Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 40
Filter
1.
Nephrol Dial Transplant ; 37(8): 1400-1410, 2022 07 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1730704

ABSTRACT

Patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases are at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The international rollout of COVID-19 vaccines has provided varying degrees of protection and enabled the understanding of vaccine efficacy and safety. The immune response to COVID-19 vaccines is lower in most patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases; either related to immunosuppression or comorbidities and complications caused by the underlying disease. Humoral vaccine response, measured by the presence of antibodies, is impaired or absent in patients receiving rituximab, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), higher doses of glucocorticoids and likely other immunosuppressants, such as cyclophosphamide. The timing between the use of these agents and administration of vaccines is associated with the level of immune response: with rituximab, vaccine response can only be expected once B cells start to recover and patients with transient discontinuation of MMF mount a humoral response more frequently. The emergence of new COVID-19 variants and waning of vaccine-induced immunity highlight the value of a booster dose and the need to develop mutant-proof vaccines. COVID-19 vaccines are safe, exhibiting a very low risk of de novo or relapsing immune-mediated kidney disease. Population-based studies will determine whether this is causal or coincidental. Such cases respond to standard management, including the use of immunosuppression. The Immunonephrology Working Group and European Vasculitis Society recommend that patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases follow national guidance on vaccination. Booster doses based on antibody measurements could be considered.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Kidney Diseases , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Humans , Kidney Diseases/drug therapy , Kidney Diseases/immunology , Mycophenolic Acid/therapeutic use , Rituximab/therapeutic use
2.
J Med Virol ; 94(3): 1085-1095, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1718373

ABSTRACT

Two messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna are being rolled out. Despite the high volume of emerging evidence regarding adverse events (AEs) associated with the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, previous studies have thus far been largely based on the comparison between vaccinated and unvaccinated control, possibly highlighting the AE risks with COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Comparing the safety profile of mRNA vaccinated individuals with otherwise vaccinated individuals would enable a more relevant assessment for the safety of mRNA vaccination. We designed a comparative safety study between 18 755 and 27 895 individuals who reported to VigiBase for adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with mRNA COVID-19 and influenza vaccines, respectively, from January 1, 2020, to January 17, 2021. We employed disproportionality analysis to rapidly detect relevant safety signals and compared comparative risks of a diverse span of AEFIs for the vaccines. The safety profile of novel mRNA vaccines was divergent from that of influenza vaccines. The overall pattern suggested that systematic reactions like chill, myalgia, fatigue were more noticeable with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, while injection site reactogenicity events were more prevalent with the influenza vaccine. Compared to the influenza vaccine, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines demonstrated a significantly higher risk for a few manageable cardiovascular complications, such as hypertensive crisis (adjusted reporting odds ratio [ROR], 12.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.47-65.54), and supraventricular tachycardia (adjusted ROR, 7.94; 95% CI, 2.62-24.00), but lower risk of neurological complications such as syncope, neuralgia, loss of consciousness, Guillain-Barre syndrome, gait disturbance, visual impairment, and dyskinesia. This study has not identified significant safety concerns regarding mRNA vaccination in real-world settings. The overall safety profile patterned a lower risk of serious AEFI following mRNA vaccines compared to influenza vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Humans , Influenza Vaccines/adverse effects , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Pharmacovigilance , RNA, Messenger/genetics , World Health Organization
3.
J Med Virol ; 94(6): 2402-2413, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1718416

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study is to provide a more accurate representation of COVID-19's case fatality rate (CFR) by performing meta-analyses by continents and income, and by comparing the result with pooled estimates. We used multiple worldwide data sources on COVID-19 for every country reporting COVID-19 cases. On the basis of data, we performed random and fixed meta-analyses for CFR of COVID-19 by continents and income according to each individual calendar date. CFR was estimated based on the different geographical regions and levels of income using three models: pooled estimates, fixed- and random-model. In Asia, all three types of CFR initially remained approximately between 2.0% and 3.0%. In the case of pooled estimates and the fixed model results, CFR increased to 4.0%, by then gradually decreasing, while in the case of random-model, CFR remained under 2.0%. Similarly, in Europe, initially, the two types of CFR peaked at 9.0% and 10.0%, respectively. The random-model results showed an increase near 5.0%. In high-income countries, pooled estimates and fixed-model showed gradually increasing trends with a final pooled estimates and random-model reached about 8.0% and 4.0%, respectively. In middle-income, the pooled estimates and fixed-model have gradually increased reaching up to 4.5%. in low-income countries, CFRs remained similar between 1.5% and 3.0%. Our study emphasizes that COVID-19 CFR is not a fixed or static value. Rather, it is a dynamic estimate that changes with time, population, socioeconomic factors, and the mitigatory efforts of individual countries.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Asia , COVID-19/epidemiology , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors
4.
Rev Med Virol ; : e2336, 2022 Feb 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1712178

ABSTRACT

The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis is to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of N95, surgical/medical and non-medical facemasks as personal protective equipment against respiratory virus infection. The study incorporated 35 published and unpublished randomized controlled trials and observational studies investigating specific mask effectiveness against influenza virus, SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and medRxiv databases for studies published up to 5 February 2021 (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020214729). The primary outcome of interest was the rate of respiratory viral infection. The quality of evidence was estimated using the GRADE approach. High compliance to mask-wearing conferred a significantly better protection (odds ratio [OR], 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.82) than low compliance. N95 or equivalent masks were the most effective in providing protection against coronavirus infections (OR, 0.30; CI, 0.20-0.44) consistently across subgroup analyses of causative viruses and clinical settings. Evidence supporting the use of medical or surgical masks against influenza or coronavirus infections (SARS, MERS and COVID-19) was weak. Our study confirmed that the use of facemasks provides protection against respiratory viral infections in general; however, the effectiveness may vary according to the type of facemask used. Our findings encourage the use of N95 respirators or their equivalents (e.g., P2) for best personal protection in healthcare settings until more evidence on surgical and medical masks is accrued. This study highlights a substantial lack of evidence on the comparative effectiveness of mask types in community settings.

5.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-317269

ABSTRACT

This non-randomized controlled study aimed to assess the efficacy of tofacitinib in reducing the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation or death in patients with COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 associated with reduced oxygen saturation, increased C-reactive protein (≥50 mg/L), and/or persisting fever were recruited. Tofacitinib was administered in addition to standard of care therapy. Study outcomes were evaluated separately in the groups of patients with oxygen saturation at rest ≤93% and >93%. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using Cox regression analysis adjusted for inverse propensity score weighting. Overall, 384 patients with COVID-19 (212 males;median age 60 years) were included in our study and were treated with tofactinib (n=131) or standard of care alone (n=253). The percentages of patients who started mechanical ventilation or died during hospitalization in the tofacitinib and control groups were 12.5% (9/72) vs. 14.1% (26/185) among patients who required respiratory support (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.33-2.56), and 1.7% (1/59) vs. 4.4% (3/68) in those with normal oxygen saturation (HR 0.83;95 CI 0.07-9.44). Tofacitinib did not reduce the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation or death in patients with COVID-19, although the analysis of these outcomes favored tofacitinib.

7.
J Med Virol ; 94(3): 1085-1095, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506221

ABSTRACT

Two messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna are being rolled out. Despite the high volume of emerging evidence regarding adverse events (AEs) associated with the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, previous studies have thus far been largely based on the comparison between vaccinated and unvaccinated control, possibly highlighting the AE risks with COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Comparing the safety profile of mRNA vaccinated individuals with otherwise vaccinated individuals would enable a more relevant assessment for the safety of mRNA vaccination. We designed a comparative safety study between 18 755 and 27 895 individuals who reported to VigiBase for adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with mRNA COVID-19 and influenza vaccines, respectively, from January 1, 2020, to January 17, 2021. We employed disproportionality analysis to rapidly detect relevant safety signals and compared comparative risks of a diverse span of AEFIs for the vaccines. The safety profile of novel mRNA vaccines was divergent from that of influenza vaccines. The overall pattern suggested that systematic reactions like chill, myalgia, fatigue were more noticeable with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, while injection site reactogenicity events were more prevalent with the influenza vaccine. Compared to the influenza vaccine, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines demonstrated a significantly higher risk for a few manageable cardiovascular complications, such as hypertensive crisis (adjusted reporting odds ratio [ROR], 12.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.47-65.54), and supraventricular tachycardia (adjusted ROR, 7.94; 95% CI, 2.62-24.00), but lower risk of neurological complications such as syncope, neuralgia, loss of consciousness, Guillain-Barre syndrome, gait disturbance, visual impairment, and dyskinesia. This study has not identified significant safety concerns regarding mRNA vaccination in real-world settings. The overall safety profile patterned a lower risk of serious AEFI following mRNA vaccines compared to influenza vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Humans , Influenza Vaccines/adverse effects , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Pharmacovigilance , RNA, Messenger/genetics , World Health Organization
8.
Clin Transl Sci ; 15(2): 501-513, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1494654

ABSTRACT

On October 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved remdesivir as the first drug for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), increasing remdesivir prescriptions worldwide. However, potential cardiovascular (CV) toxicities associated with remdesivir remain unknown. We aimed to characterize the CV adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with remdesivir using VigiBase, an individual case safety report database of the World Health Organization (WHO). Disproportionality analyses of CV-ADRs associated with remdesivir were performed using reported odds ratios and information components. We conducted in vitro experiments using cardiomyocytes derived from human pluripotent stem cell cardiomyocytes (hPSC-CMs) to confirm cardiotoxicity of remdesivir. To distinguish drug-induced CV-ADRs from COVID-19 effects, we restricted analyses to patients with COVID-19 and found that, after adjusting for multiple confounders, cardiac arrest (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-3.29), bradycardia (aOR: 2.09, 95% CI: 1.24-3.53), and hypotension (aOR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.03-2.73) were associated with remdesivir. In vitro data demonstrated that remdesivir reduced the cell viability of hPSC-CMs in time- and dose-dependent manners. Physicians should be aware of potential CV consequences following remdesivir use and implement adequate CV monitoring to maintain a tolerable safety margin.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , Cardiovascular Diseases/chemically induced , Pharmacovigilance , SARS-CoV-2 , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Alanine/adverse effects , Databases, Factual , Humans , Myocytes, Cardiac/drug effects , Retrospective Studies , World Health Organization
9.
Autoimmun Rev ; 20(12): 102986, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1491723

ABSTRACT

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic influenced the management of patients with anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis. A paucity of data exists on outcome of patients with vasculitis following COVID-19, but mortality is higher than in the general population and comparable to patients undergoing haemodialysis or kidney transplant recipients (reported mortality rates of 20-25%). Delays in diagnosis have been reported, which are associated with sequelae such as dialysis-dependency. Management of ANCA-associated vasculitis has not changed with the aim to suppress disease activity and reduce burden of disease. The use of rituximab, an important and widely used agent, is associated with a more severe hospital course of COVID-19 and absence of antibodies following severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2 infections, which prone patients to re-infection. Reports on vaccine antibody response are scarce at the moment, but preliminary findings point towards an impaired immune response, especially when patients receive rituximab as part of their treatment. Seropositivity was reported in less than 20% of patients when rituximab was administered within the prior six months, and the antibody response correlated with CD19+ B-cell repopulation. A delay in maintenance doses, if disease activity allows, has been suggested using a CD19+ B-cell guided strategy. Other immunosuppressive measures, which are used in ANCA-associated vasculitis, also impair humoral and cellular vaccine responses. Regular measurements of vaccine response or a healthcare-policy time-based strategy are indicated to provide additional doses ("booster") of COVID-19 vaccines. This review summarizes a recent educational forum and a recent virtual meeting of the European Vasculitis Society (EUVAS) focusing on COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis , COVID-19 , Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis/drug therapy , Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis/epidemiology , Antibodies, Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Pandemics , Rituximab , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 3(10): e698-e706, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1486372

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence on the association between autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases, therapies related to these diseases, and COVID-19 outcomes are inconsistent. We aimed to investigate the potential association between autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases and COVID-19 early in the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We did an exposure-driven, propensity score-matched study using a South Korean nationwide cohort linked to general health examination records. We analysed all South Korean patients aged older than 20 years who underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing between Jan 1 and May 30, 2020, and received general health examination results from the Korean National Health Insurance Service. We defined autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (inflammatory arthritis and connective tissue diseases) based on the relevant ICD-10 codes, with at least two claims (outpatient or inpatient) within 1 year. The outcomes were positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test, severe COVID-19 (requirement of oxygen therapy, intensive care unit admission, application of invasive ventilation, or death), and COVID-19-related death. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were estimated after adjusting for the potential confounders. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1 and May 30, 2020, 133 609 patients (70 050 [52·4%] female and 63 559 [47·6%] male) completed the general health examination and were tested for SARS-CoV-2; 4365 (3·3%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 8297 (6·2%) were diagnosed with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases. After matching, patients with an autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease showed an increased likelihood of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (adjusted OR 1·19, 95% CI 1·03-1·40; p=0·026), severe COVID-19 outcomes (1·26, 1·02-1·59; p=0·041), and COVID-19-related death (1·69, 1·01-2·84; p=0·046). Similar results were observed in patients with connective tissue disease and inflammatory arthritis. Treatment with any dose of systemic corticosteroids or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were not associated with COVID-19-related outcomes, but those receiving high dose (≥10 mg per day) of systemic corticosteroids had an increased likelihood of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test (adjusted OR 1·47, 95% CI 1·05-2·03; p=0·022), severe COVID-19 outcomes (1·76, 1·06-2·96; p=0·031), and COVID-19-related death (3·34, 1·23-8·90; p=0·017). INTERPRETATION: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases were associated with an increased likelihood of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test, worse clinical outcomes of COVID-19, and COVID-19-related deaths in South Korea. A high dose of systemic corticosteroid, but not DMARDs, showed an adverse effect on SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related clinical outcomes. FUNDING: National Research Foundation of Korea.

11.
Dtsch Med Wochenschr ; 146(19): 1277-1282, 2021 Oct.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1434175

ABSTRACT

HOW EFFECTIVE ARE THE APPROVED VACCINES IN KIDNEY DISEASES AND THOSE RECEIVING IMMUNOSUPPRESSION?: Several observational studies indicated that immunosuppression is associated with a weakened or absent humoral response. Patients with chronic kidney diseases or undergoing maintenance dialysis without immunosuppression have a reduced humoral response to COVID-19 vaccines. I HAD COVID-19. SHOULD I GET VACCINATED?: It is recommended to receive a booster after SARS-CoV-2 infection with a mRNA vaccine. IS A COVID-19 VACCINATION DESPITE ONGOING IMMUNOSUPPRESSION POSSIBLE?: Patients receiving immunosuppression have a reduced humoral response, and this is especially observed when anti-CD20 therapy is used. IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT THE VACCINE PROVOKES REJECTION OF MY TRANSPLANTED KIDNEY OR RELAPSE OF MY GLOMERULAR DISEASE?: Several reports were published in the last months highlighting new-onset diseases, recurrences and relapses of different glomerular diseases, which occurred after the receipt of the first or second vaccine dose. As a clear association of vaccines and induction of autoimmunity still needs to be established, most of these diseases are treatable, and COVID-19 in patients under immunosuppression is often fatal, there is a clear net benefit of vaccination. DO I HAVE A PERMANENT PROTECTION AFTER VACCINATION?: The antibody titers and likely the cellular immune response is significantly reduced in patients with kidney diseases, and titers are reducing at a fast pace under ongoing immunosuppression. A booster dose should be considered, especially taking into consideration the evolvement of virus variants and their impact on vaccine efficacy. AFTER THE FIRST SERIES OF VACCINATION, NO OR ONLY A MARGINAL AMOUNT OF ANTIBODIES WERE DETECTABLE. ARE THERE STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE VACCINE RESPONSE?: Many countries recommend the application of a third dose for vulnerable patient cohorts, especially because of a weakened response and their risk to develop a severe disease course of COVID-19. Prospective clinical trials are ongoing to test the ideal strategy to improve vaccine response in these cohorts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Immunosuppressive Agents , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/therapy , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use
12.
Int J Med Sci ; 18(15): 3395-3402, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1409696

ABSTRACT

Computed tomography (CT) of the chest is one of the main diagnositic tools for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. To document the chest CT findings in patients with confirmed COVID-19 and their association with the clinical severity, we searched related literatures through PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science (inception to May 4, 2020) and reviewed reference lists of previous systematic reviews. A total of 31 case reports (3768 patients) on CT findings of COVID-19 were included. The most common comorbid conditions were hypertension (18.4%) and diabetes mellitus (8.3%). The most common symptom was fever (78.7%), followed by cough (60.2%). It took an average of 5.6 days from symptom onset to admission. The most common chest CT finding was vascular enlargement (84.8%), followed by ground-glass opacity (GGO) (60.1%), air-bronchogram (47.8%), and consolidation (41.4%). Most lung lesions were located in the lung periphery (72.2%) and involved bilateral lung (76%). Most patients showed normal range of laboratory findings such as white blood cell count (96.4%) and lymphocyte (87.2%). Compared to previous published meta-analyses, our study is the first to summarize the different radiologic characteristics of chest CT in a total of 3768 COVID-19 patients by compiling case series studies. A comprehensive diagnostic approach should be adopted for patients with known COVID-19, suspected cases, and for exposed individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Radiography, Thoracic/methods , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , COVID-19/blood , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Lung Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Lymphocyte Count , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Prognosis
13.
Kidney Int Rep ; 6(9): 2292-2304, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1404736

ABSTRACT

The effects of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, particularly among those with chronic kidney disease (CKD), who commonly have defects in humoral and cellular immunity, and the efficacy of vaccinations against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) are uncertain. To inform public health and clinical practice, we synthesized published studies and preprints evaluating surrogate measures of immunity after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with CKD, including those receiving dialysis or with a kidney transplant. We found 35 studies (28 published, 7 preprints), with sample sizes ranging from 23 to 1140 participants and follow-up ranging from 1 week to 1 month after vaccination. Seventeen of these studies enrolled a control group. In the 22 studies of patients receiving dialysis, the development of antibodies was observed in 18% to 53% after 1 dose and in 70% to 96% after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine. In the 14 studies of transplant recipients, 3% to 59% mounted detectable humoral or cellular responses after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine. After vaccination, there were a few reported cases of relapse or de novo glomerulonephritis, and acute transplant rejection, suggesting a need for ongoing surveillance. Studies are needed to better evaluate the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in these populations. Rigorous surveillance is necessary for detection of long-term adverse effects in patients with autoimmune disease and transplant recipients. For transplant recipients and those with suboptimal immune responses, alternate vaccination platforms and strategies should be considered. As additional data arise, the NephJC COVID-19 page will continue to be updated (http://www.nephjc.com/news/covid-vaccine).

15.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 19(9): 1970-1972.e3, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1212376

ABSTRACT

Remdesivir has demonstrated clinical benefits in randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)1-4 and was first approved for COVID-19 patients.5 However, whether remdesivir causes gastrointestinal adverse drug reaction (GI-ADRs) including hepatotoxicity is less clear.1-4,6 Therefore, we aimed to detect a diverse spectrum of GI-ADRs associated with remdesivir using VigiBase, the World Health Organization's international pharmacovigilance database of individual case safety reports.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , COVID-19/drug therapy , Databases, Factual , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , Humans , Pharmacovigilance , SARS-CoV-2 , World Health Organization
16.
Br J Sports Med ; 56(16): 901-912, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1322785

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To determine the potential associations between physical activity and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, severe illness from COVID-19 and COVID-19 related death using a nationwide cohort from South Korea. METHODS: Data regarding 212 768 Korean adults (age ≥20 years), who tested for SARS-CoV-2, from 1 January 2020 to 30 May 2020, were obtained from the National Health Insurance Service of South Korea and further linked with the national general health examination from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019 to assess physical activity levels. SARS-CoV-2 positivity, severe COVID-19 illness and COVID-19 related death were the main outcomes. The observation period was between 1 January 2020 and 31 July 2020. RESULTS: Out of 76 395 participants who completed the general health examination and were tested for SARS-CoV-2, 2295 (3.0%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, 446 (0.58%) had severe illness from COVID-19 and 45 (0.059%) died from COVID-19. Adults who engaged in both aerobic and muscle strengthening activities according to the 2018 physical activity guidelines had a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (2.6% vs 3.1%; adjusted relative risk (aRR), 0.85; 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96), severe COVID-19 illness (0.35% vs 0.66%; aRR 0.42; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.91) and COVID-19 related death (0.02% vs 0.08%; aRR 0.24; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.99) than those who engaged in insufficient aerobic and muscle strengthening activities. Furthermore, the recommended range of metabolic equivalent task (MET; 500-1000 MET min/week) was associated with the maximum beneficial effect size for reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aRR 0.78; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.92), severe COVID-19 illness (aRR 0.62; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.90) and COVID-19 related death (aRR 0.17; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.98). Similar patterns of association were observed in different sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Adults who engaged in the recommended levels of physical activity were associated with a decreased likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection, severe COVID-19 illness and COVID-19 related death. Our findings suggest that engaging in physical activity has substantial public health value and demonstrates potential benefits to combat COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Cohort Studies , Exercise , Humans , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
17.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(6): e26368, 2021 06 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1278290

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of social big data is an important emerging concern in public health. Internet search volumes are useful data that can sensitively detect trends of the public's attention during a pandemic outbreak situation. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to analyze the public's interest in COVID-19 proliferation, identify the correlation between the proliferation of COVID-19 and interest in immunity and products that have been reported to confer an enhancement of immunity, and suggest measures for interventions that should be implemented from a health and medical point of view. METHODS: To assess the level of public interest in infectious diseases during the initial days of the COVID-19 outbreak, we extracted Google search data from January 20, 2020, onward and compared them to data from March 15, 2020, which was approximately 2 months after the COVID-19 outbreak began. In order to determine whether the public became interested in the immune system, we selected coronavirus, immune, and vitamin as our final search terms. RESULTS: The increase in the cumulative number of confirmed COVID-19 cases that occurred after January 20, 2020, had a strong positive correlation with the search volumes for the terms coronavirus (R=0.786; P<.001), immune (R=0.745; P<.001), and vitamin (R=0.778; P<.001), and the correlations between variables were all mutually statistically significant. Moreover, these correlations were confirmed on a country basis when we restricted our analyses to the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Korea. Our findings revealed that increases in search volumes for the terms coronavirus and immune preceded the actual occurrences of confirmed cases. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that during the initial phase of the COVID-19 crisis, the public's desire and actions of strengthening their own immune systems were enhanced. Further, in the early stage of a pandemic, social media platforms have a high potential for informing the public about potentially helpful measures to prevent the spread of an infectious disease and provide relevant information about immunity, thereby increasing the public's knowledge.


Subject(s)
Attention , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , Pandemics , Search Engine/trends , Social Media/trends , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Public Health/statistics & numerical data , Public Health/trends , Republic of Korea/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Search Engine/statistics & numerical data , Social Media/statistics & numerical data , United Kingdom/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology , Vitamins/immunology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL