Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 15 de 15
Filter
1.
Microorganisms ; 11(5)2023 Apr 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20232951

ABSTRACT

Rare cases of Pseudomonas aeruginosa community-acquired pneumonia (PA-CAP) were reported in non-immunocompromised patients. We describe a case of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) necrotizing cavitary CAP with a fatal outcome in a 53-year-old man previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, who was admitted for dyspnea, fever, cough, hemoptysis, acute respiratory failure and a right upper lobe opacification. Six hours after admission, despite effective antibiotic therapy, he experienced multi-organ failure and died. Autopsy confirmed necrotizing pneumonia with alveolar hemorrhage. Blood and bronchoalveolar lavage cultures were positive for PA serotype O:9 belonging to ST1184. The strain shares the same virulence factor profile with reference genome PA01. With the aim to better investigate the clinical and molecular characteristics of PA-CAP, we considered the literature of the last 13 years concerning this topic. The prevalence of hospitalized PA-CAP is about 4% and has a mortality rate of 33-66%. Smoking, alcohol abuse and contaminated fluid exposure were the recognized risk factors; most cases presented the same symptoms described above and needed intensive care. Co-infection of PA-influenza A is described, which is possibly caused by influenza-inducing respiratory epithelial cell dysfunction: the same pathophysiological mechanism could be assumed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Considering the high rate of fatal outcomes, additional studies are needed to identify sources of infections and new risk factors, along with genetic and immunological features. Current CAP guidelines should be revised in light of these results.

2.
Gut ; 2022 Dec 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2232967

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The long-term consequences of COVID-19 infection on the gastrointestinal tract remain unclear. Here, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms and post-COVID-19 disorders of gut-brain interaction after hospitalisation for SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: GI-COVID-19 is a prospective, multicentre, controlled study. Patients with and without COVID-19 diagnosis were evaluated on hospital admission and after 1, 6 and 12 months post hospitalisation. Gastrointestinal symptoms, anxiety and depression were assessed using validated questionnaires. RESULTS: The study included 2183 hospitalised patients. The primary analysis included a total of 883 patients (614 patients with COVID-19 and 269 controls) due to the exclusion of patients with pre-existing gastrointestinal symptoms and/or surgery. At enrolment, gastrointestinal symptoms were more frequent among patients with COVID-19 than in the control group (59.3% vs 39.7%, p<0.001). At the 12-month follow-up, constipation and hard stools were significantly more prevalent in controls than in patients with COVID-19 (16% vs 9.6%, p=0.019 and 17.7% vs 10.9%, p=0.011, respectively). Compared with controls, patients with COVID-19 reported higher rates of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) according to Rome IV criteria: 0.5% versus 3.2%, p=0.045. Factors significantly associated with IBS diagnosis included history of allergies, chronic intake of proton pump inhibitors and presence of dyspnoea. At the 6-month follow-up, the rate of patients with COVID-19 fulfilling the criteria for depression was higher than among controls. CONCLUSION: Compared with controls, hospitalised patients with COVID-19 had fewer problems of constipation and hard stools at 12 months after acute infection. Patients with COVID-19 had significantly higher rates of IBS than controls. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04691895.

