Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
Biomedicines ; 10(5)2022 Apr 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1820168

ABSTRACT

Patients with severely impaired antibody responses represent a group at-risk in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic due to the lack of Spike-specific neutralizing antibodies. The main objective of this paper was to assess, by a longitudinal prospective study, COVID-19 infection and mortality rates, and disease severity in the first two years of the pandemic in a cohort of 471 Primary Antibody Defects adult patients. As secondary endpoints, we compared SARS-CoV-2 annual mortality rate to that observed over a 10-year follow-up in the same cohort, and we assessed the impact of interventions done in the second year, vaccination and anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies administration on the disease outcome. Forty-one and 84 patients were infected during the first and the second year, respectively. Despite a higher infection and reinfection rate, and a higher COVID-19-related mortality rate compared to the Italian population, the pandemic did not modify the annual mortality rate for any cause in our cohort compared to that registered over the last ten years in the same cohort. PADs patients who died from COVID-19 had an underlying end-stage lung disease. We showed a beneficial effect of MoAbs administration on the likelihood of hospitalization and development of severe disease. In conclusion, COVID-19 did not cause excess mortality in Severe Antibody Deficiencies.

2.
J Clin Immunol ; 2022 Apr 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1802997

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 manifestations range from asymptomatic to life-threatening infections. The outcome in different inborn errors of immunity (IEI) is still a matter of debate. In this retrospective study, we describe the experience of the of the Italian Primary Immunodeficiencies Network (IPINet). Sixteen reference centers for adult or pediatric IEI were involved. One hundred fourteen patients were enrolled including 35 pediatric and 79 adult patients. Median age was 32 years, and male-to-female ratio was 1.5:1. The most common IEI were 22q11.2 deletion syndrome in children (26%) and common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) in adults (65%). Ninety-one patients did not require hospital admission, and among these, 33 were asymptomatic. Hospitalization rate was 20.17%. Older age (p 0.004) and chronic lung disease (p 0.0008) represented risk factors for hospitalization. Hospitalized patients mainly included adults suffering from humoral immunodeficiencies requiring immunoglobulin replacement therapy and as expected had lower B cell counts compared to non-hospitalized patients. Infection fatality rate in the whole cohort was 3.5%. Seroconversion was observed is 86.6% of the patients evaluated and in 83.3% of CVID patients. 16.85% of the patients reported long-lasting COVID symptoms. All but one patient with prolonged symptoms were under IgRT. The fatality rate observed in IEI was slightly similar to the general population. The age of the patients who did not survive was lower compared to the general population, and the age stratified mortality in the 50-60 age range considerable exceeded the mortality from 50 to 60 age group of the Italian population (14.3 vs 0.6%; p < 0.0001). We hypothesize that this is due to the fact that comorbidities in IEI patients are very common and usually appear early in life.

3.
Front Immunol ; 13: 842643, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775676

ABSTRACT

Background: Severity and mortality of COVID-19 largely depends on the ability of the immune system to clear the virus. Among various comorbidities potentially impacting on this process, the weight and the consequences of an antibody deficiency have not yet been clarified. Methods: We used serum protein electrophoresis to screen for hypogammaglobulinemia in a cohort of consecutive adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, hospitalized in non-intensive care setting between December 2020 and January 2021. The disease severity, measured by a validated score and by the need for semi intensive (sICU) or intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and the 30-day mortality was compared between patients presenting hypogammaglobulinemia (HYPO) and without hypogammaglobulinemia (no-HYPO). Demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 specific treatment during the hospital stay, disease duration, complications and laboratory parameters were also evaluated in both groups. Results: We enrolled 374 patients, of which 39 represented the HYPO cohort (10.4%). In 10/39 the condition was previously neglected, while in the other 29/39 hematologic malignancies were common (61.5%); 2/39 were on regular immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT). Patients belonging to the HYPO group more frequently developed a severe COVID-19 and more often required sICU/ICU admission than no-HYPO patients. IgRT were administered in 8/39 during hospitalization; none of them died or needed sICU/ICU. Among HYPO cohort, we observed a significantly higher prevalence of neoplastic affections, of active oncologic treatment and bronchiectasis, together with higher prevalence of viral and bacterial superinfections, mechanical ventilation, convalescent plasma and SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies administration during hospital stay, and longer disease duration. Multivariate logistic regression analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression confirmed the impact of hypogammaglobulinemia on the COVID-19 severity and the probability of sICU/ICU admission. The analysis of the mortality rate in the whole cohort showed no significant difference between HYPO and no-HYPO. Conclusions: Hypogammaglobulinemia, regardless of its cause, in COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a non-intensive care setting was associated to a more severe disease course and more frequent admission to s-ICU/ICU, particularly in absence of IgRT. Our findings emphasize the add-value of routine serum protein electrophoresis evaluation in patients admitted with COVID-19 to support clinicians in patient care and to consider IgRT initiation during hospitalization.


Subject(s)
Agammaglobulinemia , COVID-19 , Adult , Blood Proteins , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
4.
J Infect Dis ; 225(5): 820-824, 2022 03 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1722476

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previous reports highlighted the efficacy of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against coronavirus disease 2019. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study on the clinical outcome and antiviral effects of mAbs added to standard of care therapy in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with primary antibody defects. RESULTS: Median time of SARS-CoV-2 quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) positivity was shorter in 8 patients treated with mAbs (22 days) than in 10 patients treated with standard of care therapy only (37 days, P=.026). Median time of SARS-CoV-2 qPCR positivity from mAb administration was 10 days. CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-CoV-2 mAbs treatment was effective and well tolerated in patients with primary antibody defects.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Common Variable Immunodeficiency , Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological , Humans , Prospective Studies , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Standard of Care
5.
Front Neurol ; 12: 794471, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1581261

ABSTRACT

Background: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mainly colonizes nasopharynx. In upper airways acute infections, e.g., the common cold, saline nasal irrigations have a significant efficacy in reducing symptoms. The present study aimed to test the efficacy of nasal lavages in upper airways symptoms of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: A series of consecutive adult subjects who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from December 2020 to February 2021 performed daily nasal lavages with saline solution (Lavonase®-Purling, Lugo di Romagna, Italy) for 12 days, starting on the day after the SARS-CoV-2 positive swab. A control group included a historical series of patients who were infected in February-March 2020 and who did not perform lavages. An ad hoc questionnaire regarding symptoms was administered to each subjects at base-line and 10 days after diagnosis (i.e., on the same day of the control swab) in both cases and controls. Results: A total of 140 subjects were enrolled. 68 participants in the treatment group and 72 in the control group were included. 90% of respondents declared the lavages were simple to use and 70% declared they were satisfied. Symptoms of blocked nose, runny nose, or sneezing decreased by an average of 24.7% after the treatment. Blocked nose and sneezing increased in the same period of time in the control group. Ears and eyes symptoms, anosmia/ageusia symptoms, and infection duration (10.53 days in the treatment group and 10.48 days in the control group) didn't vary significantly among the two groups. Conclusion: Nasal lavages resulted to significantly decrease nasal symptoms in newly diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 patients. These devices proved to be well-tolerated and easy to be used. Further studies on a larger number of subjects are needed in order to possibly confirm these preliminary results.

6.
J Clin Med ; 10(24)2021 Dec 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1572522

ABSTRACT

(1) Background: Data on different steroid compounds for the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) patients are still limited. The aim of this study was to compare COVID-19 patients admitted to non-intensive units and treated with methylprednisolone or dexamethasone. (2) Methods: This was a single-center retrospective study that included consecutive patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in medical wards during the second wave of the pandemic. Thirty-day mortality and the need for intensive or semi-intensive care were the main clinical outcomes analyzed in patients receiving methylprednisolone (60 mg/day) compared with dexamethasone (6 mg/day). Secondary outcomes included complication rates, length of hospital stay, and time to viral clearance. (3) Results: Two-hundred-forty-six patients were included in the analysis, 110 treated with dexamethasone and 136 with methylprednisolone. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups of patients regarding 30-day mortality (OR 1.35, CI95% 0.71-2.56, p = 0.351) and the need for intensive or semi-intensive care (OR 1.94, CI95% 0.81-4.66, p = 0.136). The complication rates, length of hospital stay, and time to viral clearance did not significantly differ between the two groups. (4) Conclusions: In patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in non-intensive units, the choice of different steroid compounds, such as dexamethasone or methylprednisolone, did not affect the main clinical outcomes.

7.
J Infect Dis ; 225(5): 820-824, 2022 03 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506650

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previous reports highlighted the efficacy of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against coronavirus disease 2019. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study on the clinical outcome and antiviral effects of mAbs added to standard of care therapy in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with primary antibody defects. RESULTS: Median time of SARS-CoV-2 quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) positivity was shorter in 8 patients treated with mAbs (22 days) than in 10 patients treated with standard of care therapy only (37 days, P=.026). Median time of SARS-CoV-2 qPCR positivity from mAb administration was 10 days. CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-CoV-2 mAbs treatment was effective and well tolerated in patients with primary antibody defects.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Common Variable Immunodeficiency , Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological , Humans , Prospective Studies , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Standard of Care
8.
Int J Clin Pract ; 75(12): e14829, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1402928

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to develop and validate the CoronaVirus-Disease-2019 (COVID-19) Questionnaire (COVID-Q), a novel symptom questionnaire specific for COVID-19 patients, to provide a comprehensive evaluation that may be helpful for physicians, and evaluate the questionnaire's performance in identifying subjects at higher risk of testing positive. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive non-hospitalised adults who underwent nasopharyngeal-throat swab for severe-acute-respiratory-syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection at Treviso Hospital in March 2020, were enrolled. Subjects were divided into positive (cases) and negative (controls). All subjects answered the COVID-Q. Patients not able to answer COVID-Q because of clinical conditions were excluded. Parallel Analysis and Principal Component Analysis identified items measuring the same dimension. The Item Response Theory (IRT)-based analyses evaluated the functioning of item categories, the presence of clusters of local dependence among items, item fit within the model and model fit to the data. RESULTS: Answers obtained from 230 cases (113 males; mean age 55 years, range 20-99) and 230 controls (61 males; mean age 46 years, range 21-89) were analysed. Six components were extracted with parallel analysis: asthenia, influenza-like symptoms, ear and nose symptoms, breathing issues, throat symptoms, and anosmia/ageusia. The final IRT models retained 27 items as significant for symptom assessment. The total questionnaire's score was significantly associated with positivity to the molecular test: subjects with multiple symptoms were more likely to be affected (P < .001). Older age, male gender presence of breathing issues and anosmia/ageusia were significantly related to positivity (P < .001). Comorbidities had not a significant association with the COVID-19 diagnosis. CONCLUSION: COVID-Q could be validated since the evaluated aspects were overall significantly related to infection. The application of the questionnaire to clinical practice may help to identify subjects who are likely to be affected by COVID-19 and address them to a nasopharyngeal swab in order to achieve an early diagnosis.


Subject(s)
Ageusia , COVID-19 , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
10.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 9(6)2021 Jun 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1282653

ABSTRACT

Primary antibody deficiencies (PADs) are the most common primary immunodeficiencies (PIDs). They can be divided into the following groups, depending on their immunological features: agammaglobulinemia; common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) isotype; hyper IgM isotype; light chain or functional deficiencies with normal B cell count; specific antibody deficiency with normal Ig concentrations and normal numbers of B cells and transient hypogammaglobulinemia of infancy. The role of vaccination in PADs is recognized as therapeutic, diagnostic and prognostic and may be used in patients with residual B-cell function to provide humoral immunity to specific infective agents. According to their content and mechanisms, vaccines are grouped as live attenuated, inactivated (conjugated, polysaccharide), mRNA or replication-deficient vector vaccines. Vaccination may be unsafe or less effective when using certain vaccines and in specific types of immunodeficiency. Inactivated vaccines can be administered in PAD patients even if they could not generate a protective response; live attenuated vaccines are not recommended in major antibody deficiencies. From December 2020, European Medicines Agency (EMA) approved vaccines against COVID-19 infection: according to ESID advises, those vaccinations are recommended in patients with PADs. No specific data are available on safety and efficacy in PAD patients.

11.
World Allergy Organ J ; 13(12): 100489, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-922159

ABSTRACT

During the ongoing pandemic of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) allergic patients need to continue their constant and proper treatment, including allergen-specific immunotherapy. These patients are expected to be at a higher risk for exacerbation of lung inflammation during viral infection. We investigated the putative interplay existing between allergen-specific immunotherapy and COVID-19 infection in a Hymenoptera venom-allergic population. We evaluated the frequency and severity of COVID-19 infection in a cohort of 211 subjects referring to our center for the regular administration of venom immunotherapy (VIT). Our result showed that the median age of our cohort is similar to the one that in our region has been associated with a high incidence of COVID-19 infection, increased hospitalization, and mortality rates. We reported only an isolated positivity of COVID-19 in the overall group; whereas none suffered from upper airway symptoms associated with COVID-19 (fever, cough, dyspnoea, sore throat, anosmia, and/or ageusia). Even though the demographic characteristics pose a substantial risk for such a population, we suggest that a regular administration of VIT may help in the development of an immunological milieu able to down modulate the Th1/Th17 environment that has been linked to inflammatory manifestations of COVID-19. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first description of the incidence of COVID-19 infection in Hymenoptera venom allergic patients treated with VIT, suggesting indirectly that venom immune tolerance-inducing treatment may be capable of reducing the aberrant inflammatory response induced by the virus in this specific population.

12.
Am J Hypertens ; 33(10): 944-948, 2020 10 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-574682

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The effect of chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the severity of COVID-19 infection is still unclear in patients with hypertension. We aimed to investigate the association between chronic use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and COVID-19-related outcomes in hypertensive patients. METHODS: A single-center study was conducted on 133 consecutive hypertensive subjects presenting to the emergency department with acute respiratory symptoms and/or fever who were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection between 9 and 31 March 2020. RESULTS: All patients were grouped according to their chronic antihypertensive medications (ACEIs, N = 40; ARBs, N = 42; not on RAAS inhibitors, N = 51). There was no statistical difference between ACEIs and ARBs groups in terms of hospital admission rate, oxygen therapy, and need for noninvasive ventilation. Patients chronically treated with RAAS inhibitors showed a significantly lower rate of admission to semi-intensive/intensive care units, when compared with the non-RAAS population (odds ratio (OR) 0.25, confidence interval (CI) 95% 0.09-0.66, P = 0.006). Similarly, the risk of mortality was lower in the former group, although not reaching statistical significance (OR 0.56, CI 95% 0.17-1.83, P = 0.341). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that chronic use of RAAS inhibitors does not negatively affect clinical course of COVID-19 in hypertensive patients. Further studies are needed to confirm this finding and determine whether RAAS inhibitors may have a protective effect on COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Hypertension/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Hypertension/drug therapy , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Retrospective Studies
14.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 8(6): 1894-1899.e2, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-46747

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A rapidly expanding pandemic of the new coronavirus has become the focus of global scientific attention. Data are lacking on the impact of the pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 on health-related quality of life among patients affected by primary antibody deficiencies (PADs). OBJECTIVE: To identify factors impacting the health-related-quality of life (HRQOL) among Italian patients affected by PADs switched to remote assistance at the time of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. METHODS: The quality of life was surveyed in 158 patients with PADs by the Common Variable Immune Deficiency Quality of Life questionnaire, a disease-specific tool, and by the 12-item General Health Questionnaire, a generic tool to assess the risk of anxiety/depression. Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic, we shifted all patients with PADs to home therapy, and activated remote visits. Questionnaires were sent by email 4 weeks later. Common Variable Immune Deficiency Quality of Life questionnaire and 12-item General Health Questionnaire data scores were compared with the same set of data from a survey done in 2017. RESULTS: Of 210 patients, 158 (75%) agreed to participate. The quality of life was worse in the group of patients who were at risk of anxiety/depression at the study time. HRQOL was similar in patients forced to shift from hospital-based to home-based immunoglobulin treatment and in patients who continued their usual home-based replacement. The risk of anxiety/depression is associated with pandemia caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and with patients' fragility, and not with related clinical conditions associated with common variable immune deficiencies. Anxiety about running out of medications is a major new issue. CONCLUSIONS: The coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic impacted HRQOL and the risk of anxiety/depression of patients with PADs. The remote assistance program was a useful possibility to limit personal contacts without influencing the HRQOL.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/psychology , Common Variable Immunodeficiency/psychology , Common Variable Immunodeficiency/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Depression/psychology , Immunoglobulins/administration & dosage , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Quality of Life/psychology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Home Infusion Therapy/psychology , Humans , Infusions, Subcutaneous , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Telemedicine , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL