GWAS and meta-analysis identifies 49 genetic variants underlying critical COVID-19.

Critical illness in COVID-19 is an extreme and clinically homogeneous disease phenotype that we have previously shown1 to be highly efficient for discovery of genetic associations2. Despite the advanced stage of illness at presentation, we have shown that host genetics in patients who are critically ill with COVID-19 can identify immunomodulatory therapies with strong beneficial effects in this group3. Here we analyse 24,202 cases of COVID-19 with critical illness comprising a combination of microarray genotype and whole-genome sequencing data from cases of critical illness in the international GenOMICC (11,440 cases) study, combined with other studies recruiting hospitalized patients with a strong focus on severe and critical disease: ISARIC4C (676 cases) and the SCOURGE consortium (5,934 cases). To put these results in the context of existing work, we conduct a meta-analysis of the new GenOMICC genome-wide association study (GWAS) results with previously published data. We find 49 genome-wide significant associations, of which 16 have not been reported previously. To investigate the therapeutic implications of these findings, we infer the structural consequences of protein-coding variants, and combine our GWAS results with gene expression data using a monocyte transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) model, as well as gene and protein expression using Mendelian randomization. We identify potentially druggable targets in multiple systems, including inflammatory signalling (JAK1), monocyte-macrophage activation and endothelial permeability (PDE4A), immunometabolism (SLC2A5 and AK5), and host factors required for viral entry and replication (TMPRSS2 and RAB2A).

Phase 2 randomised placebo-controlled trial of spironolactone and dexamethasone versus dexamethasone in COVID-19 hospitalised patients in Delhi.

BACKGROUND: In this phase 2 randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial in patients with COVID-19, we hypothesised that blocking mineralocorticoid receptors using a combination of dexamethasone to suppress cortisol secretion and spironolactone is safe and may reduce illness severity. METHODS: Hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID-19 were randomly allocated to low dose oral spironolactone (50 mg day 1, then 25 mg once daily for 21 days) or standard of care in a 2:1 ratio. Both groups received dexamethasone 6 mg daily for 10 days. Group allocation was blinded to the patient and research team. Primary outcomes were time to recovery, defined as the number of days until patients achieved WHO Ordinal Scale (OS) category ≤ 3, and the effect of spironolactone on aldosterone, D-dimer, angiotensin II and Von Willebrand Factor (VWF). RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients with PCR confirmed COVID were recruited in Delhi from 01 February to 30 April 2021. 74 were randomly assigned to spironolactone and dexamethasone (SpiroDex), and 46 to dexamethasone alone (Dex). There was no significant difference in the time to recovery between SpiroDex and Dex groups (SpiroDex median 4.5 days, Dex median 5.5 days, p = 0.055). SpiroDex patients had significantly lower D-dimer levels on days 4 and 7 (day 7 mean D-dimer: SpiroDex 1.15 µg/mL, Dex 3.15 µg/mL, p = 0.0004) and aldosterone at day 7 (SpiroDex 6.8 ng/dL, Dex 14.52 ng/dL, p = 0.0075). There was no difference in VWF or angiotensin II levels between groups. For secondary outcomes, SpiroDex patients had a significantly greater number of oxygen free days and reached oxygen freedom sooner than the Dex group. Cough scores were no different during the acute illness, however the SpiroDex group had lower scores at day 28. There was no difference in corticosteroid levels between groups. There was no increase in adverse events in patients receiving SpiroDex. CONCLUSION: Low dose oral spironolactone in addition to dexamethasone was safe and reduced D-dimer and aldosterone. Time to recovery was not significantly reduced. Phase 3 randomised controlled trials with spironolactone and dexamethasone should be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on the Clinical Trials Registry of India TRI: CTRI/2021/03/031721, reference: REF/2021/03/041472. Registered on 04/03/2021.

Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with severe COVID-19 registered in the ISARIC WHO clinical characterization protocol: A prospective, multinational, observational study.

PURPOSE: To determine its cumulative incidence, identify the risk factors associated with Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) development, and its impact clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study from the ISARIC database. We used bivariate and multivariate logistic regressions to explore the risk factors related to MACE development and determine its impact on 28-day and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: 49,479 patients were included. Most were male 63.5% (31,441/49,479) and from high-income countries (84.4% [42,774/49,479]); however, >6000 patients were registered in low-and-middle-income countries. MACE cumulative incidence during their hospital stay was 17.8% (8829/49,479). The main risk factors independently associated with the development of MACE were older age, chronic kidney disease or cardiovascular disease, smoking history, and requirement of vasopressors or invasive mechanical ventilation at admission. The overall 28-day and 90-day mortality were higher among patients who developed MACE than those who did not (63.1% [5573/8829] vs. 35.6% [14,487/40,650] p < 0.001; 69.9% [6169/8829] vs. 37.8% [15,372/40,650] p < 0.001, respectively). After adjusting for confounders, MACE remained independently associated with higher 28-day and 90-day mortality (Odds Ratio [95% CI], 1.36 [1.33-1.39];1.47 [1.43-1.50], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe COVID-19 frequently develop MACE, which is independently associated with worse clinical outcomes.

Repair of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in COVID-19 by Stromal Cells (REALIST-COVID Trial): A Multicentre, Randomised, Controlled Trial.

RATIONALE: Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) may modulate inflammation, promoting repair in COVID-19-related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). OBJECTIVES: We investigated safety and efficacy of ORBCEL-C (CD362-enriched, umbilical cord-derived MSCs) in COVID-related ARDS. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, allocation concealed, placebo-controlled trial (NCT03042143) randomised patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-related ARDS to receive ORBCEL-C (400million cells) or placebo (Plasma-Lyte148). MEASUREMENTS: The primary safety and efficacy outcomes were incidence of serious adverse events and oxygenation index at day 7 respectively. Secondary outcomes included respiratory compliance, driving pressure, PaO2/FiO2 ratio and SOFA score. Clinical outcomes relating to duration of ventilation, length of intensive care unit and hospital stays, and mortality were collected. Long-term follow up included diagnosis of interstitial lung disease at 1 year, and significant medical events and mortality at 2 years. Transcriptomic analysis was performed on whole blood at day 0, 4 and 7. MAIN RESULTS: 60 participants were recruited (final analysis n=30 ORBCEL-C, n=29 placebo: 1 in placebo group withdrew consent). 6 serious adverse events occurred in the ORBCEL-C and 3 in the placebo group, RR 2.9(0.6-13.2)p=0.25. Day 7 mean[SD] oxygenation index did not differ (ORBCEL-C 98.357.2], placebo 96.667.3). There were no differences in secondary surrogate outcomes, nor mortality at day 28, day 90, 1 or 2 years. There was no difference in prevalence of interstitial lung disease at 1year nor significant medical events up to 2 years. ORBCEL-C modulated the peripheral blood transcriptome. CONCLUSION: ORBCEL-C MSCs were safe in moderate-to-severe COVID-related ARDS, but did not improve surrogates of pulmonary organ dysfunction. Clinical trial registration available at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, ID: NCT03042143. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Determinants of recovery from post-COVID-19 dyspnoea: analysis of UK prospective cohorts of hospitalised COVID-19 patients and community-based controls.

Background: The risk factors for recovery from COVID-19 dyspnoea are poorly understood. We investigated determinants of recovery from dyspnoea in adults with COVID-19 and compared these to determinants of recovery from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea. Methods: We used data from two prospective cohort studies: PHOSP-COVID (patients hospitalised between March 2020 and April 2021 with COVID-19) and COVIDENCE UK (community cohort studied over the same time period). PHOSP-COVID data were collected during hospitalisation and at 5-month and 1-year follow-up visits. COVIDENCE UK data were obtained through baseline and monthly online questionnaires. Dyspnoea was measured in both cohorts with the Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify determinants associated with a reduction in dyspnoea between 5-month and 1-year follow-up. Findings: We included 990 PHOSP-COVID and 3309 COVIDENCE UK participants. We observed higher odds of improvement between 5-month and 1-year follow-up among PHOSP-COVID participants who were younger (odds ratio 1.02 per year, 95% CI 1.01-1.03), male (1.54, 1.16-2.04), neither obese nor severely obese (1.82, 1.06-3.13 and 4.19, 2.14-8.19, respectively), had no pre-existing anxiety or depression (1.56, 1.09-2.22) or cardiovascular disease (1.33, 1.00-1.79), and shorter hospital admission (1.01 per day, 1.00-1.02). Similar associations were found in those recovering from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea, excluding age (and length of hospital admission). Interpretation: Factors associated with dyspnoea recovery at 1-year post-discharge among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were similar to those among community controls without COVID-19. Funding: PHOSP-COVID is supported by a grant from the MRC-UK Research and Innovation and the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) rapid response panel to tackle COVID-19. The views expressed in the publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.COVIDENCE UK is supported by the UK Research and Innovation, the National Institute for Health Research, and Barts Charity. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funders.

