Characteristics of COVID-19 vaccinated and unvaccinated patients admitted to Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.

More than 11.5 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses have been administered around the world. Although vaccine effectiveness for severe infections is reported to be 89.0%, breakthrough infections are common and may lead to severe outcome in fragile population. We conducted a real-world observational study on 420 COVID-19 admitted patients from July 2021 to January 2022 in a tertiary level Italian hospital. We collected patient's vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 serological status, SARS-CoV-2 treatments, oxygen supports, intensive (ICU) and subintensive (sub-ICU) care unit admissions, length of staying (LoS) and in-hospital mortality. One-hundred-seventy-two vaccinated and 248 unvaccinated patients were admitted during the study period. Vaccinated group (Vg) had a significantly more elevated Charlson Comorbidity Index than Unvaccinated group (UVg), and no statistical differences were found in terms of in-hospital mortality, LoS or ICU and sub-ICU admissions. Among Vg, anti-S antibodies were detected in 86.18% of patients (seropositives). Vaccinated seronegative patients' in-hospital mortality was significantly higher than vaccinated seropositive patients (33.33% vs 10.69%, p = 0.0055): in particular, mortality rate in 45-69 years old population was higher in vaccinated seronegative group, and comparable in patients ≥ 70 years old. No differences in terms of outcome were registered between Vg and UVg, taking into account that Vg was considerably older and with more comorbidities. In line with other recent observations, higher mortality rate was evidenced for seronegative vaccinated patients. Primary prophylaxis and early treatments result to be necessary, especially for older and immunosuppressed populations.

Safety and Efficacy of Outpatient Treatments for COVID-19: Real-Life Data from a Regionwide Cohort of High-Risk Patients in Tuscany, Italy (the FEDERATE Cohort).

Early COVID-19 treatments can prevent progression to severe disease. However, real-life data are still limited, and studies are warranted to monitor the efficacy and tolerability of these drugs. We retrospectively enrolled outpatients receiving early treatment for COVID-19 in 11 infectious diseases units in the Tuscany region of Italy between 1 January and 31 March 2022, when Omicron sublineages BA.1 and BA.2 were circulating. Eligible COVID-19 patients were treated with sotrovimab (SOT), remdesivir (RMD), nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NRM/r), or molnupiravir (MOL). We gathered demographic and clinical features, 28-day outcomes (hospitalization or death), and drugs tolerability. A total of 781 patients (median age 69.9, 66% boosted for SARS-CoV-2) met the inclusion criteria, of whom 314 were treated with SOT (40.2%), 205 with MOL (26.3%), 142 with RMD (18.2%), and 120 with NRM/r (15.4%). Overall, 28-day hospitalization and death occurred in 18/781 (2.3%) and 3/781 (0.3%), respectively. Multivariable Cox regression showed that patients receiving SOT had a reduced risk of meeting the composite outcome (28-day hospitalization and/or death) in comparison to the RMD cohort, while no significant differences were evidenced for the MOL and NRM/r groups in comparison to the RMD group. Other predictors of negative outcomes included cancer, chronic kidney disease, and a time between symptoms onset and treatment administration > 3 days. All treatments showed good safety and tolerability, with only eight patients (1%) whose treatment was interrupted due to intolerance. In the first Italian multicenter study presenting real-life data on COVID-19 early treatments, all regimens demonstrated good safety and efficacy. SOT showed a reduced risk of progression versus RMD. No significant differences of outcome were observed in preventing 28-day hospitalization and death among patients treated with RMD, MOL, and NRM/r.

Evaluation of Lumipulse® G SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay automated test for detecting SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein (NP) in nasopharyngeal swabs for community and population screening.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the Lumipulse® SARS-CoV-2 antigen test with the gold standard real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and to evaluate its role in screening programs. METHODS: Lumipulse® SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay was compared with the gold standard RT-PCR test in a selected cohort of 226 subjects with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, and its accuracy was evaluated. Subsequently, the test was administered to a real-life screening cohort of 1738 cases. ROC analysis was performed to explore test features and cutoffs. All tests were performed in the regional reference laboratory in Umbria, Italy. RESULTS: A 42.0% positive result at RT-PCR was observed in the selected cohort. The Lumipulse® system showed 92.6% sensitivity (95% CI 85.4-97.0%) and 90.8% specificity (95% CI 84.5-95.2%) at 1.24 pg/mL optimal cutoff. In the screening cohort, characterized by 5.2% prevalence of infection, Lumipulse® assay showed 100% sensitivity (95% CI 96.0-100.0%) and 94.8% specificity (95% CI 93.6-95.8%) at 1.645 pg/mL optimal cutoff; the AUC was 97.4%, NPV was 100% (95% CI 99.8-100.0%) and PPV was 51.1% (95% CI 43.5-58.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The Lumipulse® SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay can be safely employed in the screening strategies in small and large communities and in the general population.