Evidence That Increasing Serum 25(OH)D Concentrations to 30 ng/mL in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates Could Greatly Improve Health Outcomes.

Accumulating evidence supports the potential protective effects of vitamin D against chronic diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, autoimmune diseases, cancers, cardiovascular disease (ischaemic heart disease and stroke), type 2 diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, stroke, and infectious diseases such as acute respiratory tract diseases, COVID-19, influenza, and pneumonia, as well as adverse pregnancy outcomes. The respective evidence is based on ecological and observational studies, randomized controlled trials, mechanistic studies, and Mendelian randomization studies. However, randomized controlled trials on vitamin D supplementation have largely failed to show benefits, probably due to poor design and analysis. In this work, we aim to use the best available evidence on the potential beneficial effects of vitamin D to estimate the expected reduction in incidence and mortality rates of vitamin D-related diseases in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates if minimum serum 25(OH)D concentrations were to be raised to 30 ng/mL. Estimated reductions by 25% for myocardial infarction incidence, 35% for stroke incidence, 20 to 35% for cardiovascular disease mortality, and 35% for cancer mortality rates depicted a promising potential for raising serum 25(OH)D. Methods to increase serum 25(OH)D concentrations at the population level could include food fortification with vitamin D3, vitamin D supplementation, improved dietary vitamin D intake, and sensible sun exposure.

Does natural and hybrid immunity obviate the need for frequent vaccine boosters against SARS-CoV-2 in the endemic phase?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has entered its endemic phase and we observe significantly declining infection fatality rates due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). On this background, it is crucial but challenging to define current and future vaccine policy in a population with a high immunity against SARS-CoV-2 conferred by previous infections and/or vaccinations. Vaccine policy must consider the magnitude of the risks conferred by new infection(s) with current and evolving SARS-CoV-2 variants, how these risks vary in different groups of individuals, how to balance these risks against the apparently small, but existent, risks of harms of vaccination, and the cost-benefit of different options. More evidence from randomized controlled trials and continuously accumulating national health data is required to inform shared decision-making with people who consider vaccination options. Vaccine policy makers should cautiously weight what vaccination schedules are needed, and refrain from urging frequent vaccine boosters unless supported by sufficient evidence.

An Appraisal to Address Health Consequences of Vitamin D Deficiency With Food Fortification and Supplements: Time to Act!

A symposium entitled "Vitamin D in Prevention and Therapy" was held on May 4-5, 2022, in Homburg, Germany to discuss important new advances in the field, including identification of new vitamin D signaling pathways, of new biologic effects of vitamin D-compounds (e.g., on the microbiome), and convincing proof of the relevance of vitamin D deficiency for the risk and outcome of many chronic diseases, including cancer, cardio-vascular, auto-immune, metabolic, and infectious diseases. Concerning the COVID-19-pandemic, an inverse association between 25(OH)D serum concentrations and SARS-CoV-2-infections, morbidity, and mortality was shown. In relation to cancer, several meta-analyses recently demonstrated an association of vitamin D-supplementation with significantly decreased mortality rates, which presumably would reduce health care costs. Considering the impressive body of evidence and the high safety of oral supplementation and food fortification with vitamin D, it was concluded that there is now an urgent need to act. In many countries worldwide, health care authorities need to increase efforts to address vitamin D deficiency, e.g., via food fortification and/or supplementation with vitamin D, and/or promoting moderate UV-exposure. It was estimated that in many countries, vitamin D intakes of the order of appr. 1,000 IE (25 µg)/day would be needed to bring and/or keep the vast majority of people over a serum 25(OH)D threshold of 20 ng/ml (50 nmol/l), which would be difficult to obtain alone from food fortification. New developments in personalized medicine may represent helpful tools to identify populations at risk for vitamin D deficiency and their responsiveness to vitamin D treatment.

Comparing the Evidence from Observational Studies and Randomized Controlled Trials for Nonskeletal Health Effects of Vitamin D.

Although observational studies of health outcomes generally suggest beneficial effects with, or following, higher serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentrations, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have generally not supported those findings. Here we review results from observational studies and RCTs regarding how vitamin D status affects several nonskeletal health outcomes, including Alzheimer's disease and dementia, autoimmune diseases, cancers, cardiovascular disease, COVID-19, major depressive disorder, type 2 diabetes, arterial hypertension, all-cause mortality, respiratory tract infections, and pregnancy outcomes. We also consider relevant findings from ecological, Mendelian randomization, and mechanistic studies. Although clear discrepancies exist between findings of observational studies and RCTs on vitamin D and human health benefits these findings should be interpreted cautiously. Bias and confounding are seen in observational studies and vitamin D RCTs have several limitations, largely due to being designed like RCTs of therapeutic drugs, thereby neglecting vitamin D's being a nutrient with a unique metabolism that requires specific consideration in trial design. Thus, RCTs of vitamin D can fail for several reasons: few participants' having low baseline 25(OH)D concentrations, relatively small vitamin D doses, participants' having other sources of vitamin D, and results being analyzed without consideration of achieved 25(OH)D concentrations. Vitamin D status and its relevance for health outcomes can usefully be examined using Hill's criteria for causality in a biological system from results of observational and other types of studies before further RCTs are considered and those findings would be useful in developing medical and public health policy, as they were for nonsmoking policies. A promising approach for future RCT design is adjustable vitamin D supplementation based on interval serum 25(OH)D concentrations to achieve target 25(OH)D levels suggested by findings from observational studies.

SARS-CoV-2 reinfections: Overview of efficacy and duration of natural and hybrid immunity.

