Lung Ultrasound to Assist ICU Admission Decision-Making Process of COVID-19 Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure.

There is only low-certainty evidence on the use of predictive models to assist COVID-19 patient's ICU admission decision-making process. Accumulative evidence suggests that lung ultrasound (LUS) assessment of COVID-19 patients allows accurate bedside evaluation of lung integrity, with the added advantage of repeatability, absence of radiation exposure, reduced risk of virus dissemination, and low cost. Our goal is to assess the performance of a quantified indicator resulting from LUS data compared with standard clinical practice model to predict critical respiratory illness in the 24 hours following hospital admission. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Critical Care Unit from University Hospital Purpan (Toulouse, France) between July 2020 and March 2021. PATIENTS: Adult patients for COVID-19 who were in acute respiratory failure (ARF), defined as blood oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry less than 90% while breathing room air or respiratory rate greater than or equal to 30 breaths/min at hospital admission. Linear multivariate models were used to identify factors associated with critical respiratory illness, defined as death or mild/severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (Pao2/Fio2 < 200) in the 24 hours after patient's hospital admission. INTERVENTION: LUS assessment. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred and forty COVID-19 patients with ARF were studied. This cohort was split into two independent groups: learning sample (first 70 patients) and validation sample (last 70 patients). Interstitial lung water, thickening of the pleural line, and alveolar consolidation detection were strongly associated with patient's outcome. The LUS model predicted more accurately patient's outcomes than the standard clinical practice model (DeLong test: Testing: z score = 2.50, p value = 0.01; Validation: z score = 2.11, p value = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: LUS assessment of COVID-19 patients with ARF at hospital admission allows a more accurate prediction of the risk of critical respiratory illness than standard clinical practice. These results hold the promise of improving ICU resource allocation process, particularly in the case of massive influx of patients or limited resources, both now and in future anticipated pandemics.

NVX-Cov2373 Novavax Covid-19 vaccine: A further analysis of its efficacy using multiple modes of expression.

A fifth vaccine against Covid-19, NVX-CoV2373 Nuvavoxid® (Novavax), a protein-based adjuvanted vaccine, was recently marketed in Europe. The main clinical trial before marketing concluded to a 'vaccine efficacy' of 89.7% without talking about other validated efficacy parameters. We further analysed the data of this clinical trial using the different validated methods of risk expression: absolute risks (AR), AR reduction (ARR) and number needed to treat (NNT). ARR and NNT values were 1.22% and 82, respectively, for an RR value of 0.10. Description of these parameters allowed defining some interesting characteristics of NVX-CoV2373 efficacy according to age, race, variant and coexisting illness. Finally, we ask that the results of clinical trials be systematically presented, using not only RR but also including AR, ARR and NNT.

In utero exposure to antiretroviral drugs and pregnancy outcomes: Analysis of the French ANRS pharmacovigilance database.

AIMS: In 2018, 1.07 million pregnant women received antiretroviral drugs, raising whether this affects pregnancy outcomes. We assessed the adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with prenatal antiretroviral drug exposure, notified to the French ANRS pharmacovigilance system. METHODS: An exhaustive case report series has been performed using the ANRS pharmacovigilance database. All ANRS-sponsored HIV clinical research studies using antiretroviral drugs either in pregnant women or women of childbearing age were eligible from 2004 to 2019. We analysed the following pregnancy outcomes: abortion, ectopic pregnancy, stillbirth, prematurity (<37 weeks of gestational age), low birth weight (<2500 g) and congenital abnormalities. A logistic regression was performed to assess the odds ratio (OR) for each outcome separately (if occurrence >50) compared to the outcome observed when exposed to non-nucleoside-reverse-transcriptase-inhibitor (NNRTI)-based regimen as the reference. RESULTS: Among the 34 studies selected, 918 deliveries occurred, of whom 88% had pregnancy outcomes documented. Pregnant women were mainly exposed to PI (n = 387, 48.6%), NNRTI (n = 331, 41.5%) and INI-based combinations (n = 40, 5.0%, 18 on dolutegravir). Compared to NNRTI-based combinations, there was no significant association observed with exposure to other antiretroviral combination for spontaneous abortion, prematurity or low birth weight, except an increased risk of low birth weight in new-born exposed to exclusive nucleoside-reverse-transcriptase-inhibitor (NRTI) combinations (n = 4; OR 7.50 [1.49-37.83]). CONCLUSIONS: Our study, mainly based on protease inhibitor (PI) and NNRTI-based regimens, is overall reassuring on the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, except for NRTI which should be interpreted cautiously (small number, indication bias). In this study, the number of integrase inhibitor (INI)-based combinations was too low to draw any conclusions.

Efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: Several modes of expression should be presented in scientific publications.

Several vaccines are being developed as part of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of clinical trials for these vaccines were published with efficacy values of more than 90%, using mainly relative risk (RR). In this paper, we decided to reanalyse the data using the different validated methods of risk expression. Using main publications, absolute risks (AR), AR reduction (ARR), number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated for five COVID-19 vaccines (tozinameran Comirnaty®, Moderna, Vaxzevria®, Janssen, and Sputnik V vaccines). AR, ARR, NNT, and RR values varied according to COVID-19 vaccines. The order of the different vaccines was not the same according to the chosen efficacy parameters. This is a further example of the need to express results of clinical trials, using not only RR, but also AR, ARR, and NNT in order to clearly present the clinical interest of drugs.

COVID-19 vaccines: A perspective from social pharmacology.

Social pharmacology is a branch of clinical pharmacology, which depicts relationships between society and drugs and in particular factors, reasons, social consequences of drug use as well as representations of drugs in the society. Recent development and marketing of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines raises a number of questions of social pharmacology: are vaccines drugs like any other? What is their perception at the individual, population and societal levels? How do individuals perceive the risks and benefits of these vaccines? What is the perception at the societal level? What is the individual and societal acceptability of these vaccines during a pandemic? All these questions are discussed in the light of recent data. A number of proposals, both at the individual and at the collective or population level, are formulated to help solve these problems of social pharmacology.

Impact of previous exposure to systemic corticosteroids on unfavorable outcome in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The impact of prior exposure to systemic corticosteroids on COVID-19 severity in patients hospitalized for a SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is not known. The present study was designed to answer to this question. METHODS: The population study was the Covid-Clinic-Toul cohort which records data about all hospitalized patients with a positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction for a SARS-CoV-2 infection at Toulouse University hospital, France. Exposure to systemic corticosteroids was assessed at hospital admission. A propensity score (PS) according to corticosteroid exposure was calculated including comorbidities, clinical, radiological and biological variables that impact COVID-19 severity. The primary outcome was composite, including admission to intensive care unit, need of mechanical ventilation and death occurring during the 14 days after hospital admission. Logistic regression models adjusted for the PS (overlap weighting) provided odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). RESULTS: Overall, 253 patients were included in the study. Median age was 64 years, 140 patients (59.6%) were men and 218 (86.2%) had at least one comorbidity. Seventeen patients (6.7%) were exposed to corticosteroids before hospital admission. Chronic inflammatory disease (n = 8) was the most frequent indication. One hundred and twenty patients (47.4%) met the composite outcome. In the crude model, the OR of previous exposure to systemic corticosteroids was 1.64; 95% CI: 0.60-4.44. In the adjusted model, it was 1.09 (95% CI: 0.65-1.83). CONCLUSION: Overall, this study provide some evidences for an absence of an increased risk of unfavorable outcome with previous exposure to corticosteroids in the general setting of patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Outcome of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and exposure to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers in France: results of the ACE-CoV study.

Data are lacking on the impact of ACEI/ARB exposure on unfavorable outcome in the population of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 with hypertension/cardiovascular disease, particularly in Europe. The ACE-CoV study was designed to assess this question. The study was conducted in the Covid-Clinic-Toul cohort, which contains data about all patients hospitalized at Toulouse University hospital, France with a SARS-CoV-2 infection since March, 2020. We selected the patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (heart failure or coronary disease) and/or arterial hypertension. We conducted a subgroup analysis in patients with arterial hypertension. ACEI/ARB exposures at admission were assessed. The outcome was composite: admission to intensive care unit, need of mechanical ventilation or death during the 14 days after admission to hospital. We used logistic regression models with propensity scores (PS) weighted by overlap weighting (OW) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Between March 2020 and April 20, 2020, the Covid-Clinic-Toul included 263 patients. Among them, 111 were included in the ACE-CoV study population. In OW-PS-adjusted analyses, the association of exposure to ACEIs or ARBs with outcome occurrence was OR: 1.56 (95% CI: 0.73-3.33). It was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.68-1.45) for ACEIs and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.77-3.50) for ARBs. Analyses with weighting by the IPTW-PS method gave similar results. Results were similar when considering the subgroup of patients with arterial hypertension. The ACE-CoV study found no association between exposure to ACEIs or ARBs and unfavorable outcome in hospitalized patients for COVID-19 with a history of cardiovascular disease/arterial hypertension.

Potential drug-drug interactions associated with drugs currently proposed for COVID-19 treatment in patients receiving other treatments.

Patients with COVID-19 are sometimes already being treated for one or more other chronic conditions, especially if they are elderly. Introducing a treatment against COVID-19, either on an outpatient basis or during hospitalization for more severe cases, raises the question of potential drug-drug interactions. Here, we analyzed the potential or proven risk of the co-administration of drugs used for the most common chronic diseases and those currently offered as treatment or undergoing therapeutic trials for COVID-19. Practical recommendations are offered, where possible.