A Pathology-based Case Series of Influenza- and COVID-19-associated Pulmonary Aspergillosis: The Proof Is in the Tissue.

RATIONALE: Invasive pulmonary aspergillosis has emerged as a frequent coinfection in severe COVID-19, similarly to influenza; yet the clinical invasiveness is more debated. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the invasive nature of pulmonary aspergillosis in histology specimens of influenza and COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) fatalities in a tertiary care center. METHODS: In this monocentric, descriptive, retrospective case series we included adult ICU patients with PCR-proven influenza/COVID-19 respiratory failure that underwent postmortem examination and/or tracheobronchial biopsy during ICU admission from September 2009 until June 2021. Diagnosis of probable/proven viral-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (VAPA) was made based on the ICM-IAPA and ECMM/ISHAM-CAPA consensus criteria. All respiratory tissues were independently reviewed by two experienced pathologists. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the 44 patients of the autopsy-verified cohort, 6 proven influenza-associated and 6 proven COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis diagnoses were identified. Fungal disease was identified as missed-diagnosis upon autopsy in 8% of proven cases (n=1/12), yet most frequently found as confirmation of probable antemortem diagnosis (n=11/21, 52%) despite receiving antifungal treatment. Bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan testing showed highest sensitivity for VAPA diagnosis. Among both viral entities, an impeded fungal growth was the predominant histologic pattern of pulmonary aspergillosis. Fungal tracheobronchitis was histologically indistinguishable in influenza (n=3) and COVID-19 (n=3) cases, yet macroscopically more extensive at bronchoscopy in influenza setting. CONCLUSIONS: Proven invasive pulmonary aspergillosis diagnosis was found regularly and with a similar histological pattern in influenza and in COVID-19 ICU case-fatalities. Our findings highlight an important need for VAPA awareness with an emphasis on mycological bronchoscopic work-up. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Itraconazole for COVID-19: preclinical studies and a proof-of-concept randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The antifungal drug itraconazole exerts in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 in Vero and human Caco-2 cells. Preclinical and clinical studies are required to investigate if itraconazole is effective for the treatment and/or prevention of COVID-19. METHODS: Due to the initial absence of preclinical models, the effect of itraconazole was explored in a clinical, proof-of-concept, open-label, single-center study, in which hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care with or without itraconazole. Primary outcome was the cumulative score of the clinical status until day 15 based on the 7-point ordinal scale of the World Health Organization. In parallel, itraconazole was evaluated in a newly established hamster model of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission, as soon as the model was validated. FINDINGS: In the hamster acute infection model, itraconazole did not reduce viral load in lungs, stools or ileum, despite adequate plasma and lung drug concentrations. In the transmission model, itraconazole failed to prevent viral transmission. The clinical trial was prematurely discontinued after evaluation of the preclinical studies and because an interim analysis showed no signal for a more favorable outcome with itraconazole: mean cumulative score of the clinical status 49 vs 47, ratio of geometric means 1.01 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.19) for itraconazole vs standard of care. INTERPRETATION: Despite in vitro activity, itraconazole was not effective in a preclinical COVID-19 hamster model. This prompted the premature termination of the proof-of-concept clinical study. FUNDING: KU Leuven, Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO), Horizon 2020, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and nucleoprotein evaluated by four automated immunoassays and three ELISAs.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to determine the antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and nucleoprotein using four automated immunoassays and three ELISAs for the detection of total Ig antibodies (Roche) or IgG (Abbott, Diasorin, Snibe, Euroimmun, Mikrogen) in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Sensitivity and dynamic trend to seropositivity were evaluated in 233 samples from 114 patients with moderate, severe or critical COVID-19 confirmed with PCR on nasopharyngeal swab. Specificity was evaluated in 113 samples collected before January 2020, including 24 samples from patients with non-SARS coronavirus infection. RESULTS: Sensitivity for all assays was 100% (95% confidence interval 83.7-100) 3 weeks after onset of symptoms. Specificity varied between 94.7% (88.7-97.8) and 100% (96.1-100). Calculated at the cut-offs that corresponded to a specificity of 95% and 97.5%, Roche had the highest sensitivity (85.0% (79.8-89.0) and 81.1% (76.6-85.7), p < 0.05 except vs. Abbott). Seroconversion occurred on average 2 days earlier for Roche total Ig anti-N and the three IgG anti-N assays (Abbott, Mikrogen, Euroimmun) than for the two IgG anti-S assays (Diasorin, Euroimmun) (≥50% seroconversion day 9-10 vs. day 11-12 and p < 0.05 for percent seropositive patients day 9-10 to 17-18). There was no significant difference in the IgG antibody time to seroconversion between critical and non-critical patients. DISCUSSION: Seroconversion occurred within 3 weeks after onset of symptoms with all assays and on average 2 days earlier for assays detecting IgG or total Ig anti-N than for IgG anti-S. The specificity of assays detecting anti-N was comparable to anti-S and excellent in a challenging control population.

COVID-19 and gastrointestinal endoscopy: What should be taken into account?

On March 11, 2020 the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 pandemic, leading to a subsequent impact on the entire world and health care system. Since the causing Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 houses in the aerodigestive tract, activities in the gastrointestinal outpatient clinic and endoscopy unit should be limited to emergencies only. Health care professionals are faced with the need to perform endoscopic or endoluminal emergency procedures in patients with a confirmed positive or unknown COVID-19 status. With this report, we aim to provide recommendations and practical relevant information for gastroenterologists based on the limited amount of available data and local experience, to guarantee a high-quality patient care and adequate infection prevention in the gastroenterology clinic.