Sotrovimab restores neutralisation against current Omicron subvariants in patients with blood cancer

Wu et al. report that patients with hematologic malignancies have reduced immunity against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants and Sotrovimab retains neutralizing capacity against all tested Omicron subvariants.

Nanocell COVID-19 vaccine triggers a novel immune response pathway producing high-affinity antibodies which neutralize all variants of concern.

Most current anti-viral vaccines elicit a humoral and cellular immune response via the pathway of phagocytic cell mediated viral antigen presentation to B and T cell surface receptors. However, this pathway results in reduced ability to neutralize S-protein Receptor Binding Domains (RBDs) from several Variants of Concern (VOC) and the rapid waning of memory B cell response requiring vaccine reformulation to cover dominant VOC S-proteins and multiple boosters. Here we show for the first time in mice and humans, that a bacterially derived, non-living, nanocell (EDV; EnGeneIC Dream Vector) packaged with plasmid expressed SARS-CoV-2 S-protein and α-galactosyl ceramide adjuvant (EDV-COVID-αGC), stimulates an alternate pathway due to dendritic cells (DC) displaying both S-polypeptides and αGC thereby recruiting and activating iNKT cells with release of IFNγ. This triggers DC activation/maturation, activation of follicular helper T cells (TFH), cognate help to B cells with secretion of a cytokine milieu promoting B cell maturation, somatic hypermutation in germinal centers to result in high affinity antibodies. Surrogate virus neutralization tests show 90-100% neutralization of ancestral and early VOC in mice and human trial volunteers. EDV-COVID-αGC as a third dose booster neutralized Omicron BA. 4/5. Serum and PBMC analyses reveal long lasting S-specific memory B and T cells. In contrast, control EDVs lacking αGC, did not engage the iNKT/DC pathway resulting in antibody responses unable to neutralize all VOCs and had a reduced B cell memory. The vaccine is lyophilized, stored and transported at room temperature with a shelf-life of over a year.

Addressing global disparities in blood pressure control: perspectives of the International Society of Hypertension.

Raised blood pressure (BP) is the leading cause of preventable death in the world. Yet, its global prevalence is increasing, and it remains poorly detected, treated, and controlled in both high- and low-resource settings. From the perspective of members of the International Society of Hypertension based in all regions, we reflect on the past, present, and future of hypertension care, highlighting key challenges and opportunities, which are often region-specific. We report that most countries failed to show sufficient improvements in BP control rates over the past three decades, with greater improvements mainly seen in some high-income countries, also reflected in substantial reductions in the burden of cardiovascular disease and deaths. Globally, there are significant inequities and disparities based on resources, sociodemographic environment, and race with subsequent disproportionate hypertension-related outcomes. Additional unique challenges in specific regions include conflict, wars, migration, unemployment, rapid urbanization, extremely limited funding, pollution, COVID-19-related restrictions and inequalities, obesity, and excessive salt and alcohol intake. Immediate action is needed to address suboptimal hypertension care and related disparities on a global scale. We propose a Global Hypertension Care Taskforce including multiple stakeholders and societies to identify and implement actions in reducing inequities, addressing social, commercial, and environmental determinants, and strengthening health systems implement a well-designed customized quality-of-care improvement framework.

A Virtually-Facilitated Investigation of Ostensible RSPK Disturbances During the Covid-19 Pandemic

Introduction: Anecdotal reports were received from a middle-class family living in the Silicon Valley area of California regarding a series of ostensibly anomalous physical disturbances that were actively disrupting their lives while they remained quarantined in their small three-bedroom townhouse during the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. In addition to spontaneous object movements and odd noises (e.g., knocks, bangs, & scrapings) with no readily identified source, instances of tactile sensation (e.g., pokes, brushes, & "scratches" on various parts of the body) and the discovery of ostensibly materialized liquids (water, soap, antibacterial gel, food coloring, & ink) were reported. Although various members of the family were present at times when the phenomena occurred, several of them seemed to occur in proximity to the family's 14-year-old daughter.

Evaluation of the utility of NEWS2 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a dramatic increase in acutely ill patients presenting to hospitals with life-threatening acute respiratory disease. There was an immediate need for effective triage systems to facilitate clinical decision making. This review assesses the performance of the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) in two contexts. Firstly, the ability to detect acute illness severity and likely clinical deterioration in patients presenting to hospitals with COVID-19. Secondly, the use of NEWS2 in the longitudinal monitoring to detect acute clinical deterioration in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. NEWS2 appeared to be at least comparable and, often, superior to other scoring systems (such as qSOFA and CURB-65), and provided an earlier alert of deterioration. A NEWS2 of 5 had high short-term sensitivity within and was unlikely to miss patients with COVID-19 who go on to deteriorate, but this comes with moderate specificity. However, the specificity of these systems is likely underestimated because preventing deterioration is their purpose.NEWS2 is an adjunct to clinical decision making and has served that purpose during the COVID-19 pandemic, playing an important role in communicating illness severity, clinical deterioration, triaging patients to appropriate levels of care and prompting completion of treatment escalation plans for those with high scores and at imminent risk of deterioration.

Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors in Patients With COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Led by the International Society of Hypertension.

Background Published randomized controlled trials are underpowered for binary clinical end points to assess the safety and efficacy of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in adults with COVID-19. We therefore performed a meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of RASi in adults with COVID-19. Methods and Results MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register were searched for randomized controlled trials that randomly assigned patients with COVID-19 to RASi continuation/commencement versus no RASi therapy. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at ≤30 days. A total of 14 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled 1838 participants (aged 59 years, 58% men, mean follow-up 26 days). Of the trials, 11 contributed data. We found no effect of RASi versus control on all-cause mortality (7.2% versus 7.5%; relative risk [RR], 0.95; [95% CI, 0.69-1.30]) either overall or in subgroups defined by COVID-19 severity or trial type. Network meta-analysis identified no difference between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin II receptor blockers. RASi users had a nonsignificant reduction in acute myocardial infarction (2.1% versus 3.6%; RR, 0.59; [95% CI, 0.33-1.06]), but increased risk of acute kidney injury (7.0% versus 3.6%; RR, 1.82; [95% CI, 1.05-3.16]), in trials that initiated and continued RASi. There was no increase in need for dialysis or differences in congestive cardiac failure, cerebrovascular events, venous thromboembolism, hospitalization, intensive care admission, inotropes, or mechanical ventilation. Conclusions This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers versus control in patients with COVID-19 found no difference in all-cause mortality, a borderline decrease in myocardial infarction, and an increased risk of acute kidney injury with RASi. Our findings provide strong evidence that RASi can be used safely in patients with COVID-19.

The impact of pre-existing hypertension and its treatment on outcomes in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.

The impact of pre-existing hypertension on outcomes in patients with the novel corona virus (SARS-CoV-2) remains controversial. To address this, we examined the impact of pre-existing hypertension and its treatment on in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to hospital with Covid-19. Using the CAPACITY-COVID patient registry we examined the impact of pre-existing hypertension and guideline-recommended treatments for hypertension on in-hospital mortality in unadjusted and multi-variate-adjusted analyses using logistic regression. Data from 9197 hospitalised patients with Covid-19 (median age 69 [IQR 57-78] years, 60.6% male, n = 5573) was analysed. Of these, 48.3% (n = 4443) had documented pre-existing hypertension. Patients with pre-existing hypertension were older (73 vs. 62 years, p < 0.001) and had twice the occurrence of any cardiac disease (49.3 vs. 21.8%; p < 0.001) when compared to patients without hypertension. The most documented class of anti-hypertensive drugs were angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) or angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) (n = 2499, 27.2%). In-hospital mortality occurred in (n = 2020, 22.0%), with more deaths occurring in those with pre-existing hypertension (26.0 vs. 18.2%, p < 0.001). Pre-existing hypertension was associated with in-hospital mortality in unadjusted analyses (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.42,1.74), no significant association was found following multivariable adjustment for age and other hypertension-related covariates (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87,1.10). Use of ACEi or ARB tended to have a protective effect for in-hospital mortality in fully adjusted models (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78,0.99). After appropriate adjustment for confounding, pre-existing hypertension, or treatment for hypertension, does not independently confer an increased risk of in-hospital mortality patients hospitalized with Covid-19.

'What is the risk to me from COVID-19?': Public involvement in providing mortality risk information for people with 'high-risk' conditions for COVID-19 (OurRisk.CoV).

Patients and public have sought mortality risk information throughout the pandemic, but their needs may not be served by current risk prediction tools. Our mixed methods study involved: (1) systematic review of published risk tools for prognosis, (2) provision and patient testing of new mortality risk estimates for people with high-risk conditions and (3) iterative patient and public involvement and engagement with qualitative analysis. Only one of 53 (2%) previously published risk tools involved patients or the public, while 11/53 (21%) had publicly accessible portals, but all for use by clinicians and researchers.Among people with a wide range of underlying conditions, there has been sustained interest and engagement in accessible and tailored, pre- and postpandemic mortality information. Informed by patient feedback, we provide such information in 'five clicks' (https://covid19-phenomics.org/OurRiskCoV.html), as context for decision making and discussions with health professionals and family members. Further development requires curation and regular updating of NHS data and wider patient and public engagement.

Seven days treatment with the angiotensin II type 2 receptor agonist C21 in hospitalized COVID-19 patients; a placebo-controlled randomised multi-centre double-blind phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 morbidity and mortality remains high and the need for safe and effective drugs continues despite vaccines. METHODS: Double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre, randomised, parallel group phase 2 trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of oral angiotensin II type 2 receptor agonist C21 in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and CRP ≥ 50-150 mg/L conducted at eight sites in India (NCT04452435). Patients were randomly assigned 100 mg C21 bid or placebo for 7 days in addition to standard of care. Primary endpoint: reduction in CRP. The study period was 21 July to 13 October 2020. FINDINGS: 106 patients were randomised and included in the analysis (51 C21, 55 placebo). There was no significant group difference in reduction of CRP, 81% and 78% in the C21 and placebo groups, respectively, with a treatment effect ratio of 0.85 [90% CI 0.57, 1.26]. In a secondary analysis in patients requiring supplemental oxygen at randomisation, CRP was reduced in the C21 group compared to placebo. At the end of the 7-day treatment, 37 (72.5%) and 30 (54.5%) of the patients did not require supplemental oxygen in the C21 and placebo group, respectively (OR 2.20 [90% CI 1.12, 4.41]). A post hoc analysis showed that at day 14, the proportion of patients not requiring supplemental oxygen was 98% and 80% in the C21 group compared to placebo (OR 12.5 [90% CI 2.9, 126]). Fewer patients required mechanical ventilation (one C21 patient; four placebo patients), and C21 was associated with a numerical reduction in the mortality rate (one vs three in the C21 and placebo group, respectively). Treatment with C21 was safe and well tolerated. INTERPRETATION: Among hospitalised patients with COVID-19 receiving C21 for 7 days there was no reduction in CRP compared to placebo. However, a post-hoc analysis indicated a marked reduction of requirement for oxygen at day 14. The day 14 results from this study justify further evaluation in a Phase 3 study and such a trial is currently underway. FUNDING: Vicore Pharma AB and LifeArc, UK.

Defining Potential Therapeutic Targets in Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of a Single-Center Cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Multiple mechanisms have been proposed to explain disease severity in coronavirus disease 2019. Therapeutic approaches need to be underpinned by sound biological rationale. We evaluated whether serum levels of a range of proposed coronavirus disease 2019 therapeutic targets discriminated between patients with mild or severe disease. DESIGN: A search of ClinicalTrials.gov identified coronavirus disease 2019 immunological drug targets. We subsequently conducted a retrospective observational cohort study investigating the association of serum biomarkers within the first 5 days of hospital admission relating to putative therapeutic biomarkers with illness severity and outcome. SETTING: University College London, a tertiary academic medical center in the United Kingdom. PATIENTS: Patients admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were recruited, 44 (51%) with mild disease and 42 (49%) with severe disease. We measured levels of 10 cytokines/signaling proteins related to the most common therapeutic targets (granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, interferon-α2a, interferon-ß, interferon-γ, interleukin-1ß, interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, interleukin-6, interleukin-7, interleukin-8, tumor necrosis factor-α), immunoglobulin G antibodies directed against either coronavirus disease 2019 spike protein or nucleocapsid protein, and neutralization titers of antibodies. Four-hundred seventy-seven randomized trials, including 168 different therapies against 83 different pathways, were identified. Six of the 10 markers (interleukin-6, interleukin-7, interleukin-8, interferon-α2a, interferon-ß, interleukin-1 receptor antagonist) discriminated between patients with mild and severe disease, although most were similar or only modestly raised above that seen in healthy volunteers. A similar proportion of patients with mild or severe disease had detectable spike protein or nucleocapsid protein immunoglobulin G antibodies with equivalent levels between groups. Neutralization titers were higher among patients with severe disease. CONCLUSIONS: Some therapeutic and prognostic biomarkers may be useful in identifying coronavirus disease 2019 patients who may benefit from specific immunomodulatory therapies, particularly interleukin-6. However, biomarker absolute values often did not discriminate between patients with mild and severe disease or death, implying that these immunomodulatory treatments may be of limited benefit.

Short durations of corticosteroids for hospitalised COVID-19 patients are associated with a high readmission rate.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe the characteristics of patients admitted, discharged and readmitted, due to COVID-19, to a central London acute-care hospital during the second peak, in particular in relation to corticosteroids use. METHODS: We reviewed patients admitted from the community to University College Hospital (UCH) with COVID-19 as their primary diagnosis between 1st-31st December 2020. Re-attendance and readmission data were collected for patients who re-presented within 10 days following discharge. Data were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: 196 patients were admitted from the community with a diagnosis of COVID-19 and discharged alive in December 2020. Corticosteroids were prescribed in hospital for a median of 5 days (IQR 3-8). 20 patients (10.2%) were readmitted within 10 days. 11/20 received corticosteroids in the first admission of which 10 had received 1-3 days of corticosteroids. Readmission rate in those receiving 1-3 days of corticosteroids was 25%. CONCLUSIONS: Most international guidelines have recommended providing up to 10 days of corticosteroids for severe COVID-19 but stopping on discharge. Our findings show shorter courses of corticosteroids during admission are associated with an increased risk of being readmitted and support continuing the course of corticosteroids after hospital discharge monitored in the virtual ward setting.

Excess deaths in people with cardiovascular diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) increase mortality risk from coronavirus infection (COVID-19). There are also concerns that the pandemic has affected supply and demand of acute cardiovascular care. We estimated excess mortality in specific CVDs, both 'direct', through infection, and 'indirect', through changes in healthcare. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used (i) national mortality data for England and Wales to investigate trends in non-COVID-19 and CVD excess deaths; (ii) routine data from hospitals in England (n = 2), Italy (n = 1), and China (n = 5) to assess indirect pandemic effects on referral, diagnosis, and treatment services for CVD; and (iii) population-based electronic health records from 3 862 012 individuals in England to investigate pre- and post-COVID-19 mortality for people with incident and prevalent CVD. We incorporated pre-COVID-19 risk (by age, sex, and comorbidities), estimated population COVID-19 prevalence, and estimated relative risk (RR) of mortality in those with CVD and COVID-19 compared with CVD and non-infected (RR: 1.2, 1.5, 2.0, and 3.0).Mortality data suggest indirect effects on CVD will be delayed rather than contemporaneous (peak RR 1.14). CVD service activity decreased by 60-100% compared with pre-pandemic levels in eight hospitals across China, Italy, and England. In China, activity remained below pre-COVID-19 levels for 2-3 months even after easing lockdown and is still reduced in Italy and England. For total CVD (incident and prevalent), at 10% COVID-19 prevalence, we estimated direct impact of 31 205 and 62 410 excess deaths in England (RR 1.5 and 2.0, respectively), and indirect effect of 49 932 to 99 865 deaths. CONCLUSION: Supply and demand for CVD services have dramatically reduced across countries with potential for substantial, but avoidable, excess mortality during and after the pandemic.

Prospective meta-analysis protocol on randomised trials of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors in patients with COVID-19: an initiative of the International Society of Hypertension.

INTRODUCTION: Whether ACE inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) therapy should be continued, initiated or ceased in patients with COVID-19 is uncertain. Given the widespread use of ACEi/ARBs worldwide, guidance on the use of these drugs is urgently needed. This prospective meta-analysis aims to pool data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the safety and efficacy of ACEi/ARB therapy in adults infected with SARS-CoV-2. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: RCTs will be eligible if they compare patients with COVID-19 randomised to ACEi/ARB continuation or commencement versuss no ACEi/ARB therapy; study duration ≥14 days; recruitment completed between March 2020 and May 2021. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality at ≤30 days. Secondary outcomes will include mechanical ventilation, admission to intensive care or cardiovascular events at short-term follow-up (≤30 days) and all-cause mortality at longer-term follow-up (>1 month). Prespecified subgroup analyses will assess the effect of sex; age; comorbidities; smoking status; ethnicity; country of origin on all-cause mortality. A search of ClinicalTrials.gov has been performed, which will be followed by a formal search of trial registers, preprint servers, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify RCTs that meet inclusion criteria. To date, a search of ClinicalTrials.gov identified 21 potentially eligible trials for this meta-analysis. We will request trial investigators/sponsors to contribute standardised grouped tabular outcome data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval and informed consent will be the responsibility of the individual RCTs. Dissemination of results will occur by peer-reviewed publication. The results of our analysis can inform public health policy and clinical decision making regarding ACEi/ARB use in patients with COVID-19 on a global scale.