Long-term mayor adverse cardiovascular events after COVID-19 infection: A clinical score from a cohort of 2575 patients enrolled in the multicenter international HOPE 2 registry

Background: Long-term consequences of COVID-19 infection are still partly known. According to some studies several patients may experience long term symptoms;however, predictors of long-term mayor adverse cardiovascular events among (MACE) patients with previous COVID-19 infection are . Aim of the study: To derive a simple clinical score for risk prediction of long-term MACE among patients with previous covid-19 infection. Method(s): 2575 consecutive patients were enrolled in a multicenter, international registry (HOPE-2) from February 2020 to April 2021, and followedup at long-term. A risk score was developed using a stepwise multivariable regression analysis. Result(s): Out of 2575 patients enrolled in the HOPE-2 registry, 1481 (58%) were male, with mean age of 60+/-16 years. At long-term follow-up overall rate of MACE was 7.9% (202 of 2545 pts, 3.3% death, 2.4% inflammatory myocardial disease, 1.3% arterial thrombosis, 0.7% venous thrombosis). After multivariable regression analysis, independent predictors of MACE were used to derive a simple prognostic score: The HOPE-2 prognostic score may be calculated by giving: 1/2 point for every 10 years of age, 2 points for previous cardiovascular disease, 1 point for increased troponin serum levels during hospitalization, 2.5 points for heart failure and 3 points for sepsis during hospitalization, -1.5 points for vaccination at followup. Score accuracy at receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was 0.81. Stratification into 3 risk groups (0-2, 3-5, and >5 points) classified into low, intermediate and high risk. The observed MACE rates were 0.5% for low-risk patients, 4% for intermediate-risk patients, and 19.5% for high-risk patients (log-Rank p<0.001, Figure 1). Conclusion(s): The HOPE-2 prognostic score may be useful for long-term risk stratification in patients with previous COVID-19 infection. High-risk patients may require a strict cardiological follow-up. (Figure Presented).

Hydroxychloroquine and Mortality in SARS-Cov-2 Infection;the HOPE-Covid-19 Registry

Background: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) may be an effective, safe, and affordable treatment for Covid-19 that can be used in selected patients. However, more evidence on its association when it is used in different stages of the disease with clinical outcomes is required. This observational study investigates the association between treatment with HCQ and mortality in patients with Covid-19. Method(s): The data from 6217 patients who died or were discharged from 24 Spanish hospitals were analyzed. Propensity matching scores (PMS) were used. Result(s): 5094 patients received HCQ. Death was recorded for 17.5% of those who had HCQ and 34.1% of those who did not have it. Mortality was lower for those who had HCQ, OR=0.41 (95% CI=0.34-0.48). The PMS analysis also showed that mortality was lower for those receiving HCQ, OR=0.47 (95%CI=0.36-0.62). PMS analysis for categories revealed an association between HCQ and lowered mortality for patients over 65 years of age, with a past medical history of hypertension, for those who were diagnosed during admission with sepsis related organ failure or pneumonia, and for those with lymphocytopenia, raised troponin, LDH, ferritin and D-dimer. No increase in mortality associated with HCQ was observed in any category of any of the variables investigated. Conclusion(s): HCQ could be associated with lower mortality for older patients, those with more severe disease and raised inflammatory markers. Further RCTs, observational studies, and summaries of both types of evidence on this topic are necessary to select the precise profile of patients that may benefit from HCQ.Copyright © 2023 Bentham Science Publishers.

Aspirin therapy on prophylactic anticoagulation for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a propensity score-matched cohort analysis of the HOPE-COVID-19 registry

