Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 32
Filter
1.
Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book ; 42: 1-13, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1879288

ABSTRACT

Patients with cancer generally have a higher risk of adverse outcomes from COVID-19, with higher age, male sex, poor performance status, cancer type, and uncontrolled malignant disease as the main risk factors. However, the influence of specific cancer therapies varies and raises concerns during the pandemic. In patients undergoing cancer immunotherapy or other immunosuppressive cancer treatments, we summarize the evidence on outcomes from COVID-19; address the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination; and review COVID-19 antiviral therapeutics for the patient with cancer. Despite higher mortality for patients with cancer, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors does not seem to increase mortality risk based on observational evidence. Inhibitory therapies directed toward B-cell lineages, including monoclonal antibodies against CD20 and CAR T-cell therapies, are associated with poor outcomes in COVID-19; however, the data are sparse. Regarding vaccination in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, clinical efficacy comparable to that in the general population can be expected. In patients undergoing B-cell-depleting therapy, immunogenicity and clinical efficacy are curtailed, but vaccination is not futile, which is thought to be due to the cellular response. Vaccine reactogenicity and toxicity in all groups of patients with cancer are comparable to that of the general population. Preexposure prophylaxis with monoclonal antibodies directed against the viral spike may provide passive immunity for those not likely to mount an adequate vaccine response. If infected, prompt treatment with monoclonal antibodies or oral small molecule antivirals is beneficial, though with oral antiviral therapies, care must be taken to avoid drug interactions in patients with cancer.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors , Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use , Immunotherapy , Neoplasms/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
2.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 6568, 2022 04 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1815592

ABSTRACT

Risk stratification for hospitalized adults with COVID-19 is essential to inform decisions about individual patients and allocation of resources. So far, risk models for severe COVID outcomes have included age but have not been optimized to best serve the needs of either older or younger adults. Models also need to be updated to reflect improvements in COVID-19 treatments. This retrospective study analyzed data from 6906 hospitalized adults with COVID-19 from a community health system across five states in the western United States. Risk models were developed to predict mechanical ventilation illness or death across one to 56 days of hospitalization, using clinical data available within the first hour after either admission with COVID-19 or a first positive SARS-CoV-2 test. For the seven-day interval, models for age ≥ 18 and < 50 years reached AUROC 0.81 (95% CI 0.71-0.91) and models for age ≥ 50 years reached AUROC 0.82 (95% CI 0.77-0.86). Models revealed differences in the statistical significance and relative predictive value of risk factors between older and younger patients including age, BMI, vital signs, and laboratory results. In addition, for hospitalized patients, sex and chronic comorbidities had lower predictive value than vital signs and laboratory results.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Feb 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1713630

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Most studies of solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with COVID-19 focus on outcomes within one month of illness onset. Delayed mortality in SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19 has not been fully examined. METHODS: We used data from a multicenter registry to calculate mortality by 90 days following initial SARS-CoV-2 detection in SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19 and developed multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models to compare risk factors for death by days 28 and 90. RESULTS: Vital status at day 90 was available for 936 of 1117 (84%) SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19: 190 of 936 (20%) died by 28 days and an additional 56 of 246 deaths (23%) occurred between days 29 and 90. Factors associated with mortality by day 90 included: age > 65 years [aHR 1.8 (1.3-2.4), p =<0.001], lung transplant (vs. non-lung transplant) [aHR 1.5 (1.0-2.3), p=0.05], heart failure [aHR 1.9 (1.2-2.9), p=0.006], chronic lung disease [aHR 2.3 (1.5-3.6), p<0.001] and body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m 2 [aHR 1.5 (1.1-2.0), p=0.02]. These associations were similar for mortality by day 28. Compared to diagnosis during early 2020 (March 1-June 19, 2020), diagnosis during late 2020 (June 20-December 31, 2020) was associated with lower mortality by day 28 [aHR 0.7 (0.5-1.0, p=0.04] but not by day 90 [aHR 0.9 (0.7-1.3), p=0.61]. CONCLUSIONS: In SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19, >20% of deaths occurred between 28 and 90 days following SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Future investigations should consider extending follow-up duration to 90 days for more complete mortality assessment.

4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(10): 1812-1820, 2022 05 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1707253

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The impact of remdesivir (RDV) on mortality rates in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is controversial, and the mortality effect in subgroups of baseline disease severity has been incompletely explored. The purpose of this study was to assess the association of RDV with mortality rates in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study we compared persons receiving RDV with those receiving best supportive care (BSC). Patients hospitalized between 28 February and 28 May 2020 with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were included with the development of COVID-19 pneumonia on chest radiography and hypoxia requiring supplemental oxygen or oxygen saturation ≤94% with room air. The primary outcome was overall survival, assessed with time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression and multivariable adjustment, including calendar time, baseline patient characteristics, corticosteroid use, and random effects for hospital. RESULTS: A total of 1138 patients were enrolled, including 286 who received RDV and 852 treated with BSC, 400 of whom received hydroxychloroquine. Corticosteroids were used in 20.4% of the cohort (12.6% in RDV and 23% in BSC). Comparing persons receiving RDV with those receiving BSC, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for death was 0.46 (.31-.69) in the univariate model (P < .001) and 0.60 (.40-.90) in the risk-adjusted model (P = .01). In the subgroup of persons with baseline use of low-flow oxygen, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for death in RDV compared with BSC was 0.63 (.39-1.00; P = .049). CONCLUSION: Treatment with RDV was associated with lower mortality rates than BSC. These findings remain the same in the subgroup with baseline use of low-flow oxygen.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , COVID-19/drug therapy , Humans , Oxygen , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Lancet Respir Med ; 10(4): 327-336, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1665591

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The oral, selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor baricitinib has shown efficacy in studies of hospitalised adults with COVID-19. COV-BARRIER (NCT04421027) was a multinational, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of baricitinib in patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of baricitinib plus standard of care in critically ill hospitalised adults with COVID-19 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. METHODS: This exploratory trial followed the study design of COV-BARRIER in a critically ill cohort not included in the main phase 3 trial. The study was conducted across 18 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, and the USA. Participants (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection on baseline invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were randomly assigned (1:1) to baricitinib (4 mg) or placebo once daily for up to 14 days in combination with standard of care. Participants, study staff, and investigators were masked to study group assignment. Prespecified endpoints included all-cause mortality through days 28 and 60, number of ventilator-free days, duration of hospitalisation, and time to recovery through day 28. The efficacy analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and the safety analysis was done in the safety population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04421027. FINDINGS: Between Dec 23, 2020, and April 10, 2021, 101 participants were enrolled into the exploratory trial and assigned to baricitinib (n=51) or placebo (n=50) plus standard of care. Standard of care included baseline systemic corticosteroid use in 87 (86%) participants. Treatment with baricitinib significantly reduced 28-day all-cause mortality compared with placebo (20 [39%] of 51 participants died in the baricitinib group vs 29 [58%] of 50 in the placebo group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·54 [95% CI 0·31-0·96]; p=0·030; 46% relative reduction; absolute risk reduction 19%). A significant reduction in 60-day mortality was also observed in the baricitinib group compared with the placebo group (23 [45%] events vs 31 [62%]; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·33-0·97]; p=0·027; 44% relative reduction; absolute risk reduction 17%). In every six baricitinib-treated participants, one additional death was prevented compared with placebo at days 28 and 60. The number of ventilator-free days did not differ significantly between treatment groups (mean 8·1 days [SD 10·2] in the baricitinib group vs 5·5 days [8·4] in the placebo group; p=0·21). The mean duration of hospitalisation in baricitinib-treated participants was not significantly shorter than in placebo-treated participants (23·7 days [SD 7·1] vs 26·1 days [3·9]; p=0·050). The rates of infections, blood clots, and adverse cardiovascular events were similar between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: In critically ill hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, treatment with baricitinib compared with placebo (in combination with standard of care, including corticosteroids) reduced mortality, which is consistent with the mortality reduction observed in less severely ill patients in the hospitalised primary COV-BARRIER study population. However, this was an exploratory trial with a relatively small sample size; therefore, further phase 3 trials are needed to confirm these findings. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Adolescent , Adult , Azetidines , COVID-19/drug therapy , Critical Illness , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Purines , Pyrazoles , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , Standard of Care , Sulfonamides , Treatment Outcome
6.
Open forum infectious diseases ; 8(Suppl 1):S77-S77, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1602523

ABSTRACT

Background T cells are central to the early identification and clearance of viral infections and support antibody generation by B cells, making them desirable for assessing the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccines. We combined 2 high-throughput immune profiling methods to create a quantitative picture of the SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response that is highly sensitive, durable, diagnostic, and discriminatory between natural infection and vaccination. Methods We deeply characterized 116 convalescent COVID-19 subjects by experimentally mapping CD8 and CD4 T-cell responses via antigen stimulation to 545 Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) class I and 284 class II viral peptides. We also performed T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire sequencing on 1815 samples from 1521 PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases and 3500 controls to identify shared public TCRs from SARS-CoV-2-associated CD8 and CD4 T cells. Combining these approaches with additional samples from vaccinated individuals, we characterized the response to natural infection as well as vaccination by separating responses to spike protein from other viral targets. Results We find that T-cell responses are often driven by a few immunodominant, HLA-restricted epitopes. As expected, the SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response peaks about 1-2 weeks after infection and is detectable at least several months after recovery. Applying these data, we trained a classifier to diagnose past SARS-CoV-2 infection based solely on TCR sequencing from blood samples and observed, at 99.8% specificity, high sensitivity soon after diagnosis (Day 3–7 = 85.1%;Day 8–14 = 94.8%) that persists after recovery (Day 29+/convalescent = 95.4%). Finally, by evaluating TCRs binding epitopes targeting all non-spike SARS-CoV-2 proteins, we were able to separate natural infection from vaccination with > 99% specificity. Conclusion TCR repertoire sequencing from whole blood reliably measures the adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 soon after viral antigenic exposure (before antibodies are typically detectable) as well as at later time points, and distinguishes post-infection vs. vaccine immune responses with high specificity. This approach to characterizing the cellular immune response has applications in clinical diagnostics as well as vaccine development and monitoring. Disclosures Thomas M. Snyder, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Rachel M. Gittelman, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Mark Klinger, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Damon H. May, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Edward J. Osborne, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Ruth Taniguchi, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) H. Jabran Zahid, PhD, Microsoft Research (Employee, Shareholder) Rebecca Elyanow, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Sudeb C. Dalai, MD, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Ian M. Kaplan, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Jennifer N. Dines, MD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Matthew T. Noakes, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder) Ravi Pandya, PhD, Microsoft Research (Employee, Shareholder) Lance Baldo, MD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Employee, Shareholder, Leadership Interest) James R. Heath, PhD, Merck (Research Grant or Support, Funding (from BARDA) for the ISB INCOV project, but had no role in planning the research or in writing the paper.) Joaquin Martinez-Lopez, MD, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Consultant) Jonathan M. Carlson, PhD, Microsoft Research (Employee, Shareholder) Harlan S. Robins, PhD, Adaptive Biotechnologies (Board Member, Employee, Shareholder)

7.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(12): 2193-2204, 2021 12 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1592626

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data on the characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients disaggregated by race/ethnicity remains limited. We evaluated the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients across racial/ethnic groups and assessed their associations with COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined 629 953 patients tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a large health system spanning California, Oregon, and Washington between March 1 and December 31, 2020. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were obtained from electronic health records. Odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 hospitalization, and in-hospital death were assessed with multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 570 298 patients with known race/ethnicity were tested for SARS-CoV-2, of whom 27.8% were non-White minorities: 54 645 individuals tested positive, with minorities representing 50.1%. Hispanics represented 34.3% of infections but only 13.4% of tests. Although generally younger than White patients, Hispanics had higher rates of diabetes but fewer other comorbidities. A total of 8536 patients were hospitalized and 1246 died, of whom 56.1% and 54.4% were non-White, respectively. Racial/ethnic distributions of outcomes across the health system tracked with state-level statistics. Increased odds of testing positive and hospitalization were associated with all minority races/ethnicities. Hispanic patients also exhibited increased morbidity, and Hispanic race/ethnicity was associated with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-1.70). CONCLUSION: Major healthcare disparities were evident, especially among Hispanics who tested positive at a higher rate, required excess hospitalization and mechanical ventilation, and had higher odds of in-hospital mortality despite younger age. Targeted, culturally responsive interventions and equitable vaccine development and distribution are needed to address the increased risk of poorer COVID-19 outcomes among minority populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Open forum infectious diseases ; 8(Suppl 1):S808-S809, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1564089

ABSTRACT

Background Interventions to reduce mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19 are a crucial unmet medical need. Baricitinib (BARI) is an oral, selective Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor with efficacy in hospitalized adults with COVID-19. Treatment with BARI 4-mg was evaluated in critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 with baseline need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Methods COV-BARRIER (NCT04421027) was a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and elevation of ≥ 1 serum inflammatory marker. In this newly completed substudy, enrolled participants (not previously reported) from 4 countries on IMV or ECMO at study entry were randomly assigned 1:1 to once-daily BARI 4-mg or placebo (PBO) for up to 14 days plus standard of care (SOC), which included baseline systemic corticosteroid use in 86% of patients. The prespecified exploratory endpoints included all-cause mortality and number of ventilator-free days (VFDs) through Day 28. Results Characteristics for 101 participants are shown in Table 1. Treatment with BARI significantly reduced all-cause mortality by Day 28 compared to PBO [39.2% vs 58.0%, respectively;hazard ratio (HR) = 0.54 (95%CI 0.31, 0.96), p=0.030, relative risk (RR) = 0.68 (95%CI 0.45, 1.02);Figure 1A]. One additional death was prevented for every six BARI-treated patients. Significant reduction in mortality was also observed by Day 60 [45.1% vs 62.0%;HR = 0.56 (95%CI 0.33, 0.97), p=0.027, RR = 0.73 (95%CI 0.50, 1.06);Figure 1B]. Patients treated with BARI showed a numerical reduction in the duration of IMV and duration of hospitalization vs PBO and more BARI treated patients recovered (Table 2). No new safety findings were observed (Table 2). Conclusion Treatment with BARI+SOC (corticosteroids) resulted in an absolute risk reduction in mortality of 19% at Day 28 and 17% at Day 60 in patients with COVID-19 who were on IMV or ECMO at enrollment. These results are consistent with the reduction in mortality observed in the less severely ill hospitalized patients in the primary COV-BARRIER study population. Disclosures E. Wesley Ely, MD, CDC (Grant/Research Support)Eli Lilly (Other Financial or Material Support, Unpaid consultant)NIH (Grant/Research Support)VA (Grant/Research Support) Athimalaipet V. Ramanan, FRCP, AbbVie (Consultant, Speaker’s Bureau)Eli Lilly and Company (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Speaker’s Bureau)Novartis (Consultant, Speaker’s Bureau)Pfizer (Consultant, Speaker’s Bureau)Roche (Consultant, Speaker’s Bureau)Sobi (Consultant, Speaker’s Bureau)UCB (Consultant, Speaker’s Bureau) Cynthia E. Kartman, RN BSN, Eli Lilly and Company (Employee, Shareholder) Stephanie de Bono, MD PhD, Eli Lilly and Company (Employee, Shareholder) Ran Liao, PhD, Eli Lilly and Company (Employee, Shareholder) Maria Lucia B Piruzeli, MD, Eli Lilly and Company (Employee, Shareholder) Sujatro Chakladar, PhD, Eli Lilly and Company (Employee, Shareholder) Vincent Marconi, MD, Bayer (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Eli Lilly (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Gilead Sciences (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)ViiV (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)

10.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(11): e4090-e4099, 2021 12 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1561046

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to significant reductions in transplantation, motivated in part by concerns of disproportionately more severe disease among solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. However, clinical features, outcomes, and predictors of mortality in SOT recipients are not well described. METHODS: We performed a multicenter cohort study of SOT recipients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Data were collected using standardized intake and 28-day follow-up electronic case report forms. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for the primary endpoint, 28-day mortality, among hospitalized patients. RESULTS: Four hundred eighty-two SOT recipients from >50 transplant centers were included: 318 (66%) kidney or kidney/pancreas, 73 (15.1%) liver, 57 (11.8%) heart, and 30 (6.2%) lung. Median age was 58 (interquartile range [IQR] 46-57), median time post-transplant was 5 years (IQR 2-10), 61% were male, and 92% had ≥1 underlying comorbidity. Among those hospitalized (376 [78%]), 117 (31%) required mechanical ventilation, and 77 (20.5%) died by 28 days after diagnosis. Specific underlying comorbidities (age >65 [adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-5.5, P < .001], congestive heart failure [aOR 3.2, 95% CI 1.4-7.0, P = .004], chronic lung disease [aOR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2-5.2, P = .018], obesity [aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.0-3.4, P = .039]) and presenting findings (lymphopenia [aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.5, P = .033], abnormal chest imaging [aOR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1-7.5, P = .027]) were independently associated with mortality. Multiple measures of immunosuppression intensity were not associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality among SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19 was 20.5%. Age and underlying comorbidities rather than immunosuppression intensity-related measures were major drivers of mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Organ Transplantation , Cohort Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , Transplant Recipients
11.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(12): 1407-1418, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1545515

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is an oral selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor with known anti-inflammatory properties. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of baricitinib in combination with standard of care for the treatment of hospitalised adults with COVID-19. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial, participants were enrolled from 101 centres across 12 countries in Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. Hospitalised adults with COVID-19 receiving standard of care were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive once-daily baricitinib (4 mg) or matched placebo for up to 14 days. Standard of care included systemic corticosteroids, such as dexamethasone, and antivirals, including remdesivir. The composite primary endpoint was the proportion who progressed to high-flow oxygen, non-invasive ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death by day 28, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. All-cause mortality by day 28 was a key secondary endpoint, and all-cause mortality by day 60 was an exploratory endpoint; both were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in the safety population defined as all randomly allocated participants who received at least one dose of study drug and who were not lost to follow-up before the first post-baseline visit. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04421027. FINDINGS: Between June 11, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 1525 participants were randomly assigned to the baricitinib group (n=764) or the placebo group (n=761). 1204 (79·3%) of 1518 participants with available data were receiving systemic corticosteroids at baseline, of whom 1099 (91·3%) were on dexamethasone; 287 (18·9%) participants were receiving remdesivir. Overall, 27·8% of participants receiving baricitinib and 30·5% receiving placebo progressed to meet the primary endpoint (odds ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·67 to 1·08], p=0·18), with an absolute risk difference of -2·7 percentage points (95% CI -7·3 to 1·9). The 28-day all-cause mortality was 8% (n=62) for baricitinib and 13% (n=100) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [95% CI 0·41-0·78]; nominal p=0·0018), a 38·2% relative reduction in mortality; one additional death was prevented per 20 baricitinib-treated participants. The 60-day all-cause mortality was 10% (n=79) for baricitinib and 15% (n=116) for placebo (HR 0·62 [95% CI 0·47-0·83]; p=0·0050). The frequencies of serious adverse events (110 [15%] of 750 in the baricitinib group vs 135 [18%] of 752 in the placebo group), serious infections (64 [9%] vs 74 [10%]), and venous thromboembolic events (20 [3%] vs 19 [3%]) were similar between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: Although there was no significant reduction in the frequency of disease progression overall, treatment with baricitinib in addition to standard of care (including dexamethasone) had a similar safety profile to that of standard of care alone, and was associated with reduced mortality in hospitalised adults with COVID-19. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company. TRANSLATIONS: For the French, Japanese, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.


Subject(s)
Azetidines/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Purines/therapeutic use , Pyrazoles/therapeutic use , Sulfonamides/therapeutic use , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adrenal Cortex Hormones , Adult , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents , Asia , COVID-19/drug therapy , Dexamethasone , Double-Blind Method , Europe , Humans , North America , SARS-CoV-2 , South America , Treatment Outcome
12.
[Unspecified Source]; 2020.
Preprint in English | [Unspecified Source] | ID: ppcovidwho-292804

ABSTRACT

T cells are involved in the early identification and clearance of viral infections and also support the development of antibodies by B cells. This central role for T cells makes them a desirable target for assessing the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here, we combined two high-throughput immune profiling methods to create a quantitative picture of the T-cell response to SARS-CoV-2. First, at the individual level, we deeply characterized 3 acutely infected and 58 recovered COVID-19 subjects by experimentally mapping their CD8 T-cell response through antigen stimulation to 545 Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) class I presented viral peptides (class II data in a forthcoming study). Then, at the population level, we performed T-cell repertoire sequencing on 1,015 samples (from 827 COVID-19 subjects) as well as 3,500 controls to identify shared "public" T-cell receptors (TCRs) associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection from both CD8 and CD4 T cells. Collectively, our data reveal that CD8 T-cell responses are often driven by a few immunodominant, HLA-restricted epitopes. As expected, the T-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 peaks about one to two weeks after infection and is detectable for several months after recovery. As an application of these data, we trained a classifier to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection based solely on TCR sequencing from blood samples, and observed, at 99.8% specificity, high early sensitivity soon after diagnosis (Day 3-7 = 83.8% [95% CI = 77.6-89.4];Day 8-14 = 92.4% [87.6-96.6]) as well as lasting sensitivity after recovery (Day 29+/convalescent = 96.7% [93.0-99.2]). These results demonstrate an approach to reliably assess the adaptive immune response both soon after viral antigenic exposure (before antibodies are typically detectable) as well as at later time points. This blood-based molecular approach to characterizing the cellular immune response has applications in vaccine development as well as clinical diagnostics and monitoring.

13.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0259902, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1523440

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with endothelial activation and coagulopathy, which may be related to pre-existing or infection-induced pro-thrombotic autoantibodies such as those targeting angiotensin II type I receptor (AT1R-Ab). METHODS: We compared prevalence and levels of AT1R-Ab in COVID-19 cases with mild or severe disease to age and sex matched negative controls utilizing multivariate logistic and quantile regression adjusted for comorbidities including hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease. RESULTS: There were trends toward increased prevalence (50% vs. 33%, p = 0.1) and level of AT1R-Ab (median 9.8 vs. 6.1 U/mL, p = 0.06) in all cases versus controls. When considered by COVID-19 disease severity, there was a trend toward increased prevalence of AT1R-Ab (55% vs. 31%, p = 0.07), as well as significantly higher AT1R-Ab levels (median 10.7 vs. 5.9 U/mL, p = 0.03) amongst individuals with mild COVID-19 versus matched controls. In contrast, the prevalence (42% vs. 37%, p = 0.9) and level (both medians 6.7 U/mL, p = 0.9) of AT1R-Ab amongst those with severe COVID-19 did not differ from matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support an association between COVID-19 and AT1R-Ab, emphasizing that vascular pathology may be present in individuals with mild COVID-19 as well as those with severe disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Graft Rejection , Humans , Kidney Transplantation , Male , Middle Aged , Receptor, Angiotensin, Type 1
14.
Am J Transplant ; 22(1): 279-288, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1405162

ABSTRACT

Mortality among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 has declined over the course of the pandemic. Mortality trends specifically in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) are unknown. Using data from a multicenter registry of SOTR hospitalized for COVID-19, we compared 28-day mortality between early 2020 (March 1, 2020-June 19, 2020) and late 2020 (June 20, 2020-December 31, 2020). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess comorbidity-adjusted mortality. Time period of diagnosis was available for 1435/1616 (88.8%) SOTR and 971/1435 (67.7%) were hospitalized: 571/753 (75.8%) in early 2020 and 402/682 (58.9%) in late 2020 (p < .001). Crude 28-day mortality decreased between the early and late periods (112/571 [19.6%] vs. 55/402 [13.7%]) and remained lower in the late period even after adjusting for baseline comorbidities (aOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.98, p = .016). Between the early and late periods, the use of corticosteroids (≥6 mg dexamethasone/day) and remdesivir increased (62/571 [10.9%] vs. 243/402 [61.5%], p < .001 and 50/571 [8.8%] vs. 213/402 [52.2%], p < .001, respectively), and the use of hydroxychloroquine and IL-6/IL-6 receptor inhibitor decreased (329/571 [60.0%] vs. 4/492 [1.0%], p < .001 and 73/571 [12.8%] vs. 5/402 [1.2%], p < .001, respectively). Mortality among SOTR hospitalized for COVID-19 declined between early and late 2020, consistent with trends reported in the general population. The mechanism(s) underlying improved survival require further study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Organ Transplantation , Humans , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Transplant Recipients
15.
Nat Biotechnol ; 40(1): 110-120, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1397879

ABSTRACT

A better understanding of the metabolic alterations in immune cells during severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may elucidate the wide diversity of clinical symptoms experienced by individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Here, we report the metabolic changes associated with the peripheral immune response of 198 individuals with COVID-19 through an integrated analysis of plasma metabolite and protein levels as well as single-cell multiomics analyses from serial blood draws collected during the first week after clinical diagnosis. We document the emergence of rare but metabolically dominant T cell subpopulations and find that increasing disease severity correlates with a bifurcation of monocytes into two metabolically distinct subsets. This integrated analysis reveals a robust interplay between plasma metabolites and cell-type-specific metabolic reprogramming networks that is associated with disease severity and could predict survival.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/immunology , Monocytes/metabolism , Single-Cell Analysis , T-Lymphocytes/metabolism , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/metabolism , Humans , Prognosis
17.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(10): 1812-1820, 2022 05 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1364780

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The impact of remdesivir (RDV) on mortality rates in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is controversial, and the mortality effect in subgroups of baseline disease severity has been incompletely explored. The purpose of this study was to assess the association of RDV with mortality rates in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study we compared persons receiving RDV with those receiving best supportive care (BSC). Patients hospitalized between 28 February and 28 May 2020 with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were included with the development of COVID-19 pneumonia on chest radiography and hypoxia requiring supplemental oxygen or oxygen saturation ≤94% with room air. The primary outcome was overall survival, assessed with time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression and multivariable adjustment, including calendar time, baseline patient characteristics, corticosteroid use, and random effects for hospital. RESULTS: A total of 1138 patients were enrolled, including 286 who received RDV and 852 treated with BSC, 400 of whom received hydroxychloroquine. Corticosteroids were used in 20.4% of the cohort (12.6% in RDV and 23% in BSC). Comparing persons receiving RDV with those receiving BSC, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for death was 0.46 (.31-.69) in the univariate model (P < .001) and 0.60 (.40-.90) in the risk-adjusted model (P = .01). In the subgroup of persons with baseline use of low-flow oxygen, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for death in RDV compared with BSC was 0.63 (.39-1.00; P = .049). CONCLUSION: Treatment with RDV was associated with lower mortality rates than BSC. These findings remain the same in the subgroup with baseline use of low-flow oxygen.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , COVID-19/drug therapy , Humans , Oxygen , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
18.
J Immunother Cancer ; 9(6)2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1266400

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2 is the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 has highly variable disease severity and a bimodal course characterized by acute respiratory viral infection followed by hyperinflammation in a subset of patients with severe disease. This immune dysregulation is characterized by lymphocytopenia, elevated levels of plasma cytokines and proliferative and exhausted T cells, among other dysfunctional cell types. Immunocompromised persons often fare worse in the context of acute respiratory infections, but preliminary data suggest this may not hold true for COVID-19. In this review, we explore the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection on mortality in four populations with distinct forms of immunocompromise: (1) persons with hematological malignancies (HM) and hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) recipients; (2) solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs); (3) persons with rheumatological diseases; and (4) persons living with HIV (PLWH). For each population, key immunological defects are described and how these relate to the immune dysregulation in COVID-19. Next, outcomes including mortality after SARS-CoV-2 infection are described for each population, giving comparisons to the general population of age-matched and comorbidity-matched controls. In these four populations, iatrogenic or disease-related immunosuppression is not clearly associated with poor prognosis in HM, HCT, SOTR, rheumatological diseases, or HIV. However, certain individual immunosuppressants or disease states may be associated with harmful or beneficial effects, including harm from severe CD4 lymphocytopenia in PLWH and possible benefit to the calcineurin inhibitor ciclosporin in SOTRs, or tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors in persons with rheumatic diseases. Lastly, insights gained from clinical and translational studies are explored as to the relevance for repurposing of immunosuppressive host-directed therapies for the treatment of hyperinflammation in COVID-19 in the general population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Drug Repositioning , Immunocompromised Host , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Immunotherapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Drug Repositioning/methods , Drug Repositioning/statistics & numerical data , HIV Infections/epidemiology , HIV Infections/immunology , Hematologic Neoplasms/epidemiology , Hematologic Neoplasms/therapy , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Immunocompromised Host/physiology , Immunotherapy/adverse effects , Immunotherapy/methods , Immunotherapy/statistics & numerical data , Mortality , Pandemics , Prognosis , Rheumatic Diseases/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Transplant Recipients/statistics & numerical data
19.
Am J Transplant ; 21(8): 2774-2784, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1234215

ABSTRACT

Lung transplant recipients (LTR) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may have higher mortality than non-lung solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR), but direct comparisons are limited. Risk factors for mortality specifically in LTR have not been explored. We performed a multicenter cohort study of adult SOTR with COVID-19 to compare mortality by 28 days between hospitalized LTR and non-lung SOTR. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess comorbidity-adjusted mortality among LTR vs. non-lung SOTR and to determine risk factors for death in LTR. Of 1,616 SOTR with COVID-19, 1,081 (66%) were hospitalized including 120/159 (75%) LTR and 961/1457 (66%) non-lung SOTR (p = .02). Mortality was higher among LTR compared to non-lung SOTR (24% vs. 16%, respectively, p = .032), and lung transplant was independently associated with death after adjusting for age and comorbidities (aOR 1.7, 95% CI 1.0-2.6, p = .04). Among LTR, chronic lung allograft dysfunction (aOR 3.3, 95% CI 1.0-11.3, p = .05) was the only independent risk factor for mortality and age >65 years, heart failure and obesity were not independently associated with death. Among SOTR hospitalized for COVID-19, LTR had higher mortality than non-lung SOTR. In LTR, chronic allograft dysfunction was independently associated with mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Organ Transplantation , Adult , Aged , Cohort Studies , Humans , Lung , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , Transplant Recipients
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL