COVID-19 Pandemic Had Minimal Impact on Colonoscopy Completion After Colorectal Cancer Red Flag Sign or Symptoms in US Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Delays in colonoscopy work-up for red flag signs or symptoms of colorectal cancer (CRC) during the COVID-19 pandemic are not well characterized. AIMS: To examine colonoscopy uptake and time to colonoscopy after red flag diagnosis, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Cohort study of adults ages 50-75 with iron deficiency anemia (IDA), hematochezia, or abnormal stool blood test receiving Veterans Health Administration (VHA) care from April 2019 to December 2020. Index date was first red flag diagnosis date, categorized into "pre" (April-December 2019) and "intra" (April-December 2020) policy implementation prioritizing diagnostic procedures, allowing for a 3-month "washout" (January-March 2020) period. Outcomes were colonoscopy completion and time to colonoscopy pre- vs. intra-COVID-19, examined using multivariable Cox models with hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: There were 52,539 adults with red flag signs or symptoms (pre-COVID: 25,154; washout: 7527; intra-COVID: 19,858). Proportion completing colonoscopy was similar pre- vs. intra-COVID-19 (27.0% vs. 26.5%; p = 0.24). Median time to colonoscopy among colonoscopy completers was similar for pre- vs. intra-COVID-19 (46 vs. 42 days), but longer for individuals with IDA (60 vs. 49 days). There was no association between time period and colonoscopy completion (aHR: 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy work-up of CRC red flag signs and symptoms was not delayed within VHA during the COVID-19 pandemic, possibly due to VHA policies supporting prioritization and completion. Further work is needed to understand how COVID-19 policies on screening and surveillance impact CRC-related outcomes, and how to optimize colonoscopy completion after a red flag diagnosis.

Associations Between Gastrointestinal Symptoms and COVID-19 Severity Outcomes Based on a Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis of a Nationwide Cohort.

Background and Aims: Gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are well-recognized manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our primary objective was to evaluate the association between GI symptoms and COVID-19 severity. Methods: In this nationwide cohort of US veterans, we evaluated GI symptoms (nausea/vomiting/diarrhea) reported 30 days before and including the date of positive SARS-CoV-2 testing (March 1, 2020, to February 20, 2021). All patients had ≥1 year of prior baseline data and ≥60 days follow-up relative to the test date. We used propensity score (PS)-weighting to balance covariates in patients with vs without GI symptoms. The primary composite outcome was severe COVID-19, defined as hospital admission, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, or death within 60 days of positive testing. Results: Of 218,045 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, 29,257 (13.4%) had GI symptoms. After PS weighting, all covariates were balanced. In the PS-weighted cohort, patients with vs without GI symptoms had severe COVID-19 more often (29.0% vs 17.1%; P < .001). When restricted to hospitalized patients (14.9%; n=32,430), patients with GI symptoms had similar frequencies of intensive care unit admission and mechanical ventilation compared with patients without symptoms. There was a significant age interaction; among hospitalized patients aged ≥70 years, lower COVID-19-associated mortality was observed in patients with vs without GI symptoms, even after accounting for COVID-19-specific medical treatments. Conclusion: In the largest integrated US health care system, SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with GI symptoms experienced severe COVID-19 outcomes more often than those without symptoms. Additional research on COVID-19-associated GI symptoms may inform preventive efforts and interventions to reduce severe COVID-19.

Pharmacogenetic variants and risk of remdesivir-associated liver enzyme elevations in Million Veteran Program participants hospitalized with COVID-19.

Remdesivir is the first US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a retrospective pharmacogenetic study to examine remdesivir-associated liver enzyme elevation among Million Veteran Program participants hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 15, 2020, and June 30, 2021. Pharmacogene phenotypes were assigned using Stargazer. Linear regression was performed on peak log-transformed enzyme values, stratified by population, adjusted for age, sex, baseline liver enzymes, comorbidities, and 10 population-specific principal components. Patients on remdesivir had higher peak alanine aminotransferase (ALT) values following treatment initiation compared with patients not receiving remdesivir. Remdesivir administration was associated with a 33% and 24% higher peak ALT in non-Hispanic White (NHW) and non-Hispanic Black (NHB) participants (p < 0.001), respectively. In a multivariable model, NHW CYP2C19 intermediate/poor metabolizers had a 9% increased peak ALT compared with NHW normal/rapid/ultrarapid metabolizers (p = 0.015); this association was not observed in NHB participants. In summary, remdesivir-associated ALT elevations appear to be multifactorial, and further studies are needed.

