Age Moderates the Effect of Obesity on Mortality Risk in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Nationwide Observational Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: A high body mass index (BMI) is associated with an unfavorable disease course in COVID-19, but not among those who require admission to the ICU. This has not been examined across different age groups. We examined whether age modifies the association between BMI and mortality among critically ill COVID-19 patients. DESIGN: An observational cohort study. SETTING: A nationwide registry analysis of critically ill patients with COVID-19 registered in the National Intensive Care Evaluation registry. PATIENTS: We included 15,701 critically ill patients with COVID-19 (10,768 males [68.6%] with median [interquartile range] age 64 yr [55-71 yr]), of whom 1,402 (8.9%) patients were less than 45 years. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the total sample and after adjustment for age, gender, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV, mechanical ventilation, and use of vasoactive drugs, we found that a BMI greater than or equal to 30 kg/m 2 does not affect hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [OR adj ] = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.90-1.06; p = 0.62). For patients less than 45 years old, but not for those greater than or equal to 45 years old, a BMI greater than or equal to 30 kg/m 2 was associated with a lower hospital mortality (OR adj = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.96; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: A higher BMI may be favorably associated with a lower mortality among those less than 45 years old. This is in line with the so-called "obesity paradox" that was established for other groups of critically ill patients in broad age ranges. Further research is needed to understand this favorable association in young critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Understanding the association between sleep, shift work and COVID-19 vaccine immune response efficacy: Protocol of the S-CORE study.

This protocol describes an innovative study to investigate the relationship between sleep, shift work and the immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2; coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) vaccination. As the COVID-19 pandemic is a global crisis with devastating health, social and economic impacts, there is a pressing need for effective vaccination programmes. Previous influenza and hepatitis vaccination studies suggest that lack of sleep can negatively alter immune responsiveness, while circadian misalignment most likely may also play an important role in the immune response to vaccination. Our present study will be the first to address this question in actual shift workers and in relation to COVID-19 vaccination. We hypothesise that the occurrence of recent night shifts and diminished sleep will negatively alter the immune response to vaccination in shift workers compared to dayworkers. We aim to recruit 50 shift workers and 50 dayworkers. Participants will receive an mRNA-based vaccination, through the Dutch vaccination programme. To assess immune responsiveness, blood will be drawn at baseline (before first vaccination), 10 days after first vaccination, the day prior to the second vaccination; and 28 days, 6 and 12 months after the second vaccination. Actigraphy and daily sleep e-diaries will be implemented for 7 days around each vaccination to assess sleep. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index will be used to monitor sleep in the long term. Optimising the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines is of outmost importance and results of this study could provide insights to develop sleep and circadian-based interventions to enhance vaccination immunity, and thereby improve global health.

Association between Clinical Frailty Scale score and hospital mortality in adult patients with COVID-19 (COMET): an international, multicentre, retrospective, observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the scarcity of resources has necessitated triage of critical care for patients with the disease. In patients aged 65 years and older, triage decisions are regularly based on degree of frailty measured by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). However, the CFS could also be useful in patients younger than 65 years. We aimed to examine the association between CFS score and hospital mortality and between CFS score and admission to intensive care in adult patients of all ages with COVID-19 across Europe. METHODS: This analysis was part of the COVID Medication (COMET) study, an international, multicentre, retrospective observational cohort study in 63 hospitals in 11 countries in Europe. Eligible patients were aged 18 years and older, had been admitted to hospital, and either tested positive by PCR for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or were judged to have a high clinical likelihood of having SARS-CoV-2 infection by the local COVID-19 expert team. CFS was used to assess level of frailty: fit (CFS1-3), mildly frail (CFS4-5), or frail (CFS6-9). The primary outcome was hospital mortality. The secondary outcome was admission to intensive care. Data were analysed using a multivariable binary logistic regression model adjusted for covariates (age, sex, number of drugs prescribed, and type of drug class as a proxy for comorbidities). FINDINGS: Between March 30 and July 15, 2020, 2434 patients (median age 68 years [IQR 55-77]; 1480 [61%] men, 954 [30%] women) had CFS scores available and were included in the analyses. In the total sample and in patients aged 65 years and older, frail patients and mildly frail patients had a significantly higher risk of hospital mortality than fit patients (total sample: CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 odds ratio [OR] 2·71 [95% CI 2·04-3·60], p<0·0001 and CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·54 [1·16-2·06], p=0·0030; age ≥65 years: CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 2·90 [2·12-3·97], p<0·0001 and CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·64 [1·20-2·25], p=0·0020). In patients younger than 65 years, an increased hospital mortality risk was only observed in frail patients (CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 2·22 [1·08-4·57], p=0·030; CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·08 [0·48-2·39], p=0·86). Frail patients had a higher incidence of admission to intensive care than fit patients (CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·54 [1·21-1·97], p=0·0010), whereas mildly frail patients had a lower incidence than fit patients (CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 0·71 [0·55-0·92], p=0·0090). Among patients younger than 65 years, frail patients had an increased incidence of admission to intensive care (CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 2·96 [1·98-4·43], p<0·0001), whereas mildly frail patients had no significant difference in incidence compared with fit patients (CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 0·93 [0·63-1·38], p=0·72). Among patients aged 65 years and older, frail patients had no significant difference in the incidence of admission to intensive care compared with fit patients (CFS6-9 vs CFS1-3 OR 1·27 [0·92-1·75], p=0·14), whereas mildly frail patients had a lower incidence than fit patients (CFS4-5 vs CFS1-3 OR 0·66 [0·47-0·93], p=0·018). INTERPRETATION: The results of this study suggest that CFS score is a suitable risk marker for hospital mortality in adult patients with COVID-19. However, treatment decisions based on the CFS in patients younger than 65 years should be made with caution. FUNDING: LOEY Foundation.

No association between use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers prior to hospital admission and clinical course of COVID-19 in the COvid MEdicaTion (COMET) study.

Since the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, also known as COVID-19, conflicting theories have circulated on the influence of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) on incidence and clinical course of COVID-19, but data are scarce. The COvid MEdicaTion (COMET) study is an observational, multinational study that focused on the clinical course of COVID-19 (i.e. hospital mortality and intensive care unit [ICU] admission), and included COVID-19 patients who were registered at the emergency department or admitted to clinical wards of 63 participating hospitals. Pharmacists, clinical pharmacologists or treating physicians collected data on medication prescribed prior to admission. The association between the medication and composite clinical endpoint, including mortality and ICU admission, was analysed by multivariable logistic regression models to adjust for potential confounders. A total of 4870 patients were enrolled. ACEi were used by 847 (17.4%) patients and ARB by 761 (15.6%) patients. No significant association was seen with ACEi and the composite endpoint (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79 to 1.12), mortality (OR 1.03; 95%CI 0.84 to 1.27) or ICU admission (OR 0.96; 95%CI 0.78 to 1.19) after adjustment for covariates. Similarly, no association was observed between ARB and the composite endpoint (OR 1.09; 95%CI 0.90 to 1.30), mortality (OR 1.12; OR 0.90 to 1.39) or ICU admission (OR 1.21; 95%CI 0.98 to 1.49). In conclusion, we found no evidence of a harmful or beneficial effect of ACEi or ARB use prior to hospital admission on ICU admission or hospital mortality.

COvid MEdicaTion (COMET) study: protocol for a cohort study.

Various theories about drugs such as ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in relation to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 are circulating in both mainstream media and medical literature. These are based on the fact that ACE2 facilitates SARS-CoV-2 cell invasion via binding of a viral spike protein to ACE2. However, the effect of ACE inhibitors, ARBs and other drugs on ACE2 is unclear and all theories are based on conflicting evidence mainly from animal studies. Therefore, clinical evidence is urgently needed. The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between use of these drugs on clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19. Patients will be included from several hospitals in Europe. Data will be collected in a user-friendly database (Digitalis) on an external server. Analyses will be adjusted for sex, age and presence of cardiovascular disease, hypertension and diabetes. These results will enable more rational choices for randomised controlled trials for preventive and therapeutic strategies in COVID-19.