Background: COVID-19 is an infectious illness, featured by an increased risk of thromboembolism. However, no standard antithrombotic therapy is currently recommended for COVID-19 hospitalized patients. Aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of additional therapy with aspirin over prophylactic anticoagulation (PAC) in COVID-19 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. Methods: 8168 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicenter-international prospective registry (HOPE COVID-19). Clinical data and in-hospital complications, including mortality, were recorded. 344 patients with incomplete data were excluded. Study population included patients treated with PAC or with PAC and aspirin. A comparison of clinical outcomes between patients treated with PAC and PAC and aspirin was performed using an adjusted analysis with propensity score matching. Results: Of 7824 patients, 360 (4.6%) received PAC and aspirin and 2949 (37.6%) PAC. Propensity-score matching yielded 298 patients from each group. Mean age was 73±11 years, 67% were male, prevalence of hypertension and diabetes was 79 and 33% respectively and 7.5% underwent invasive ventilation.In the propensity score-matched population, cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with PAC and aspirin vs PAC (15% vs 21%, Log Rank p=0.01, Figure 1). At multivariable analysis in propensity matched population of COVID-19 patients, including age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, kidney failure and invasive ventilation, aspirin treatment was associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality (HR 0.62, CI 95% 0.42–0.92, p=0.018). Conclusions: Additional therapy with aspirin over PAC in COVID-19 hospitalized patients was associated with lower mortality risk in a propensity score matched population. Funding Acknowledgement: Type of funding sources: None.Figure 1. Survival curves according to therapy

Antiplatelet therapy and outcome in COVID-19. Results from a multicentre international prospective registry (HOPE-COVID)

Aims: Standard therapy for Corona-virus-19 disease (COVID-19) is mainly developed for critical ill patients. Autopsy studies showed high prevalence of platelet-fibrin rich micro-thrombi in several organs. Aim of the study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in COVID-19 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. Methods and results: 7824 consecutive patients with COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicentre-international prospective registry (HOPE-COVID-19). Clinical data and inhospital complications were recorded. Antiplatelet (AP) regimen, including aspirin and other antiplatelet drugs, was obtained for each patient. During hospitalization 730 (9%) patients received AP drugs with single (93%, n=680) or dual APT (7%, n=50). Patients treated with APT were older (74±12 vs. 63±17 years, P<0.01), more frequently male (68% vs. 57%, P<0.01) and had higher prevalence of diabetes (39% vs. 16%, P<0.01). Patients treated with APT compared with no APT showed no differences in terms of in-hospital mortality (18% vs. 19%, P=0.64, Log Rank P=0.23), need of invasive ventilation (8.7% vs. 8.5%, P=0.88), embolic events (2.9% vs. 2.5% P=0.34) and bleeding (2.1% vs. 2.4%, P=0.43) but shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (8±5 vs. 11±7 days, P=0.01);however, when comparing patients with APT vs. no APT and no anticoagulation therapy, APT was associated with lower mortality rates (Log Rank P<0.01, relative risk 0.79, 95% CI: 0.70-0.94). At multivariable analysis in-hospital APT was associated with a lower mortality risk (relative risk 0.39, 95% CI: 0.32-0.48, P<0.01). Conclusions: APT during hospitalization for COVID-19 could be associated with lower mortality risk and shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, without increased risk of bleeding.

Antiplatelet therapy and outcome in patients with COVID-19. Results from a multi-center international prospective registry (HOPE-COVID19)

Background: No standard therapy is currently recommended for Coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19). Autopsy studies showed high prevalence of platelet-fibrin rich micro-thrombi in several organs. Aim of the study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in COVID-19 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. Methods: 7824 consecutive patients with COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicenter-international prospective registry (HOPE-COVID19). Clinical data and in-hospital complications were recorded. AP regimen, including aspirin and other antiplatelet drugs, was obtained for each patient. Results: During hospitalization 730 (9.3%) patients received AP drugs with single (93%, n=680) or dual APT (7%, n=50). Patients treated with APT were older (73±12 vs 62±17 years, p<0.01), more frequently male (70% vs 64%, p<0.01) and had higher prevalence of diabetes (39.5% vs 17%, p<0.01). Patients treated with APT showed no differences in terms of in-hospital mortality (18% vs 19%, p=0.64, Log Rank p=0.23), need of invasive ventilation (8.7% vs 8.5%, p=0.88) and bleeding (2.1% vs 2.4%, p=0.43);However, after excluding patients treated only with anticoagulation, APT was associated with lower mortality rates (Log Rank p<0.01, relative risk 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.94) (Figure 1). At multivariable analysis including age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, respiratory failure, pre-hospital therapy with antiplatelet drugs, in-hospital APT, and anticoagulation therapy, in-hospital APT was associated with a lower mortality risk (relative risk 0.29, 95% CI 0.22-0.38, p<0.001). Conclusions: APT during hospitalization for COVID-19 could be associated with lower mortality risk without increased risk of bleeding. Randomized trials are needed to confirm these preliminary data.

Myocardial ischaemia of non-obstructive origin as a cause of new onset anginal chest pain in the long COVID syndrome

Background: New-onset chest pain occurs in around 20% of patients with long COVID syndrome (LCS). Being the vascular endothelium one of the targets of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, we hypothesized that new onset anginal symptoms in LCS could be due to endothelium dysfunction and other non-obstructive causes of myocardial ischaemia. Methods: We investigated 11 consecutive patients who developed new onset anginal chest pain, suggestive of myocardial ischaemia, after documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Intracoronary assessment included endothelium-dependent evaluation with acetylcholine testing (Ach), and endothelium-independent assessment with coronary flow reserve (CFR) and microcirculatory resistance (MR). Criteria for positiveness of these tests and medical treatment recommendation were obtained from 2019 ESC guidelines and 2020 EAPCI consensus document on ischaemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA). Results: Mean patient age was 56 years (SD ± 15);10 (91%) were female. In the acute COVID-19 phase, 4 patients (36%) had had pulmonary infiltrates and 2 (18%) required hospitalization. Conclusive non-invasive tests were obtained in 7 (64%), showing exercise-related myocardial ischaemia in 6 (86%). Coronary angiography ruled out obstructive epicardial stenoses in all the patients. Ach testing revealed abnormal endothelium-dependent responses in 9 (82%) patients: 5 (56%) had epicardial vessel and 4 (44%) microvascular spasm. Endothelium-independent assessment was abnormal in 6 (54%) cases, with abnormal CFR in 2 (33%), abnormal MR in 2 (33) and both abnormal CFR and MR in 2 (33%) patients. The most frequent endotype was combined endothelium dependent- and independent abnormalities (6/9, 67%). Stratified medical treatment according to endotype led to significant improvement in Seattle Angina Scores for angina frequency (+22 points, p=0.013) and a notable trend towards angina stability (+25 points, p=0.093) at a mean follow-up time of 222 days. Conclusions: Myocardial ischaemia of non-obstructive origin is common in patients with chest pain and LCS. Vasomotor abnormalities related to endothelial dysfunction occurred in 82% of patients, frequently associated to impaired microvascular vasodilation or high microvascular resistance. Stratified medical treatment led to significant improvement in angina stability and frequency.

Prognostic factors at admission on patients with cancer and COVID-19: Analysis of HOPE registry data Factores pronósticos en pacientes oncológicos con COVID-19 a su llegada a urgencias: Análisis de los datos del registro internacional HOPE

<h4>Background</h4> Previous works seem to agree in the higher mortality of cancer patients with COVID-19. Identifying potential prognostic factors upon admission could help identify patients with a poor prognosis. <h4>Methods</h4> We aimed to explore the characteristics and evolution of COVID-19 cancer patients admitted to hospital in a multicenter international registry (HOPE COVID-19). Our primary objective is to define those characteristics that allow us to identify cancer patients with a worse prognosis (mortality within 30 days after the diagnosis of COVID-19). <h4>Results</h4> 5838 patients have been collected in this registry, of whom 770 had cancer among their antecedents. In hospital mortality reached 258 patients (33.51%). The median was 75 years (65–82). Regarding the distribution by sex, 34.55% of the patients (266/770) were women. The distribution by type of cancer: genitourinary 238/745 (31.95%), digestive 124/745 (16.54%), hematologic 95/745 (12.75%). In multivariate regression analysis, factors that are independently associated with mortality at admission are: renal impairment (OR 3.45, CI 97.5% 1.85–6.58), heart disease (2.32, 1.47–3.66), liver disease (4.69, 1.94–11.62), partial dependence (2.41, 1.34–4.33), total dependence (7.21, 2.60–21.82), fatigue (1.84, 1.16–2.93), arthromialgias (0.45, 0.26–0.78), SatO2 < 92% (4.58, 2.97–7.17), elevated LDH (2.61, 1.51–4.69) and abnormal decreased Blood Pressure (3.57, 1.81–7.15). Analitical parameters are also significant altered. <h4>Conclusion</h4> In patients with cancer from the HOPE registry, 30-day mortality from any cause is high and is associated with easily identifiable clinical factors upon arrival at the hospital. Identifying these patients can help initiate more intensive treatments from the start and evaluate the prognosis of these patients.

Prognostic factors at admission on patients with cancer and COVID-19: Analysis of HOPE registry data.

BACKGROUND: Previous works seem to agree in the higher mortality of cancer patients with COVID-19. Identifying potential prognostic factors upon admission could help identify patients with a poor prognosis. METHODS: We aimed to explore the characteristics and evolution of COVID-19 cancer patients admitted to hospital in a multicenter international registry (HOPE COVID-19).Our primary objective is to define those characteristics that allow us to identify cancer patients with a worse prognosis (mortality within 30 days after the diagnosis of COVID-19). RESULTS: 5838 patients have been collected in this registry, of whom 770 had cancer among their antecedents. In hospital mortality reached 258 patients (33.51%). The median was 75 years (65-82). Regarding the distribution by sex, 34.55% of the patients (266/770) were women.The distribution by type of cancer: genitourinary 238/745 (31.95%), digestive 124/745 (16.54%), hematologic 95/745 (12.75%).In multivariate regression analysis, factors that are independently associated with mortality at admission are: renal impairment (OR 3.45, CI 97.5% 1.85-6.58), heart disease (2.32, 1.47-3.66), liver disease (4.69, 1.94-11.62), partial dependence (2.41, 1.34-4.33), total dependence (7.21, 2.60-21.82), fatigue (1.84, 1.16-2.93), arthromialgias (0.45, 0.26-0.78), SatO2 < 92% (4.58, 2.97-7.17), elevated LDH (2.61, 1.51-4.69) and abnormal decreased Blood Pressure (3.57, 1.81-7.15). Analitical parameters are also significant altered. CONCLUSION: In patients with cancer from the HOPE registry, 30-day mortality from any cause is high and is associated with easily identifiable clinical factors upon arrival at the hospital. Identifying these patients can help initiate more intensive treatments from the start and evaluate the prognosis of these patients.

ANTECEDENTES: Trabajos previos parecen coincidir en la mayor mortalidad de los pacientes con cáncer y COVID-19. La identificación de posibles factores pronósticos en el momento del ingreso podría ayudar a identificar a los pacientes con mal pronóstico. MÉTODOS: Nos propusimos explorar las características y la evolución de los pacientes con cáncer y COVID-19 ingresados en un registro internacional multicéntrico (HOPE COVID-19).Nuestro objetivo principal es definir aquellas características que nos permitan identificar a los pacientes con cáncer de peor pronóstico (mortalidad en los 30 días siguientes al diagnóstico de COVID-19). RESULTADOS: En este registro se ha recogido a 5.838 pacientes, de los cuales 770 tenían cáncer entre sus antecedentes. La mortalidad hospitalaria alcanzó a 258 pacientes (33,51%). La mediana fue de 75 años (65-82). En cuanto a la distribución por sexo, el 34,55% de los pacientes eran mujeres (266/770).La distribución por tipo de cáncer: genitourinario 238/745 (31,95%), digestivo 124/745 (16,54%) y hematológico 95/745 (12,75%).En el análisis de regresión multivariante, los factores que se asocian de forma independiente con la mortalidad al ingreso son: insuficiencia renal (OR 3,45; IC 97,5%: 1,85-6,58), cardiopatía (2,32; 1,47-3,66), hepatopatía (4,69; 1,94-11,62), dependencia parcial (2,41; 1,34-4,33), dependencia total (7,21; 2,60-21,82), fatiga (1,84, 1;16-2,93), artromialgias (0,45; 0,26-0,78), SatO2 < 92% (4,58; 2,97-7,17), LDH elevada (2,61; 1,51-4,69) y disminución anormal de la presión arterial (3,57; 1,81-7,15). Los parámetros analíticos también están significativamente alterados. CONCLUSIÓN: En los pacientes con cáncer del registro HOPE, la mortalidad a los 30 días por cualquier causa es elevada y se asocia a factores clínicos fácilmente identificables a su llegada al hospital. La identificación de estos pacientes puede ayudar a iniciar tratamientos más intensivos desde el principio y evaluar el pronóstico de estos pacientes.

Prognostic factors at admission on patients with cancer and COVID-19: Analysis of HOPE registry data.

BACKGROUND: Previous works seem to agree in the higher mortality of cancer patients with COVID-19. Identifying potential prognostic factors upon admission could help identify patients with a poor prognosis. METHODS: We aimed to explore the characteristics and evolution of COVID-19 cancer patients admitted to hospital in a multicenter international registry (HOPE COVID-19). Our primary objective is to define those characteristics that allow us to identify cancer patients with a worse prognosis (mortality within 30 days after the diagnosis of COVID-19). RESULTS: 5838 patients have been collected in this registry, of whom 770 had cancer among their antecedents. In hospital mortality reached 258 patients (33.51%). The median was 75 years (65-82). Regarding the distribution by sex, 34.55% of the patients (266/770) were women. The distribution by type of cancer: genitourinary 238/745 (31.95%), digestive 124/745 (16.54%), hematologic 95/745 (12.75%). In multivariate regression analysis, factors that are independently associated with mortality at admission are: renal impairment (OR 3.45, CI 97.5% 1.85-6.58), heart disease (2.32, 1.47-3.66), liver disease (4.69, 1.94-11.62), partial dependence (2.41, 1.34-4.33), total dependence (7.21, 2.60-21.82), fatigue (1.84, 1.16-2.93), arthromialgias (0.45, 0.26-0.78), SatO2<92% (4.58, 2.97-7.17), elevated LDH (2.61, 1.51-4.69) and abnormal decreased Blood Pressure (3.57, 1.81-7.15). Analitical parameters are also significant altered. CONCLUSION: In patients with cancer from the HOPE registry, 30-day mortality from any cause is high and is associated with easily identifiable clinical factors upon arrival at the hospital. Identifying these patients can help initiate more intensive treatments from the start and evaluate the prognosis of these patients.

COVID-19 therapies and their impact on QT interval prolongation: A multicentre retrospective study on 196 patients.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection has caused a global pandemic. Many of the medications identified to treat COVID-19 could be connected with QTc prolongation and its consequences. METHODS: Non-ICU hospitalized patients of the three centres involved in the study from the 19th of March to the 1st of May were included in this retrospective multicentre study. Relevant clinical data were digitally collected. The primary outcome was the incidence of QTc prolongation ≥ 500 ms, the main secondary outcomes were the Tisdale score ability to predict QTc prolongation and the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden deaths. RESULTS: 196 patients were analysed. 20 patients (10.2%) reached a QTc ≥ 500 ms. Patients with QTc ≥ 500 ms were significantly older (66.7 ± 14.65 vs 76.6 ± 8.77 years p: 0.004), with higher Tisdale score (low 56 (31.8%) vs 0; intermediate 95 (54.0%) vs 14 (70.0%); high 25 (14.2%) vs 6 (30.0%); p: 0.007) and with higher prognostic lab values (d-dimer 1819 ± 2815 vs 11486 ± 38554 ng/ml p: 0.010; BNP 212.5 ± 288.4 vs 951.3 ± 816.7 pg/ml p < 0.001; procalcitonin 0.27 ± 0.74 vs 1.33 ± 4.04 ng/ml p: 0.003). After a multivariate analysis the Tisdale score was able to predict a QTc prolongation ≥ 500 ms (OR 1,358 95% CI 1,076-1,714p: 0,010). 27 patients died because of COVID-19 (13.7%), none experienced ventricular arrhythmias, and 2 (1.02%) patients with concomitant cardiovascular condition died of sudden death. CONCLUSIONS: In our population, a QTc prolongation ≥ 500 ms was observed in a minority of patients, no suspected fatal arrhythmias have been observed. Tisdale score can help in predicting QTc prolongation.