3.
Intern Emerg Med ; 2022 Oct 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2234979

ABSTRACT

Over the past few years, COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a high toll worldwide, with a high burden of morbidity and mortality. Healthcare practitioners (HCPs) have been in the frontline since the beginning of the outbreak, and the high level of stress have affected their physical and mental status, as well as their relationships. We aimed at exploring the self-reported changes in comprehensive well-being in a cohort of Italian physicians. An online-based survey was administered to the members of the Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI) between March and June 2021. The survey was based on 32 multiple-choice questions exploring self-reported physical and mental well-being, as well as changes in workloads, work-related feelings and physicians' relationship with patients, colleagues and families. 228 physicians (mean age: 35.7 ± 9.8 years) participated in the survey; 120 (52.6%) were residents, 196 (86.0%) worked in COVID-19 units and 65 (28.5%) had COVID-19 during the pandemic. A significant proportion of respondents reported to have experience onset or worsening of physical and mental symptoms, with insomnia/sleep disorders (58.3%) and mood swings (47.8%) being the most common, respectively. The burden of physical and mental consequences was broadly higher among residents compared to specialists, with the former reporting more frequently an increase in the number of worked hours (p = 0.020) and being more frequently infected with COVID-19 (35.0% vs. 21.3, p = 0.032). Moreover, familiar and doctor-patient relationships were also considerably affected. Physicians have been suffering a wide spectrum of physical, mental and relational consequences during COVID-19 pandemic, with youngest doctors being more likely to present several physical and mental health symptoms. Further studies are needed to evaluate long-term consequences of COVID-19 pandemic on the well-being of HCPs, and potential preventive strategies.

4.
Viruses ; 15(2)2023 01 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2200902

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Treatment guidelines recommend the tocilizumab use in patients with a CRP of >7.5 mg/dL. We aimed to estimate the causal effect of glucocorticoids + tocilizumab on mortality overall and after stratification for PaO2/FiO2 ratio and CRP levels. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. The primary endpoint was day 28 mortality. Survival analysis was conducted to estimate the conditional and average causal effect of glucocorticoids + tocilizumab vs. glucocorticoids alone using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models with a time-varying variable for the intervention. The hypothesis of the existence of effect measure modification by CRP and PaO2/FiO2 ratio was tested by including an interaction term in the model. RESULTS: In total, 992 patients, median age 69 years, 72.9% males, 597 (60.2%) treated with monotherapy, and 395 (31.8%), adding tocilizumab upon respiratory deterioration, were included. At BL, the two groups differed for median values of CRP (6 vs. 7 mg/dL; p < 0.001) and PaO2/FiO2 ratio (276 vs. 235 mmHg; p < 0.001). In the unadjusted analysis, the mortality was similar in the two groups, but after adjustment for key confounders, a significant effect of glucocorticoids + tocilizumab was observed (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.38-0.90). Although the study was not powered to detect interactions (p = 0.41), there was a signal for glucocorticoids + tocilizumab to have a larger effect in subsets, especially participants with high levels of CRP at intensification. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm that glucocorticoids + tocilizumab vs. glucocorticoids alone confers a survival benefit only in patients with a CRP > 7.5 mg/dL prior to treatment initiation and the largest effect for a CRP > 15 mg/dL. Large randomized studies are needed to establish an exact cut-off for clinical use.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Glucocorticoids , Male , Humans , Aged , Female , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Critical Illness , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
5.
Thromb J ; 20(1): 72, 2022 Nov 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2139318

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acutely ill medical patients experience deep venous thrombosis (DVT) during the hospitalization, however the time course of DVT is still unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate risk factors in acutely ill hospitalized medical patients for proximal asymptomatic DVT (ADVT) and symptomatic DVT (SDVT) at admission and discharge. PATIENTS/METHODS: In this prospective observational study, consecutive acutely ill medical patients (hospitalized mainly for acute medical disease as infections, neoplasm, anemia, heart failure) underwent compression ultrasonography (CUS) of proximal lower limb veins within 48 h from admission and at discharge to diagnose ADVT and SDVT. Covid-19 patients, anticoagulant therapy, surgical procedures, acute SDVT, and acute pulmonary embolism, were exclusion criteria. Biographical characteristics at hospitalization, D-Dimer (assessed by ELISA)) and DD-improve score. RESULTS: Of 2,100 patients (1002 females, 998 males, age 71 ± 16 years) 58 (2.7%) had proximal ADVT at admission. Logistic regression analysis showed that age, and active cancer were independently associated with ADVT at admission. The median length of hospitalization was 10 days [interquartile range: 6-15]. During the hospital stay, 6 patients (0.3%) with a negative CUS at admission experienced DVT (2 SDVT and 4 ADVT). In the subgroup of patients (n = 1118), in whom D-dimer was measured at admission, D-Dimer and IMPROVE-DD score were associated with ADVT at admission (n = 37) and with all DVT (n = 42) at discharge. ROC curve defined an IMPROVE-DD score of 2.5 as the optimal cut-off for discriminating patients with and without thrombotic events. CONCLUSIONS: We provide evidence of early development of ADVT in unselected acutely ill medical patients suggesting the need of investigating patients by CUS immediately after hospital admission (within 48 h). Advanced age, active cancer, known thrombophilia and increased IMPROVE-DD score may identify patients at risk. The benefit of anticoagulation needs to be investigated in patients with these specific risk factors and negative CUS at admission. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03157843.

6.
BMJ Open ; 12(1): e054069, 2022 01 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1606566

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The first COVID-19-19 epidemic wave was over the period of February-May 2020. Since 1 October 2020, Italy, as many other European countries, faced a second wave. The aim of this analysis was to compare the 28-day mortality between the two waves among COVID-19 hospitalised patients. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. Standard survival analysis was performed to compare all-cause mortality within 28 days after hospital admission in the two waves. Kaplan-Meier curves as well as Cox regression model analysis were used. The effect of wave on risk of death was shown by means of HRs with 95% CIs. A sensitivity analysis around the impact of the circulating variant as a potential unmeasured confounder was performed. SETTING: University Hospital of Modena, Italy. Patients admitted to the hospital for severe COVID-19 pneumonia during the first (22 February-31 May 2020) and second (1 October-31 December 2020) waves were included. RESULTS: During the two study periods, a total of 1472 patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia were admitted to our hospital, 449 during the first wave and 1023 during the second. Median age was 70 years (IQR 56-80), 37% women, 49% with PaO2/FiO2 <250 mm Hg, 82% with ≥1 comorbidity, median duration of symptoms was 6 days. 28-day mortality rate was 20.0% (95% CI 16.3 to 23.7) during the first wave vs 14.2% (95% CI 12.0 to 16.3) in the second (log-rank test p value=0.03). After including key predictors of death in the multivariable Cox regression model, the data still strongly suggested a lower 28-day mortality rate in the second wave (aHR=0.64, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.90, p value=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In our hospitalised patients with COVID-19 with severe pneumonia, the 28-day mortality appeared to be reduced by 36% during the second as compared with the first wave. Further studies are needed to identify factors that may have contributed to this improved survival.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Aged , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Italy/epidemiology , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers
7.
Infez Med ; 29(4): 538-549, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1579085

ABSTRACT

Cardiovascular complications after a SARS-CoV-2 infection are a phenomenon of relevant scientific interest. The aim of this study was to analyze the onset of post-COVID-19 cardiovascular events in patients hospitalized in a tertiary care center. This is a retrospective study conducted on patients hospitalized over a period of three months. The patients were older than 18 years of age and had a diagnosis of COVID-19 infection confirmed from a nasopharyngeal swab sample. Anamnestic and clinical-laboratory data were collected. Cardiovascular events at 30 days were defined as follows: arrhythmias, myocardial infarction, myocarditis, and pulmonary embolism. Univariate analysis (Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U test, as appropriate) and multivariate analysis (multinomial logistic regression) were applied to the data. A total of 394 patients were included; they were mostly males and had a median age of 65.5 years. Previous cardiovascular disease was present in 14.7% of patients. Oxygen therapy was required for 77.9%, and 53% received anticoagulant therapy. The overall 30-day mortality was 20.3%. A cardiovascular event developed in 15.7% of the subjects. These were mainly pulmonary embolism (9.4%), followed by arrhythmias (3.3%), myocardial infarction (2.3%), and myocarditis (0.8%). Patients who developed cardiovascular events upon univariate analysis were significantly older, with major comorbidities, a more compromised respiratory situation, and a higher mortality rate. Multivariate analysis revealed independent factors that were significantly associated with the development of cardiovascular events: hypertension, endotracheal intubation, and age older than 75 years. In patients with COVID-19, the development of a cardiovascular event occurs quite frequently and is mainly seen in elderly subjects with comorbidities (especially hypertension) in the presence of a severe respiratory picture.