Risk factors for developing ventilator-associated lower respiratory tract infection in patients with severe COVID-19: a multinational, multicentre study, prospective, observational study.

Around one-third of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 develop a severe illness that requires admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). In clinical practice, clinicians have learned that patients admitted to the ICU due to severe COVID-19 frequently develop ventilator-associated lower respiratory tract infections (VA-LRTI). This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics, the factors associated with VA-LRTI, and its impact on clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19. This was a multicentre, observational cohort study conducted in ten countries in Latin America and Europe. We included patients with confirmed rtPCR for SARS-CoV-2 requiring ICU admission and endotracheal intubation. Only patients with a microbiological and clinical diagnosis of VA-LRTI were included. Multivariate Logistic regression analyses and Random Forest were conducted to determine the risk factors for VA-LRTI and its clinical impact in patients with severe COVID-19. In our study cohort of 3287 patients, VA-LRTI was diagnosed in 28.8% [948/3287]. The cumulative incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) was 18.6% [610/3287], followed by ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) 10.3% [338/3287]. A total of 1252 bacteria species were isolated. The most frequently isolated pathogens were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (21.2% [266/1252]), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (19.1% [239/1252]) and Staphylococcus aureus (15.5% [194/1,252]). The factors independently associated with the development of VA-LRTI were prolonged stay under invasive mechanical ventilation, AKI during ICU stay, and the number of comorbidities. Regarding the clinical impact of VA-LRTI, patients with VAP had an increased risk of hospital mortality (OR [95% CI] of 1.81 [1.40-2.34]), while VAT was not associated with increased hospital mortality (OR [95% CI] of 1.34 [0.98-1.83]). VA-LRTI, often with difficult-to-treat bacteria, is frequent in patients admitted to the ICU due to severe COVID-19 and is associated with worse clinical outcomes, including higher mortality. Identifying risk factors for VA-LRTI might allow the early patient diagnosis to improve clinical outcomes.Trial registration: This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable.

Causal Bayesian machine learning to assess treatment effect heterogeneity by dexamethasone dose for patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia.

The currently recommended dose of dexamethasone for patients with severe or critical COVID-19 is 6 mg per day (mg/d) regardless of patient features and variation. However, patients with severe or critical COVID-19 are heterogenous in many ways (e.g., age, weight, comorbidities, disease severity, and immune features). Thus, it is conceivable that a standardized dosing protocol may not be optimal. We assessed treatment effect heterogeneity in the COVID STEROID 2 trial, which compared 6 mg/d to 12 mg/d, using a causal inference framework with Bayesian Additive Regression Trees, a flexible modeling method that detects interactive effects and nonlinear relationships among multiple patient characteristics simultaneously. We found that 12 mg/d of dexamethasone, relative to 6 mg/d, was probably associated with better long-term outcomes (days alive without life support and mortality after 90 days) among the entire trial population (i.e., no signals of harm), and probably more beneficial among those without diabetes mellitus, that were older, were not using IL-6 inhibitors at baseline, weighed less, or had higher level respiratory support at baseline. This adds more evidence supporting the use of 12 mg/d in practice for most patients not receiving other immunosuppressants and that additional study of dosing could potentially optimize clinical outcomes.

