Persistent symptoms and risk factors predicting prolonged time to symptom-free after SARS­CoV­2 infection: an analysis of the baseline examination of the German COVIDOM/NAPKON-POP cohort.

PURPOSE: We aimed to assess symptoms in patients after SARS-CoV-2 infection and to identify factors predicting prolonged time to symptom-free. METHODS: COVIDOM/NAPKON-POP is a population-based prospective cohort of adults whose first on-site visits were scheduled ≥ 6 months after a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. Retrospective data including self-reported symptoms and time to symptom-free were collected during the survey before a site visit. In the survival analyses, being symptom-free served as the event and time to be symptom-free as the time variable. Data were visualized with Kaplan-Meier curves, differences were tested with log-rank tests. A stratified Cox proportional hazard model was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of predictors, with aHR < 1 indicating a longer time to symptom-free. RESULTS: Of 1175 symptomatic participants included in the present analysis, 636 (54.1%) reported persistent symptoms after 280 days (SD 68) post infection. 25% of participants were free from symptoms after 18 days [quartiles: 14, 21]. Factors associated with prolonged time to symptom-free were age 49-59 years compared to < 49 years (aHR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56-0.87), female sex (aHR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.93), lower educational level (aHR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.93), living with a partner (aHR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66-0.99), low resilience (aHR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47-0.90), steroid treatment (aHR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-0.90) and no medication (aHR 0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.89) during acute infection. CONCLUSION: In the studied population, COVID-19 symptoms had resolved in one-quarter of participants within 18 days, and in 34.5% within 28 days. Over half of the participants reported COVID-19-related symptoms 9 months after infection. Symptom persistence was predominantly determined by participant's characteristics that are difficult to modify.

The Development of Interoperable, Domain-Specific Extensions for the German Corona Consensus (GECCO) COVID-19 Research Dataset Using an Interdisciplinary, Consensus-Based Workflow: Dataset Development Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred large-scale, inter-institutional research efforts. To enable these efforts, researchers must agree on dataset definitions that not only cover all elements relevant to the respective medical specialty but that are also syntactically and semantically interoperable. Following such an effort, the German Corona Consensus (GECCO) dataset has been developed previously as a harmonized, interoperable collection of the most relevant data elements for COVID-19-related patient research. As GECCO has been developed as a compact core dataset across all medical fields, the focused research within particular medical domains demands the definition of extension modules that include those data elements that are most relevant to the research performed in these individual medical specialties. OBJECTIVE: To (i) specify a workflow for the development of interoperable dataset definitions that involves a close collaboration between medical experts and information scientists and to (ii) apply the workflow to develop dataset definitions that include data elements most relevant to COVID-19-related patient research regarding immunization, pediatrics, and cardiology. METHODS: We developed a workflow to create dataset definitions that are (i) content-wise as relevant as possible to a specific field of study and (ii) universally usable across computer systems, institutions, and countries, i.e., interoperable. We then gathered medical experts from three specialties (infectious diseases with a focus on immunization, pediatrics, and cardiology) to the select data elements most relevant to COVID-19-related patient research in the respective specialty. We mapped the data elements to international standardized vocabularies and created data exchange specifications using HL7 FHIR. All steps were performed in close interdisciplinary collaboration between medical domain experts and medical information specialists. The profiles and vocabulary mappings were syntactically and semantically validated in a two-stage process. RESULTS: We created GECCO extension modules for the immunization, pediatrics, and cardiology domains with respect to the pandemic requests. The data elements included in each of these modules were selected according to the here developed consensus-based workflow by medical experts from the respective specialty to ensure that the contents are aligned with the respective research needs. We defined dataset specifications for a total number of 48 (immunization), 150 (pediatrics), and 52 (cardiology) data elements that complement the GECCO core dataset. We created and published implementation guides and example implementations as well as dataset annotations for each extension module. CONCLUSIONS: These here presented GECCO extension modules, which contain data elements most relevant to COVID-19-related patient research in infectious diseases with a focus on immunization, pediatrics and cardiology, were defined in an interdisciplinary, iterative, consensus-based workflow that may serve as a blueprint for the development of further dataset definitions. The GECCO extension modules provide a standardized and harmonized definition of specialty-related datasets that can help to enable inter-institutional and cross-country COVID-19 research in these specialties.

Age and Comorbidity Burden of Patients Critically Ill with COVID-19 Affect Both Access to and Outcome of Ventilation Therapy in Intensive Care Units.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, large numbers of elderly, multimorbid people required treatment in intensive care units. This study investigated how the inherent patient factors age and comorbidity burden affected the treatment strategy and the outcome achieved. Retrospective analysis of data from intensive care patients enrolled in the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV2-Infected Patients (LEOSS) cohort found that a patient's age and comorbidity burden in fact influenced their mortality rate and the use of ventilation therapy. Evidence showed that advanced age and multimorbidity were associated with the restrictive use of invasive ventilation therapies, particularly ECMO. Geriatric patients with a high comorbidity burden were clustered in the sub-cohort of non-ventilated ICU patients characterized by a high mortality rate. The risk of death generally increased with older age and accumulating comorbidity burden. Here, the more aggressive an applied procedure, the younger the age in which a majority of patients died. Clearly, geriatric, multimorbid COVID-19 patients benefit less from invasive ventilation therapies. This implies the need for a holistic approach to therapy decisions, taking into account the patient's wishes.

Statistical biases due to anonymization evaluated in an open clinical dataset from COVID-19 patients.

Anonymization has the potential to foster the sharing of medical data. State-of-the-art methods use mathematical models to modify data to reduce privacy risks. However, the degree of protection must be balanced against the impact on statistical properties. We studied an extreme case of this trade-off: the statistical validity of an open medical dataset based on the German National Pandemic Cohort Network (NAPKON), which was prepared for publication using a strong anonymization procedure. Descriptive statistics and results of regression analyses were compared before and after anonymization of multiple variants of the original dataset. Despite significant differences in value distributions, the statistical bias was found to be small in all cases. In the regression analyses, the median absolute deviations of the estimated adjusted odds ratios for different sample sizes ranged from 0.01 [minimum = 0, maximum = 0.58] to 0.52 [minimum = 0.25, maximum = 0.91]. Disproportionate impact on the statistical properties of data is a common argument against the use of anonymization. Our analysis demonstrates that anonymization can actually preserve validity of statistical results in relatively low-dimensional data.

Hospitalized patients dying with SARS-CoV-2 infection-An analysis of patient characteristics and management in ICU and general ward of the LEOSS registry.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a severe disease with a high need for intensive care treatment and a high mortality rate in hospitalized patients. The objective of this study was to describe and compare the clinical characteristics and the management of patients dying with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the acute medical and intensive care setting. METHODS: Descriptive analysis of dying patients enrolled in the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients (LEOSS), a non-interventional cohort study, between March 18 and November 18, 2020. Symptoms, comorbidities and management of patients, including palliative care involvement, were compared between general ward and intensive care unit (ICU) by univariate analysis. RESULTS: 580/4310 (13%) SARS-CoV-2 infected patients died. Among 580 patients 67% were treated on ICU and 33% on a general ward. The spectrum of comorbidities and symptoms was broad with more comorbidities (≥ four comorbidities: 52% versus 25%) and a higher age distribution (>65 years: 98% versus 70%) in patients on the general ward. 69% of patients were in an at least complicated phase at diagnosis of the SARS-CoV-2 infection with a higher proportion of patients in a critical phase or dying the day of diagnosis treated on ICU (36% versus 11%). While most patients admitted to ICU came from home (71%), patients treated on the general ward came likewise from home and nursing home (44% respectively) and were more frequently on palliative care before admission (29% versus 7%). A palliative care team was involved in dying patients in 15%. Personal contacts were limited but more often documented in patients treated on ICU (68% versus 47%). CONCLUSION: Patients dying with SARS-CoV-2 infection suffer from high symptom burden and often deteriorate early with a demand for ICU treatment. Therefor a demand for palliative care expertise with early involvement seems to exist.

Severity, predictors and clinical correlates of Post-COVID syndrome (PCS) in Germany: A prospective, multi-centre, population-based cohort study.

Background: Post-COVID syndrome (PCS) is an important sequela of COVID-19, characterised by symptom persistence for >3 months, post-acute symptom development, and worsening of pre-existing comorbidities. The causes and public health impact of PCS are still unclear, not least for the lack of efficient means to assess the presence and severity of PCS. Methods: COVIDOM is a population-based cohort study of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, recruited through public health authorities in three German regions (Kiel, Berlin, Würzburg) between November 15, 2020 and September 29, 2021. Main inclusion criteria were (i) a PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and (ii) a period of at least 6 months between the infection and the visit to the COVIDOM study site. Other inclusion criteria were written informed consent and age ≥18 years. Key exclusion criterion was an acute reinfection with SARS-CoV-2. Study site visits included standardised interviews, in-depth examination, and biomaterial procurement. In sub-cohort Kiel-I, a PCS (severity) score was developed based upon 12 long-term symptom complexes. Two validation sub-cohorts (Würzburg/Berlin, Kiel-II) were used for PCS score replication and identification of clinically meaningful predictors. This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04679584) and at the German Registry for Clinical Studies (DRKS, DRKS00023742). Findings: In Kiel-I (n = 667, 57% women), 90% of participants had received outpatient treatment for acute COVID-19. Neurological ailments (61·5%), fatigue (57·1%), and sleep disturbance (57·0%) were the most frequent persisting symptoms at 6-12 months after infection. Across sub-cohorts (Würzburg/Berlin, n = 316, 52% women; Kiel-II, n = 459, 56% women), higher PCS scores were associated with lower health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L-VAS/-index: r = -0·54/ -0·56, all p < 0·0001). Severe, moderate, and mild/no PCS according to the individual participant's PCS score occurred in 18·8%, 48·2%, and 32·9%, respectively, of the Kiel-I sub-cohort. In both validation sub-cohorts, statistically significant predictors of the PCS score included the intensity of acute phase symptoms and the level of personal resilience. Interpretation: PCS severity can be quantified by an easy-to-use symptom-based score reflecting acute phase disease burden and general psychological predisposition. The PCS score thus holds promise to facilitate the clinical diagnosis of PCS, scientific studies of its natural course, and the development of therapeutic interventions. Funding: The COVIDOM study is funded by the Network University Medicine (NUM) as part of the National Pandemic Cohort Network (NAPKON).

Corrigendum to "Machine Learning Based Prediction of COVID-19 Mortality Suggests Repositioning of Anticancer Drug for Treating Severe Cases"[Artificial Intelligence in Life Sciences] 1(2021), 100020.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.ailsci.2021.100020.].

Machine Learning Based Prediction of COVID-19 Mortality Suggests Repositioning of Anticancer Drug for Treating Severe Cases.

Despite available vaccinations COVID-19 case numbers around the world are still growing, and effective medications against severe cases are lacking. In this work, we developed a machine learning model which predicts mortality for COVID-19 patients using data from the multi-center 'Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-infected patients' (LEOSS) observational study (>100 active sites in Europe, primarily in Germany), resulting into an AUC of almost 80%. We showed that molecular mechanisms related to dementia, one of the relevant predictors in our model, intersect with those associated to COVID-19. Most notably, among these molecules was tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2), a protein that has been patented as drug target in Alzheimer's Disease but also genetically associated with severe COVID-19 outcomes. We experimentally verified that anti-cancer drugs Sorafenib and Regorafenib showed a clear anti-cytopathic effect in Caco2 and VERO-E6 cells and can thus be regarded as potential treatments against COVID-19. Altogether, our work demonstrates that interpretation of machine learning based risk models can point towards drug targets and new treatment options, which are strongly needed for COVID-19.

Angiotensin II receptor blocker intake associates with reduced markers of inflammatory activation and decreased mortality in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities and COVID-19 disease.

AIMS: Patients with cardiovascular comorbidities have a significantly increased risk for a critical course of COVID-19. As the SARS-CoV2 virus enters cells via the angiotensin-converting enzyme receptor II (ACE2), drugs which interact with the renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) were suspected to influence disease severity. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 1946 consecutive patients with cardiovascular comorbidities or hypertension enrolled in one of the largest European COVID-19 registries, the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 (LEOSS) registry. Here, we show that angiotensin II receptor blocker intake is associated with decreased mortality in patients with COVID-19 [OR 0.75 (95% CI 0,59-0.96; p = 0.013)]. This effect was mainly driven by patients, who presented in an early phase of COVID-19 at baseline [OR 0,64 (95% CI 0,43-0,96; p = 0.029)]. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significantly lower incidence of death in patients on an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) (n = 33/318;10,4%) compared to patients using an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) (n = 60/348;17,2%) or patients who received neither an ACE-inhibitor nor an ARB at baseline in the uncomplicated phase (n = 90/466; 19,3%; p<0.034). Patients taking an ARB were significantly less frequently reaching the mortality predicting threshold for leukocytes (p<0.001), neutrophils (p = 0.002) and the inflammatory markers CRP (p = 0.021), procalcitonin (p = 0.001) and IL-6 (p = 0.049). ACE2 expression levels in human lung samples were not altered in patients taking RAAS modulators. CONCLUSION: These data suggest a beneficial effect of ARBs on disease severity in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities and COVID-19, which is linked to dampened systemic inflammatory activity.

Prediction of COVID-19 deterioration in high-risk patients at diagnosis: an early warning score for advanced COVID-19 developed by machine learning.

PURPOSE: While more advanced COVID-19 necessitates medical interventions and hospitalization, patients with mild COVID-19 do not require this. Identifying patients at risk of progressing to advanced COVID-19 might guide treatment decisions, particularly for better prioritizing patients in need for hospitalization. METHODS: We developed a machine learning-based predictor for deriving a clinical score identifying patients with asymptomatic/mild COVID-19 at risk of progressing to advanced COVID-19. Clinical data from SARS-CoV-2 positive patients from the multicenter Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients (LEOSS) were used for discovery (2020-03-16 to 2020-07-14) and validation (data from 2020-07-15 to 2021-02-16). RESULTS: The LEOSS dataset contains 473 baseline patient parameters measured at the first patient contact. After training the predictor model on a training dataset comprising 1233 patients, 20 of the 473 parameters were selected for the predictor model. From the predictor model, we delineated a composite predictive score (SACOV-19, Score for the prediction of an Advanced stage of COVID-19) with eleven variables. In the validation cohort (n = 2264 patients), we observed good prediction performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.73 ± 0.01. Besides temperature, age, body mass index and smoking habit, variables indicating pulmonary involvement (respiration rate, oxygen saturation, dyspnea), inflammation (CRP, LDH, lymphocyte counts), and acute kidney injury at diagnosis were identified. For better interpretability, the predictor was translated into a web interface. CONCLUSION: We present a machine learning-based predictor model and a clinical score for identifying patients at risk of developing advanced COVID-19.

Design and evaluation of a data anonymization pipeline to promote Open Science on COVID-19.

The Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients (LEOSS) is a European registry for studying the epidemiology and clinical course of COVID-19. To support evidence-generation at the rapid pace required in a pandemic, LEOSS follows an Open Science approach, making data available to the public in real-time. To protect patient privacy, quantitative anonymization procedures are used to protect the continuously published data stream consisting of 16 variables on the course and therapy of COVID-19 from singling out, inference and linkage attacks. We investigated the bias introduced by this process and found that it has very little impact on the quality of output data. Current laws do not specify requirements for the application of formal anonymization methods, there is a lack of guidelines with clear recommendations and few real-world applications of quantitative anonymization procedures have been described in the literature. We therefore believe that our work can help others with developing urgently needed anonymization pipelines for their projects.

First results of the "Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients (LEOSS)".

PURPOSE: Knowledge regarding patients' clinical condition at severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection is sparse. Data in the international, multicenter Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients (LEOSS) cohort study may enhance the understanding of COVID-19. METHODS: Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, enrolled in the LEOSS cohort study between March 16, 2020, and May 14, 2020, were analyzed. Associations between baseline characteristics and clinical stages at diagnosis (uncomplicated vs. complicated) were assessed using logistic regression models. RESULTS: We included 2155 patients, 59.7% (1,287/2,155) were male; the most common age category was 66-85 years (39.6%; 500/2,155). The primary COVID-19 diagnosis was made in 35.0% (755/2,155) during complicated clinical stages. A significant univariate association between age; sex; body mass index; smoking; diabetes; cardiovascular, pulmonary, neurological, and kidney diseases; ACE inhibitor therapy; statin intake and an increased risk for complicated clinical stages of COVID-19 at diagnosis was found. Multivariable analysis revealed that advanced age [46-65 years: adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.73, 95% CI 1.25-2.42, p = 0.001; 66-85 years: aOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.36-2.74, p < 0.001; > 85 years: aOR 2.38, 95% CI 1.49-3.81, p < 0.001 vs. individuals aged 26-45 years], male sex (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01-1.50, p = 0.040), cardiovascular disease (aOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.09-1.72, p = 0.007), and diabetes (aOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.04-1.69, p = 0.023) were associated with complicated stages of COVID-19 at diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The LEOSS cohort identified age, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and male sex as risk factors for complicated disease stages at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, thus confirming previous data. Further data regarding outcomes of the natural course of COVID-19 and the influence of treatment are required.

Frequently asked questions regarding SARS-CoV-2 in cancer patients-recommendations for clinicians caring for patients with malignant diseases.

Since early 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has a massive impact on health care systems worldwide. Patients with malignant diseases are assumed to be at increased risk for a worse outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and therefore, guidance regarding prevention and management of the infection as well as safe administration of cancer-therapy is required. Here, we provide recommendations for the management of patients with malignant disease in the times of COVID-19. These recommendations were prepared by an international panel of experts and then consented by the EHA Scientific Working Group on Infection in Hematology. The primary aim is to enable clinicians to provide optimal cancer care as safely as possible, since the most important protection for patients with malignant disease is the best-possible control of the underlying disease.