Efficacy of Tocilizumab in Severely Ill COVID-19 Patients With Rapid Respiratory Deterioration: A Single Center Experience During the Third Pandemic Wave in Greece.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Immunomodulatory therapy with Tocilizumab (TCZ), a monoclonal antibody against interleukin-6 receptor-alpha, has been endorsed by the World Health Organization and other major regulatory bodies, as part of the standard-of-care therapy for severe or critical COVID-19 cases despite discordant trial outcomes. The aim of the present study was to report the experience of our center regarding TCZ routine use in severely ill COVID-19 patients who were hospitalized during the third pandemic wave in Greece. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From March 2021 to December 2021, we retrospectively analyzed COVID-19 patients with radiological findings of pneumonia and signs of rapid respiratory deterioration that were treated with TCZ. The primary outcome included the risk of intubation or/and death in TCZ-treated patients compared to matched controls. RESULTS: TCZ administration was neither predictive of intubation and/or death [OR=17.5 (95% CI=0.47-652.2; p=0.12)] or associated with fewer events (p=0.92) in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Our single-center real-life experience is in line with recently published research, revealing no benefit from TCZ routine use in severely or critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Effectiveness of full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination against severe outcomes and work absenteeism in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the Delta and Omicron waves in Greece

Aim We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of full (booster) vaccination against severe outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients during the Delta and Omicron waves. Methods The study extended from November 15, 2021 to April 17, 2022. Full vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination plus a booster ≥ 6 months later. Results We studied 1138 patients (mean age: 66.6 years), of whom 826 (72.6 %) had > 1 comorbidity. Of the 1138 patients, 75 (6.6 %) were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), 64 (5.6 %) received mechanical ventilation, and 172 (15.1 %) died. There were 386 (33.9 %) fully vaccinated, 172 (15.1 %) partially vaccinated, and 580 (51 %) unvaccinated patients. Unvaccinated patients were absent from work for longer periods compared to partially or fully vaccinated patients (mean absence of 20.1 days versus 12.3 and 17.3 days, respectively;p-value = 0.03). Compared to unvaccinated patients, fully vaccinated patients were less likely to be admitted to ICU [adjusted relative risk (ARR: 0.49;95 % CI: 0.29–0.84)], mechanically ventilated (ARR: 0.43;95 % CI: 0.23–0.80), and die (ARR: 0.57;95 % CI: 0.42–0.78), while they were hospitalized for significantly shorter periods (ARR: 0.79;95 % CI: 0.70–0.89). The adjusted full VE was 48.8 % (95 % CI: 42.7 %-54.9 %) against ICU admission, 55.4 % (95 % CI: 52.0 %-56.2 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 22.6 % (95 % CI: 7.4 %-34.8 %) against death. For patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities, VE was 56.2 % (95 % CI: 43.9 %-67.1 %) against ICU admission, 60.2 % (95 % CI: 53.7 %-65.4 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 43.9 % (95 % CI: 19.9 %-59.7 %) against death. Conclusions Full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination conferred protection against severe outcomes, prolonged hospitalization, and prolonged work absenteeism.

Effectiveness of full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination against severe outcomes and work absenteeism in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the Delta and Omicron waves in Greece.

AIM: We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of full (booster) vaccination against severe outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients during the Delta and Omicron waves. METHODS: The study extended from November 15, 2021 to April 17, 2022. Full vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination plus a booster ≥ 6 months later. RESULTS: We studied 1138 patients (mean age: 66.6 years), of whom 826 (72.6 %) had ≥ 1 comorbidity. Of the 1138 patients, 75 (6.6 %) were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), 64 (5.6 %) received mechanical ventilation, and 172 (15.1 %) died. There were 386 (33.9 %) fully vaccinated, 172 (15.1 %) partially vaccinated, and 580 (51 %) unvaccinated patients. Unvaccinated patients were absent from work for longer periods compared to partially or fully vaccinated patients (mean absence of 20.1 days versus 12.3 and 17.3 days, respectively; p-value = 0.03). Compared to unvaccinated patients, fully vaccinated patients were less likely to be admitted to ICU [adjusted relative risk (ARR: 0.49; 95 % CI: 0.29-0.84)], mechanically ventilated (ARR: 0.43; 95 % CI: 0.23-0.80), and die (ARR: 0.57; 95 % CI: 0.42-0.78), while they were hospitalized for significantly shorter periods (ARR: 0.79; 95 % CI: 0.70-0.89). The adjusted full VE was 48.8 % (95 % CI: 42.7 %-54.9 %) against ICU admission, 55.4 % (95 % CI: 52.0 %-56.2 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 22.6 % (95 % CI: 7.4 %-34.8 %) against death. For patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities, VE was 56.2 % (95 % CI: 43.9 %-67.1 %) against ICU admission, 60.2 % (95 % CI: 53.7 %-65.4 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 43.9 % (95 % CI: 19.9 %-59.7 %) against death. CONCLUSIONS: Full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination conferred protection against severe outcomes, prolonged hospitalization, and prolonged work absenteeism.

Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Common Features in Two Patients Receiving Anti-CD20 Therapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Anti-CD20-depleting monoclonal antibodies predispose patients to the development of severe disease of SARS-CoV-2 infection. These antibodies are given as backbone or maintenance therapy in patients with hematological malignancies and rheumatology diseases, inducing effective B-cell depletion along with antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) and disrupting infection-protective antibody responses. CASE REPORT: We describe two cases of prolonged SARS-CoV-2 infection with common features, in two patients receiving anti-CD20 therapies, the first for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and the second for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). For CLL patient, despite administration of antiviral therapy, signs and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection persisted for 43 days, with resolution and lymphocyte recovery from day 33. For RA patient, despite administration of two courses of antiviral therapy, signs and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection persisted for 47 days, without resolution and lymphocyte recovery, leading to a fatal outcome due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and unspecified sepsis. CONCLUSION: These two cases highlight the risk for persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients treated with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies and support a role for cellular immunity recovery for disease control.

Interferon gamma-induced protein 10 (IP-10) for the early prognosis of the risk for severe respiratory failure and death in COVID-19 pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: Elevated concentrations of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) predict progression to severe respiratory failure (SRF) or death among patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and guide early anakinra treatment. As suPAR testing may not be routinely available in every health-care setting, alternative biomarkers are needed. We investigated the performance of C-reactive protein (CRP), interferon gamma-induced protein-10 (IP-10) and TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) for predicting SRF or death in COVID-19. METHODS: Two cohorts were studied; one discovery cohort with 534 patients from the SAVE-MORE clinical trial; and one validation cohort with 364 patients from the SAVE trial including also 145 comparators. CRP, IP-10 and TRAIL were measured by the MeMed Key® platform in order to select the biomarker with the best prognostic performance for the early prediction of progression into SRF or death. RESULTS: IP-10 had the best prognostic performance: baseline concentrations 2000 pg/ml or higher predicted equally well to suPAR (sensitivity 85.0 %; negative predictive value 96.6 %). Odds ratio for poor outcome among anakinra-treated participants of the SAVE-MORE trial was 0.35 compared to placebo when IP-10 was 2,000 pg/ml or more. IP-10 could divide different strata of severity for SRF/death by day 14 in the validation cohort. Anakinra treatment decreased this risk irrespective the IP-10 concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: IP-10 concentrations of 2,000 pg/ml or higher are a valid alternative to suPAR for the early prediction of progression into SRF or death the first 14 days from hospital admission for COVID-19 and they may guide anakinra treatment. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, NCT04680949 and NCT04357366.

Efficacy and Safety of Ensovibep for Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19 : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ensovibep (MP0420) is a designed ankyrin repeat protein, a novel class of engineered proteins, under investigation as a treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. OBJECTIVE: To investigate if ensovibep, in addition to remdesivir and other standard care, improves clinical outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with standard care alone. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978). SETTING: Multinational, multicenter trial. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: Intravenous ensovibep, 600 mg, or placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Ensovibep was assessed for early futility on the basis of pulmonary ordinal scores at day 5. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery through day 90, defined as 14 consecutive days at home or place of usual residence after hospital discharge. A composite safety outcome that included death, serious adverse events, end-organ disease, and serious infections was assessed through day 90. RESULTS: An independent data and safety monitoring board recommended that enrollment be halted for early futility after 485 patients were randomly assigned and received an infusion of ensovibep (n = 247) or placebo (n = 238). The odds ratio (OR) for a more favorable pulmonary outcome in the ensovibep (vs. placebo) group at day 5 was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.30; P = 0.68; OR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The 90-day cumulative incidence of sustained recovery was 82% for ensovibep and 80% for placebo (subhazard ratio [sHR], 1.06 [CI, 0.88 to 1.28]; sHR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The primary composite safety outcome at day 90 occurred in 78 ensovibep participants (32%) and 70 placebo participants (29%) (HR, 1.07 [CI, 0.77 to 1.47]; HR < 1 would favor ensovibep). LIMITATION: The trial was prematurely stopped because of futility, limiting power for the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Compared with placebo, ensovibep did not improve clinical outcomes for hospitalized participants with COVID-19 receiving standard care, including remdesivir; no safety concerns were identified. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Early Occurrence of Adverse Events in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 and Beneficial Effect of Anticoagulation.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This study analyzed the characteristics of patients with COVID-19 with major events during the first days of hospitalization. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients admitted to two hospitals in Athens, Greece. The characteristics of patients with COVID-19 who suffered the primary endpoint (venous thromboembolic events, intubation, and death) during the first days of hospitalization were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 95 patients included in the analysis, 21 presented with major adverse events during a median follow-up of 13 days. More than 50% of these patients presented with a major event during the first 3 days. Anticoagulation treatment was inversely associated with the cumulative incidence of the primary endpoint [hazard ratio=0.16 (95% confidence interval=0.06-0.47)]. Patients with major events were older, with lower baseline SatO2, and higher number of Wells' criteria and Charlson comorbidity index. Among these patients, those with hypertension were at higher risk for early occurrence of events (≤ first three days of hospitalization). CONCLUSION: Major adverse events may occur early in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 with a high-risk profile. Anticoagulation treatment appears to reduce this risk and thus prompt thromboprophylaxis should be employed in these patients.

Comparative Immunogenicity of BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine with Natural SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BNT162b2 has proven to be highly effective, but there is a paucity of data regarding immunogenicity factors and comparison between response to vaccination and natural infection. This study included 871 vaccinated healthcare workers (HCW) and 181 patients with natural infection. Immunogenicity was assessed by measuring anti-SARS-CoV-2 against the RBD domain of the spike protein (anti-RBD). Samples were collected 1-2 weeks after vaccination or 15-59 days post-onset of symptoms. Post-vaccine anti-RBD concentrations were associated with age, gender, vaccination side-effects (VSE) and prior infection (Pr-CoV). Anti-RBD median levels (95%CI) were lower by 2466 (651-5583), 6228 (3254-9203) and 7651 (4479-10,823) AU/mL in 35-44, 45-54, 55-70 yrs, respectively, compared with the 18-34 yrs group. In females, the median levels were higher by 2823 (859-4787), 5024 (3122-6926) in individuals with VSE, and 9971 (5158-14,783) AU/mL in HCWs with Pr-CoV. The ratio of anti-RBD in vaccinated individuals versus those with natural infection varied from 1.0 to 19.4. The high immunogenicity of BNT162b2 is verified, although its sustainability has yet to be elucidated. The use of comparative data from natural infection serological panels, expressing the clinical heterogeneity of natural infection, may facilitate early decisions for candidate vaccines to be evaluated in clinical trials.

Knowledge and Perceptions about COVID-19 among Health Care Workers: Evidence from COVID-19 Hospitals during the Second Pandemic Wave.

Health care workers (HCWs) face a higher risk of infection, since they work at the front line of COVID-19 patients' management. Misinterpretations of current scientific evidence among HCWs may impact the delivery of appropriate care to COVID-19 patients and increase the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the hospital setting. Moreover, knowledge may affect HCWs perceptions depending on their broad beliefs and past experiences. The aim of this study was to explore the knowledge and perceptions of HCWs regarding COVID-19 issues during the second wave of the pandemic. A cross-sectional survey, involving a printed questionnaire, was conducted from 21 October 2020 to 31 January 2021 in four tertiary care hospitals located at four distant geographical regions in Greece. In total, 294 HCWs participated in this study. The majority of HCWs provided precise responses regarding general knowledge, perceptions, and practices concerning the COVID-19 pandemic. However, responses on hand hygiene and antimicrobial use in HCWs with COVID-19 were mistaken. This study reveals a certain degree of misconceptions and knowledge gaps in HCWs everyday practice, especially regarding hand hygiene and antimicrobial use in COVID-19 patients.

Clinical examination practices and perceptions in the era of COVID-19.

Introduction The art of clinical examination has been the cornerstone of medical practices since ancient years. Recent technological achievements and their overuse have led falsely to underestimation of their significance, which has been further questioned during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, due to concerns regarding exposure risk and use of personal protective equipment.Areas covered The role of clinical examination (namely chest examination) during the pandemic is discussed. Emerging evidence is being accumulated concerning alternatives to traditional practices. Telemedicine stands out as a promising tool, allowing inspection and interaction between physicians and patients, proved to be useful for many medical specialties but not enough for some others. Medical practices cannot remain the same in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic, yet realistic strategies should be adopted for their optimal and safe implementation.Expert opinion The experiences of a dedicated Reference Center for COVID-19 along with a suggested algorithm for conducting clinical examinations are presented. According to our experience, an initial detailed clinical examination upon admission of each COVID-19 patient appears to be necessary. Then, vital signs and signs of respiratory distress using inspection should be checked frequently. A focused examination approach should be adopted, in case of new onset clinical problems.

Beneficial Effects of Intermediate Dosage of Anticoagulation Treatment on the Prognosis of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: The ETHRA Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To investigate the efficacy (prognosis, coagulation/inflammation biomarkers) and safety (bleeding events) of different anticoagulation dosages in COVID-19 inpatients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: COVID-19 inpatients (Athens, Greece) were included. The "Enhanced dose THRomboprophylaxis in Admissions (ETHRA)" protocol was applied in certain Departments, suggesting the use of intermediate anticoagulation dosage. The primary endpoint was a composite of intubation/venous thromboembolism/death. Inflammation/coagulation parameters were assessed. RESULTS: Among 127 admissions, 95 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one events (4 deaths, 17 intubations) were observed. Regression analysis demonstrated significant reduction of events with intermediate or therapeutic dosage [HR=0.16 (95%CI=0.05-0.52) p=0.002; HR=0.17 (0.04-0.71) p=0.015, respectively]. D-Dimer values were higher in those who met the composite endpoint. Intermediate dosage treatment was associated with decreased values of ferritin. Three patients (3%) had minor hemorrhagic complications. CONCLUSION: Anticoagulation treatment (particularly intermediate dosage) appears to have positive impact on COVID-19 inpatients' prognosis by inhibiting both coagulation and inflammatory cascades.