Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 12(1): e049506, 2022 01 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1629401

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Existing UK prognostic models for patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 are limited by reliance on comorbidities, which are under-recorded in secondary care, and lack of imaging data among the candidate predictors. Our aims were to develop and externally validate novel prognostic models for adverse outcomes (death and intensive therapy unit (ITU) admission) in UK secondary care and externally validate the existing 4C score. DESIGN: Candidate predictors included demographic variables, symptoms, physiological measures, imaging and laboratory tests. Final models used logistic regression with stepwise selection. SETTING: Model development was performed in data from University Hospitals Birmingham (UHB). External validation was performed in the CovidCollab dataset. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with COVID-19 admitted to UHB January-August 2020 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Death and ITU admission within 28 days of admission. RESULTS: 1040 patients with COVID-19 were included in the derivation cohort; 288 (28%) died and 183 (18%) were admitted to ITU within 28 days of admission. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for mortality was 0.791 (95% CI 0.761 to 0.822) in UHB and 0.767 (95% CI 0.754 to 0.780) in CovidCollab; AUROC for ITU admission was 0.906 (95% CI 0.883 to 0.929) in UHB and 0.811 (95% CI 0.795 to 0.828) in CovidCollab. Models showed good calibration. Addition of comorbidities to candidate predictors did not improve model performance. AUROC for the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium 4C score in the UHB dataset was 0.753 (95% CI 0.720 to 0.785). CONCLUSIONS: The novel prognostic models showed good discrimination and calibration in derivation and external validation datasets, and performed at least as well as the existing 4C score using only routinely collected patient information. The models can be integrated into electronic medical records systems to calculate each individual patient's probability of death or ITU admission at the time of hospital admission. Implementation of the models and clinical utility should be evaluated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2 , Secondary Care
2.
Lancet Respir Med ; 2021 Dec 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1586183

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Dysregulated inflammation is associated with poor outcomes in COVID-19. We aimed to assess the efficacy of namilumab (a granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor inhibitor) and infliximab (a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor) in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, to prioritise agents for phase 3 trials. METHODS: In this randomised, multicentre, multi-arm, multistage, parallel-group, open-label, adaptive, phase 2, proof-of-concept trial (CATALYST), we recruited patients (aged ≥16 years) admitted to hospital with COVID-19 pneumonia and C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations of 40 mg/L or greater, at nine hospitals in the UK. Participants were randomly assigned with equal probability to usual care or usual care plus a single intravenous dose of namilumab (150 mg) or infliximab (5 mg/kg). Randomisation was stratified by care location within the hospital (ward vs intensive care unit [ICU]). Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was improvement in inflammation, measured by CRP concentration over time, analysed using Bayesian multilevel models. This trial is now complete and is registered with ISRCTN, 40580903. FINDINGS: Between June 15, 2020, and Feb 18, 2021, we screened 299 patients and 146 were enrolled and randomly assigned to usual care (n=54), namilumab (n=57), or infliximab (n=35). For the primary outcome, 45 patients in the usual care group were compared with 52 in the namilumab group, and 29 in the usual care group were compared with 28 in the infliximab group. The probabilities that the interventions were superior to usual care alone in reducing CRP concentration over time were 97% for namilumab and 15% for infliximab; the point estimates for treatment-time interactions were -0·09 (95% CI -0·19 to 0·00) for namilumab and 0·06 (-0·05 to 0·17) for infliximab. 134 adverse events occurred in 30 (55%) of 55 patients in the namilumab group compared with 145 in 29 (54%) of 54 in the usual care group. 102 adverse events occurred in 20 (69%) of 29 patients in the infliximab group compared with 112 in 17 (50%) of 34 in the usual care group. Death occurred in six (11%) patients in the namilumab group compared with ten (19%) in the usual care group, and in four (14%) in the infliximab group compared with five (15%) in the usual care group. INTERPRETATION: Namilumab, but not infliximab, showed proof-of-concept evidence for reduction in inflammation-as measured by CRP concentration-in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Namilumab should be prioritised for further investigation in COVID-19. FUNDING: Medical Research Council.

3.
Preprint | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-296652

ABSTRACT

Background: There are currently no effective pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for Long-COVID. To identify potential therapeutic targets, we focussed on previously described four recovery clusters five months after hospital discharge, their underlying inflammatory profiles and relationship with clinical outcomes at one year. Methods PHOSP-COVID is a prospective longitudinal cohort study, recruiting adults hospitalised with COVID-19 across the UK. Recovery was assessed using patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs), physical performance, and organ function at five-months and one-year after hospital discharge. Hierarchical logistic regression modelling was performed for patient-perceived recovery at one-year. Cluster analysis was performed using clustering large applications (CLARA) k-medoids approach using clinical outcomes at five-months. Inflammatory protein profiling from plasma at the five-month visit was performed. Findings 2320 participants have been assessed at five months after discharge and 807 participants have completed both five-month and one-year visits. Of these, 35.6% were female, mean age 58.7 (SD 12.5) years, and 27.8% received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The proportion of patients reporting full recovery was unchanged between five months 501/165 (25.6%) and one year 232/804 (28.9%). Factors associated with being less likely to report full recovery at one year were: female sex OR 0.68 (95% CI 0.46-0.99), obesity OR 0.50 (95%CI 0.34-0.74) and IMV OR 0.42 (95%CI 0.23-0.76). Cluster analysis (n=1636) corroborated the previously reported four clusters: very severe, severe, moderate/cognitive, mild relating to the severity of physical, mental health and cognitive impairments at five months in a larger sample. There was elevation of inflammatory mediators of tissue damage and repair in both the very severe and the moderate/cognitive clusters compared to the mild cluster including interleukin-6 which was elevated in both comparisons. Overall, there was a substantial deficit in median (IQR) EQ5D-5L utility index from pre-COVID (retrospective assessment) 0.88 (0.74-1.00), five months 0.74 (0.60-0.88) to one year: 0.74 (0.59-0.88), with minimal improvements across all outcome measures at one-year after discharge in the whole cohort and within each of the four clusters. Interpretation The sequelae of a hospital admission with COVID-19 remain substantial one year after discharge across a range of health domains with the minority in our cohort feeling fully recovered. Patient perceived health-related quality of life remains reduced at one year compared to pre-hospital admission. Systematic inflammation and obesity are potential treatable traits that warrant further investigation in clinical trials.

4.
BMJ Open ; 11(11): e050202, 2021 11 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1515299

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Severe SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with a dysregulated immune response. Inflammatory monocytes and macrophages are crucial, promoting injurious, proinflammatory sequelae. Immunomodulation is, therefore, an attractive therapeutic strategy and we sought to test licensed and novel candidate drugs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The CATALYST trial is a multiarm, open-label, multicentre, phase II platform trial designed to identify candidate novel treatments to improve outcomes of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with usual care. Treatments with evidence of biomarker improvements will be put forward for larger-scale testing by current national phase III platform trials. Hospitalised patients >16 years with a clinical picture strongly suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia (confirmed by chest X-ray or CT scan, with or without a positive reverse transcription PCR assay) and a C reactive protein (CRP) ≥40 mg/L are eligible. The primary outcome measure is CRP, measured serially from admission to day 14, hospital discharge or death. Secondary outcomes include the WHO Clinical Progression Improvement Scale as a principal efficacy assessment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by the East Midlands-Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee (20/EM/0115) and given urgent public health status; initial approval was received on 5 May 2020, current protocol version (V.6.0) approval on 12 October 2020. The MHRA also approved all protocol versions. The results of this trial will be disseminated through national and international presentations and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EudraCT2020-001684-89, ISRCTN40580903.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , Hospitalization , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Research , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(11): 1275-1287, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1514340

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The impact of COVID-19 on physical and mental health and employment after hospitalisation with acute disease is not well understood. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of COVID-19-related hospitalisation on health and employment, to identify factors associated with recovery, and to describe recovery phenotypes. METHODS: The Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) is a multicentre, long-term follow-up study of adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital in the UK with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, involving an assessment between 2 and 7 months after discharge, including detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical testing. Multivariable logistic regression was done for the primary outcome of patient-perceived recovery, with age, sex, ethnicity, body-mass index, comorbidities, and severity of acute illness as covariates. A post-hoc cluster analysis of outcomes for breathlessness, fatigue, mental health, cognitive impairment, and physical performance was done using the clustering large applications k-medoids approach. The study is registered on the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN10980107). FINDINGS: We report findings for 1077 patients discharged from hospital between March 5 and Nov 30, 2020, who underwent assessment at a median of 5·9 months (IQR 4·9-6·5) after discharge. Participants had a mean age of 58 years (SD 13); 384 (36%) were female, 710 (69%) were of white ethnicity, 288 (27%) had received mechanical ventilation, and 540 (50%) had at least two comorbidities. At follow-up, only 239 (29%) of 830 participants felt fully recovered, 158 (20%) of 806 had a new disability (assessed by the Washington Group Short Set on Functioning), and 124 (19%) of 641 experienced a health-related change in occupation. Factors associated with not recovering were female sex, middle age (40-59 years), two or more comorbidities, and more severe acute illness. The magnitude of the persistent health burden was substantial but only weakly associated with the severity of acute illness. Four clusters were identified with different severities of mental and physical health impairment (n=767): very severe (131 patients, 17%), severe (159, 21%), moderate along with cognitive impairment (127, 17%), and mild (350, 46%). Of the outcomes used in the cluster analysis, all were closely related except for cognitive impairment. Three (3%) of 113 patients in the very severe cluster, nine (7%) of 129 in the severe cluster, 36 (36%) of 99 in the moderate cluster, and 114 (43%) of 267 in the mild cluster reported feeling fully recovered. Persistently elevated serum C-reactive protein was positively associated with cluster severity. INTERPRETATION: We identified factors related to not recovering after hospital admission with COVID-19 at 6 months after discharge (eg, female sex, middle age, two or more comorbidities, and more acute severe illness), and four different recovery phenotypes. The severity of physical and mental health impairments were closely related, whereas cognitive health impairments were independent. In clinical care, a proactive approach is needed across the acute severity spectrum, with interdisciplinary working, wide access to COVID-19 holistic clinical services, and the potential to stratify care. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research.

6.
Respir Res ; 22(1): 255, 2021 Sep 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440932

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is relatively little published on the effects of COVID-19 on respiratory physiology, particularly breathing patterns. We sought to determine if there were lasting detrimental effect following hospital discharge and if these related to the severity of COVID-19. METHODS: We reviewed lung function and breathing patterns in COVID-19 survivors > 3 months after discharge, comparing patients who had been admitted to the intensive therapy unit (ITU) (n = 47) to those who just received ward treatments (n = 45). Lung function included spirometry and gas transfer and breathing patterns were measured with structured light plethysmography. Continuous data were compared with an independent t-test or Mann Whitney-U test (depending on distribution) and nominal data were compared using a Fisher's exact test (for 2 categories in 2 groups) or a chi-squared test (for > 2 categories in 2 groups). A p-value of < 0.05 was taken to be statistically significant. RESULTS: We found evidence of pulmonary restriction (reduced vital capacity and/or alveolar volume) in 65.4% of all patients. 36.1% of all patients has a reduced transfer factor (TLCO) but the majority of these (78.1%) had a preserved/increased transfer coefficient (KCO), suggesting an extrapulmonary cause. There were no major differences between ITU and ward lung function, although KCO alone was higher in the ITU patients (p = 0.03). This could be explained partly by obesity, respiratory muscle fatigue, localised microvascular changes, or haemosiderosis from lung damage. Abnormal breathing patterns were observed in 18.8% of subjects, although no consistent pattern of breathing pattern abnormalities was evident. CONCLUSIONS: An "extrapulmonary restrictive" like pattern appears to be a common phenomenon in previously admitted COVID-19 survivors. Whilst the cause of this is not clear, the effects seem to be similar on patients whether or not they received mechanical ventilation or had ward based respiratory support/supplemental oxygen.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/physiopathology , Hospitalization/trends , Lung/physiology , Respiratory Mechanics/physiology , Spirometry/trends , Survivors , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Humans , Lung Diseases/diagnosis , Lung Diseases/physiopathology , Lung Diseases/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge/trends , Respiratory Function Tests/methods , Respiratory Function Tests/trends , Spirometry/methods , Young Adult
7.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 7(1)2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388517

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is the major cause of mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. It appears that development of 'cytokine storm' in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia precipitates progression to ARDS. However, severity scores on admission do not predict severity or mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Our objective was to determine whether patients with SARS-CoV-2 ARDS are clinically distinct, therefore requiring alternative management strategies, compared with other patients with ARDS. We report a single-centre retrospective study comparing the characteristics and outcomes of patients with ARDS with and without SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Two intensive care unit (ICU) cohorts of patients at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham were analysed: SARS-CoV-2 patients admitted between 11 March and 21 April 2020 and all patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) from bacterial or viral infection who developed ARDS between 1 January 2017 and 1 November 2019. All data were routinely collected on the hospital's electronic patient records. RESULTS: A greater proportion of SARS-CoV-2 patients were from an Asian ethnic group (p=0.002). SARS-CoV-2 patients had lower circulating leucocytes, neutrophils and monocytes (p<0.0001), but higher CRP (p=0.016) on ICU admission. SARS-CoV-2 patients required a longer duration of mechanical ventilation (p=0.01), but had lower vasopressor requirements (p=0.016). DISCUSSION: The clinical syndromes and respiratory mechanics of SARS-CoV-2 and CAP-ARDS are broadly similar. However, SARS-CoV-2 patients initially have a lower requirement for vasopressor support, fewer circulating leukocytes and require prolonged ventilation support. Further studies are required to determine whether the dysregulated inflammation observed in SARS-CoV-2 ARDS may contribute to the increased duration of respiratory failure.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Critical Care/methods , Patient Outcome Assessment , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/blood , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , C-Reactive Protein/metabolism , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Leukocytes/metabolism , Male , Middle Aged , Monocytes/metabolism , Neutrophils/metabolism , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Mechanics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Time , United Kingdom , Vasoconstrictor Agents/therapeutic use
8.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 8(1)2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1350028

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Ethnic minorities account for 34% of critically ill patients with COVID-19 despite constituting 14% of the UK population. Internationally, researchers have called for studies to understand deterioration risk factors to inform clinical risk tool development. METHODS: Multicentre cohort study of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 (n=3671) exploring determinants of health, including Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) subdomains, as risk factors for presentation, deterioration and mortality by ethnicity. Receiver operator characteristics were plotted for CURB65 and ISARIC4C by ethnicity and area under the curve (AUC) calculated. RESULTS: Ethnic minorities were hospitalised with higher Charlson Comorbidity Scores than age, sex and deprivation matched controls and from the most deprived quintile of at least one IMD subdomain: indoor living environment (LE), outdoor LE, adult skills, wider barriers to housing and services. Admission from the most deprived quintile of these deprivation forms was associated with multilobar pneumonia on presentation and ICU admission. AUC did not exceed 0.7 for CURB65 or ISARIC4C among any ethnicity except ISARIC4C among Indian patients (0.83, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.93). Ethnic minorities presenting with pneumonia and low CURB65 (0-1) had higher mortality than White patients (22.6% vs 9.4%; p<0.001); Africans were at highest risk (38.5%; p=0.006), followed by Caribbean (26.7%; p=0.008), Indian (23.1%; p=0.007) and Pakistani (21.2%; p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Ethnic minorities exhibit higher multimorbidity despite younger age structures and disproportionate exposure to unscored risk factors including obesity and deprivation. Household overcrowding, air pollution, housing quality and adult skills deprivation are associated with multilobar pneumonia on presentation and ICU admission which are mortality risk factors. Risk tools need to reflect risks predominantly affecting ethnic minorities.


Subject(s)
Air Pollution/analysis , Benchmarking/methods , COVID-19/therapy , Housing/standards , Patient Admission , Risk Assessment/methods , Age Distribution , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/ethnology , Comorbidity , Crowding , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multimorbidity , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
9.
Crit Care Med ; 49(10): 1757-1768, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1334267

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether right ventricular dilation or systolic impairment is associated with mortality and/or disease severity in invasively ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Single-center U.K. ICU. PATIENTS: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation that received a transthoracic echocardiogram between March and December 2020. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Right ventricular dilation was defined as right ventricular:left ventricular end-diastolic area greater than 0.6, right ventricular systolic impairment as fractional area change less than 35%, or tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion less than 17 mm. One hundred seventy-two patients were included, 59 years old (interquartile range, 49-67), with mostly moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome (n = 101; 59%). Ninety-day mortality was 41% (n = 70): 49% in patients with right ventricular dilation, 53% in right ventricular systolic impairment, and 72% in right ventricular dilation with systolic impairment. The right ventricular dilation with systolic impairment phenotype was independently associated with mortality (odds ratio, 3.11 [95% CI, 1.15-7.60]), but either disease state alone was not. Right ventricular fractional area change correlated with Pao2:Fio2 ratio, Paco2, chest radiograph opacification, and dynamic compliance, whereas right ventricular:left ventricle end-diastolic area correlated negatively with urine output. CONCLUSIONS: Right ventricular systolic impairment correlated with pulmonary pathophysiology, whereas right ventricular dilation correlated with renal dysfunction. Right ventricular dilation with systolic impairment was the only right ventricular phenotype that was independently associated with mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/complications , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , Echocardiography/methods , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality/trends , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Retrospective Studies , United Kingdom , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/mortality
10.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 8(1)2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1299232

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Many respiratory clinical trials fail to reach their recruitment target and this problem exacerbates existing funding issues. Integration of the clinical trial recruitment process into a clinical care pathway (CCP) may represent an effective way to significantly increase recruitment numbers. METHODS: A respiratory support unit and a CCP for escalation of patients with severe COVID-19 were established on 11 January 2021. The recruitment process for the Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy-Respiratory Support trial was integrated into the CCP on the same date. Recruitment data for the trial were collected before and after integration into the CCP. RESULTS: On integration of the recruitment process into a CCP, there was a significant increase in recruitment numbers. Fifty patients were recruited over 266 days before this process occurred whereas 108 patients were recruited over 49 days after this process. There was a statistically significant increase in both the proportion of recruited patients relative to the number of COVID-19 hospital admissions (change from 2.8% to 9.1%, p<0.0001) and intensive therapy unit admissions (change from 17.8% to 50.2%, p<0.001) over the same period, showing that this increase in recruitment was independent of COVID-19 prevalence. DISCUSSION: Integrating the trial recruitment process into a CCP can significantly boost recruitment numbers. This represents an innovative model that can be used to maximise recruitment without impacting on the financial and labour costs associated with the running of a respiratory clinical trial.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Critical Pathways , Patient Selection , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Hospitalization , Humans , Respiratory Therapy
11.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Apr 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1203663

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The medium and long-term effects of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection on survivors are unknown. Here we studied the medium term effects of COVID-19 on survivors of severe disease. METHODS: This is a retrospective, case series of 200 patients hospitalised across three large Birmingham hospitals with severe-to-critical COVID-19 infection 4-7 months from disease-onset. Patients underwent comprehensive clinical, laboratory, imaging, lung function test, quality of life and cognitive assessments. RESULTS: At 4-7 months from disease-onset, 63.2% of patients experienced persistent breathlessness, 53.5% complained of significant fatigue, 37.5% reduced mobility and 36.8% pain. Serum markers of inflammation and organ injuries that persisted at hospital discharge had normalised on follow-up indicating no sustained immune response causing chronic maladaptive inflammation. Chest radiographs showed a complete resolution in 82.8%; and significantly improved or no change in 17.2%. Lung function test (LFT) revealed gas transfer abnormalities in 80.0% and spirometry in 37.6% patients. Patients with breathlessness had significantly high incidence of comorbidities, abnormal residual chest X-ray and LFT (p<0.01 to all). In all parameters assessed and persisting symptoms there was no statically significant difference between patients managed on hospital wards and on ITU groups. All patients reported a significantly reduced quality of life in all domains of the EQ-5D-5L quality of life measures. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A significant proportion of COVID-19 with severe illness experience ongoing symptoms of breathlessness, fatigue, pain, reduced mobility, depression and reduced quality of life at 4-7 months from disease-onset. Symptomatic patients tend to have more residual CXR and LFT abnormalities.

12.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 262, 2021 Mar 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1136209

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors have been postulated to influence susceptibility to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study investigated whether there is an association between their prescription and the incidence of COVID-19 and all-cause mortality. METHODS: We conducted a propensity-score matched cohort study comparing the incidence of COVID-19 among patients with hypertension prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme I (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin II type-1 receptor blockers (ARBs) to those treated with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in a large UK-based primary care database (The Health Improvement Network). We estimated crude incidence rates for confirmed/suspected COVID-19 in each drug exposure group. We used Cox proportional hazards models to produce adjusted hazard ratios for COVID-19. We assessed all-cause mortality as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: The incidence rate of COVID-19 among users of ACE inhibitors and CCBs was 9.3 per 1000 person-years (83 of 18,895 users [0.44%]) and 9.5 per 1000 person-years (85 of 18,895 [0.45%]), respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.92 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.26). The incidence rate among users of ARBs was 15.8 per 1000 person-years (79 out of 10,623 users [0.74%]). The adjusted hazard ratio was 1.38 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.95). There were no significant associations between use of RAS inhibitors and all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: Use of ACE inhibitors was not associated with the risk of COVID-19 whereas use of ARBs was associated with a statistically non-significant increase compared to the use of CCBs. However, no significant associations were observed between prescription of either ACE inhibitors or ARBs and all-cause mortality.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Calcium Channel Blockers/therapeutic use , Hypertension/complications , Hypertension/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/adverse effects , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Antihypertensive Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/mortality , Calcium Channel Blockers/adverse effects , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Propensity Score , Proportional Hazards Models , Renin-Angiotensin System , United Kingdom , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...