Abatacept for Treatment of Adults Hospitalized with Moderate or Severe Covid-19 (preprint)

Background: We investigated whether abatacept, a selective costimulation modulator, provides additional benefit when added to standard-of-care for patients hospitalized with Covid-19. Methods: We conducted a master protocol to investigate immunomodulators for potential benefit treating patients hospitalized with Covid-19 and report results for abatacept. Intravenous abatacept (one-time dose 10 mg/kg, maximum dose 1000 mg) plus standard of care (SOC) was compared with shared placebo plus SOC. Primary outcome was time-to-recovery by day 28. Key secondary endpoints included 28-day mortality. Results: Between October 16, 2020 and December 31, 2021, a total of 1019 participants received study treatment (509 abatacept; 510 shared placebo), constituting the modified intention-to-treat cohort. Participants had a mean age 54.8 (SD 14.6) years, 60.5% were male, 44.2% Hispanic/Latino and 13.7% Black. No statistically significant difference for the primary endpoint of time-to-recovery was found with a recovery-rate-ratio of 1.14 (95% CI 1.00-1.29; p=0.057) compared with placebo. We observed a substantial improvement in 28-day all-cause mortality with abatacept versus placebo (11.0% vs. 15.1%; odds ratio [OR] 0.62 [95% CI 0.41-0.94]), leading to 38% lower odds of dying. Improvement in mortality occurred for participants requiring oxygen/noninvasive ventilation at randomization. Subgroup analysis identified the strongest effect in those with baseline C-reactive protein >75mg/L. We found no statistically significant differences in adverse events, with safety composite index slightly favoring abatacept. Rates of secondary infections were similar (16.1% for abatacept; 14.3% for placebo). Conclusions: Addition of single-dose intravenous abatacept to standard-of-care demonstrated no statistically significant change in time-to-recovery, but improved 28-day mortality. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04593940).

Infliximab for Treatment of Adults Hospitalized with Moderate or Severe Covid-19 (preprint)

BackgroundImmune dysregulation contributes to poorer outcomes in severe Covid-19. Immunomodulators targeting various pathways have improved outcomes. We investigated whether infliximab provides benefit over standard of care. MethodsWe conducted a master protocol investigating immunomodulators for potential benefit in treatment of participants hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia. We report results for infliximab (single dose infusion) versus shared placebo both with standard of care. Primary outcome was time to recovery by day 29 (28 days after randomization). Key secondary endpoints included 14-day clinical status and 28-day mortality. ResultsA total of 1033 participants received study drug (517 infliximab, 516 placebo). Mean age was 54.8 years, 60.3% were male, 48.6% Hispanic or Latino, and 14% Black. No statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint was seen with infliximab compared with placebo (recovery rate ratio 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.29; p=0.063). Median (IQR) time to recovery was 8 days (7, 9) for infliximab and 9 days (8, 10) for placebo. Participants assigned to infliximab were more likely to have an improved clinical status at day 14 (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.05-1.66). Twenty-eight-day mortality was 10.1% with infliximab versus 14.5% with placebo, with 41% lower odds of dying in those receiving infliximab (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90). No differences in risk of serious adverse events including secondary infections. ConclusionsInfliximab did not demonstrate statistically significant improvement in time to recovery. It was associated with improved 14-day clinical status and substantial reduction in 28- day mortality compared with standard of care. Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04593940).

Vaccination boosts protective responses and counters SARS-CoV-2-induced pathogenic memory B cells (preprint)

Given the rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the recent implementation of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, we have much to learn about the duration of immune protection and the interface between the immune responses to infection and to vaccination. To address these questions, we monitored immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection in convalescent individuals over seven months and following mRNA vaccination. Spike Receptor-Binding-Domain (RBD)-specific circulating antibodies and plasma neutralizing activity generally decreased over time, whereas RBD-specific memory B cells persisted. Additionally, using antibody depletion techniques, we showed that the neutralizing activity of plasma specifically resides in the anti-RBD antibodies. More vigorous antibody and B cell responses to vaccination were observed in previously infected subjects relative to uninfected comparators, presumably due to immune priming by infection. SARS-CoV-2 infection also led to increased numbers of double negative B memory cells, which are described as a dysfunctional B cell subset. This effect was reversed by SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, providing a potential mechanistic explanation for the vaccination-induced reduction in symptoms in patients with "Long-COVID".

Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in previously undiagnosed health care workers at the onset of the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic (preprint)

ImportanceHealthcare workers are presumed to be at increased risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection due to occupational exposure to infected patients. However, no epidemiological study has examined the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a cohort of healthcare workers during the early phase of community transmission. ObjectiveTo determine the baseline prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a cohort of previously undiagnosed healthcare workers and a comparison group of non-healthcare workers. DesignProspective cohort study SettingA large U.S. university and two affiliated university hospitals Participants546 health care workers and 283 non-health care workers with no known prior SARS-CoV-2 infection ExposureHealthcare worker status and role Main outcome(s) and measure(s)SARS-CoV-2 infection status as determined by presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in oropharyngeal swabs. ResultsAt baseline, 41 (5.0%) of participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection, of whom 14 (34.2%) reported symptoms. The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher among healthcare workers (7.3%) than in non-healthcare workers (0.4%), representing a 7.0% greater absolute risk (95% confidence interval for risk difference 4.7%, 9.3%). The majority of infected healthcare workers (62.5%) worked as nurses. Positive tests increased across the two weeks of cohort recruitment in line with rising confirmed cases in the hospitals and surrounding counties. Conclusions and relevanceIn a prospective cohort conducted in the early phases of community transmission, healthcare workers had a higher prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection than non-healthcare workers, attesting to the occupational hazards of caring for patients in this crisis. Baseline data reported here will enable us to monitor the spread of infection and examine risk factors for transmission among healthcare workers. These results will inform optimal strategies for protecting the healthcare workforce, their families, and their patients. Clinicaltrials.gov registration number:NCT04336215 Key pointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSAmong previously undiagnosed individuals, is the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection higher in U.S. healthcare workers compared to non-healthcare workers in the early phase of the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic? FindingsThe prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 7.3% in healthcare workers and 0.4% in non-healthcare workers, representing 7.0% greater absolute risk in the former (95% confidence interval for risk difference 4.7%, 9.3%). Infections were most common among nursing staff. MeaningHealth care workers, particularly those with high levels of close patient contact, may be particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additional strategies are needed to protect these critical frontline workers.