9.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 117(1): 147-157, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506384

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) have been reported with great variability and without standardization. In hospitalized patients, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence of GI symptoms, factors associated with their occurrence, and variation at 1 month. METHODS: The GI-COVID-19 is a prospective, multicenter, controlled study. Patients with and without COVID-19 diagnosis were recruited at hospital admission and asked for GI symptoms at admission and after 1 month, using the validated Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale questionnaire. RESULTS: The study included 2036 hospitalized patients. A total of 871 patients (575 COVID+ and 296 COVID-) were included for the primary analysis. GI symptoms occurred more frequently in patients with COVID-19 (59.7%; 343/575 patients) than in the control group (43.2%; 128/296 patients) (P < 0.001). Patients with COVID-19 complained of higher presence or intensity of nausea, diarrhea, loose stools, and urgency as compared with controls. At a 1-month follow-up, a reduction in the presence or intensity of GI symptoms was found in COVID-19 patients with GI symptoms at hospital admission. Nausea remained increased over controls. Factors significantly associated with nausea persistence in COVID-19 were female sex, high body mass index, the presence of dyspnea, and increased C-reactive protein levels. DISCUSSION: The prevalence of GI symptoms in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is higher than previously reported. Systemic and respiratory symptoms are often associated with GI complaints. Nausea may persist after the resolution of COVID-19 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Gastroenteritis/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Egypt/epidemiology , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Gastroenteritis/etiology , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Prospective Studies , Russia/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires
10.
Intern Emerg Med ; 16(4): 1005-1015, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1202836

ABSTRACT

During the COVID-19 2020 outbreak, a large body of data has been provided on general management and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Yet, relatively little is known on characteristics and outcome of patients managed in Internal Medicine Units (IMU). To address this gap, the Italian Society of Internal Medicine has conducted a nationwide cohort multicentre study on death outcome in adult COVID-19 patients admitted and managed in IMU. This study assessed 3044 COVID-19 patients at 41 referral hospitals across Italy from February 3rd to May 8th 2020. Demographics, comorbidities, organ dysfunction, treatment, and outcomes including death were assessed. During the study period, 697 patients (22.9%) were transferred to intensive care units, and 351 died in IMU (death rate 14.9%). At admission, factors independently associated with in-hospital mortality were age (OR 2.46, p = 0.000), productive cough (OR 2.04, p = 0.000), pre-existing chronic heart failure (OR 1.58, p = 0.017) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 1.17, p = 0.048), the number of comorbidities (OR 1.34, p = 0.000) and polypharmacy (OR 1.20, p = 0.000). Of note, up to 40% of elderly patients did not report fever at admission. Decreasing PaO2/FiO2 ratio at admission was strongly inversely associated with survival. The use of conventional oxygen supplementation increased with the number of pre-existing comorbidities, but it did not associate with better survival in patients with PaO2/FiO2 ratio < 100. The latter, significantly benefited by the early use of non-invasive mechanical ventilation. Our study identified PaO2/FiO2 ratio at admission and comorbidity as the main alert signs to inform clinical decisions and resource allocation in non-critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to IMU.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Hospitalization , Internal Medicine , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , Cohort Studies , Critical Care , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Italy , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial , Survival Rate
11.
PLoS One ; 16(2): e0247275, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1097208

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aim of this secondary analysis of the TESEO cohort is to identify, early in the course of treatment with tocilizumab, factors associated with the risk of progressing to mechanical ventilation and death and develop a risk score to estimate the risk of this outcome according to patients' profile. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 severe pneumonia receiving standard of care + tocilizumab who were alive and free from mechanical ventilation at day 6 after treatment initiation were included in this retrospective, multicenter cohort study. Multivariable logistic regression models were built to identify predictors of mechanical ventilation or death by day-28 from treatment initiation and ß-coefficients were used to develop a risk score. Secondary outcome was mortality. Patients with the same inclusion criteria as the derivation cohort from 3 independent hospitals were used as validation cohort. RESULTS: 266 patients treated with tocilizumab were included. By day 28 of hospital follow-up post treatment initiation, 40 (15%) underwent mechanical ventilation or died [26 (10%)]. At multivariable analysis, sex, day-4 PaO2/FiO2 ratio, platelets and CRP were independently associated with the risk of developing the study outcomes and were used to generate the proposed risk score. The accuracy of the score in AUC was 0.80 and 0.70 in internal validation and test for the composite endpoint and 0.92 and 0.69 for death, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our score could assist clinicians in identifying, early after tocilizumab administration, patients who are likely to progress to mechanical ventilation or death, so that they could be selected for eventual rescue therapies.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Aged , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Treatment Outcome
12.
Intern Emerg Med ; 16(4): 989-996, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1095732

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with severe acute respiratory failure. Early identification of high-risk COVID-19 patients is crucial. We aimed to derive and validate a simple score for the prediction of severe outcomes. A retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 was carried out by the Italian Society of Internal Medicine. Epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and treatment variables were collected at hospital admission at five hospitals. Three algorithm selection models were used to construct a predictive risk score: backward Selection, Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO), and Random Forest. Severe outcome was defined as the composite of need for non-invasive ventilation, need for orotracheal intubation, or death. A total of 610 patients were included in the analysis, 313 had a severe outcome. The subset for the derivation analysis included 335 patients, the subset for the validation analysis 275 patients. The LASSO selection identified 6 variables (age, history of coronary heart disease, CRP, AST, D-dimer, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio) and resulted in the best performing score with an area under the curve of 0.79 in the derivation cohort and 0.80 in the validation cohort. Using a cut-off of 7 out of 13 points, sensitivity was 0.93, specificity 0.34, positive predictive value 0.59, and negative predictive value 0.82. The proposed score can identify patients at low risk for severe outcome who can be safely managed in a low-intensity setting after hospital admission for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Hospitalization , Aged , COVID-19/complications , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Predictive Value of Tests , ROC Curve , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Survival Rate
13.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 27(8): 1137-1144, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-996799

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Sex differences in COVID-19 severity and mortality have been described. Key aims of this analysis were to compare the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and mortality by sex and to explore whether variation in specific biomarkers could mediate this difference. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study among patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. A survival analysis was conducted to compare time to the composite endpoint of IMV or death according to sex. Interaction was formally tested to compare the risk difference by sex in sub-populations. Mediation analysis with a binary endpoint IMV or death (yes/no) by day 28 of follow-up for a number of inflammation/coagulation biomarkers in the context of counterfactual prediction was also conducted. RESULTS: Among 415 patients, 134 were females (32%) and 281 males (67%), median age 66 years (IQR 54-77). At admission, females showed a significantly less severe clinical and respiratory profiles with a higher PaO2/FiO2 (254 mmHg vs. 191 mmHg; p 0.023). By 28 days from admission, 49.2% (95% CI 39.6-58.9%) of males vs. 31.7% (17.9-45.4%) of females underwent IMV or death (log-rank p < 0.0001) and this amounted to a difference in terms of HR of 0.40 (0.26-0.63, p 0.0001). The area under the curve in C-reactive protein (CRP) over the study period appeared to explain 85% of this difference in risk by sex. DISCUSSION: Our analysis confirms a difference in the risk of COVID-19 clinical progression by sex and provides a hypothesis for potential mechanisms leading to this. Specifically, CRP showed a predominant role to mediate the difference in risk by sex.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Inflammation , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Sex Factors
14.
Nat Commun ; 11(1): 3434, 2020 07 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-631255

