ABSTRACT
Background. Evidence regarding the impact of remdesivir (RDV) on SARSCoV-2 viral clearance (VC) is scarce. Aim of this study was to compare VC timing in COVID-19 patients who received RDV with those who did not. Methods. Matched-cohort study conducted (25 February 2020-15 April 2021) at the IRCSS San Raffaele, Milan, Italy. The study enrolled hospitalized patients with pneumonia and a SARS-CoV-2 positive nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) at admission and at least one NPS during follow-up. Follow-up started at hospital admission and ended at the date of the first negative NPS (within 30 days after discharge). Patients who received RDV (cases) and patients who did not (controls) were matched based on age (±5 years), sex and PaO2/FiO2 (P/F;±10 mmHg) values at admission. NPS were analyzed with RT-PCR. Results described as median (IQR) or frequency (%). Time to VC was estimated with Kaplan-Meier curve and compared with log-rank test. Results. 648 patients were enrolled: 216 cases and 432 controls. Patients' characteristics at admission are reported in Table 1. VC was observed in 490 patients (75.6%) in a median time of 25 (16-34) days. Overall, time to VC was similar in patients receiving or not receiving remdesivir (p=0.519). However, time to VC was different when considering both the use of RDV (yes vs no) and age (≤ or > 63 years), as shown in Figure 1A. A significant finding was also observed considering the use of RDV and P/F values at admission (≤ or > 200 mmHg), as reported in Figure 1B. Among the 490 patients who reached VC during follow-up, overall time to VC was similar in patients receiving or not receiving RDV (p=0.075;Figure 2A);however, RDV use was associated with a higher probability of VC in the subgroup of patients with P/F admission values ≤ 200mmHg (p=0.035;Figure 2B), in the age group 55-65 years (p=0.025;Figure 2C) and in patients with comorbidities (p=0.028). Time to viral clearance among the 490 patients who reached VC during follow-up. Panel A: time to VC according to RDV use. Panel B: time to VC according to RDV and P/F ratio value at admission. Panel C: time to VC according to RDV in the age group 55-65 years. Conclusion. Time to viral clearance was similar in patients receiving or not receiving remdesivir;however the use of RDV was associated with a benefit on time to viral clearance in younger patients and in those with a P/F ratio at admission ≤200 mmHg.
ABSTRACT
Objective: The use of angiotensin II in invasively ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is controversial. Its effect on organ function is unknown. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: Intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary academic hospital in Milan, Italy. Participants: Adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation due to COVID-19. Interventions: Use angiotensin II either as rescue vasopressor agent or as low dose vasopressor support. Main outcome measures: Patients treated before angiotensin II was available or treated in an adjacent COVID-19 ICU served as controls. For data analysis, we applied Bayesian modelling as appropriate. We assessed the effects of angiotensin II on organ function. Results: We compared 46 patients receiving angiotensin II therapy with 53 controls. Compared with controls, angiotensin II increased the mean arterial pressure (median difference, 9.05 mmHg;95% CI, 1.87-16.22;P = 0.013) and the PaO2/FiO(2) ratio (median difference, 23.17;95% CI, 3.46-42.88;P = 0.021), and decreased the odds ratio (OR) of liver dysfunction (OR, 0.32;95% CI, 0.09-0.94). However, angiotensin II had no effect on lactate, urinary output, serum creatinine, C-reactive protein, platelet count, or thromboembolic complications. In patients with abnormal baseline serum creatinine, Bayesian modelling showed that angiotensin II carried a 95.7% probability of reducing the use of renal replacement therapy (RRT). Conclusions: In ventilated patients with COVID-19, angiotensin II therapy increased blood pressure and PaO2/FiO(2) ratios, decreased the OR of liver dysfunction, and appeared to decrease the risk of RRT use in patients with abnormal baseline serum creatinine. However, all of these findings are hypothesis-generating only.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Describe characteristics, daily care and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Design: Case series of 73 patients. Setting: Large tertiary hospital in Milan. Participants: Mechanically ventilated patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between 20 February and 2 April 2020. Main outcome measures: Demographic and daily clinical data were collected to identify predictors of early mortality. Results: Of the 73 patients included in the study, most were male (83.6%), the median age was 61 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-69 years), and hypertension affected 52.9% of patients. Lymphocytopenia (median, 0.77 x 103 per mm3 ;IQR, 0.58-1.00 x 103 per mm3), hyperinflammation with C-reactive protein (median, 184.5 mg/dL;IQR, 108.2-269.1 mg/dL) and pro-coagulant status with D-dimer (median, 10.1 mug/m;IQR, 5.0-23.8 mug/m) were present. Median tidal volume was 6.7 mL/kg (IQR, 6.0-7.5 mL/kg), and median positive end-expiratory pressure was 12 cmH2O (IQR, 10-14 cmH2O). In the first 3 days, prone positioning (12-16 h) was used in 63.8% of patients and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in five patients (6.8%). After a median follow-up of 19.0 days (IQR, 15.0-27.0 days), 17 patients (23.3%) had died, 23 (31.5%) had been discharged from the ICU, and 33 (45.2%) were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the ICU. Older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.12;95% CI, 1.04-1.22;P = 0.004) and hypertension (OR, 6.15;95% CI, 1.75-29.11;P = 0.009) were associated with mortality, while early improvement in arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) to fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio was associated with being discharged alive from the ICU (P = 0.002 for interaction). Conclusions: Despite multiple advanced critical care interventions, COVID-19 ARDS was associated with prolonged ventilation and high short term mortality. Older age and pre-admission hypertension were key mortality risk factors. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04318366.
ABSTRACT
At the end of 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak spread from China all around the world, causing thousands of deaths. In Italy, the hardest hit region was Lombardy, with the first reported case on 20 February 2020. San Raffaele Scientific Institute - a large tertiary hospital and research centre in Milan, Italy - was immediately involved in the management of the public health emergency. Since the beginning of the outbreak, the elective surgical activity of the hospital was rapidly reduced and large areas of the hospital were simultaneously reorganised to admit and assist patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In addition, the hospital became the regional referral hub for cardiovascular emergencies in order to keep ensuring a high level of health care to non-COVID-19 patients in northern Italy. In a few days, a COVID-19 emergency department was created, improving the general ward capacity to a total number of 279 beds dedicated to patients with COVID-19. Moreover, the number of intensive care unit (ICU) beds was increased from 28 to 72 (54 of them dedicated to patients with COVID-19, and 18 to cardiology and cardiac surgery hub emergencies), both converting pre-existing areas and creating new high technology spaces. All the involved health care personnel were rapidly trained to use personal protection equipment and to manage this particular category of patients both in general wards and ICUs. Furthermore, besides clinical activities, continuously important research projects were carried out in order to find new strategies and more effective therapies to better face an unprecedented health emergency in Italy.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Describe characteristics, daily care and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Design: Case series of 73 patients. Setting: Large tertiary hospital in Milan. Participants: Mechanically ventilated patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between 20 February and 2 April 2020. Main outcome measures: Demographic and daily clinical data were collected to identify predictors of early mortality. Results: Of the 73 patients included in the study, most were male (83.6%), the median age was 61 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-69 years), and hypertension affected 52.9% of patients. Lymphocytopenia (median, 0.77 x 10(3) per mm(3);IQR, 0.58-1.00 x 10(3) per mm(3)), hyperinflammation with C-reactive protein (median, 184.5 mg/dL;IQR, 108.2-269.1 mg/dL) and pro-coagulant status with D-dimer (median, 10.1 mu g/m;IQR, 5.0-23.8 mu g/m) were present. Median tidal volume was 6.7 mUkg (IQR, 6.0-7.5 mL/kg), and median positive end-expiratory pressure was 12 cmH(2)O (IQR, 10-14 cmH(2)O). In the first 3 days, prone positioning (12-16 h) was used in 63.8% of patients and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in five patients (6.8%). After a median followup of 19.0 days (IQR, 15.0-27.0 days), 17 patients (23.3%) had died, 23 (31.5%) had been discharged from the ICU, and 33 (45.2%) were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the ICU. Older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.12;95% CI, 1.04-1.22;P= 0.004) and hypertension (OR, 6.15;95% CI, 1.75-29.11;P = 0.009) were associated with mortality, while early improvement in arterial partial pressure of oxygen (Pao(2) ) to fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio(2)) ratio was associated with being discharged alive from the ICU (P = 0.002 for interaction). Conclusions: Despite multiple advanced critical care interventions, COVID-19 ARDS was associated with prolonged ventilation and high short term mortality. Older age and pre-admission hypertension were key mortality risk factors.
ABSTRACT
We suggest the use of MicroCLOTS (microvascular COVID-19 lung vessels obstructive thromboinflammatory syndrome) as a new name for severe pulmonary coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We hypothesise that, in predisposed individuals, alveolar viral damage is followed by an inflammatory reaction and by microvascular pulmonary thrombosis. This progressive endothelial thromboinflammatory syndrome may also involve the microvascular bed of the brain and other vital organs, leading to multiple organ failure and death. Future steps in the understanding of the disease and in the identification of treatments may benefit from this definition and hypothesised sequence of events.
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of early treatment with corticosteroids on SARS-CoV-2 clearance in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Retrospective analysis on patients admitted to the San Raffaele Hospital (Milan, Italy) with moderate/severe COVID-19 and availability of at least two nasopharyngeal swabs. The primary outcome was the time to nasopharyngeal swab negativization. A multivariable Cox model was fitted to determine factors associated with nasopharyngeal swab negativization. Of 280 patients included, 59 (21.1%) patients were treated with steroids. Differences observed between steroid users and non-users included the proportion of patients with a baseline PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 200 mmHg (45.8% vs 34.4% in steroids and non-steroids users, respectively; p = 0.023) or ≤ 100 mmHg (16.9% vs 12.7%; p = 0.027), and length of hospitalization (20 vs 14 days; p < 0.001). Time to negativization of nasopharyngeal swabs was similar in steroid and non-steroid users (p = 0.985). According to multivariate analysis, SARS-CoV-2 clearance was associated with age ≤ 70 years, a shorter duration of symptoms at admission, a baseline PaO2/FiO2 > 200 mmHg, and a lymphocyte count at admission > 1.0 × 109/L. SARS-CoV-2 clearance was not associated with corticosteroid use. Our study shows that delayed SARS-CoV-2 clearance in moderate/severe COVID-19 is associated with older age and a more severe disease, but not with an early use of corticosteroids.
Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Viral Load/drug effects , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Background:Patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and hyperinflammation face increased mortality. There is an urgent need for effective treatments to reduce the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic.Objectives:Our protocol aimed at evaluating the potential improvement in clinical outcomes with mavrilimumab, an anti-Granulocyte/Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor Receptor alpha (GM-CSFRα) monoclonal antibody, in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyper-inflammation.Methods:Single-center, open-label, single active arm intervention;Adult patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia (as evaluated by CT scanning), hypoxia (PaO2:FiO2 ratio ≤ 300 mmHg), and systemic hyper-inflammation (increased C-reactive protein [CRP] ≥ 100 mg/mL and/or ferritin ≥ 900 μg/L, increased lactate dehydrogenase [LDH]) received a single intravenous dose of mavrilimumab added to standard of care;follow-up 28 days. Main outcomes measure was time to clinical improvement (reduction ≥ 2 categories on the 7-point WHO clinical status scale, 1=discharge, 7=death);others included time to discharge from hospital;% of pts achieving a clinical improvement;survival;mechanical-ventilation free survival;time to fever resolution;CRP;PaO2:FiO2 ratio.Results:A mavrilimumab group (n=13 COVID-19 patients, non-mechanically ventilated, median age 57 [IQR, 52-58], males 12 [92%], febrile 11 [85%];PaO2:FiO2 195.5[166.7–215.0]) was compared to a cohort of 26 contemporaneous patients with similar baseline characteristics. Death occurred in 0% (n=0/13) of mavrilimumab recipients and 27% (n=7/26) of comparison-group patients (log rank p=0.046) during the 28-day follow-up. 100% (n=13) of mavrilimumab recipients and 65% (n=17) of comparison-group patients achieved clinical improvement (p=0.018) at Day 28, with earlier improvement (median 8.0 [IQR, 5.0–11.0] days vs 18.5 [11.0–NE] days) (p0.001) in mavrilimumab recipients. Fever had resolved in 91% (n=10/11 febrile patients) of mavrilimumab recipients by Day 14, compared to 61% (n=11/18 febrile) of patients in the comparison group (p=0.110);fever resolution was faster in mavrilimumab recipients versus controls (median 1.0 [IQR, 1.0–2.0] day vs 7.0 [3.0 - NE] days, respectively, p=0·009). Mavrilimumab was well tolerated in all patients.Conclusion:Patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyper-inflammation who received treatment with mavrilimumab had better clinical outcomes compared to patients receiving routine care. Mavrilimumab was well-tolerated. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm our findings.References:[1]Zhou F, Yu T, Du R, et al. Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2020;395:1054-62[2]Mehta P, McAuley DF, Brown M, et al. HLH Across Speciality Collaboration, UK. COVID-19: consider cytokine storm syndromes and immunosuppression. Lancet. 2020;395:1033-4Disclosure of Interests:Giacomo De Luca Speakers bureau: SOBI, Novartis, Celgene, Pfizer, MSD, Giulio Cavalli Speakers bureau: SOBI, Novartis, Pfizer, Corrado Campochiaro Speakers bureau: Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, GSK, SOBI, Emanuel Della Torre: None declared, Piera Angelillo: None declared, Alessandro Tomelleri: None declared, nicola boffini: None declared, Stefano Tentori: None declared, Francesca Mette: None declared, Patrizia Rovere-Querini: None declared, Annalisa Ruggeri: None declared, Teresa D’Aliberti: None declared, Paolo Scarpelllini: None declared, Giovanni Landoni: None declared, Francesco De Cobelli: None declared, John F. Paolini Shareholder of: Kiniksa, Employee of: Kiniksa, Alberto Zangrillo: None declared, Moreno Tresoldi: None declared, Bruce C. Trapnell Consultant of: Kiniksa, Fabio Ciceri: None declared, Lorenzo Dagna Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Mundipharma Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SG, SOBI, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SG, and SOBI