Comparison of systemic inflammatory profiles in COVID-19 and community-acquired pneumonia patients: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory responses contribute to tissue damage in COVID-19 and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Although predictive values of different inflammatory biomarkers have been reported in both, similarities and differences of inflammatory profiles between these conditions remain uncertain. Therefore, we aimed to determine the similarities and differences of the inflammatory profiles between COVID-19 and CAP, and their association with clinical outcomes. METHODS: We report a prospective observational cohort study; conducted in a reference hospital in Latin America. Patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia and CAP were included. Multiplex (Luminex) cytokine assays were used to measure the plasma concentration of 14 cytokines at hospital admission. After comparing similarities and differences in the inflammatory profile between COVID-19 and CAP patients, an unsupervised classification method (i.e., hierarchical clustering) was used to identify subpopulations within COVID-19 and CAP patients. RESULTS: A total of 160 patients were included, 62.5% were diagnosed with COVID-19 (100/160), and 37.5% with CAP (60/160). Using the hierarchical clustering, COVID-19 and CAP patients were divided based on its inflammatory profile: pauci, moderate, and hyper-inflammatory immune response. COVID-19 hyper-inflammatory subpopulation had the highest mortality. COVID-19 hyper-inflammatory subpopulation, compared to pauci-inflammatory, had higher levels of IL-10 (median [IQR] 61.4 [42.0-109.4] vs 13.0 [5.0-24.9], P: < 0.001), IL-6 (48.1 [22.3-82.6] vs 9.1 [0.1-30.4], P: < 0.001), among others. Hyper-inflammatory vs pauci-inflammatory CAP patients were characterized by elevation of IFN2 (48.8 [29.7-110.5] vs 3.0 [1.7-10.3], P: < 0.001), TNFα (36.3 [24.8-53.4] vs 13.1 [11.3-16.9], P: < 0.001), among others. Hyper-inflammatory subpopulations in COVID-19 and CAP compared to the corresponding pauci-inflammatory subpopulations had higher MCP-1. CONCLUSIONS: Our data highlights three distinct subpopulations in COVID-19 and CAP, with differences in inflammatory marker profiles and risks of adverse clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This is a prospective study, therefore no health care intervention were applied to participants and trial registration is not applicable.

An Inhaled Galectin-3 Inhibitor in COVID-19 Pneumonitis (DEFINE): A Phase Ib/IIa Randomised Controlled Trial.

RATIONALE: High circulating galectin-3 is associated with poor outcomes in patients with COVID-19. We hypothesised that GB0139, a potent inhaled thiodigalactoside galectin-3 inhibitor with anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic actions, would be safely and effectively delivered in COVID-19 pneumonitis. OBJECTIVES: Primary outcomes were safety and tolerability of inhaled GB0139 as an add-on therapy for patients hospitalised with COVID-19 pneumonitis. METHODS: We present the findings of two arms of a phase Ib/IIa randomised controlled platform trial in hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonitis. Patients received standard of care (SoC) or SoC plus 10 mg inhaled GB0139 twice daily for 48 hours, then once daily for up to 14 days or discharge. RESULTS: Data are reported from 41 patients, 20 of which were assigned randomly to receive GB0139. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: the GB0139 group experienced no treatment-related serious adverse events. Incidences of adverse events were similar between treatment arms (40 with GB0139+SoC vs 35 with SoC). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: plasma GB0139 was measurable in all patients after inhaled exposure, and demonstrated target engagement with decreased circulating galectin (overall treatment effect post-hoc ANCOVA over days 2-7: p=0.0099 vs SoC). Plasma biomarkers associated with inflammation, fibrosis, coagulopathy and major organ function were evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: In COVID pneumonitis, inhaled GB013 was well-tolerated, achieved clinically relevant plasma concentrations with target engagement. The data support larger clinical trials to determine clinical efficacy. Clinical trial registration available at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, ID: NCT04473053. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Prevalence, risk factors and treatments for post-COVID-19 breathlessness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Persistent breathlessness >28 days after acute COVID-19 infection has been identified as a highly debilitating post-COVID symptom. However, the prevalence, risk factors, mechanisms and treatments for post-COVID breathlessness remain poorly understood. We systematically searched PubMed and Embase for relevant studies published from 1 January 2020 to 1 November 2021 (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021285733) and included 119 eligible papers. Random-effects meta-analysis of 42 872 patients with COVID-19 reported in 102 papers found an overall prevalence of post-COVID breathlessness of 26% (95% CI 23-29) when measuring the presence/absence of the symptom, and 41% (95% CI 34-48) when using Medical Research Council (MRC)/modified MRC dyspnoea scale. The pooled prevalence decreased significantly from 1-6 months to 7-12 months post-infection. Post-COVID breathlessness was more common in those with severe/critical acute infection, those who were hospitalised and females, and was less likely to be reported by patients in Asia than those in Europe or North America. Multiple pathophysiological mechanisms have been proposed (including deconditioning, restrictive/obstructive airflow limitation, systemic inflammation, impaired mental health), but the body of evidence remains inconclusive. Seven cohort studies and one randomised controlled trial suggested rehabilitation exercises may reduce post-COVID breathlessness. There is an urgent need for mechanistic research and development of interventions for the prevention and treatment of post-COVID breathlessness.

Association between tocilizumab, sarilumab and all-cause mortality at 28 days in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: A network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A recent prospective meta-analysis demonstrated that interleukin-6 antagonists are associated with lower all-cause mortality in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, compared with usual care or placebo. However, emerging evidence suggests that clinicians are favouring the use of tocilizumab over sarilumab. A new randomised comparison of these agents from the REMAP-CAP trial shows similar effects on in-hospital mortality. Therefore, we initiated a network meta-analysis, to estimate pairwise associations between tocilizumab, sarilumab and usual care or placebo with 28-day mortality, in COVID-19 patients receiving concomitant corticosteroids and ventilation, based on all available direct and indirect evidence. METHODS: Eligible trials randomised hospitalised patients with COVID-19 that compared tocilizumab or sarilumab with usual care or placebo in the prospective meta-analysis or that directly compared tocilizumab with sarilumab. Data were restricted to patients receiving corticosteroids and either non-invasive or invasive ventilation at randomisation. Pairwise associations between tocilizumab, sarilumab and usual care or placebo for all-cause mortality 28 days after randomisation were estimated using a frequentist contrast-based network meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs), implementing multivariate fixed-effects models that assume consistency between the direct and indirect evidence. FINDINGS: One trial (REMAP-CAP) was identified that directly compared tocilizumab with sarilumab and supplied results on all-cause mortality at 28-days. This network meta-analysis was based on 898 eligible patients (278 deaths) from REMAP-CAP and 3710 eligible patients from 18 trials (1278 deaths) from the prospective meta-analysis. Summary ORs were similar for tocilizumab [0·82 [0·71-0·95, p = 0·008]] and sarilumab [0·80 [0·61-1·04, p = 0·09]] compared with usual care or placebo. The summary OR for 28-day mortality comparing tocilizumab with sarilumab was 1·03 [95%CI 0·81-1·32, p = 0·80]. The p-value for the global test of inconsistency was 0·28. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of either tocilizumab or sarilumab was associated with lower 28-day all-cause mortality compared with usual care or placebo. The association is not dependent on the choice of interleukin-6 receptor antagonist.

Risk of Myocarditis After Sequential Doses of COVID-19 Vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 Infection by Age and Sex.

BACKGROUND: Myocarditis is more common after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection than after COVID-19 vaccination, but the risks in younger people and after sequential vaccine doses are less certain. METHODS: A self-controlled case series study of people ages 13 years or older vaccinated for COVID-19 in England between December 1, 2020, and December 15, 2021, evaluated the association between vaccination and myocarditis, stratified by age and sex. The incidence rate ratio and excess number of hospital admissions or deaths from myocarditis per million people were estimated for the 1 to 28 days after sequential doses of adenovirus (ChAdOx1) or mRNA-based (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273) vaccines, or after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. RESULTS: In 42 842 345 people receiving at least 1 dose of vaccine, 21 242 629 received 3 doses, and 5 934 153 had SARS-CoV-2 infection before or after vaccination. Myocarditis occurred in 2861 (0.007%) people, with 617 events 1 to 28 days after vaccination. Risk of myocarditis was increased in the 1 to 28 days after a first dose of ChAdOx1 (incidence rate ratio, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.09-1.62]) and a first, second, and booster dose of BNT162b2 (1.52 [95% CI, 1.24-1.85]; 1.57 [95% CI, 1.28-1.92], and 1.72 [95% CI, 1.33-2.22], respectively) but was lower than the risks after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test before or after vaccination (11.14 [95% CI, 8.64-14.36] and 5.97 [95% CI, 4.54-7.87], respectively). The risk of myocarditis was higher 1 to 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273 (11.76 [95% CI, 7.25-19.08]) and persisted after a booster dose (2.64 [95% CI, 1.25-5.58]). Associations were stronger in men younger than 40 years for all vaccines. In men younger than 40 years old, the number of excess myocarditis events per million people was higher after a second dose of mRNA-1273 than after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test (97 [95% CI, 91-99] versus 16 [95% CI, 12-18]). In women younger than 40 years, the number of excess events per million was similar after a second dose of mRNA-1273 and a positive test (7 [95% CI, 1-9] versus 8 [95% CI, 6-8]). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the risk of myocarditis is greater after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after COVID-19 vaccination and remains modest after sequential doses including a booster dose of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. However, the risk of myocarditis after vaccination is higher in younger men, particularly after a second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine.

SARS-CoV-2-Specific Memory B Cell Responses Are Maintained After Recovery from Natural Infection and Postvaccination.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has resulted in major worldwide disruption and loss of life over the last 2 years. Many research studies have shown waning serological SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibody titers over time, yet, it is unclear whether these changes are reflected in the potential functional reactivation of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-specific memory B cells (MBC) populations. This is especially true in the contexts of differing COVID-19 disease severity and after vaccination regimens. This study aimed to investigate these by polyclonal in vitro reactivation of MBC populations followed by analysis using SAR-CoV-2 antigen-specific B cell ELISpots and IgG antibody ELISAs. Natural disease-associated differences were investigated in 52 donors who have recovered from COVID-19 with varying disease severity, from asymptomatic to severe COVID-19 disease, accompanied by a longitudinal evaluation in a subset of donors. Overall, these data showed limited disease severity-associated differences between donor groups but did show that COVID-19 serologically positive donors had strong antigen-specific MBC-associated responses. MBC responses were better maintained 6 months after recovery from infection when compared to serological antigen-specific IgG antibody titers. A similar investigation after vaccination using 14 donors showed robust serological antigen-specific antibody responses against spike protein that waned over time. MBC-associated responses against spike protein were also observed but showed less waning over time, indicating maintenance of a protective response 6 months after vaccination. Further research is required to evaluate these putatively functional SARS-CoV-2-specific responses in the context of long-term protection mediated by vaccination against this pathogen.

Associations of BMI with COVID-19 vaccine uptake, vaccine effectiveness, and risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes after vaccination in England: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A high BMI has been associated with a reduced immune response to vaccination against influenza. We aimed to investigate the association between BMI and COVID-19 vaccine uptake, vaccine effectiveness, and risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes after vaccination by using a large, representative population-based cohort from England. METHODS: In this population-based cohort study, we used the QResearch database of general practice records and included patients aged 18 years or older who were registered at a practice that was part of the database in England between Dec 8, 2020 (date of the first vaccination in the UK), to Nov 17, 2021, with available data on BMI. Uptake was calculated as the proportion of people with zero, one, two, or three doses of the vaccine across BMI categories. Effectiveness was assessed through a nested matched case-control design to estimate odds ratios (OR) for severe COVID-19 outcomes (ie, admission to hospital or death) in people who had been vaccinated versus those who had not, considering vaccine dose and time periods since vaccination. Vaccine effectiveness against infection with SARS-CoV-2 was also investigated. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models estimated the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes associated with BMI (reference BMI 23 kg/m2) after vaccination. FINDINGS: Among 9 171 524 participants (mean age 52 [SD 19] years; BMI 26·7 [5·6] kg/m2), 566 461 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during follow-up, of whom 32 808 were admitted to hospital and 14 389 died. Of the total study sample, 19·2% (1 758 689) were unvaccinated, 3·1% (287 246) had one vaccine dose, 52·6% (4 828 327) had two doses, and 25·0% (2 297 262) had three doses. In people aged 40 years and older, uptake of two or three vaccine doses was more than 80% among people with overweight or obesity, which was slightly lower in people with underweight (70-83%). Although significant heterogeneity was found across BMI groups, protection against severe COVID-19 disease (comparing people who were vaccinated vs those who were not) was high after 14 days or more from the second dose for hospital admission (underweight: OR 0·51 [95% CI 0·41-0·63]; healthy weight: 0·34 [0·32-0·36]; overweight: 0·32 [0·30-0·34]; and obesity: 0·32 [0·30-0·34]) and death (underweight: 0·60 [0·36-0·98]; healthy weight: 0·39 [0·33-0·47]; overweight: 0·30 [0·25-0·35]; and obesity: 0·26 [0·22-0·30]). In the vaccinated cohort, there were significant linear associations between BMI and COVID-19 hospitalisation and death after the first dose, and J-shaped associations after the second dose. INTERPRETATION: Using BMI categories, there is evidence of protection against severe COVID-19 in people with overweight or obesity who have been vaccinated, which was of a similar magnitude to that of people of healthy weight. Vaccine effectiveness was slightly lower in people with underweight, in whom vaccine uptake was also the lowest for all ages. In the vaccinated cohort, there were increased risks of severe COVID-19 outcomes for people with underweight or obesity compared with the vaccinated population with a healthy weight. These results suggest the need for targeted efforts to increase uptake in people with low BMI (<18·5 kg/m2), in whom uptake is lower and vaccine effectiveness seems to be reduced. Strategies to achieve and maintain a healthy weight should be prioritised at the population level, which could help reduce the burden of COVID-19 disease. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

Artemisinin inhibits neutrophil and macrophage chemotaxis, cytokine production and NET release.

Immune cell chemotaxis to the sites of pathogen invasion is critical for fighting infection, but in life-threatening conditions such as sepsis and Covid-19, excess activation of the innate immune system is thought to cause a damaging invasion of immune cells into tissues and a consequent excessive release of cytokines, chemokines and neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs). In these circumstances, tempering excessive activation of the innate immune system may, paradoxically, promote recovery. Here we identify the antimalarial compound artemisinin as a potent and selective inhibitor of neutrophil and macrophage chemotaxis induced by a range of chemotactic agents. Artemisinin released calcium from intracellular stores in a similar way to thapsigargin, a known inhibitor of the Sarco/Endoplasmic Reticulum Calcium ATPase pump (SERCA), but unlike thapsigargin, artemisinin blocks only the SERCA3 isoform. Inhibition of SERCA3 by artemisinin was irreversible and was inhibited by iron chelation, suggesting iron-catalysed alkylation of a specific cysteine residue in SERCA3 as the mechanism by which artemisinin inhibits neutrophil motility. In murine infection models, artemisinin potently suppressed neutrophil invasion into both peritoneum and lung in vivo and inhibited the release of cytokines/chemokines and NETs. This work suggests that artemisinin may have value as a therapy in conditions such as sepsis and Covid-19 in which over-activation of the innate immune system causes tissue injury that can lead to death.

Redefining critical illness.

Research and practice in critical care medicine have long been defined by syndromes, which, despite being clinically recognizable entities, are, in fact, loose amalgams of heterogeneous states that may respond differently to therapy. Mounting translational evidence-supported by research on respiratory failure due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection-suggests that the current syndrome-based framework of critical illness should be reconsidered. Here we discuss recent findings from basic science and clinical research in critical care and explore how these might inform a new conceptual model of critical illness. De-emphasizing syndromes, we focus on the underlying biological changes that underpin critical illness states and that may be amenable to treatment. We hypothesize that such an approach will accelerate critical care research, leading to a richer understanding of the pathobiology of critical illness and of the key determinants of patient outcomes. This, in turn, will support the design of more effective clinical trials and inform a more precise and more effective practice at the bedside.