Proton pump inhibitor use is not significantly associated with severe COVID-19 related outcomes after extensive covariate adjustment

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Using the covariate-rich Veteran Health Administration data, estimate the association between Proton Pump Inhibitor (PPI) use and severe COVID-19, rigorously adjusting for confounding using propensity score (PS)-weighting. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We assembled a national retrospective cohort of United States veterans who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, with information on 33 covariates including comorbidity diagnoses, lab values, and medications. Current outpatient PPI use was compared to non-use (two or more fills and pills on hand at admission vs no PPI prescription fill in prior year). The primary composite outcome was mechanical ventilation use or death within 60 days;the secondary composite outcome included ICU admission. PS-weighting mimicked a 1:1 matching cohort, allowing inclusion of all patients while achieving good covariate balance. The weighted cohort was analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Our analytic cohort included 97,674 veterans with SARS-CoV-2 testing, of whom 14,958 (15.3%) tested positive (6,262 [41.9%] current PPI-users, 8,696 [58.1%] non-users). After weighting, all covariates were well-balanced with standardized mean differences less than a threshold of 0.1. Prior to PS-weighting (no covariate adjustment), we observed higher odds of the primary (9.3% vs 7.5%;OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.13-1.43) and secondary (25.8% vs 21.4%;OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.18-1.37) outcomes among PPI users vs non-users. After PS-weighting, PPI use vs non-use was not associated with the primary (8.2% vs 8.0%;OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.91-1.16) or secondary (23.4% vs 22.9%;OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.95-1.12) outcomes. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The associations between PPI use and severe COVID-19 outcomes that have been previously reported may be due to limitations in the covariates available for adjustment. With respect to COVID-19, our robust PS-weighted analysis provides patients and providers with further evidence for PPI safety.

APOL1 Risk Variants, Acute Kidney Injury, and Death in Participants With African Ancestry Hospitalized With COVID-19 From the Million Veteran Program.

IMPORTANCE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) confers significant risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). Patients with COVID-19 with AKI have high mortality rates. OBJECTIVE: Individuals with African ancestry with 2 copies of apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) variants G1 or G2 (high-risk group) have significantly increased rates of kidney disease. We tested the hypothesis that the APOL1 high-risk group is associated with a higher-risk of COVID-19-associated AKI and death. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study included 990 participants with African ancestry enrolled in the Million Veteran Program who were hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and January 2021 with available genetic information. EXPOSURES: The primary exposure was having 2 APOL1 risk variants (RV) (APOL1 high-risk group), compared with having 1 or 0 risk variants (APOL1 low-risk group). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was AKI. The secondary outcomes were stages of AKI severity and death. Multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusted for preexisting comorbidities, medications, and inpatient AKI risk factors; 10 principal components of ancestry were performed to study these associations. We performed a subgroup analysis in individuals with normal kidney function prior to hospitalization (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2). RESULTS: Of the 990 participants with African ancestry, 905 (91.4%) were male with a median (IQR) age of 68 (60-73) years. Overall, 392 (39.6%) patients developed AKI, 141 (14%) developed stages 2 or 3 AKI, 28 (3%) required dialysis, and 122 (12.3%) died. One hundred twenty-five (12.6%) of the participants were in the APOL1 high-risk group. Patients categorized as APOL1 high-risk group had significantly higher odds of AKI (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.95; 95% CI, 1.27-3.02; P = .002), higher AKI severity stages (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.37-2.99; P < .001), and death (OR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.22-3.72; P = .007). The association with AKI persisted in the subgroup with normal kidney function (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.15-3.26; P = .01). Data analysis was conducted between February 2021 and April 2021. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study of veterans with African ancestry hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, APOL1 kidney risk variants were associated with higher odds of AKI, AKI severity, and death, even among individuals with prior normal kidney function.

