it shorten the duration of hospital stay (+0.91 days; 95% CI: -1.1-2.9 days). Additionally, HCQ did not decrease the risk of COVID-19 in-hospital death (aHR 1.67; 95% CI: 0.29-9.36). Finally, we observed a slight QTc prolongation from a baseline of 444 ± 26 ms to 464 ± 32 ms (mean±SD) among patients receiving hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin. CONCLUSION: This study did not yield benefits from hydroxychloroquine use in patients with COVID-19 and monitoring for adverse events is warranted. Nevertheless, the treatment was safely studied under the guidance of an antimicrobial stewardship program.

Remdesivir Use Compared With Supportive Care in Hospitalized Patients With Severe COVID-19: A Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration issued an Emergency Use Authorization for remdesivir use in patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: We utilized data from 2 quaternary acute care hospitals. The outcomes of interest were the impact of remdesivir on in-hospital death by day 28 and time to recovery, clinical improvement, and discharge. We utilized Cox proportional hazards models and stratified log-rank tests. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four patients were included in the study. The median age was 59 years; 67.0% were male; 17/125 patients (13.6%) who received supportive care and 7/99 patients (7.1%) who received remdesivir died. The unadjusted risk for 28-day in-hospital death was lower for patients who received remdesivir compared with patients who received supportive care (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.16-1.08). Although this trend remained the same after adjusting for age, sex, race, and oxygen requirements on admission (adjusted HR [aHR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.19-1.28), as well as chronic comorbidities and use of corticosteroids (aHR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.16-1.23), it did not reach statistical significance. The use of remdesivir was not associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) or liver test abnormalities. Although not statistically significant, the rate ratios for time to recovery, clinical improvement, and discharge were higher in women and black or African American patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on remdesivir had lower, albeit not significant, all-cause in-hospital mortality, and the use of remdesivir did not increase the risk for AKI. Promising signals from this study need to be confirmed by future placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials.

Emerging Technologies for Use in the Study, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused an unprecedented health and economic worldwide crisis. Innovative solutions are imperative given limited resources and immediate need for medical supplies, healthcare support and treatments. AIM: The purpose of this review is to summarize emerging technologies being implemented in the study, diagnosis, and treatment of COVID-19. RESULTS: Key focus areas include the applications of artificial intelligence, the use of Big Data and Internet of Things, the importance of mathematical modeling for predictions, utilization of technology for community screening, the use of nanotechnology for treatment and vaccine development, the utility of telemedicine, the implementation of 3D-printing to manage new demands and the potential of robotics. CONCLUSION: The review concludes by highlighting the need for collaboration in the scientific community with open sharing of knowledge, tools, and expertise.

Association of Obesity with Disease Severity Among Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the potential association of obesity and other chronic diseases with severe outcomes, such as intensive care unit (ICU) admission and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This study analyzed a retrospective cohort of 103 patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Demographic data, past medical history, and hospital course were collected and analyzed. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was implemented to examine associations. RESULTS: From February 17 to April 5, 103 consecutive patients were hospitalized with COVID-19. Among them, 44 patients (42.7%) were admitted to the ICU, and 29 (65.9%) required IMV. The prevalence of obesity was 47.5% (49 of 103). In a multivariate analysis, severe obesity (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 ) was associated with ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 5.39, 95% CI: 1.13-25.64). Moreover, patients who required IMV were more likely to have had heart disease (aOR: 3.41, 95% CI: 1.05-11.06), obesity (BMI = 30-34.9 kg/m2 ; aOR: 6.85, 95% CI: 1.05-44.82), or severe obesity (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 ; aOR: 9.99, 95% CI: 1.39-71.69). CONCLUSIONS: In our analysis, severe obesity (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 ) was associated with ICU admission, whereas history of heart disease and obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 ) were independently associated with the use of IMV. Increased vigilance and aggressive treatment of patients with obesity and COVID-19 are warranted.