Effectiveness and Safety of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in HIV-Infected Patients-Real-World Study.

The development of COVID-19 vaccines has been a triumph of biomedical research. However, there are still challenges, including assessment of their immunogenicity in high-risk populations, including PLWH. In the present study, we enrolled 121 PLWH aged >18 years, that were vaccinated against COVID-19 in the Polish National Vaccination Program. Patients filled in questionnaires regarding the side effects of vaccination. Epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory data were collected. The efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines was evaluated with an ELISA that detects IgG antibodies using a recombinant S1 viral protein antigen. The interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) was applied to quantitate interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) to assess cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2. In total, 87 patients (71.9%) received mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2-76 (59.5%), mRNA-1273- 11 (9.1%)). A total of 34 patients (28.09%) were vaccinated with vector-based vaccines (ChAdOx Vaxzevria- 20 (16.52%), Ad26.COV2.S- 14 (11.6%)). A total of 95 (78.5%) of all vaccinated patients developed a protective level of IgG antibodies. Only eight PLWH (6.6%) did not develop cellular immune response. There were six patients (4.95%) that did not develop a cellular and humoral response. Analysis of variance proved that the best humoral and cellular response related to the administration of the mRNA-1273 vaccine. COVID-19 vaccines were found to be immunogenic and safe in PLWH. Vaccination with mRNA vaccines were related to better humoral and cellular responses.

Artificial intelligence guided HRCT assessment predicts the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia based on clinical parameters.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study was to compare the results of AI (artificial intelligence) analysis of the extent of pulmonary lesions on HRCT (high resolution computed tomography) images in COVID-19 pneumonia, with clinical data including laboratory markers of inflammation, to verify whether AI HRCT assessment can predict the clinical severity of COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: The analyzed group consisted of 388 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, with automatically analyzed HRCT parameters of volume: AIV (absolute inflammation), AGV (absolute ground glass), ACV (absolute consolidation), PIV (percentage inflammation), PGV (percentage ground glass), PCV (percentage consolidation). Clinical data included: age, sex, admission parameters: respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, CRP (C-reactive protein), IL6 (interleukin 6), IG - immature granulocytes, WBC (white blood count), neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, serum ferritin, LDH (lactate dehydrogenase), NIH (National Institute of Health) severity score; parameters of clinical course: in-hospital death, transfer to the ICU (intensive care unit), length of hospital stay. RESULTS: The highest correlation coefficients were found for PGV, PIV, with LDH (respectively 0.65, 0.64); PIV, PGV, with oxygen saturation (respectively - 0.53, -0.52); AIV, AGV, with CRP (respectively 0.48, 0.46); AGV, AIV, with ferritin (respectively 0.46, 0.45). Patients with critical pneumonia had significantly lower oxygen saturation, and higher levels of immune-inflammatory biomarkers on admission. The radiological parameters of lung involvement proved to be strong predictors of transfer to the ICU (in particular, PGV ≥ cut-off point 29% with Odds Ratio (OR): 7.53) and in-hospital death (in particular: AIV ≥ cut-off point 831 cm3 with OR: 4.31). CONCLUSIONS: Automatic analysis of HRCT images by AI may be a valuable method for predicting the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia. The radiological parameters of lung involvement correlate with laboratory markers of inflammation, and are strong predictors of transfer to the ICU and in-hospital death from COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Center for Research and Development CRACoV-HHS project, contract number SZPITALE-JEDNOIMIENNE/18/2020.

Sex-related patient-reported brain fog symptoms in non-hospitalised COVID-19 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies on the prognostic role of sex in post-COVID-associated brain fog have yielded divergent results. Moreover, limited evidence exists regarding the evolution of brain fog symptoms over time, especially in ambulatory patients and separately for women and men. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to assess brain fog symptoms in nonhospitalised patients with COVID-19, according to their sex. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We created a neuropsychological questionnaire including eight questions on the presence of brain fog symptoms in the following four time periods: before COVID-19, and 0-4, 4-12, and > 12 weeks post-infection. The validity and reliability of the questionnaire were assessed. In this cross-sectional study, questionnaires were filled out anonymously and retrospectively once only by patients or through a survey link posted online. Included were patients ≥ 18 years, with > 3 months since the SARS-CoV-2 infection onset confirmed by RT-PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab. RESULTS: The study included 303 patients (79.53% women, 47.52% medical personnel). Median time between COVID-19 onset and questionnaire completion was 208 (IQR 161-248) days. Women, compared to men, reported a higher prevalence of problems with writing, reading, and counting (< 4 weeks, OR 3.05, 95% CI: 1.38-6.72; 4-12 weeks, OR 2.51, 95% CI: 1.02-6.14; > 12 weeks, OR 3.74, 95% CI: 1.12-12.56) and thoughts communication (< 4 weeks, OR 2.53, 95% CI: 1.41-4.54; 4-12 weeks, OR 3.74, 95% CI: 1.93-7.24; > 12 weeks, OR 2.00, 95% CI: 1.01-3.99). The difference between the two sexes in answering questions in an understandable/unambiguous manner was statistically significant between four and 12 weeks after infection (OR 2.63, 95% CI: 1.36-5.10), while a sex difference in recalling new information was found below 12 weeks (OR 2.54, 95% CI: 1.44-4.48 and OR 2.43, 95% CI: 1.37-4.31 for < 4 and 4-12 weeks, respectively). No sex differences in reporting problems with multitasking, remembering information from the past, determining the current date, or field orientation were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Non-hospitalised women and men retrospectively report a different course of COVID-19-associated brain fog.

Factors associated with mortality in hospitalised, non-severe, older COVID-19 patients - the role of sarcopenia and frailty assessment.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has affected older persons the most. The propensity to have severe COVID-19 or die of the infection was especially prevalent among older subjects with multimorbidity, frailty and sarcopenia. The aim of our study was to check which of the simple clinical biomarkers, including the assessment of muscle and frailty, would associate with the survival and the length of hospital stay in older patients with COVID-19. An additional aim was to report the influence of chronic diseases, chronic medication use, and COVID-19 signs and symptoms on the aforementioned outcome measures. METHODS: The CRACoV study was a prospective single-center (University Hospital in Krakow, Krakow, Poland) observational study of clinical outcomes in symptomatic COVID-19 patients that required hospital treatment. We analysed data of persons aged ≥ 65 years. We assessed muscular parameters in accordance with EWGSOP2, frailty with the Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale. We used the data of the initial and 3-month assessment. Demographic characteristics, past medical history, and baseline laboratory values were gathered as a part of routine care. We calculated sex and age, and additionally number-of-diseases adjusted odds ratios of mortality associated with studied factors and betas of the relation with these factors and the length of hospital stay. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation, SD) age of 163 participants (44.8% women, 14.8% died) was 71.8 (5.6) years, age range 65-89 years. One score greater SARC-F was associated with 34% (p = 0.003) greater risk of death, and 16.8 h longer hospital stay (p = 0.01). One score greater Rockwood was associated with 86% (p = 0.002) greater risk of death, but was unrelated to the length of hospital stay. Hand grip strength and dynapenia were unrelated to mortality, but dynapenia was related to longer hospital stay. Probable sarcopenia was associated with 441% (p = 0.01) greater risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the patient assessment with SARC-F and the Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale may significantly improve the prediction of outcomes in older patients with COVID-19 and by extension might be of use in other acute severe infections. This, however, requires further research to confirm.

Comparison between COVID­19 outcomes in the first 3 waves of the pandemic: a reference hospital report.

INTRODUCTION: The course of consecutive COVID­19 waves was influenced by medical and organizational factors. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the outcomes of patients hospitalized for COVID­19 during the first 3 waves of the pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of medical records of all COVID­19 patients admitted to the University Hospital in Kraków, Poland, a designated COVID­19 hospital in Malopolska province, between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2021. The waves were defined as 1, 2, and 3, and covered the periods of March 2020 to July 2020, August 2020 to January 2021, and February 2021 to May 2021, respectively. Patients' characteristics and outcomes for waves 1 through 3 were compared. RESULTS: Data analyses included 5191 patients with COVID­19. We found differences in age (mean [SD], 60.2 [17.3] years vs 62.4 [16.8] years vs 61.9 [16.1] years, respectively, for waves 1, 2, and 3; P = 0.003), sex distribution (proportion of women, 51.4% vs 44.2% vs 43.6%; P = 0.003), as well as concentrations of inflammatory markers and oxygen saturation (the lowest and the highest for wave 1, respectively; P <0.001). Hospital death rates in subsequent waves were 10.4%, 19.8%, and 20.3% (P <0.001). Despite similarities in patients' characteristics, the length of hospital and intensive care unit stay was shorter for wave 3 than for wave 2. The risk factors for in­hospital death were: advanced age, male sex, cardiovascular or chronic kidney disease, higher C­reactive protein level, and hospitalization during the second or third wave. CONCLUSIONS: We identified differences in patients' clinical characteristics and outcomes between consecutive pandemic waves, which probably reflect changes in terms of COVID­19 isolation policy, hospitalization and treatment indications, and treatment strategies.

Chemerin as a Potential Marker of Resolution of Inflammation in COVID-19 Infection.

Chemerin is one of the specialized pro-resolving mediators that participate in the early phase of inflammation and contribute to the initiation of the pro-resolving response. There is a paucity of data regarding the time course of chemerin during acute infections. We aimed to evaluate the sequence of inflammatory responses in the acute COVID-19 phase throughout onset and resolution of inflammation. We evaluated changes in selected biomarkers in COVID-19 survivors on the 7-day and 28-day follow up. Chemerin was lower in patients with baseline moderate/severe disease at day 7 compared with asymptomatic patients and individuals with mild illness (7265 [5526-9448] vs. 8730 [6888-11,058] pg/mL; p = 0.03). Only in patients with moderate/severe disease, but not in those with mild symptoms, were chemerin concentrations decreased one week after infection onset compared with baseline (7265 [5526-9448] vs. 8866 [6383-10,690] pg/mL; p < 0.05) with a subsequent increase on the 28-day follow up (9313 [7353-11,033] pg/mL; p < 0.05). Resolution of inflammation in the group of moderate/severe SARS-CoV2 infection was associated with increasing serum concentrations of chemerin, contrary to pro-inflammatory cytokines and adipokines (pentraxin 3, TNFα, resistin, leptin). A similar pattern of angiopoietin-2 dynamics may suggest signs of enhanced vascularization as a consequence of acute SARS-CoV2 infection.

The Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies among HealthCare Workers in University Hospital in Krakow before the Era of Vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of occupational health is crucial to the safety of healthcare workers in the pandemic period. The aim of our study was the rating of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in connection with selected demographic, social, and organizational factors, as well as the identification of key elements determining the safety of HCWs and patients of the University Hospital in Krakow. METHODS: This was a non-interventional, uncontrolled, open, single-center, cross-sectional online survey on the preparedness for the COVID-19 epidemic and the seroprevalence of medical and non-medical HCWs and students. Serum specimens from 1221 persons were tested using an immunoassay analyzer based on the ECLIA technique for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies IgM + IgG. RESULTS: The total seroprevalence was 42.7%. In medical students it was 25.2%, while in physicians it was 43.4% and in nurses/midwives it was 48.1%. Of those who tested positive, 21.5% did not know their serological status. The use of personal protective equipment did not have any significant impact on the result of testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The risk of developing the disease was not influenced by sex, professional work experience, workplace, or intensity of contact with the patient. Among the studied elements, only care of COVID-19 patients significantly increased the risk. The protective factor was starting work between the waves of the epidemic (June-September 2020). CONCLUSIONS: PPE is only one element of infection prevention and control-without other components, such as hand hygiene, it can be dangerous and contribute to self-infection. It is also very important to test healthcare workers. Not being aware of the COVID-19 status of HCWs poses a threat to other staff members, as well as patients and the family and friends of the infected. Thus, extreme caution should be applied when employing respirators with exhalation valves during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies among HealthCare Workers in University Hospital in Krakow before the Era of Vaccination

Background: Knowledge of occupational health is crucial to the safety of healthcare workers in the pandemic period. The aim of our study was the rating of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in connection with selected demographic, social, and organizational factors, as well as the identification of key elements determining the safety of HCWs and patients of the University Hospital in Krakow. Methods: This was a non-interventional, uncontrolled, open, single-center, cross-sectional online survey on the preparedness for the COVID-19 epidemic and the seroprevalence of medical and non-medical HCWs and students. Serum specimens from 1221 persons were tested using an immunoassay analyzer based on the ECLIA technique for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies IgM + IgG. Results: The total seroprevalence was 42.7%. In medical students it was 25.2%, while in physicians it was 43.4% and in nurses/midwives it was 48.1%. Of those who tested positive, 21.5% did not know their serological status. The use of personal protective equipment did not have any significant impact on the result of testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The risk of developing the disease was not influenced by sex, professional work experience, workplace, or intensity of contact with the patient. Among the studied elements, only care of COVID-19 patients significantly increased the risk. The protective factor was starting work between the waves of the epidemic (June–September 2020). Conclusions: PPE is only one element of infection prevention and control-without other components, such as hand hygiene, it can be dangerous and contribute to self-infection. It is also very important to test healthcare workers. Not being aware of the COVID-19 status of HCWs poses a threat to other staff members, as well as patients and the family and friends of the infected. Thus, extreme caution should be applied when employing respirators with exhalation valves during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CRACoV-HHS: an interdisciplinary project for multi-specialist hospital and non-hospital care for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection as well hospital staff assessment for infection exposure.

The complex course of the COVID-19 and the distant complications of the SARS-CoV-2 infection still remain an unfaded challenge for modern medicine. The care of patients with the symptomatic course of COVID-19 exceeds the competence of a single specialty, often requiring a multispecialist approach. The CRACoV-HHS (CRAcow in CoVid pandemic - Home, Hospital and Staff) project has been developed by a team of scientists and clinicians with the aim of optimizing medical care at hospital and ambulatory settings and treatment of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The CRACoV project integrates 26 basic and clinical research from multiple medical disciplines, involving different populations infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus and exposed to infection. Between January 2021 and April 2022 we plan to recruit subjects among patients diagnosed and treated in the University Hospital in Cracow, the largest public hospital in Poland, i.e. 1) patients admitted to the hospital due to COVID-19 [main module: 'Hospital']; 2) patients with signs of infection who have been confirmed as having SARS-CoV-2 infection and have been referred to home isolation due to their mild course (module: 'Home isolation'); 3) patients with symptoms of infection and high exposure to SARS- CoV-2 who have a negative RT-PCR test result. In addition, survey in various professional groups of hospital employees, both medical and non-medical, and final-fifth year medical students (module: 'Staff') is planned. The project carries both scientific and practical dimension and is expected to develop a multidisciplinary model of care of COVID-19 patients as well as recommendations for the management of particular groups of patients including: asymptomatic patient or with mild symptoms of COVID-19; symptomatic patients requiring hospitalization due to more severe clinical course of disease and organ complications; patient requiring surgery; patient with diabetes; patient requiring psychological support; patient with undesirable consequences of pharmacological treatment.

Is treated hypertension associated with a lower 1-year mortality among older multimorbid residents of long-term care facilities?

INTRODUCTION: Long-term care facility (LTCF) residents are typically excluded from clinical trials due to multimorbidity, dementia, and frailty, so there are no clear evidence-based rules for treating arterial hypertension in this population. Moreover, the role of hypertension as mortality risk factor in LTCFs has not yet been clearly established. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to investigate whether treated hypertension is associated with lower mortality among older LTCF residents with multimorbidity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was performed in a group of 168 residents aged ≥ 65 years in three LTCFs. Initial assessment included blood pressure (BP) measurements and selected geriatric scales: MNA-SF, AMTS and ADL. Hypertension, comorbidities, pharmacotherapy, antihypertensive drugs and mortality during one-year follow-up were extracted from the medical records. The data was compared in groups: Survivors and Deceased. RESULTS: Survivors and Deceased revealed similar age, DBP, number of diseases, medications, and antihypertensive drugs. However, Deceased had significantly lower SBP (P <0.05) and presented significantly worse functional, nutritional and cognitive status than Survivors (P <0.001). Hypertension (P <0.001) and antihypertensive therapy (P <0.05) were significantly more frequent among Survivors. Significantly more of the hypertensive-treated than other multimorbid residents survived the follow-up (P <0.001). Logistic regression analysis showed that treated hypertension had a protective effect on mortality [OR = 0.11 (95% CI, 0.03-0.39); P <0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: One-year survival of LTCF residents with treated hypertension was significantly higher than the others. Appropriate antihypertensive therapy may be a protective factor against death in frail nursing home residents, even in short period of time.