Low rate of daily active tobacco smoking in patients with symptomatic COVID-19

Abstract Importance: As the pandemic of COVID-19 is still under progression, identification of prognostic factors remains a global challenge. The role of smoking has been suggested among the disease risk factors, although it is highly controversial. Objective: To evaluate whether the rate of daily smokers in patients with COVID-19 was different to that in the French population. Participants: COVID-19-infected in- and outpatients in a large French university hospital between February 28, 2020 and March 30, 2020 for outpatients and from March 23, till April 9, 2020 for inpatients. Design: We systematically interviewed the patients on their smoking status, use of e-cigarette and nicotinic substitutes. The rate of daily smokers in inpatients and outpatients were compared to those in the 2018 French general population, after standardization for sex and age. Results: The inpatient group was composed of 340 patients, median age 66 years: 203 men (59.7%, median age 66 years) and 137 women (40.3%, median age 66 years),with a rate of daily smokers of 4.1% CI95% [2.3 – 6.9] (5.4% of men and 2.2% of women). The outpatient group was composed of 139 patients, median age 44 years: 62 men (44.6%, median age 43 years, and 77 women (55.4 %, median age 44 years). The daily smokers' rate was 6.1 % CI95% [2.7 - 11.6] (5.1% of men and 6.8 % of women). In the French population, the daily smokers' rate was 25.4% (28.2% of men and 22.9% of women). The rate of daily smokers was significantly lower in COVID-19 patients, as compared to that in the French general population after standardization by age and sex, with Standardized Incidence Ratios of 0.23 [0.11 - 0.45] for outpatients and 0.23 [0.14 - 0.39] for inpatients. These ratios did not significantly differ between the two groups (P=0.94). Conclusions and relevance: This cross sectional study in both COVID-19 out- and inpatients shows that daily smokers rate in patients with symptomatic COVID-19 is lower as compared to the general population.

Low incidence of daily active tobacco smoking in patients with symptomatic COVID-19

Importance: As the pandemic of COVID-19 is still under progression, identification of prognostic factors remains a global challenge. The role of cigarette smoking has been suggested among the disease's epidemiological risk factors, although it is highly controversial. Objective: To evaluate the correlation of daily smoking with the susceptibility to develop SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants: We estimated the rates of daily current smokers in COVID-19-infected patients in a large French university hospital between February 28th , 2020 and March 30th , 2020 for outpatients and from March 23rd , till April 9th , 2020 for inpatients. Design: The rates from both groups were compared to those of daily current smokers in the 2018 French general population, established in 2018, after standardization of the data for sex and age. Results: The inpatient group was composed of 343 patients, median age 65 yr: 206 men (601%, median age 66 years) and 137 women (39.9%, median age 65 years) with a rate of daily smokers of 4.4% (5.4% of men and 2.9% of women).The outpatient group was composed of 139 patients, median age 44 years: 62 men (44.6 %, median age 43 years, and 77 women (55.4 %, median age 44 years). The daily smokers rate was 5.3% (5.1% of men and 5.5 % of women). In the French population, the daily smokers rate was 25.4% (28.2% of men and 22.9% of women). The rate of current daily smokers was significantly lower in COVID-19 outpatients and inpatients (80.3% and 75.4%, respectively), as compared to that in the French general population with standardized incidence ratios according to sex and age of 0.197 [0.094 - 0.41] and 0.246 [0.148 - 0.408]. These ratios did not significantly differ between the two groups (P=0.63). Conclusions and relevance: Our cross sectional study in both COVID-19 out- and inpatients strongly suggests that daily smokers have a very much lower probability of developing symptomatic or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection as compared to the general population.

COVID-19 trials were not more likely to report intent to share individual data than non-COVID-19 trials in ClinicalTrials.gov.

OBJECTIVES: To compare intent to share individual participant data (IPD) between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov between 01/09/2020, and 01/03/2021. We also evaluated factors independently associated with intent to share IPD and whether intent to share IPD has improved as compared with the prepandemic period. METHODS: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for all interventional phase 3 studies registered between 01/09/2020, and 01/03/2021. Then, we identified COVID-19 trials and selected a random sample of non-COVID-19 trials with a ratio 2:1. We compared the intent to share IPD between these trials and with 292 trials registered between 01/12/2019, and 01/03/2020 (prepandemic period). RESULTS: We included 148 COVID-19 trials and 296 non-COVID-19 trials. Intent to share IPD did not significantly differ between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 trials (22.3% vs. 27.0%, P = 0.3). Intent to share IPD was independently associated with industry-sponsorship (odds ratio [OR] = 2.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.65-5.27) and location in the United States (OR = 2.93; 95% CI: 1.64-5.41) or the European Union (OR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.03-4.19). The intent to share IPD has not significantly improved compared with the prepandemic period (P = 0.16). CONCLUSION: Data-sharing intent at registration does not seem better for COVID-19 trials.

Lower Rate of Daily Smokers With Symptomatic COVID-19: A Monocentric Self-Report of Smoking Habit Study.

Background: Identification of prognostic factors in COVID-19 remains a global challenge. The role of smoking is still controversial. Methods: PCR-positive in- and outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19 from a large French University hospital were systematically interviewed for their smoking status, use of e-cigarette, and nicotinic substitutes. The rates of daily smokers in in- and outpatients were compared using the same smoking habit questionnaire to those in the 2019 French general population, after standardisation for sex and age. Results: The inpatient group was composed of 340 patients, median age of 66 years: 203 men (59.7%) and 137 women (40.3%), median age of both 66 years, with a rate of 4.1% daily smokers (CI 95% [2.3-6.9]) (5.4% of men and 2.2% of women). The outpatient group was composed of 139 patients, median age of 44 years: 62 men (44.6%, median age of 43 years) and 77 women (55.4%, median age of 44 years). The daily smoker rate was 6.1% (CI 95% [2.7-11.6], 5.1% of men and 6.8% of women). Amongst inpatients, daily smokers represented 2.2 and 3.4% of the 45 dead patients and of the 29 patients transferred to ICU, respectively. The rate of daily smokers was significantly lower in patients with symptomatic COVID-19, as compared to that in the French general population after standardisation by age and sex, with standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) of 0.24 [0.12-0.48] for outpatients and 0.24 [0.14-0.40] for inpatients. Conclusions: Daily smoker rate in patients with symptomatic COVID-19 is lower as compared to the French general population.

Nicotine patches in patients on mechanical ventilation for severe COVID-19: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial.

PURPOSE: Epidemiologic studies have documented lower rates of active smokers compared to former or non-smokers in symptomatic patients affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We assessed the efficacy and safety of nicotine administered by a transdermal patch in critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 18 intensive care units in France, we randomly assigned adult patients (non-smokers, non-vapers or who had quit smoking/vaping for at least 12 months) with proven COVID-19 pneumonia receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for up to 72 h to receive transdermal patches containing either nicotine at a daily dose of 14 mg or placebo until 48 h following successful weaning from mechanical ventilation or for a maximum of 30 days, followed by 3-week dose tapering by 3.5 mg per week. Randomization was stratified by centre, non- or former smoker status and Sequential Organ Function Assessment score (< or ≥ 7). The primary outcome was day-28 mortality. Main prespecified secondary outcomes included 60-day mortality, time to successful extubation, days alive and free from mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, vasopressor support or organ failure at day 28. RESULTS: Between November 6th 2020, and April 2nd 2021, 220 patients were randomized from 18 active recruiting centers. After excluding 2 patients who withdrew consent, 218 patients (152 [70%] men) were included in the analysis: 106 patients to the nicotine group and 112 to the placebo group. Day-28 mortality did not differ between the two groups (30 [28%] of 106 patients in the nicotine group vs 31 [28%] of 112 patients in the placebo group; odds ratio 1.03 [95% confidence interval, CI 0.57-1.87]; p = 0.46). The median number of day-28 ventilator-free days was 0 (IQR 0-14) in the nicotine group and 0 (0-13) in the placebo group (with a difference estimate between the medians of 0 [95% CI -3-7]). Adverse events likely related to nicotine were rare (3%) and similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In patients having developed severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, transdermal nicotine did not significantly reduce day-28 mortality. There is no indication to use nicotine in this situation.

Cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated risk factors among frontline health care workers in Paris: the SEROCOV cohort study.

With the COVID-19 pandemic, documenting whether health care workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 contamination and identifying risk factors is of major concern. In this multicenter prospective cohort study, HCWs from frontline departments were included in March and April 2020 and followed for 3 months. SARS-CoV-2 serology was performed at month 0 (M0), M1, and M3 and RT-PCR in case of symptoms. The primary outcome was laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at M3. Risk factors of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at M3 were identified by multivariate logistic regression. Among 1062 HCWs (median [interquartile range] age, 33 [28-42] years; 758 [71.4%] women; 321 [30.2%] physicians), the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at M3 was 14.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] [12.5; 16.9]). Risk factors were the working department specialty, with increased risk for intensive care units (odds ratio 1.80, 95% CI [0.38; 8.58]), emergency departments (3.91 [0.83; 18.43]) and infectious diseases departments (4.22 [0.92; 18.28]); current smoking was associated with reduced risk (0.36 [0.21; 0.63]). Age, sex, professional category, number of years of experience in the job or department, and public transportation use were not significantly associated with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at M3. The rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection in frontline HCWs was 14.6% at the end of the first COVID-19 wave in Paris and occurred mainly early. The study argues for an origin of professional in addition to private life contamination and therefore including HCWs in the first-line vaccination target population. It also highlights that smokers were at lower risk.Trial registration The study has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04304690 first registered on 11/03/2020.

Long-term evolution of humoral immune response after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to characterize the evolution of humoral immune response up to 1 year after SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers (HCWs) during the first wave of COVID-19 in Paris. METHODS: Serum samples from 92 HCWs were tested at month 0 (M0), M6, and M12 after SARS-CoV-2 infection for IgG targeting the nucleocapsid (N), IgG targeting the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of spike (S) protein, IgA targeting S, and anti-RBD neutralizing antibodies. After M6, 46 HCWs received a single dose of COVID-19 vaccine. RESULTS: We observed a significant decrease in all SARS-CoV-2 immunologic markers at M6 post-infection: median decreases were 0.26 log binding antibody units/mL (M0: 1.9 (interquartile range (IQR) 1.47-2.27); M6: 1.64 (IQR 1.22-1.92)) for anti-RBD IgG; 4.10 (index) (M0: 4.94 (IQR 2.72-6.82); M6: 0.84 (IQR 0.25-1.55)) for anti-N IgG; 0.64 (index) (M0: 2.50 (IQR 1.18-4.62); M6: 1.86 (IQR 0.85-3.54)) for anti-S IgA; and 24.4% (M0: 66.4 (IQR 39.7-82.5); M6: 42.0 (IQR 16.8-68.8)) inhibition activity for the RBD neutralizing antibodies. Between M6 and M12, anti-RBD IgG level, anti-S IgA index, and anti-RBD neutralizing activity significantly increased among COVID-19 vaccinated HCWs, whereas they remained stable among unvaccinated HCWs. Anti-N IgG index significantly decreased between M6 and M12 among both vaccinated (median: 0.73 (IQR 0.23-1.11) at M6 and 0.52 (IQR 0.20-0.73) at M12) and unvaccinated HCWs (median: 0.79 (IQR 0.21-4.67) at M6 and 0.34 (IQR 0.24-2.78) at M12). DISCUSSION: A steady decline in the anti-N IgG response was observed during the first year after SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs, whereas the anti-RBD IgG and the anti-S IgA responses remained stable and could be enhanced by COVID-19 vaccination.

Impact de l’épidémie de COVID-19 lors de la 1ère vague sur les patients de la cohorte PSOBIOTEQ traités pour psoriasis cutané

Introduction La propagation de COVID-19 a amené la France à se confiner une 1ère fois du 17 mars au 11 mai 2020. Cette maladie potentiellement grave a confronté les patients atteints de psoriasis et recevant un traitement systémique, ainsi que leurs médecins, à de nombreuses incertitudes qui ont pu conduire à des modifications de leur traitement de fond. L’objectif de cette étude était d’évaluer les facteurs associés à une modification (arrêt, diminution de dose, espacement) du traitement systémique des patients au cours de la 1ère vague. Matériel et méthodes Étude ancillaire de la cohorte PSOBIOTEQ, portant sur les patients psoriasiques inclus avant le confinement et recevant un traitement systémique. Une enquête spécifique sur COVID-19 a été menée du 1er juin au 31 décembre portant sur la 1ère vague. L’analyse des facteurs associés à une modification du traitement systémique a été réalisée en uni et multivariée. Résultats Au total, 1664 patients (âge médian : 49 ans ;femmes : 37,4 %) ont été inclus dont 631 (37,4 %) provenaient de régions à forte incidence de COVID-19. Les patients étaient sous le même traitement depuis une durée médiane de 20 mois avant le confinement. Le nombre de cas suspectés/confirmés incidents de COVID-19 était de 43 (2,9 %). Au total, 282 (16,9 %) patients ont modifié leur traitement. Cette modification a été décidée par le patient (46,0 %), recommandée par un médecin généraliste (14,0 %), un dermatologue (16,2 %) ou était liée à un problème d’accès aux soins (ex: consultation annulée ou rupture de stock en pharmacie) (18,0 %). Parmi les patients ayant modifié leur traitement, 155 (58,7 %) ont eu une poussée de psoriasis au cours du confinement vs 189 (14,4 %) chez les patients ne l’ayant pas modifié (p<0,0001). Aucune différence n’a été observée concernant les précautions vis-à-vis de COVID-19 pendant le 1er confinement entre les deux groupes. En analyse multivariée, les facteurs associés à une modification du traitement étaient : avoir une maladie cardiovasculaire (Odds ratio (OR) IC95 % 0,5 [0,3 ;0,7], p<0,001), un diabète (OR IC95% 0,5 [0,2 ;1,1], p=0,049) et le fait de consommer de l’alcool (OR IC95% 1,7 [1,1 ;2,6], p=0,007). Discussion L’épidémie de COVID-19 a provoqué une modification des traitements systémiques lors de la 1ère vague parmi 16,9 % des patients de la cohorte–principalement décidée par les patients eux-mêmes–et entraînant des poussées de psoriasis. Les patients avec des comorbidités, facteurs de risque de formes graves de COVID-19, ont moins fréquemment modifié leur traitement systémique. En revanche, la consommation d’alcool était un facteur associé à une modification du traitement systémique. Le type de traitement de fond n’était pas retenu par le modèle. Ces résultats nous incitent à une meilleure anticipation sur l’information des patients et la continuité des soins en cas de crise sanitaire.

Prevalence of hyposmia and hypogeusia in 390 COVID-19 hospitalized patients and outpatients: a cross-sectional study.

Anecdotal evidence rapidly accumulated during March 2020 from sites around the world that sudden hyposmia and hypogeusia are significant symptoms associated with the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Our objective was to describe the prevalence of hyposmia and hypogeusia and compare it in hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients to evaluate an association of these symptoms with disease severity. We performed a cross-sectional survey during 5 consecutive days in March 2020, within a tertiary referral center, associated outpatient clinic, and two primary care outpatient facilities in Paris. All SARS-CoV-2-positive patients hospitalized during the study period and able to be interviewed (n = 198), hospital outpatients seen during the previous month (n = 129), and all COVID-19-highly suspect patients in two primary health centers (n = 63) were included. Hospitalized patients were significantly more often male (64 vs 40%) and older (66 vs 43 years old in median) and had significantly more comorbidities than outpatients. Hyposmia and hypogeusia were reported by 33% of patients and occurred significantly less frequently in hospitalized patients (12% and 13%, respectively) than in the health centers' outpatients (33% and 43%, respectively) and in the hospital outpatients (65% and 60%, respectively). Hyposmia and hypogeusia appeared more frequently after other COVID-19 symptoms. Patients with hyposmia and/or hypogeusia were significantly younger and had significantly less respiratory severity criteria than patients without these symptoms. Olfactory and gustatory dysfunction occurs frequently in COVID-19, especially in young, non-severe patients. These symptoms might be a useful tool for initial diagnostic work-up in patients with suspected COVID-19.

Compassionate Use of Hydroxychloroquine in Clinical Practice for Patients With Mild to Severe COVID-19 in a French University Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Data from nonrandomized studies have suggested that hydroxychloroquine could be an effective therapeutic agent against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted an observational, retrospective cohort study involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed, mild to severe COVID-19 in a French university hospital. Patients who received hydroxychloroquine (200 mg 3 times daily dosage for 10 days) on a compassionate basis in addition to standard of care (SOC) were compared with patients without contraindications to hydroxychloroquine who received SOC alone. A propensity score-weighted analysis was performed to control for confounders: age, sex, time between symptom onset and admission ≤ 7 days, Charlson comorbidity index, medical history of arterial hypertension, obesity, National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) score at admission, and pneumonia severity. The primary endpoint was time to unfavorable outcome, defined as: death, admission to an intensive care unit, or decision to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatments, whichever came first. RESULTS: Data from 89 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were analyzed, 84 of whom were considered in the primary analysis; 38 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and 46 patients treated with SOC alone. At admission, the mean age of patients was 66 years, the median Charlson comorbidity index was 3, and the median NEWS2 severity score was 3. After propensity score weighting, treatment with hydroxychloroquine was not associated with a significantly reduced risk of unfavorable outcome (hazard ratio, 0.90 [95% confidence interval, .38-2.1], P = .81). Overall survival was not significantly different between the 2 groups (hazard ratio, 0.89 [0.23; 3.47], P = 1). CONCLUSION: In hospitalized adults with COVID-19, no significant reduction of the risk of unfavorable outcomes was observed with hydroxychloroquine in comparison to SOC. Unmeasured confounders may have persisted however, despite careful propensity-weighted analysis and the study might be underpowered. Ongoing controlled trials in patients with varying degrees of initial severity on a larger scale will help determine whether there is a place for hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19. In hospitalized adults with COVID-19, no significant reduction of the risk of unfavorable outcomes was observed with hydroxychloroquine in comparison to SOC.