Assessing the Combined Public Health Impact of Pharmaceutical Interventions on Pandemic Transmission and Mortality: An Example in SARS CoV-2.

To assess the combined role of anti-viral monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and vaccines in reducing severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and mortality in the United States, an agent-based model was developed that accounted for social contacts, movement/travel, disease progression, and viral shedding. The model was calibrated to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality between October 2020 and April 2021 (aggressive pandemic phase), and projected an extended outlook to estimate mortality during a less aggressive phase (April-August 2021). Simulated scenarios evaluated mAbs for averting infections and deaths in addition to vaccines and aggregated non-pharmaceutical interventions. Scenarios included mAbs as a treatment of COVID-19 and for passive immunity for postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) during a period when variants were susceptible to the mAbs. Rapid diagnostic testing paired with mAbs was evaluated as an early treatment-as-prevention strategy. Sensitivity analyses included increasing mAb supply and vaccine rollout. Allocation of mAbs for use only as PEP averted up to 14% more infections than vaccine alone, and targeting individuals ≥ 65 years averted up to 37% more deaths. Rapid testing for earlier diagnosis and mAb use amplified these benefits. Doubling the mAb supply further reduced infections and mortality. mAbs provided benefits even as proportion of the immunized population increased. Model projections estimated that ~ 42% of expected deaths between April and August 2021 could be averted. Assuming sensitivity to mAbs, their use as early treatment and PEP in addition to vaccines would substantially reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission and mortality even as vaccination increases and mortality decreases. These results provide a template for informing public health policy for future pandemic preparedness.

Efficacy and Safety of Intensified Versus Standard Prophylactic Anticoagulation Therapy in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported inconsistent effects from intensified anticoagulation on clinical outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We performed an aggregate data meta-analysis from available trials to quantify effect on nonfatal and fatal outcomes and identify subgroups who may benefit. Methods: We searched multiple databases for RCTs comparing intensified (intermediate or therapeutic dose) vs prophylactic anticoagulation in adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 through 19 January 2022. We used random-effects meta-analysis to estimate pooled risk ratios for mortality, thrombotic, and bleeding events (at end of follow-up or discharge) and performed subgroup analysis for clinical setting and dose of intensified anticoagulation. Results: Eleven RCTs were included (N = 5873). Intensified vs prophylactic anticoagulation was not associated with a mortality reduction up to 45 days (risk ratio [RR], 0.93 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .79-1.10]). There was a possible signal of mortality reduction for non-intensive care unit (ICU) patients, although with low precision and high heterogeneity (5 studies; RR, 0.84 [95% CI, .49-1.44]; I 2 = 75%). Risk of venous thromboembolism was reduced (RR, 0.53 [95% CI, .41-.69]; I 2 = 0%), with effect driven by therapeutic rather than intermediate dosing (interaction P = .04). Major bleeding was increased with intensified anticoagulation (RR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.17-2.56]) with no interaction for dosing and clinical setting. Conclusions: Intensified anticoagulation has no effect on mortality among hospitalized adults with COVID-19 and is associated with increased bleeding risk. The observed reduction in venous thromboembolism risk and trend toward reduced mortality in non-ICU settings requires exploration in additional RCTs. Clinical Trials Registration. CRD42021273449 (PROSPERO).

Efficacy and safety of intensified versus standard prophylactic anticoagulation therapy in patients with Covid-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have reported inconsistent effects from intensified anticoagulation on clinical outcomes in Covid-19. We performed an aggregate data meta-analysis from available trials to quantify effect on non-fatal and fatal outcomes and identify subgroups who may benefit. Methods We searched multiple databases for RCTs comparing intensified (intermediate or therapeutic dose) versus prophylactic anticoagulation in adults with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 through 19 January 2022. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate pooled risk ratios for mortality, thrombotic, and bleeding events (at end of follow-up or discharge) and performed subgroup analysis for clinical setting and dose of intensified anticoagulation. Results Eleven RCTs were included (n = 5873). Intensified versus prophylactic anticoagulation was not associated with a mortality reduction up to 45 days (relative risk (RR) 0.93;95%CI 0.79–1.10). There was a possible signal of mortality reduction for non-ICU patients, although with low precision and high heterogeneity (5 studies;RR 0.84;95% CI 0.49 - 1.44;I2 = 75%). Risk of venous thromboembolism was reduced (RR 0.53, 95%CI 0.41–0.69;I2 = 0%), with effect driven by therapeutic rather than intermediate dosing (interaction P = 0.04). Major bleeding was increased with intensified anticoagulation (RR 1.73, 95%CI 1.17–2.56) with no interaction for dosing and clinical setting. Conclusion Intensified anticoagulation has no effect on mortality among hospitalised adults with Covid-19 and is associated with increased bleeding risk. The observed reduction in venous thromboembolism risk and trend towards reduced mortality in non-ICU settings requires exploration in additional RCTs.

Considerations to increase rates of breast cancer screening across populations.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 has caused considerable drops in utilization of breast cancer screening services during the pandemic, especially among certain racial and ethnic groups. Members of the Community Oncology Alliance (COA)-including the COA president, South Carolina oncologist Kashyap Patel, MD-have reported increases in patients, particularly those of color, presenting with stage III and IV cancer at diagnosis. According to data released by the Biden administration, more than 9.5 million recommended cancer screenings had been missed in the United States as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, as of February 2022. President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden, EdD, aim to address this in the 2022 revitalized Cancer Moonshot Initiative. The findings made by COA as well as by Avalere also suggest that the pandemic has exacerbated existing health care disparities. METHODS: Using a multipayer database, we analyzed breast cancer screening rates for 2 periods-March 1 to September 30, 2019, and March 1 to September 30, 2020-among Medicare fee-for-service (FFS), managed Medicaid, and commercial insurance beneficiaries to understand the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adherence to the US Preventive Services Task Force breast cancer screening recommendations, which are currently undergoing review. Screening rates were evaluated across 5 racial/ethnic groups and by payer type. RESULTS: Mean monthly mammogram screening rates among eligible White Medicare FFS beneficiaries dropped to 0.6% in April 2020, but these screening rates recovered to 6.5% by June 2020. Screening rates for eligible Black Medicare FFS beneficiaries recovered on a pace slightly slower than that of White beneficiaries, but more rapidly than that of other groups. By comparison, American Indian/Alaska Native beneficiaries had a mean monthly screening rate of 0.5% in April 2020, which recovered to 3.1% in June 2020; these were below 2019 screening rates of 4.2% for April and 3.9% for June. Differences in screening rates by payer type were also observed. Patients with commercial insurance had higher screening rates compared with those covered by Medicare FFS and managed Medicaid. CONCLUSIONS: Our principal finding shows that mean breast cancer screening rates decreased in April 2020 across all payers, but recovery to prepandemic screening levels has occurred more slowly among certain racial and ethnic minority groups. Differences in recovery rates by payer type highlight a strong relationship between income level and screening utilization.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown in Ambient Concentrations of Aromatic Volatile Organic Compounds in a Metropolitan City of Western India.

The real-time Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes (BTEX) concentrations were measured in a metropolitan city of India during January to May of 2020 and 2014-2015-2018 to assess the impact of emission reduction during the COVID-19 lockdown. The total BTEX (∑BTEX) concentrations were 11.5 ± 9.0, 15.7 ± 16, 5.3 ± 5.0, 2.9 ± 2.0, and 0.93 ± 1.2 ppbv in January-May 2020, respectively. The evening rush hour peaks of BTEX during lockdown decreased by 4-5 times from the same period of years 2014-2015-2018. A significant decline in background concentrations suggests a regional-scale reduction in anthropogenic emissions. The contributions of ∑TEX compounds to ∑BTEX increased from 42% to 59% in winter to 64%-75% during the lockdown under hot summer conditions. While emission reductions dominated during the lockdown period, the meteorological and photochemical factors may also have contributed. Meteorological influence on actual observed BTEX data was removed by normalizing with ventilation coefficient (VC). The actual ambient air reductions of 85%-90% and VC-normalized reductions of 54%-88% of the BTEX concentrations during lockdown were estimated compared to those during the same period of 2014-2015-2018. The estimated changes using nighttime data, which take into account BTEX photooxidation removal, are ∼8% lower than the VC-normalized estimates using all data. These significant reductions in BTEX concentrations are consistent with the change in people's movement as inferred from mobility data during the lockdown. Although enforced, the significant decline in ambient BTEX levels during lockdown was a good change for the air quality. The study suggests a need for more effective science-based policies that consider local and regional factors.

Using in silico viral kinetic models to guide therapeutic strategies during a pandemic: An example in SARS-CoV-2.

AIMS: We propose the use of in silico mathematical models to provide insights that optimize therapeutic interventions designed to effectively treat respiratory infection during a pandemic. A modelling and simulation framework is provided using SARS-CoV-2 as an example, considering applications for both treatment and prophylaxis. METHODS: A target cell-limited model was used to quantify the viral infection dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 in a pooled population of 105 infected patients. Parameter estimates from the resulting model were used to simulate and compare the impact of various interventions against meaningful viral load endpoints. RESULTS: Robust parameter estimates were obtained for the basic reproduction number, viral release rate and infected-cell mortality from the infection model. These estimates were informed by the largest dataset currently available for SARS-CoV-2 viral time course. The utility of this model was demonstrated using simulations, which hypothetically introduced inhibitory or stimulatory drug mechanisms at various target sites within the viral life-cycle. We show that early intervention is crucial to achieving therapeutic benefit when monotherapy is administered. In contrast, combination regimens of two or three drugs may provide improved outcomes if treatment is initiated late. The latter is relevant to SARS-CoV-2, where the period between infection and symptom onset is relatively long. CONCLUSIONS: The use of in silico models can provide viral load predictions that can rationalize therapeutic strategies against an emerging viral pathogen.

Neuromyelitis Optica in a Healthy Female After Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 mRNA-1273 Vaccine.

Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder is an autoimmune demyelinating disease with high relative prevalence in the East Asian population. Clinical manifestations include optic neuritis, longitudinally extensive transverse myelitis, area postrema syndrome, brainstem syndromes, and diencephalic syndromes. In this case report, we present a case of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder that developed 10 days after the first dose of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 mRNA-1273 vaccine. The patient was a previously healthy White female, completely independent and functional at baseline. She presented with bilateral lower-extremity numbness/tingling, weakness, and urinary retention. Although her neuromyelitis optica IgG was negative, the MRI was consistent with neuromyelitis optica involving and spanning longitudinally the C6-T2 vertebrae. She was treated with IV steroids and her symptoms improved. Given the novelty of the COVID-19 vaccines and the paucity of literature regarding their adverse effects, case reports such as ours provide unique information that aids healthcare providers in accurately diagnosing and treating patients, ultimately minimizing long-term neurologic deficits.

Are We Forgetting About IgA? A Re-examination of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Convalescent Plasma.

BACKGROUND: While convalescent plasma (CP) may benefit patients with COVID-19, fundamental questions remain regarding its efficacy, including the components of CP that may contribute to its therapeutic effect. Most current serological evaluation of CP relies on examination of total immunoglobulin or IgG-specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels. However, IgA antibodies, which also circulate and are secreted along the respiratory mucosa, represent a relatively uncharacterized component of CP. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Residual samples from patients and CP donors were assessed for IgM, IgG, and IgA anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers against the receptor-binding domain responsible for viral entry. Symptom onset was obtained by chart review. RESULTS: Increased IgA anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels correlated with clinical improvement and viral clearance in an infant with COVID-19, prompting a broader examination of IgA levels among CP donors and hospitalized patients. Significant heterogeneity in IgA levels was observed among CP donors, which correlated weakly with IgG levels or the results of a commonly employed serological test. Unlike IgG and IgM, IgA levels were also more likely to be variable in hospitalized patients and this variability persisted in some patients >14 days following symptom onset. IgA levels were also less likely to be sustained than IgG levels following subsequent CP donation. CONCLUSIONS: IgA levels can be very heterogenous among CP donors and hospitalized patients and do not necessarily correlate with commonly employed testing platforms. Examining isotype levels in CP and COVID-19 patients may allow for a tailored approach when seeking to fill specific gaps in humoral immunity.

Comparison of Antibody Class-Specific SARS-CoV-2 Serologies for the Diagnosis of Acute COVID-19.

Accurate diagnosis of acute severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is critical for appropriate management of patients with this disease. We examined the possible complementary role of laboratory-developed class-specific clinical serology in assessing SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients. Serological tests for immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgA, and IgM antibodies against the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 were evaluated using samples from real-time reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (qRT-PCR)-confirmed inpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. We analyzed the influence of timing and clinical severity on the diagnostic value of class-specific COVID-19 serology testing. Cross-sectional analysis revealed higher sensitivity and specificity at lower optical density cutoffs for IgA in hospitalized patients than for IgG and IgM serology (IgG area under the curve [AUC] of 0.91 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.89 to 0.93] versus IgA AUC of 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96 to 0.98] versus IgM AUC of 0.95 [95% CI, 0.92 to 0.97]). The enhanced performance of IgA serology was apparent in the first 2 weeks after symptom onset and the first week after PCR testing. In patients requiring intubation, all three tests exhibit enhanced sensitivity. Among PCR-negative patients under investigation for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2 out of 61 showed clear evidence of seroconversion IgG, IgA, and IgM. Suspected false-positive results in the latter population were most frequently observed in IgG and IgM serology tests. Our findings suggest the potential utility of IgA serology in the acute setting and explore the benefits and limitations of class-specific serology as a complementary diagnostic tool to PCR for COVID-19 in the acute setting.

Type 2 Diabetes and COVID-19-Related Mortality in the Critical Care Setting: A National Cohort Study in England, March-July 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the relationship between type 2 diabetes and all-cause mortality among adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the critical care setting. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a nationwide retrospective cohort study in people admitted to hospital in England with COVID-19 requiring admission to a high dependency unit (HDU) or intensive care unit (ICU) between 1 March 2020 and 27 July 2020. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate 30-day in-hospital all-cause mortality associated with type 2 diabetes, with adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity, obesity, and other major comorbidities (chronic respiratory disease, asthma, chronic heart disease, hypertension, immunosuppression, chronic neurological disease, chronic renal disease, and chronic liver disease). RESULTS: A total of 19,256 COVID-19-related HDU and ICU admissions were included in the primary analysis, including 13,809 HDU (mean age 70 years) and 5,447 ICU (mean age 58 years) admissions. Of those admitted, 3,524 (18.3%) had type 2 diabetes and 5,077 (26.4%) died during the study period. Patients with type 2 diabetes were at increased risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.23 [95% CI 1.14, 1.32]), and this result was consistent in HDU and ICU subsets. The relative mortality risk associated with type 2 diabetes decreased with higher age (age 18-49 years aHR 1.50 [95% CI 1.05, 2.15], age 50-64 years 1.29 [1.10, 1.51], and age ≥65 years 1.18 [1.09, 1.29]; P value for age-type 2 diabetes interaction = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Type 2 diabetes may be an independent prognostic factor for survival in people with severe COVID-19 requiring critical care treatment, and in this setting the risk increase associated with type 2 diabetes is greatest in younger people.

Model-informed drug repurposing: A pharmacometric approach to novel pathogen preparedness, response and retrospection.

During a pandemic caused by a novel pathogen (NP), drug repurposing offers the potential of a rapid treatment response via a repurposed drug (RD) while more targeted treatments are developed. Five steps of model-informed drug repurposing (MIDR) are discussed: (i) utilize RD product label and in vitro NP data to determine initial proof of potential, (ii) optimize potential posology using clinical pharmacokinetics (PK) considering both efficacy and safety, (iii) link events in the viral life cycle to RD PK, (iv) link RD PK to clinical and virologic outcomes, and optimize clinical trial design, and (v) assess RD treatment effects from trials using model-based meta-analysis. Activities which fall under these five steps are categorized into three stages: what can be accomplished prior to an NP emergence (preparatory stage), during the NP pandemic (responsive stage) and once the crisis has subsided (retrospective stage). MIDR allows for extraction of a greater amount of information from emerging data and integration of disparate data into actionable insight.

COVID-19 Fears May Be Worse Than the Virus: A Case of Cardiogenic Shock Secondary to Post-Myocardial Infarction Ventricular Septum Rupture.

Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there has been a growing and justifiable fear of catching the virus from the emergency rooms, thus decreasing the hospital visits. With Virginia State slowly reopening and HCA local hospitals resuming elective procedures, the number of emergency room visits, are recovering and increasing. We report a sad and unfortunate case of an 87-year-old female who was experiencing pressure-like chest pain but presented to the emergency room five days later out of fear of catching COVID-19 from the hospital. On presentation to the ED, she was found to have an non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, which required urgent stenting of the left anterior descending artery. Unfortunately, several hours later, she developed fatal cardiogenic shock due to ventricular septal rupture. We are reporting this case to highlight one of the many potential bad outcomes as a result of a delay in seeking necessary medical attention due to the fear of contracting the virus.