Randomised controlled trial of intravenous nafamostat mesylate in COVID pneumonitis: Phase 1b/2a experimental study to investigate safety, Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics.

BACKGROUND: Many repurposed drugs have progressed rapidly to Phase 2 and 3 trials in COVID19 without characterisation of Pharmacokinetics /Pharmacodynamics including safety data. One such drug is nafamostat mesylate. METHODS: We present the findings of a phase Ib/IIa open label, platform randomised controlled trial of intravenous nafamostat in hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonitis. Patients were assigned randomly to standard of care (SoC), nafamostat or an alternative therapy. Nafamostat was administered as an intravenous infusion at a dose of 0.2 mg/kg/h for a maximum of seven days. The analysis population included those who received any dose of the trial drug and all patients randomised to SoC. The primary outcomes of our trial were the safety and tolerability of intravenous nafamostat as an add on therapy for patients hospitalised with COVID-19 pneumonitis. FINDINGS: Data is reported from 42 patients, 21 of which were randomly assigned to receive intravenous nafamostat. 86% of nafamostat-treated patients experienced at least one AE compared to 57% of the SoC group. The nafamostat group were significantly more likely to experience at least one AE (posterior mean odds ratio 5.17, 95% credible interval (CI) 1.10 - 26.05) and developed significantly higher plasma creatinine levels (posterior mean difference 10.57 micromol/L, 95% CI 2.43-18.92). An average longer hospital stay was observed in nafamostat patients, alongside a lower rate of oxygen free days (rate ratio 0.55-95% CI 0.31-0.99, respectively). There were no other statistically significant differences in endpoints between nafamostat and SoC. PK data demonstrated that intravenous nafamostat was rapidly broken down to inactive metabolites. We observed no significant anticoagulant effects in thromboelastometry. INTERPRETATION: In hospitalised patients with COVID-19, we did not observe evidence of anti-inflammatory, anticoagulant or antiviral activity with intravenous nafamostat, and there were additional adverse events. FUNDING: DEFINE was funded by LifeArc (an independent medical research charity) under the STOPCOVID award to the University of Edinburgh. We also thank the Oxford University COVID-19 Research Response Fund (BRD00230).

Repair of acute respiratory distress syndrome by stromal cell administration (REALIST): a structured study protocol for an open-label dose-escalation phase 1 trial followed by a randomised, triple-blind, allocation concealed, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) may be of benefit in ARDS due to immunomodulatory and reparative properties. This trial investigates a novel CD362 enriched umbilical cord derived MSC product (REALIST ORBCEL-C), produced to Good Manufacturing Practice standards, in patients with moderate to severe ARDS due to COVID-19 and ARDS due to other causes. METHODS: Phase 1 is a multicentre open-label dose-escalation pilot trial. Patients will receive a single infusion of REALIST ORBCEL-C (100 × 106 cells, 200 × 106 cells or 400 × 106 cells) in a 3 + 3 design. Phase 2 is a multicentre randomised, triple blind, allocation concealed placebo-controlled trial. Two cohorts of patients, with ARDS due to COVID-19 or ARDS due to other causes, will be recruited and randomised 1:1 to receive either a single infusion of REALIST ORBCEL-C (400 × 106 cells or maximal tolerated dose in phase 1) or placebo. Planned recruitment to each cohort is 60 patients. The primary safety outcome is the incidence of serious adverse events. The primary efficacy outcome is oxygenation index at day 7. The trial will be reported according to the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT 2010) statement. DISCUSSION: The development and manufacture of an advanced therapy medicinal product to Good Manufacturing Practice standards within NHS infrastructure are discussed, including challenges encountered during the early stages of trial set up. The rationale to include a separate cohort of patients with ARDS due to COVID-19 in phase 2 of the trial is outlined. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03042143. Registered on 3 February 2017. EudraCT Number 2017-000584-33.