Seroprevalence surveys suggest that more than a third and possibly more than half of the global population has been infected with SARS-CoV-2 by early 2022. As large numbers of people continue to be infected, the efficacy and duration of natural immunity in terms of protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfections and severe disease is of crucial significance for the future. This narrative review provides an overview on epidemiological studies addressing this issue. National surveys covering 2020-2021 documented that a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with a significantly reduced risk of reinfections with efficacy lasting for at least one year and only relatively moderate waning immunity. Importantly, natural immunity showed roughly similar effect sizes regarding protection against reinfection across different SARS-CoV-2 variants, with the exception of the Omicron variant for which data are just emerging before final conclusions can be drawn. Risk of hospitalizations and deaths was also reduced in SARS-CoV-2 reinfections versus primary infections. Observational studies indicate that natural immunity may offer equal or greater protection against SARS-CoV-2 infections compared to individuals receiving two doses of an mRNA vaccine, but data are not fully consistent. The combination of a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and a respective vaccination, termed hybrid immunity, seems to confer the greatest protection against SARS-CoV-2 infections, but several knowledge gaps remain regarding this issue. Natural immunity should be considered for public health policy regarding SARS-CoV-2.

Antifungal prophylaxis for prevention of COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis in critically ill patients: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19)-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) emerged as important fungal complications in patients with COVID-19-associated severe acute respiratory failure (ARF). Whether mould active antifungal prophylaxis (MAFP) can prevent CAPA remains elusive so far. METHODS: In this observational study, we included all consecutive patients admitted to intensive care units with COVID-19-associated ARF between September 1, 2020, and May 1, 2021. We compared patients with versus without antifungal prophylaxis with respect to CAPA incidence (primary outcome) and mortality (secondary outcome). Propensity score adjustment was performed to account for any imbalances in baseline characteristics. CAPA cases were classified according to European Confederation of Medical Mycology (ECMM)/International Society of Human and Animal Mycoses (ISHAM) consensus criteria. RESULTS: We included 132 patients, of whom 75 (57%) received antifungal prophylaxis (98% posaconazole). Ten CAPA cases were diagnosed, after a median of 6 days following ICU admission. Of those, 9 CAPA cases were recorded in the non-prophylaxis group and one in the prophylaxis group, respectively. However, no difference in 30-day ICU mortality could be observed. Thirty-day CAPA incidence estimates were 1.4% (95% CI 0.2-9.7) in the MAFP group and 17.5% (95% CI 9.6-31.4) in the group without MAFP (p = 0.002). The respective subdistributional hazard ratio (sHR) for CAPA incidence comparing the MAFP versus no MAFP group was of 0.08 (95% CI 0.01-0.63; p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: In ICU patients with COVID-19 ARF, antifungal prophylaxis was associated with significantly reduced CAPA incidence, but this did not translate into improved survival. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MAFP with respect to CAPA incidence and clinical outcomes.

Convalescent plasma therapy and mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to quantify the potential survival benefit of convalescent plasma therapy (CVP) in critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure related to coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This is a single-center prospective observational cohort study in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure. Immediately after intensive care unit (ICU) admission patients were allocated to CVP treatment following pre-specified criteria to rapidly identify those patients potentially susceptible for this treatment. A propensity score adjustment [inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) analysis] was implemented to account rigorously for imbalances in prognostic variables between the treatment groups. RESULTS: We included 120 patients of whom 48 received CVP. Thirty percent were female with a median age of 66 years [25th-75th percentile 54-75]. Eighty-eight percent of patients presented with severe acute respiratory failure as displayed by a median paO2/FiO2 ratio (Horowitz Index) of 92 [77-150]. All patients required any kind of ventilatory support with more than half of them (52%) receiving invasive ventilation. Thirty-day ICU overall survival (OS) was 69% in the CVP group and 54% in the non-CVP group (log-rank p = 0.049), respectively. After weighing the time-to-event data for the IPTW, the favorable association between CVP and OS became even stronger (log-rank p = 0.035). Moreover, an exploratory analysis showed an overall survival benefit of CVP therapy for patients with non-invasive ventilation (Hazard ratio 0.12 95% CI 0.03-0.57, p = 0.007) CONCLUSION: Administration of CVP in patients with acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19 is associated with improved ICU survival rates.

SARS-CoV-2 re-infection risk in Austria.

BACKGROUND: A key question concerning coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is how effective and long lasting immunity against this disease is in individuals who were previously infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to evaluate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 re-infections in the general population in Austria. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study using national SARS-CoV-2 infection data from the Austrian epidemiological reporting system. As the primary outcome, we aim to compare the odds of SARS-CoV-2 re-infections of COVID-19 survivors of the first wave (February to April 30, 2020) versus the odds of first infections in the remainder general population by tracking polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed infections of both groups during the second wave from September 1 to November 30, 2020. Re-infection counts are tentative, since it cannot be excluded that the positive PCR in the first and/or second wave might have been a false positive. RESULTS: We recorded 40 tentative re-infections in 14 840 COVID-19 survivors of the first wave (0.27%) and 253 581 infections in 8 885 640 individuals of the remaining general population (2.85%) translating into an odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of 0.09 (0.07 to 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a relatively low re-infection rate of SARS-CoV-2 in Austria. Protection against SARS-CoV-2 after natural infection is comparable with the highest available estimates on vaccine efficacies. Further well-designed research on this issue is urgently needed for improving evidence-based decisions on public health measures and vaccination strategies.