Survey Finds Gender Disparities Impact Both Women Mentors and Mentees in Gastroenterology.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroenterologists at all levels of practice benefit from formal mentoring. Much of the current literature on mentoring in gastroenterology is based on expert opinion rather than data. In this study, we aimed to identify gender-related barriers to successful mentoring relationships from the mentor and mentee perspectives. METHODS: A voluntary, web-based survey was distributed to physicians at 20 academic institutions across the United States. Overall, 796 gastroenterology fellows and faculty received the survey link, with 334 physicians responding to the survey (42% response rate), of whom 299 (90%; 129 women and 170 men) completed mentorship questions and were included in analysis. RESULTS: Responses of women and men were compared. Compared with men, more women preferred a mentor of the same gender (38.6% women vs 4.2% men, P < 0.0001) but less often had one (45.5% vs 70.2%, P < 0.0001). Women also reported having more difficulty finding a mentor (44.4% vs 16.0%, P < 0.0001) and more often cited inability to identify a mentor of the same gender as a contributing factor (12.8% vs 0.9%, P = 0.0004). More women mentors felt comfortable advising women mentees about work-life balance (88.3% vs 63.8%, P = 0.0005). Nonetheless, fewer women considered themselves effective mentors (33.3% vs 52.6%, P = 0.03). More women reported feeling pressured to mentor because of their gender (39.5% vs 0.9% of men, P < 0.0001). Despite no gender differences, one-third of respondents reported negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their ability to mentor and be mentored. DISCUSSION: Inequities exist in the experiences of women mentees and mentors in gastroenterology, which may affect career advancement and job satisfaction.

Comparison of COVID-19 versus influenza on the incidence, features, and recovery from acute kidney injury in hospitalized United States Veterans.

Acute kidney injury is a common complication in patients hospitalized with SARSCoV-2 (COVID-19), with prior studies implicating multiple potential mechanisms of injury. Although COVID-19 is often compared to other respiratory viral illnesses, few formal comparisons of these viruses on kidney health exist. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the incidence, features, and outcomes of acute kidney injury among Veterans hospitalized with COVID-19 or influenza and adjusted for baseline conditions using weighted comparisons. A total of 3402 hospitalizations for COVID-19 and 3680 hospitalizations for influenza admitted between October 1, 2019 and May 31, 2020 across 127 Veterans Administration hospitals nationally were studied using the electronic medical record. Acute kidney injury occurred more frequently among those with COVID-19 compared to those with influenza (40.9% versus 29.4%, weighted analysis) and was more severe. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to require mechanical ventilation and vasopressors and experienced higher mortality. Proteinuria and hematuria were frequent in both groups but more common in COVID-19. Recovery of kidney function was less common in patients with COVID-19 and acute kidney injury but was similar among survivors. Thus, findings from this study confirm that acute kidney injury is more common and severe among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared to influenza, a finding that may be driven largely by illness severity. Hence, the combined impact of these two illnesses on kidney health may be significant and have important implications for resource allocation.

Delivering maternal and neonatal health interventions in conflict settings: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: While much progress was made throughout the Millennium Development Goals era in reducing maternal and neonatal mortality, both remain unacceptably high, especially in areas affected by humanitarian crises. While valuable guidance on interventions to improve maternal and neonatal health in both non-crisis and crisis settings exists, guidance on how best to deliver these interventions in crisis settings, and especially in conflict settings, is still limited. This systematic review aimed to synthesise the available literature on the delivery on maternal and neonatal health interventions in conflict settings. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases using terms related to conflict, women and children, and maternal and neonatal health. We searched websites of 10 humanitarian organisations for relevant grey literature. Publications reporting on conflict-affected populations in low-income and middle-income countries and describing a maternal or neonatal health intervention delivered during or within 5 years after the end of a conflict were included. Information on population, intervention, and delivery characteristics were extracted and narratively synthesised. Quantitative data on intervention coverage and effectiveness were tabulated but no meta-analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: 115 publications met our eligibility criteria. Intervention delivery was most frequently reported in the sub-Saharan Africa region, and most publications focused on displaced populations based in camps. Reported maternal interventions targeted antenatal, obstetric and postnatal care; neonatal interventions focused mostly on essential newborn care. Most interventions were delivered in hospitals and clinics, by doctors and nurses, and were mostly delivered through non-governmental organisations or the existing healthcare system. Delivery barriers included insecurity, lack of resources and lack of skilled health staff. Multi-stakeholder collaboration, the introduction of new technology or systems innovations, and staff training were delivery facilitators. Reporting of intervention coverage or effectiveness data was limited. DISCUSSION: The relevant existing literature focuses mostly on maternal health especially around the antenatal period. There is still limited literature on postnatal care in conflict settings and even less on newborn care. In crisis settings, as much as in non-crisis settings, there is a need to focus on the first day of birth for both maternal and neonatal health. There is also a need to do more research on how best to involve community members in the delivery of maternal and neonatal health interventions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019125221.