6-month consequences of COVID-19 in patients discharged from hospital: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The long-term health consequences of COVID-19 remain largely unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the long-term health consequences of patients with COVID-19 who have been discharged from hospital and investigate the associated risk factors, in particular disease severity. METHODS: We did an ambidirectional cohort study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 who had been discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital (Wuhan, China) between Jan 7 and May 29, 2020. Patients who died before follow-up; patients for whom follow-up would be difficult because of psychotic disorders, dementia, or readmission to hospital; those who were unable to move freely due to concomitant osteoarthropathy or immobile before or after discharge due to diseases such as stroke or pulmonary embolism; those who declined to participate; those who could not be contacted; and those living outside of Wuhan or in nursing or welfare homes were all excluded. All patients were interviewed with a series of questionnaires for evaluation of symptoms and health-related quality of life, underwent physical examinations and a 6-min walking test, and received blood tests. A stratified sampling procedure was used to sample patients according to their highest seven-category scale during their hospital stay as 3, 4, and 5-6, to receive pulmonary function test, high resolution CT of the chest, and ultrasonography. Enrolled patients who had participated in the Lopinavir Trial for Suppression of SARS-CoV-2 in China received SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests. Multivariable adjusted linear or logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between disease severity and long-term health consequences. FINDINGS: In total, 1733 of 2469 discharged patients with COVID-19 were enrolled after 736 were excluded. Patients had a median age of 57·0 years (IQR 47·0-65·0) and 897 (52%) were male and 836 (48%) were female. The follow-up study was done from June 16 to Sept 3, 2020, and the median follow-up time after symptom onset was 186·0 days (175·0-199·0). Fatigue or muscle weakness (52%, 855 of 1654) and sleep difficulties (26%, 437 of 1655) were the most common symptoms. Anxiety or depression was reported among 23% (367 of 1616) of patients. The proportions of 6-min walking distance less than the lower limit of the normal range were 17% for those at severity scale 3, 13% for severity scale 4, and 28% for severity scale 5-6. The corresponding proportions of patients with diffusion impairment were 22% for severity scale 3, 29% for scale 4, and 56% for scale 5-6, and median CT scores were 3·0 (IQR 2·0-5·0) for severity scale 3, 4·0 (3·0-5·0) for scale 4, and 5·0 (4·0-6·0) for scale 5-6. After multivariable adjustment, patients showed an odds ratio (OR) of 1·61 (95% CI 0·80-3·25) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 4·60 (1·85-11·48) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for diffusion impairment; OR 0·88 (0·66-1·17) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and OR 1·76 (1·05-2·96) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for anxiety or depression, and OR 0·87 (0·68-1·11) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 2·75 (1·61-4·69) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for fatigue or muscle weakness. Of 94 patients with blood antibodies tested at follow-up, the seropositivity (96·2% vs 58·5%) and median titres (19·0 vs 10·0) of the neutralising antibodies were significantly lower compared with at the acute phase. 107 of 822 participants without acute kidney injury and with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 or more at acute phase had eGFR less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 at follow-up. INTERPRETATION: At 6 months after acute infection, COVID-19 survivors were mainly troubled with fatigue or muscle weakness, sleep difficulties, and anxiety or depression. Patients who were more severely ill during their hospital stay had more severe impaired pulmonary diffusion capacities and abnormal chest imaging manifestations, and are the main target population for intervention of long-term recovery. FUNDING: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, National Key Research and Development Program of China, Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, and Peking Union Medical College Foundation.

Identification of a novel coronavirus causing severe pneumonia in human: a descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Human infections with zoonotic coronaviruses (CoVs), including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV, have raised great public health concern globally. Here, we report a novel bat-origin CoV causing severe and fatal pneumonia in humans. METHODS: We collected clinical data and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimens from five patients with severe pneumonia from Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital, Hubei province, China. Nucleic acids of the BAL were extracted and subjected to next-generation sequencing. Virus isolation was carried out, and maximum-likelihood phylogenetic trees were constructed. RESULTS: Five patients hospitalized from December 18 to December 29, 2019 presented with fever, cough, and dyspnea accompanied by complications of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Chest radiography revealed diffuse opacities and consolidation. One of these patients died. Sequence results revealed the presence of a previously unknown ß-CoV strain in all five patients, with 99.8% to 99.9% nucleotide identities among the isolates. These isolates showed 79.0% nucleotide identity with the sequence of SARS-CoV (GenBank NC_004718) and 51.8% identity with the sequence of MERS-CoV (GenBank NC_019843). The virus is phylogenetically closest to a bat SARS-like CoV (SL-ZC45, GenBank MG772933) with 87.6% to 87.7% nucleotide identity, but is in a separate clade. Moreover, these viruses have a single intact open reading frame gene 8, as a further indicator of bat-origin CoVs. However, the amino acid sequence of the tentative receptor-binding domain resembles that of SARS-CoV, indicating that these viruses might use the same receptor. CONCLUSION: A novel bat-borne CoV was identified that is associated with severe and fatal respiratory disease in humans.

The Efficacy and Safety of Janus Kinase Inhibitors for Patients With COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cytokine storm observed in patients with severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) contributes to poor clinical outcomes and increased mortality. Janus kinases (JAKs) are important mediators in the cytokine storm. Therefore, we conduct a living systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature investigating efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors for patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Databases were searched up to December 1, 2021 for interventional and observational studies comparing JAK inhibitor treatment with concurrent control in patients with COVID-19. Efficacy and safety outcomes were evaluated by pooled risk ratio (RR). RESULTS: Of 3,170 records retrieved, 15 studies were eligible and 13 were evaluated in the meta-analysis (n = 3,977). Based on data from three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), baricitinib treatment significantly decreased mortality by day 28 in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.51-0.80) without increasing the incidence of adverse outcomes. In subgroup analysis, patients who required supplemental oxygen (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.41-0.95) or high-flow oxygen/non-invasive ventilation (RR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.42-0.85) at baseline benefited most. Pooled analysis of all eligible studies for JAK inhibitors (baricitinib, ruxolitinib, tofacitinib, and nezulcitinib) demonstrated a significant decrease in mortality (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.49-0.78) with no increase in the risk of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Baricitinib probably decreases mortality in hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19, especially for patients who required supplemental oxygen or high-flow oxygen/non-invasive ventilation at baseline. The efficacy and safety of other JAK inhibitors, such as ruxolitinib, tofacitinib, and nezulcitinib, await more evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021261414, identifier: CRD42021261414.

Association of acute kidney injury with 1-year outcome of kidney function in hospital survivors with COVID-19: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Kidney damage in COVID-19 patients has been of special concern. The association of acute kidney injury (AKI) with post-acute kidney function among COVID-19 survivors was not sufficiently elucidated. METHODS: An ambidirectional cohort study was conducted with enrollment of COVID-19 survivors discharged from hospital between Jan 7, and May 29, 2020. Study participants were invited to follow-up visits at 6 and 12 months after symptom onset. The primary outcome was percentage of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decreased from acute phase (between symptom onset and hospital discharge) to follow-up, and secondary outcome was reduced renal function at follow-up. FINDINGS: In total, 1,734 study participants were included in this study. Median follow-up duration was 342.0 days (IQR, 223.0-358.0) after symptom onset. After multivariable adjustment, percentage of eGFR decreased from acute phase to follow-up was 8.30% (95% CI, 5.99-10.61) higher among AKI participants than those without AKI at acute phase. Participants with AKI had an odds ratio (OR) of 4.60 (95% CI, 2.10-10.08) for reduced renal function at follow-up. The percentage of eGFR decreased for participants with AKI stage 1, stage 2, and stage 3 was 6.02% (95% CI, 3.48-8.57), 15.99% (95% CI, 10.77-21.22), and 17.79% (95% CI, 9.14-26.43) higher compared with those without AKI, respectively. INTERPRETATION: AKI at acute phase of COVID-19 was closely related to the longitudinal decline and post-acute status of kidney function at nearly one-year after symptom onset. Earlier and more intense follow-up strategies on kidney function management could be beneficial to COVID-19 survivors. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS 2020-I2M-CoV19-005, 2018-I2M-1-003, and 2020-I2M-2-013); National Natural Science Foundation of China (82041011); National Key Research and Development Program of China (2018YFC1200102); Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis (2020ZX09201001).

1-year outcomes in hospital survivors with COVID-19: a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The full range of long-term health consequences of COVID-19 in patients who are discharged from hospital is largely unclear. The aim of our study was to comprehensively compare consequences between 6 months and 12 months after symptom onset among hospital survivors with COVID-19. METHODS: We undertook an ambidirectional cohort study of COVID-19 survivors who had been discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital (Wuhan, China) between Jan 7 and May 29, 2020. At 6-month and 12-month follow-up visit, survivors were interviewed with questionnaires on symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and received a physical examination, a 6-min walking test, and laboratory tests. They were required to report their health-care use after discharge and work status at the 12-month visit. Survivors who had completed pulmonary function tests or had lung radiographic abnormality at 6 months were given the corresponding tests at 12 months. Non-COVID-19 participants (controls) matched for age, sex, and comorbidities were interviewed and completed questionnaires to assess prevalent symptoms and HRQoL. The primary outcomes were symptoms, modified British Medical Research Council (mMRC) score, HRQoL, and distance walked in 6 min (6MWD). Multivariable adjusted logistic regression models were used to evaluate the risk factors of 12-month outcomes. FINDINGS: 1276 COVID-19 survivors completed both visits. The median age of patients was 59·0 years (IQR 49·0-67·0) and 681 (53%) were men. The median follow-up time was 185·0 days (IQR 175·0-198·0) for the 6-month visit and 349·0 days (337·0-361·0) for the 12-month visit after symptom onset. The proportion of patients with at least one sequelae symptom decreased from 68% (831/1227) at 6 months to 49% (620/1272) at 12 months (p<0·0001). The proportion of patients with dyspnoea, characterised by mMRC score of 1 or more, slightly increased from 26% (313/1185) at 6-month visit to 30% (380/1271) at 12-month visit (p=0·014). Additionally, more patients had anxiety or depression at 12-month visit (26% [331/1271] at 12-month visit vs 23% [274/1187] at 6-month visit; p=0·015). No significant difference on 6MWD was observed between 6 months and 12 months. 88% (422/479) of patients who were employed before COVID-19 had returned to their original work at 12 months. Compared with men, women had an odds ratio of 1·43 (95% CI 1·04-1·96) for fatigue or muscle weakness, 2·00 (1·48-2·69) for anxiety or depression, and 2·97 (1·50-5·88) for diffusion impairment. Matched COVID-19 survivors at 12 months had more problems with mobility, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression, and had more prevalent symptoms than did controls. INTERPRETATION: Most COVID-19 survivors had a good physical and functional recovery during 1-year follow-up, and had returned to their original work and life. The health status in our cohort of COVID-19 survivors at 12 months was still lower than that in the control population. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the National Key Research and Development Program of China, Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, the China Evergrande Group, Jack Ma Foundation, Sino Biopharmaceutical, Ping An Insurance (Group), and New Sunshine Charity Foundation.

The Effect of Prior Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Treatment on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Susceptibility and Outcome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

There have been arguments on whether angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) treatment alters the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) susceptibility and disease severity. We identified a total of 102 eligible studies for systematic review, in which 49 studies adjusting for confounders were included in the meta-analysis. We found no association between prior ACEI/ARB use and risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the general population (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], .94-1.05). The risk of mortality (aOR, .87; 95% CI, .66-1.04) and severe outcomes (aOR, .95; 95% CI, .73-1.24) were also unchanged among COVID-19 patients taking ACEIs/ARBs. These findings remained consistent in subgroup analyses stratified by populations, drug exposures, and other secondary outcomes. This systematic review provides evidence-based support to current medical guidelines and position statements that ACEIs/ARBs should not be discontinued. Additionally, there has been no evidence for initiating ACEI/ARB regimen as prevention or treatment of COVID-19.

Antibody Responses and Clinical Outcomes in Adults Hospitalized With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Post hoc Analysis of LOTUS China Trial.

BACKGROUND: The characteristics of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) and antibody against major antigen proteins related to clinical outcomes in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients were still less known. METHODS: NAbs and antibodies targeting nucleocapsid (N), spike protein (S), and the receptor-binding domain (RBD) in longitudinal plasma samples from the LOTUS China trial were measured by microneutralization assay and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Viral load was determined by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). A total of 576 plasma and 576 throat swabs were collected from 191 COVID-19 patients. Antibody titers related to adverse outcome and clinical improvement were analyzed. Multivariable adjusted generalized linear mixed model for random effects were developed. RESULTS: After day 28 post symptoms onset, the rate of antibody positivity reached 100% for RBD-immunoglobulin M (IgM), 97.8% for S-IgM, 100% for N-immunoglobulin G (IgG), 100% for RBD-IgG, 91.1% for N-IgM, and 91.1% for NAbs. The NAbs titers increased over time in both survivors and nonsurvivors and correlated to IgG antibodies against N, S, and RBD, whereas its presence showed no statistical correlation with death. N-IgG (slope -2.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.04 to -1.18, P < .0001), S-IgG (slope -2.44, 95% CI -3.35 to -1.54, P < .0001), and RBD-IgG (slope -1.43, 95% CI -1.98 to -.88, P < .0001) were negatively correlated with viral load. S-IgG titers were lower in nonsurvivors than survivors (P = .020) at week 4 after symptoms onset. CONCLUSIONS: IgM and IgG against N, S, and RBD and NAbs developed in most severe COVID-19 patients and do not correlate clearly with clinical outcomes. The levels of IgG antibodies against N, S, and RBD were related to viral clearance.

Cross-reactive antibody against human coronavirus OC43 spike protein correlates with disease severity in COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study.

Seasonal human coronaviruses (HCoVs) including HCoV-229E, -OC43, -NL63, and -HKU1 widely spread in global human populations. However, the relevance of humoral response against seasonal HCoVs to COVID-19 pathogenesis is elusive. In this study, we profiled the temporal changes of IgG antibody against spike proteins (S-IgG) of SARS-CoV-2 and seasonal HCoVs in 838 plasma samples collected from 344 COVID-19 patients. We tested the antigenic cross-reactivities of S protein between SARS-CoV-2 and seasonal HCoVs and evaluated the correlations between the levels of HCoV-OC43 S-IgG and the disease severity in COVID-19 patients. We found that SARS-CoV-2 S-IgG titres mounted until days 22-28, whereas HCoV-OC43 antibody titres increased until days 15-21 and then plateaued until day 46. However, IgG titres against HCoV-NL63, -229E, and -HKU1 showed no significant increase. A two-way cross-reactivity was identified between SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV-OC43. Neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were not detectable in healthy controls who were positive for HCoV-OC43 S-IgG. HCoV-OC43 S-IgG titres were significantly higher in patients with severe disease than those in mild patients at days 1-21 post symptom onset (PSO). Higher levels of HCoV-OC43 S-IgG were also observed in patients requiring mechanical ventilation. At days 1-10 PSO, HCoV-OC43 S-IgG titres correlated to disease severity in the age group over 60. Our data indicate that there is a correlation between cross-reactive antibody against HCoV-OC43 spike protein and disease severity in COVID-19 patients.

6-month consequences of COVID-19 in patients discharged from hospital: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The long-term health consequences of COVID-19 remain largely unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the long-term health consequences of patients with COVID-19 who have been discharged from hospital and investigate the associated risk factors, in particular disease severity. METHODS: We did an ambidirectional cohort study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 who had been discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital (Wuhan, China) between Jan 7, 2020, and May 29, 2020. Patients who died before follow-up, patients for whom follow-up would be difficult because of psychotic disorders, dementia, or re-admission to hospital, those who were unable to move freely due to concomitant osteoarthropathy or immobile before or after discharge due to diseases such as stroke or pulmonary embolism, those who declined to participate, those who could not be contacted, and those living outside of Wuhan or in nursing or welfare homes were all excluded. All patients were interviewed with a series of questionnaires for evaluation of symptoms and health-related quality of life, underwent physical examinations and a 6-min walking test, and received blood tests. A stratified sampling procedure was used to sample patients according to their highest seven-category scale during their hospital stay as 3, 4, and 5-6, to receive pulmonary function test, high resolution CT of the chest, and ultrasonography. Enrolled patients who had participated in the Lopinavir Trial for Suppression of SARS-CoV-2 in China received severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody tests. Multivariable adjusted linear or logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between disease severity and long-term health consequences. FINDINGS: In total, 1733 of 2469 discharged patients with COVID-19 were enrolled after 736 were excluded. Patients had a median age of 57·0 (IQR 47·0-65·0) years and 897 (52%) were men. The follow-up study was done from June 16, to Sept 3, 2020, and the median follow-up time after symptom onset was 186·0 (175·0-199·0) days. Fatigue or muscle weakness (63%, 1038 of 1655) and sleep difficulties (26%, 437 of 1655) were the most common symptoms. Anxiety or depression was reported among 23% (367 of 1617) of patients. The proportions of median 6-min walking distance less than the lower limit of the normal range were 24% for those at severity scale 3, 22% for severity scale 4, and 29% for severity scale 5-6. The corresponding proportions of patients with diffusion impairment were 22% for severity scale 3, 29% for scale 4, and 56% for scale 5-6, and median CT scores were 3·0 (IQR 2·0-5·0) for severity scale 3, 4·0 (3·0-5·0) for scale 4, and 5·0 (4·0-6·0) for scale 5-6. After multivariable adjustment, patients showed an odds ratio (OR) 1·61 (95% CI 0·80-3·25) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 4·60 (1·85-11·48) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for diffusion impairment; OR 0·88 (0·66-1·17) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and OR 1·77 (1·05-2·97) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for anxiety or depression, and OR 0·74 (0·58-0·96) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 2·69 (1·46-4·96) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for fatigue or muscle weakness. Of 94 patients with blood antibodies tested at follow-up, the seropositivity (96·2% vs 58·5%) and median titres (19·0 vs 10·0) of the neutralising antibodies were significantly lower compared with at the acute phase. 107 of 822 participants without acute kidney injury and with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 or more at acute phase had eGFR less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m2 at follow-up. INTERPRETATION: At 6 months after acute infection, COVID-19 survivors were mainly troubled with fatigue or muscle weakness, sleep difficulties, and anxiety or depression. Patients who were more severely ill during their hospital stay had more severe impaired pulmonary diffusion capacities and abnormal chest imaging manifestations, and are the main target population for intervention of long-term recovery. FUNDING: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, National Key Research and Development Program of China, Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, and Peking Union Medical College Foundation.

Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: No specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2-10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir-ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656. FINDINGS: Between Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87-1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95-2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early. INTERPRETATION: In this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.

Low-to-moderate dose corticosteroids treatment in hospitalized adults with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Use of corticosteroids is common in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019, but clinical effectiveness is controversial. We aimed to investigate the association of corticosteroids therapy with clinical outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: In this single-centre, retrospective cohort study, adult patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 and dead or discharged between 29 December 2019 and 15 February 2020 were studied; 1:1 propensity score matchings were performed between patients with or without corticosteroid treatment. A multivariable COX proportional hazards model was used to estimate the association between corticosteroid treatment and in-hospital mortality by taking corticosteroids as a time-varying covariate. RESULTS: Among 646 patients, the in-hospital death rate was higher in 158 patients with corticosteroid administration (72/158, 45.6% vs. 56/488, 11.5%, p < 0.0001). After propensity score matching analysis, no significant differences were observed in in-hospital death between patients with and without corticosteroid treatment (47/124, 37.9% vs. 47/124, 37.9%, p 1.000). When patients received corticosteroids before they required nasal high-flow oxygen therapy or mechanical ventilation, the in-hospital death rate was lower than that in patients who were not administered corticosteroids (17/86, 19.8% vs. 26/86, 30.2%, log rank p 0.0102), whereas the time from admission to clinical improvement was longer (13 (IQR 10-17) days vs. 10 (IQR 8-13) days; p < 0.001). Using the Cox proportional hazards regression model accounting for time varying exposures in matched pairs, corticosteroid therapy was not associated with mortality difference (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93-1.03, p 0.4694). DISCUSSION: Corticosteroids use in COVID-19 patients may not be associated with in-hospital mortality.

Use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers in context of COVID-19 outbreak: a retrospective analysis.

The possible effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) on COVID-19 disease severity have generated considerable debate. We performed a single-center, retrospective analysis of hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China, who had definite clinical outcome (dead or discharged) by February 15, 2020. Patients on anti-hypertensive treatment with or without ACEI/ARB were compared on their clinical characteristics and outcomes. The medical records from 702 patients were screened. Among the 101 patients with a history of hypertension and taking at least one anti-hypertensive medication, 40 patients were receiving ACEI/ARB as part of their regimen, and 61 patients were on antihypertensive medication other than ACEI/ARB. We observed no statistically significant differences in percentages of in-hospital mortality (28% vs. 34%, P = 0.46), ICU admission (20% vs. 28%, P = 0.37) or invasive mechanical ventilation (18% vs. 26%, P = 0.31) between patients with or without ACEI/ARB treatment. Further multivariable adjustment of age and gender did not provide evidence for a significant association between ACEI/ARB treatment and severe COVID-19 outcomes. Our findings confirm the lack of an association between chronic receipt of renin-angiotensin system antagonists and severe outcomes of COVID-19. Patients should continue previous anti-hypertensive therapy until further evidence is available.