Characteristics and Outcomes of Heart Transplant Recipients With Coronavirus-19 Disease in a High-volume Transplant Center.

BACKGROUND: Heart transplant (HT) recipients may be at higher risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection and developing critical illness. The aim of this study is to describe characteristics and outcomes of HT recipients infected by SARS-COV-2, from a high-volume transplant center. METHODS: We have described data of all adult HT recipients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 by RT-PCR in nasopharyngeal samples from April 5, 2020, to January 5, 2021. Outcomes and follow-up were recorded until February 5, 2021. RESULTS: Forty patients were included. Twenty-four patients (60%) were men; the median age was 53 (40-60) y old; median HT time was 34 mo; and median follow-up time 162 d. The majority needed hospitalization (83%). Immunosuppressive therapy was reduced/withdrawn in the majority of patients, except from steroids, which were maintained. Seventeen patients (42.5%) were classified as having severe disease according to the ordinal scale developed by the World Health Organization Committee. They tended to have lower absolute lymphocyte count (P < 0.001) during follow-up when compared with patients with mild disease. Thirty-day mortality was 12.5%. However, a longer follow-up revealed increased later mortality (27.5%), with median time to death around 35 d. Bacterial nosocomial infections were a leading cause of death. Cardiac allograft rejection (10%) and ventricular dysfunction (12.5%) were also not negligible. CONCLUSIONS: Major findings of this study corroborate other cohorts' results, but it also reports significant rate of later events, suggesting that a strict midterm surveillance is advisable to HT recipients with coronavirus disease 2019.

A Brazilian Inter-Hospital Candidemia Outbreak Caused by Fluconazole-Resistant Candida parapsilosis in the COVID-19 Era.

Horizontal transmission of fluconazole-resistant Candida parapsilosis (FRCP) through healthcare workers' hands has contributed to the occurrence of candidemia outbreaks worldwide. Since the first COVID-19 case in Brazil was detected in early 2020, hospitals have reinforced hand hygiene and disinfection practices to minimize SARS-CoV-2 contamination. However, a Brazilian cardiology center, which shares ICU patients with a cancer center under a FRCP outbreak since 2019, reported an increased FRCP candidemia incidence in May 2020. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate an inter-hospital candidemia outbreak caused by FRCP isolates during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. C. parapsilosis bloodstream isolates obtained from the cancer (n = 35) and cardiology (n = 30) centers in 2020 were submitted to microsatellite genotyping and fluconazole susceptibility testing. The ERG11 gene of all isolates from the cardiology center was sequenced and compared to the corresponding sequences of the FRCP genotype responsible for the cancer center outbreak in 2019. Unprecedentedly, most of the FRCP isolates from the cardiology center presented the same genetic profile and Erg11-Y132F mutation detected in the strain that has been causing the persistent outbreak in the cancer center, highlighting the uninterrupted horizontal transmission of clonal isolates in our hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin early treatment of mild COVID-19 in an outpatient setting: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating viral clearance.

BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine has shown potential to block viral replication of SARS-CoV-2 in some in vitro studies. This randomised, double-blinded, placebo controlled clinical trial evaluated the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (HCQ/AZT) in reducing viral loads in patients with early and mild SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: A single-centre randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted with outpatients with early and mild SARS-CoV-2 infection. Inclusion criteria were: patients aged 18-65 years with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 for < 5 days, no significant comorbidities, and positive nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab screening tests (POCT-PCR). Randomised patients received either hydroxychloroquine for 7 days plus azithromycin for 5 days or placebo. The primary endpoint was viral clearance within a 9-day period. Secondary endpoints included viral load reduction, clinical evolution, hospitalization rates, chest computed tomography evolution, and adverse effects. RESULTS: From 107 potential trial participants, 84 were enrolled following predetermined criteria. Statistical analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat (N = 84) and per-protocol (PP) basis (N = 70). On the PP analysis, the treatment (N = 36) and placebo (N = 34) groups displayed similar demographic characteristics. At 95% CI, no statistically significant between-group differences were found in viral clearance rates within 9 days following enrolment (P = 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: This randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating outpatients with early and mild COVID-19 showed that viral clearance rates within a 9-day period from enrolment did not change with HCQ/AZT treatment compared with placebo, although no major cardiovascular events were observed in participants without comorbidities. Secondary outcomes were also not significantly improved with HCQ/AZT treatment compared with placebo. These findings do not support use of HCQ/AZT in this setting.

Platelet Reactivity and Coagulation Markers in Patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUTION: COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events. However, the contribution of platelet reactivity (PR) to the aetiology of the increased thrombotic risk associated with COVID-19 remains unclear. Our aim was to evaluate PR in stable patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and hospitalized with respiratory symptoms (mainly dyspnoea and dry cough), in comparison with a control group comprised of non-hospitalized healthy controls. METHODS: Observational, case control study that included patients with confirmed COVID-19 (COVID-19 group, n = 60) and healthy individuals matched by age and sex (control group, n = 60). Multiplate electrode aggregometry (MEA) tests were used to assess PR with adenosine diphosphate (MEA-ADP, low PR defined as < 53 AUC), arachidonic acid (MEA-ASPI, low PR < 86 AUC) and thrombin receptor-activating peptide 6 (MEA-TRAP, low PR < 97 AUC) in both groups. RESULTS: The rates of low PR with MEA-ADP were 27.5% in the COVID-19 group and 21.7% in the control group (OR = 1.60, p = 0.20); with MEA-ASPI, the rates were, respectively, 37.5% and 22.5% (OR = 3.67, p < 0.001); and with MEA-TRAP, the incidences were 48.5% and 18.8%, respectively (OR = 9.58, p < 0.001). Levels of D-dimer, fibrinogen, and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) were higher in the COVID-19 group in comparison with the control group (all p < 0.05). Thromboelastometry was utilized in a subgroup of patients and showed a hypercoagulable state in the COVID-19 group. CONCLUSION: Patients hospitalized with non-severe COVID-19 had lower PR compared to healthy controls, despite having higher levels of D-dimer, fibrinogen, and PAI-1, and hypercoagulability by thromboelastometry. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04447131.

The "false-positive" conundrum: IgA reference level overestimates the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: On 12 June 2020, Brazil reached the second position worldwide in the number of COVID-19 cases. Authorities increased the number of tests performed, including the identification of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 (IgG, IgA, and IgM). There was an overflooding of the market with several tests, and the presence of possible false-positive results became a challenge. The purpose of this study was to describe the seroprevalence and immunoglobulin blood levels in a group of asymptomatic individuals using the reference levels provided by the manufacturer. METHODS: Levels of IgG and IgA antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were determined in blood serum by the same ELISA (enzyme-linked immunoassay) test. Patients must be free of symptoms. RESULTS: From 20 to 22 May 2020, 938 individuals were tested. There were 441 (47%) men, age 53 years (interquartile range (IQR) = 39-63.2). The sample included 335 (35.7%) subjects aged ≥60 years old. Subjects with a positive test were 54 (5.8%) for IgG and 96 (10.2%) for IgA and 42 (4.5%) for both IgG and IgA. The prevalence of IgG and IgA positive test was not different in men and women and not different in individuals under 60 and over 60 years of age. Conversely, analysing only individuals with positive tests, the levels of IgG in positive subjects were significantly higher than those with an IgA positive test, 3.00 (IQR = 1.68-5.65), and 1.95 (IQR = 1.40-3.38), respectively; P = 0.017. Additionally, individuals with isolated IgA positive tests had significantly lower levels of IgA than those with both IgA and IgG positive tests: 1.95 (IQR = 1.60-2.40) and 3.15 (IQR = 2.20-3.90), respectively, P = 0.005. These latter data suggest that IgA shows a deviation of the distribution to the left in comparison to IgG distribution data. Indeed, many subjects reported as IgA positive had immunoglobulin levels slightly elevated. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, we strongly suggest caution in the interpretation of IgA test results. This recommendation is more important for those with positive IgA just above the reference level.