ABSTRACT

The immune system of patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 is severely impaired. Detailed investigation of T cells and cytokine production in patients affected by COVID-19 pneumonia are urgently required. Here we show that, compared with healthy controls, COVID-19 patients' T cell compartment displays several alterations involving naïve, central memory, effector memory and terminally differentiated cells, as well as regulatory T cells and PD1+CD57+ exhausted T cells. Significant alterations exist also in several lineage-specifying transcription factors and chemokine receptors. Terminally differentiated T cells from patients proliferate less than those from healthy controls, whereas their mitochondria functionality is similar in CD4+ T cells from both groups. Patients display significant increases of proinflammatory or anti-inflammatory cytokines, including T helper type-1 and type-2 cytokines, chemokines and galectins; their lymphocytes produce more tumor necrosis factor (TNF), interferon-γ, interleukin (IL)-2 and IL-17, with the last observation implying that blocking IL-17 could provide a novel therapeutic strategy for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/immunology , CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , T-Lymphocyte Subsets/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Biomarkers/metabolism , CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes/metabolism , CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes/pathology , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/metabolism , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/pathology , COVID-19 , Cellular Senescence , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Cytokine Release Syndrome , Cytokines/immunology , Cytokines/metabolism , Female , Humans , Immunologic Memory , Italy/epidemiology , Lymphocyte Activation , Lymphocyte Count , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , SARS-CoV-2 , T-Lymphocyte Subsets/metabolism , T-Lymphocyte Subsets/pathology , Th17 Cells/immunology , Th17 Cells/metabolism , Th17 Cells/pathology
15.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 2(8): e474-e484, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-612713

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: No therapy is approved for COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this study was to assess the role of tocilizumab in reducing the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation and death in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who received standard of care treatment. METHODS: This retrospective, observational cohort study included adults (≥18 years) with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who were admitted to tertiary care centres in Bologna and Reggio Emilia, Italy, between Feb 21 and March 24, 2020, and a tertiary care centre in Modena, Italy, between Feb 21 and April 30, 2020. All patients were treated with the standard of care (ie, supplemental oxygen, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, antiretrovirals, and low molecular weight heparin), and a non-randomly selected subset of patients also received tocilizumab. Tocilizumab was given either intravenously at 8 mg/kg bodyweight (up to a maximum of 800 mg) in two infusions, 12 h apart, or subcutaneously at 162 mg administered in two simultaneous doses, one in each thigh (ie, 324 mg in total), when the intravenous formulation was unavailable. The primary endpoint was a composite of invasive mechanical ventilation or death. Treatment groups were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis after adjusting for sex, age, recruiting centre, duration of symptoms, and baseline Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. FINDINGS: Of 1351 patients admitted, 544 (40%) had severe COVID-19 pneumonia and were included in the study. 57 (16%) of 365 patients in the standard care group needed mechanical ventilation, compared with 33 (18%) of 179 patients treated with tocilizumab (p=0·41; 16 [18%] of 88 patients treated intravenously and 17 [19%] of 91 patients treated subcutaneously). 73 (20%) patients in the standard care group died, compared with 13 (7%; p<0·0001) patients treated with tocilizumab (six [7%] treated intravenously and seven [8%] treated subcutaneously). After adjustment for sex, age, recruiting centre, duration of symptoms, and SOFA score, tocilizumab treatment was associated with a reduced risk of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (adjusted hazard ratio 0·61, 95% CI 0·40-0·92; p=0·020). 24 (13%) of 179 patients treated with tocilizumab were diagnosed with new infections, versus 14 (4%) of 365 patients treated with standard of care alone (p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Treatment with tocilizumab, whether administered intravenously or subcutaneously, might reduce the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation or death in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. FUNDING: None.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL