Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 15 de 15
Filter
1.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 10(5): ofad205, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2326544

ABSTRACT

We performed a secondary analysis of the National Institutes of Health-sponsored Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT-2) randomized controlled trial and found that baricitinib was associated with a 50% reduction in secondary infections after controlling for baseline and postrandomization patient characteristics. This finding provides a novel mechanism of benefit for baricitinib and supports the safety profile of this immunomodulator for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019.

2.
Pract Lab Med ; 31: e00289, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2245828

ABSTRACT

Background: The 2019 novel coronavirus infectious disease (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in a surge of assays aimed at detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) - coronavirus (CoV) - 2 infection and prior exposure. Although both molecular and antigen testing have clearly defined uses, the utility of serology remains uncertain and is presently not recommended for assessing immunity. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, observational study evaluating four commercially available emergency use authorized laboratory-based COVID-19 serology assays (Assays A-D). Remnant samples from hospitalized, and non-hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patients, as well as vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals were collected and tested. Positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) were calculated. Antibody concentrations were compared across the platforms and populations. Results: A total of 588 remnant samples derived from 500 patients were tested. PPA at 5-12 weeks post-PCR positive results for Assays A-D was 98.3, 97.4, 99.2, and 95.8% respectively. NPA was 100% across all platforms. Mean antibody concentrations at 2-4 weeks post-PCR positive result were significantly higher in hospitalized versus non-hospitalized patients, respectively, for Assay A (131.8 [101.7] vs. 95.6 [100.3] AU/mL, P < 0.001), B (61.7 [62.4] vs. 38.1 [40.5] AU/mL, P < 0.001), and C (157.6 [105.3] vs. 133.3 [100.7] AU/mL, P < 0.001). For individuals receiving two vaccine doses mean antibody concentrations were respectively 169.6 (104.4), 27.3 (50.8), 189.6 (120.9), 21.19 (13.1) AU/mL for Assays A-D. Conclusions: Overall, PPA and NPA differed across the four assays. Assays A and C produced higher PPA and NPA and detected larger concentrations of antibodies following vaccination.

4.
Ann Intern Med ; 2022 Nov 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2145013

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 standard of care (SOC) evolved rapidly during 2020 and 2021, but its cumulative effect over time is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether recovery and mortality improved as SOC evolved, using data from ACTT (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial). DESIGN: ACTT is a series of phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated COVID-19 therapeutics from February 2020 through May 2021. ACTT-1 compared remdesivir plus SOC to placebo plus SOC, and in ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, remdesivir plus SOC was the control group. This post hoc analysis compared recovery and mortality between these comparable sequential cohorts of patients who received remdesivir plus SOC, adjusting for baseline characteristics with propensity score weighting. The analysis was repeated for participants in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4 who received remdesivir plus dexamethasone plus SOC. Trends in SOC that could explain outcome improvements were analyzed. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04280705 [ACTT-1], NCT04401579 [ACTT-2], NCT04492475 [ACTT-3], and NCT04640168 [ACTT-4]). SETTING: 94 hospitals in 10 countries (86% U.S. participants). PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: SOC. MEASUREMENTS: 28-day mortality and recovery. RESULTS: Although outcomes were better in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were close to 1 (HR for recovery, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.17]; HR for mortality, 0.90 [CI, 0.56 to 1.40]). Comparable patients were less likely to be intubated in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1 (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.53 to 0.97]), and hydroxychloroquine use decreased. Outcomes improved from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3 (HR for recovery, 1.43 [CI, 1.24 to 1.64]; HR for mortality, 0.45 [CI, 0.21 to 0.97]). Potential explanatory factors (SOC trends, case surges, and variant trends) were similar between ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, except for increased dexamethasone use (11% to 77%). Outcomes were similar in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4. Antibiotic use decreased gradually across all stages. LIMITATION: Unmeasured confounding. CONCLUSION: Changes in patient composition explained improved outcomes from ACTT-1 to ACTT-2 but not from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3, suggesting improved SOC. These results support excluding nonconcurrent controls from analysis of platform trials in rapidly changing therapeutic areas. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(1): e895-e897, 2022 Aug 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2008521

ABSTRACT

In a retrospective, cohort study at 4 medical centers with high coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination rates, we evaluated breakthrough severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Delta variant infections in vaccinated healthcare workers. Few work-related secondary cases were identified. Breakthrough cases were largely due to unmasked social activities outside of work.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cohort Studies , Health Personnel , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
7.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(9): 1194-1200, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1735156

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination effectiveness in healthcare personnel (HCP) has been established. However, questions remain regarding its performance in high-risk healthcare occupations and work locations. We describe the effect of a COVID-19 HCP vaccination campaign on SARS-CoV-2 infection by timing of vaccination, job type, and work location. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance, incidence of postvaccination COVID-19, hospitalization, and mortality among 16,156 faculty, students, and staff at a large academic medical center. Data were collected 8 weeks prior to the start of phase 1a vaccination of frontline employees and ended 11 weeks after campaign onset. RESULTS: The COVID-19 incidence rate among HCP at our institution decreased from 3.2% during the 8 weeks prior to the start of vaccinations to 0.38% by 4 weeks after campaign initiation. COVID-19 risk was reduced among individuals who received a single vaccination (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.68; P < .0001) and was further reduced with 2 doses of vaccine (HR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.32; P < .0001). By 2 weeks after the second dose, the observed case positivity rate was 0.04%. Among phase 1a HCP, we observed a lower risk of COVID-19 among physicians and a trend toward higher risk for respiratory therapists independent of vaccination status. Rates of infection were similar in a subgroup of nurses when examined by work location. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show the real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in HCP. Despite these encouraging results, unvaccinated HCP remain at an elevated risk of infection, highlighting the need for targeted outreach to combat vaccine hesitancy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , Academic Medical Centers , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Incidence , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/methods
8.
J Emerg Med ; 63(3): 332-338, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1670719

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: High rates of asymptomatic infections with COVID-19 have been reported. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe an asymptomatic COVID-19 testing protocol in a pediatric emergency department (ED). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of pediatric patients (younger than 18 years) who were tested for COVID-19 via the asymptomatic testing protocol at a single urban pediatric ED between May 2020 and January 2021. This included all pediatric patients undergoing admission, urgent procedures, and psychiatric facility placement. The primary outcome was the percentage of positive COVID-19 tests. COVID-19 testing was performed via real-time polymerase chain reaction RNA assay testing. County-level COVID-19 data were used to estimate local daily COVID-19 cases/100,000 individuals (from all ages). Data were described with simple descriptive statistics. RESULTS: There were 1459 children tested for COVID-19 under the asymptomatic protocol. Mean ± standard deviation age was 8.2 ± 5.8 years. Two tests were inconclusive and 29 (2.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-2.8%) were positive. Of the 29 positive cases, 14 (48%; 95% CI 29-67%) had abnormal vital signs or signs and symptoms of COVID-19, on retrospective review. A total of 15 truly asymptomatic infections were identified. On the days that asymptomatic cases were identified, the lowest average daily community rate was 7.67 cases/100,000 individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Asymptomatic COVID-19 positivity rates in the pediatric ED were low when the average daily community rate was fewer than 7.5 cases/100,000 individuals. In the current pandemic, ED clinicians should assess for signs and symptoms of COVID-19, even when children present to the ED with unrelated chief symptoms.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Child , Child, Preschool , Adolescent , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Retrospective Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital
9.
N Engl J Med ; 386(3): 220-229, 2022 01 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1632249

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Current therapies for recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection do not address the disrupted microbiome, which supports C. difficile spore germination into toxin-producing bacteria. SER-109 is an investigational microbiome therapeutic composed of purified Firmicutes spores for the treatment of recurrent C. difficile infection. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in which patients who had had three or more episodes of C. difficile infection (inclusive of the qualifying acute episode) received SER-109 or placebo (four capsules daily for 3 days) after standard-of-care antibiotic treatment. The primary efficacy objective was to show superiority of SER-109 as compared with placebo in reducing the risk of C. difficile infection recurrence up to 8 weeks after treatment. Diagnosis by toxin testing was performed at trial entry, and randomization was stratified according to age and antibiotic agent received. Analyses of safety, microbiome engraftment, and metabolites were also performed. RESULTS: Among the 281 patients screened, 182 were enrolled. The percentage of patients with recurrence of C. difficile infection was 12% in the SER-109 group and 40% in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.58; P<0.001 for a relative risk of <1.0; P<0.001 for a relative risk of <0.833). SER-109 led to less frequent recurrence than placebo in analyses stratified according to age stratum (relative risk, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.78] for patients <65 years of age and 0.36 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.72] for those ≥65 years) and antibiotic received (relative risk, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.22 to 0.79] with vancomycin and 0.09 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.63] with fidaxomicin). Most adverse events were mild to moderate and were gastrointestinal in nature, with similar numbers in the two groups. SER-109 dose species were detected as early as week 1 and were associated with bile-acid profiles that are known to inhibit C. difficile spore germination. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with symptom resolution of C. difficile infection after treatment with standard-of-care antibiotics, oral administration of SER-109 was superior to placebo in reducing the risk of recurrent infection. The observed safety profile of SER-109 was similar to that of placebo. (Funded by Seres Therapeutics; ECOSPOR III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03183128.).


Subject(s)
Clostridioides difficile , Clostridium Infections/therapy , Firmicutes , Aged , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Feces/microbiology , Female , Gastrointestinal Tract/microbiology , Humans , Intention to Treat Analysis , Male , Microbiota/drug effects , Middle Aged , Recurrence , Secondary Prevention , Spores, Bacterial
10.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(9): 1046-1052, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1368877

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe the pattern of transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during 2 nosocomial outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with regard to the possibility of airborne transmission. DESIGN: Contact investigations with active case finding were used to assess the pattern of spread from 2 COVID-19 index patients. SETTING: A community hospital and university medical center in the United States, in February and March, 2020, early in the COVID-19 pandemic. PATIENTS: Two index patients and 421 exposed healthcare workers. METHODS: Exposed healthcare workers (HCWs) were identified by analyzing the electronic medical record (EMR) and conducting active case finding in combination with structured interviews. Healthcare coworkers (HCWs) were tested for COVID-19 by obtaining oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal specimens, and RT-PCR testing was used to detect SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Two separate index patients were admitted in February and March 2020, without initial suspicion for COVID-19 and without contact or droplet precautions in place; both patients underwent several aerosol-generating procedures in this context. In total, 421 HCWs were exposed in total, and the results of the case contact investigations identified 8 secondary infections in HCWs. In all 8 cases, the HCWs had close contact with the index patients without sufficient personal protective equipment. Importantly, despite multiple aerosol-generating procedures, there was no evidence of airborne transmission. CONCLUSION: These observations suggest that, at least in a healthcare setting, most SARS-CoV-2 transmission is likely to take place during close contact with infected patients through respiratory droplets, rather than by long-distance airborne transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Crit Care Explor ; 3(7): e0474, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1313893

ABSTRACT

We sought to validate prognostic scores in coronavirus disease 2019 including National Early Warning Score, Modified Early Warning Score, and age-based modifications, and define their performance characteristics. DESIGN: We analyzed prospectively collected data from the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial. National Early Warning Score was collected daily during the trial, Modified Early Warning Score was calculated, and age applied to both scores. We assessed prognostic value for the end points of recovery, mechanical ventilation, and death for score at enrollment, average, and slope of score over the first 48 hours. SETTING: A multisite international inpatient trial. PATIENTS: A total of 1,062 adult nonpregnant inpatients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia. INTERVENTIONS: Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial 1 randomized participants to receive remdesivir or placebo. The prognostic value of predictive scores was evaluated in both groups separately to assess for differential performance in the setting of remdesivir treatment. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For mortality, baseline National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score were weakly to moderately prognostic (c-index, 0.60-0.68), and improved with addition of age (c-index, 0.66-0.74). For recovery, baseline National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score demonstrated somewhat better prognostic ability (c-index, 0.65-0.69); however, National Early Warning Score+age and Modified Early Warning Score+age further improved performance (c-index, 0.68-0.71). For deterioration, baseline National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score were weakly to moderately prognostic (c-index, 0.59-0.69) and improved with addition of age (c-index, 0.63-0.70). All prognostic performance improvements due to addition of age were significant (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial 1 cohort, National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score demonstrated moderate prognostic performance in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019, with improvement in predictive ability for National Early Warning Score+age and Modified Early Warning Score+age. Area under receiver operating curve for National Early Warning Score and Modified Early Warning Score improved in patients receiving remdesivir versus placebo early in the pandemic for recovery and mortality. Although these scores are simple and readily obtainable in myriad settings, in our data set, they were insufficiently predictive to completely replace clinical judgment in coronavirus disease 2019 and may serve best as an adjunct to triage, disposition, and resourcing decisions.

12.
PLoS One ; 16(6): e0253578, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1282305

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: There is little doubt that aerosols play a major role in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The significance of the presence and infectivity of this virus on environmental surfaces, especially in a hospital setting, remains less clear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to analyze surface swabs for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and infectivity, and to determine their suitability for sequence analysis. METHODS: Samples were collected during two waves of COVID-19 at the University of California, Davis Medical Center, in COVID-19 patient serving and staff congregation areas. qRT-PCR positive samples were investigated in Vero cell cultures for cytopathic effects and phylogenetically assessed by whole genome sequencing. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Improved cleaning and patient management practices between April and August 2020 were associated with a substantial reduction of SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR positivity (from 11% to 2%) in hospital surface samples. Even though we recovered near-complete genome sequences in some, none of the positive samples (11 of 224 total) caused cytopathic effects in cultured cells suggesting this nucleic acid was either not associated with intact virions, or they were present in insufficient numbers for infectivity. Phylogenetic analysis suggested that the SARS-CoV-2 genomes of the positive samples were derived from hospitalized patients. Genomic sequences isolated from qRT-PCR negative samples indicate a superior sensitivity of viral detection by sequencing. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the low likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 contamination on hospital surfaces contains infectious virus, disputing the importance of fomites in COVID-19 transmission. Ours is the first report on recovering near-complete SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences directly from environmental surface swabs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/genetics , Genome, Viral , Hospitals, Teaching , Phylogeny , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sequence Analysis, RNA , Animals , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Chlorocebus aethiops , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Vero Cells
13.
N Engl J Med ; 384(9): 795-807, 2021 03 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-972740

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with dysregulated inflammation. The effects of combination treatment with baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, plus remdesivir are not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating baricitinib plus remdesivir in hospitalized adults with Covid-19. All the patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (≤14 days) or placebo (control). The primary outcome was the time to recovery. The key secondary outcome was clinical status at day 15. RESULTS: A total of 1033 patients underwent randomization (with 515 assigned to combination treatment and 518 to control). Patients receiving baricitinib had a median time to recovery of 7 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 6 to 8), as compared with 8 days (95% CI, 7 to 9) with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P = 0.03), and a 30% higher odds of improvement in clinical status at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.6). Patients receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation at enrollment had a time to recovery of 10 days with combination treatment and 18 days with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.08). The 28-day mortality was 5.1% in the combination group and 7.8% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.09). Serious adverse events were less frequent in the combination group than in the control group (16.0% vs. 21.0%; difference, -5.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.8 to -0.3; P = 0.03), as were new infections (5.9% vs. 11.2%; difference, -5.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to -1.9; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib plus remdesivir was superior to remdesivir alone in reducing recovery time and accelerating improvement in clinical status among patients with Covid-19, notably among those receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation. The combination was associated with fewer serious adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04401579.).


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azetidines/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Purines/therapeutic use , Pyrazoles/therapeutic use , Sulfonamides/therapeutic use , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Alanine/adverse effects , Alanine/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Azetidines/adverse effects , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Double-Blind Method , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Janus Kinase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Janus Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Purines/adverse effects , Pyrazoles/adverse effects , Respiration, Artificial , Sulfonamides/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
14.
N Engl J Med ; 382(24): 2327-2336, 2020 06 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-47286

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir, a nucleotide analogue prodrug that inhibits viral RNA polymerases, has shown in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We provided remdesivir on a compassionate-use basis to patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the illness caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2. Patients were those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who had an oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or who were receiving oxygen support. Patients received a 10-day course of remdesivir, consisting of 200 mg administered intravenously on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for the remaining 9 days of treatment. This report is based on data from patients who received remdesivir during the period from January 25, 2020, through March 7, 2020, and have clinical data for at least 1 subsequent day. RESULTS: Of the 61 patients who received at least one dose of remdesivir, data from 8 could not be analyzed (including 7 patients with no post-treatment data and 1 with a dosing error). Of the 53 patients whose data were analyzed, 22 were in the United States, 22 in Europe or Canada, and 9 in Japan. At baseline, 30 patients (57%) were receiving mechanical ventilation and 4 (8%) were receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. During a median follow-up of 18 days, 36 patients (68%) had an improvement in oxygen-support class, including 17 of 30 patients (57%) receiving mechanical ventilation who were extubated. A total of 25 patients (47%) were discharged, and 7 patients (13%) died; mortality was 18% (6 of 34) among patients receiving invasive ventilation and 5% (1 of 19) among those not receiving invasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients hospitalized for severe Covid-19 who were treated with compassionate-use remdesivir, clinical improvement was observed in 36 of 53 patients (68%). Measurement of efficacy will require ongoing randomized, placebo-controlled trials of remdesivir therapy. (Funded by Gilead Sciences.).


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Compassionate Use Trials , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Administration, Intravenous , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Alanine/adverse effects , Alanine/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Canada , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Europe , Female , Humans , Japan , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Young Adult , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL