Previous BCG vaccination is associated with less severe clinical progression of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: BCG vaccination, originally used to prevent tuberculosis, is known to "train" the immune system to improve defence against viral respiratory infections. We investigated whether a previous BCG vaccination is associated with less severe clinical progression of COVID-19 METHODS: A case-control study comparing the proportion with a BCG vaccine scar (indicating previous vaccination) in cases and controls presenting with COVID-19 to health units in Brazil. Cases were subjects with severe COVID-19 (O2 saturation < 90%, severe respiratory effort, severe pneumonia, severe acute respiratory syndrome, sepsis, and septic shock). Controls had COVID-19 not meeting the definition of "severe" above. Unconditional regression was used to estimate vaccine protection against clinical progression to severe disease, with strict control for age, comorbidity, sex, educational level, race/colour, and municipality. Internal matching and conditional regression were used for sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: BCG was associated with high protection against COVID-19 clinical progression, over 87% (95% CI 74-93%) in subjects aged 60 or less and 35% (95% CI - 44-71%) in older subjects. CONCLUSIONS: This protection may be relevant for public health in settings where COVID-19 vaccine coverage is still low and may have implications for research to identify vaccine candidates for COVID-19 that are broadly protective against mortality from future variants. Further research into the immunomodulatory effects of BCG may inform COVID-19 therapeutic research.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in tuberculosis preventive treatment in Brazil: a retrospective cohort study using secondary data.

Background: Disruptions in tuberculosis services have been reported around the world since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the pandemic's effect on tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT) has been poorly explored. We compared TPT-notified prescriptions and outcomes before and during the pandemic in Brazil. Methods: Retrospective cohort using secondary data from the Brazilian TPT information system in five cities with over 1000 notifications. The number of TPT prescriptions was analysed from 6 months after healthcare workers' training, in 2018, to July 2021. The proportion of TPT outcomes by the date of treatment initiation was analysed up to the end of 2020, as most outcomes of TPT started in 2021 were still unknown in July 2021. Joinpoint regression was used to evaluate trends. Findings: 14,014 TPT prescriptions were included, most from São Paulo (8032) and Rio de Janeiro (3187). Compared to the same epidemiological weeks in 2019, the number of TPT prescribed in 2020 increased in Rio de Janeiro (82%) and São Paulo (14%) and decreased in Recife (65%), Fortaleza (31%) and Manaus (44%). In 2021, however, there was a 93% reduction in TPT prescriptions in all cities. The proportion of completed TPT remained constant (median = 74%). Interpretation: The COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil was associated with a dramatic decrease in TPT prescriptions in 2021. Treatment adherence remained constant, suggesting that health services were able to keep people on treatment but did not perform well in providing opportunities for people to enter care. Efforts are needed to expand access to TPT. Funding: Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, CNPq.

Efficacy and effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines for death prevention: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is consistent evidence that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have statistical and clinical significant efficacy to prevent incident and severe cases of COVID-19, although different outcomes were analyzed and different risk reductions were observed. However, randomized control trials (RCT) were not designed or powered to assess whether the vaccines prevent deaths, even though this was a secondary or exploratory outcome across many studies. Early real-world observational data suggest that these vaccines are highly effective in reducing hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Our objective is to summarize and appraise-the existing evidence on the efficacy and real-world effectiveness of all SARS-CoV-2 vaccines currently approved for full or limited use to prevent all-cause and COVID-19-attributed mortality. METHODS: The population consists of persons with a record of vaccination status and the outcome of interest. Randomized controlled trials, comparative cohort and case-control studies reporting vaccination with any of the vaccines approved (intervention) will be eligible. The primary outcome will be all cause deaths. COVID-19-attributed deaths and deaths attributable to the vaccination (adverse event deaths) will be secondary outcomes. We will compare deaths occurring in vaccinated persons versus those non-vaccinated or having received placebo. Studies in any language will be eligible. Two independent reviewers will screen for inclusion and assess quality of studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 and the ROBINS-1 tool, as appropriate. Hazard ratios will be calculated. Assessment of statistical heterogeneity amongst the studies will be done using I2 and prediction intervals, as well as visual inspection of the forest plots. Publication bias will be assessed using a funnel plot and Egger statistical test if we have more than 10 studies in a forest plot. We have followed the PRISMA-Protocol checklist for the current protocol, which is registered at Prospero (York University, CRD42021262211).

Feasibility of GeneXpert® Edge for Tuberculosis Diagnosis in Difficult-to-Reach Populations: Preliminary Results of a Proof-of-Concept Study.

GeneXpert® Edge (GX-Edge) is a new point-of-care platform not yet tested in the field. In this proof-of-concept study conducted for the diagnosis of tuberculosis in communities living alongside two large rivers of the Brazilian Amazon, we demonstrate that GX-Edge implemented in boats to offer onsite testing is a feasible strategy to investigate potentially devastating diseases such as tuberculosis in difficult-to-reach populations, such as riverside communities.

The need for fast-track, high-quality and low-cost studies about the role of the BCG vaccine in the fight against COVID-19.

Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination is routine and near-universal in many low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). It has been suggested that BCG can have a protective effect on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. This commentary discusses the limitations of the evidence around BCG and COVID-19. We argue that higher-quality evidence is necessary to understand the protective effect of the BCG vaccine from existing, secondary data, while we await results from clinical trials currently conducted in different settings.

Diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for coronavirus disease-2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, bioRxiv, and medRxiv from 1 January to 30 April 2020, using subject headings or subheadings combined with text words for the concepts of covid-19 and serological tests for covid-19. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA AND DATA ANALYSIS: Eligible studies measured sensitivity or specificity, or both of a covid-19 serological test compared with a reference standard of viral culture or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Studies were excluded with fewer than five participants or samples. Risk of bias was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Pooled sensitivity and specificity were estimated using random effects bivariate meta-analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was overall sensitivity and specificity, stratified by method of serological testing (enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs), or chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs)) and immunoglobulin class (IgG, IgM, or both). Secondary outcomes were stratum specific sensitivity and specificity within subgroups defined by study or participant characteristics, including time since symptom onset. RESULTS: 5016 references were identified and 40 studies included. 49 risk of bias assessments were carried out (one for each population and method evaluated). High risk of patient selection bias was found in 98% (48/49) of assessments and high or unclear risk of bias from performance or interpretation of the serological test in 73% (36/49). Only 10% (4/40) of studies included outpatients. Only two studies evaluated tests at the point of care. For each method of testing, pooled sensitivity and specificity were not associated with the immunoglobulin class measured. The pooled sensitivity of ELISAs measuring IgG or IgM was 84.3% (95% confidence interval 75.6% to 90.9%), of LFIAs was 66.0% (49.3% to 79.3%), and of CLIAs was 97.8% (46.2% to 100%). In all analyses, pooled sensitivity was lower for LFIAs, the potential point-of-care method. Pooled specificities ranged from 96.6% to 99.7%. Of the samples used for estimating specificity, 83% (10 465/12 547) were from populations tested before the epidemic or not suspected of having covid-19. Among LFIAs, pooled sensitivity of commercial kits (65.0%, 49.0% to 78.2%) was lower than that of non-commercial tests (88.2%, 83.6% to 91.3%). Heterogeneity was seen in all analyses. Sensitivity was higher at least three weeks after symptom onset (ranging from 69.9% to 98.9%) compared with within the first week (from 13.4% to 50.3%). CONCLUSION: Higher quality clinical studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19 are urgently needed. Currently, available evidence does not support the continued use of existing point-of-care serological tests. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020179452.