Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
PLoS Med ; 19(7): e1004056, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1962980

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Myocarditis and pericarditis following the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines administration have been reported, but their frequency is still uncertain in the younger population. This study investigated the association between Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA vaccines, BNT162b2, and mRNA-1273 and myocarditis/pericarditis in the population of vaccinated persons aged 12 to 39 years in Italy. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a self-controlled case series study (SCCS) using national data on COVID-19 vaccination linked to emergency care/hospital discharge databases. The outcome was the first diagnosis of myocarditis/pericarditis between 27 December 2020 and 30 September 2021. Exposure risk period (0 to 21 days from the vaccination day, subdivided in 3 equal intervals) for first and second dose was compared with baseline period. The SCCS model, adapted to event-dependent exposures, was fitted using unbiased estimating equations to estimate relative incidences (RIs) and excess of cases (EC) per 100,000 vaccinated by dose, age, sex, and vaccine product. Calendar period was included as time-varying confounder in the model. During the study period 2,861,809 persons aged 12 to 39 years received mRNA vaccines (2,405,759 BNT162b2; 456,050 mRNA-1273); 441 participants developed myocarditis/pericarditis (346 BNT162b2; 95 mRNA-1273). Within the 21-day risk interval, 114 myocarditis/pericarditis events occurred, the RI was 1.99 (1.30 to 3.05) after second dose of BNT162b2 and 2.22 (1.00 to 4.91) and 2.63 (1.21 to 5.71) after first and second dose of mRNA-1273. During the [0 to 7) days risk period, an increased risk of myocarditis/pericarditis was observed after first dose of mRNA-1273, with RI of 6.55 (2.73 to 15.72), and after second dose of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, with RIs of 3.39 (2.02 to 5.68) and 7.59 (3.26 to 17.65). The number of EC for second dose of mRNA-1273 was 5.5 per 100,000 vaccinated (3.0 to 7.9). The highest risk was observed in males, at [0 to 7) days after first and second dose of mRNA-1273 with RI of 12.28 (4.09 to 36.83) and RI of 11.91 (3.88 to 36.53); the number of EC after the second dose of mRNA-1273 was 8.8 (4.9 to 12.9). Among those aged 12 to 17 years, the RI was of 5.74 (1.52 to 21.72) after second dose of BNT162b2; for this age group, the number of events was insufficient for estimating RIs after mRNA-1273. Among those aged 18 to 29 years, the RIs were 7.58 (2.62 to 21.94) after first dose of mRNA-1273 and 4.02 (1.81 to 8.91) and 9.58 (3.32 to 27.58) after second dose of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273; the numbers of EC were 3.4 (1.1 to 6.0) and 8.6 (4.4 to 12.6) after first and second dose of mRNA-1273. The main study limitations were that the outcome was not validated through review of clinical records, and there was an absence of information on the length of hospitalization and, thus, the severity of the outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This population-based study of about 3 millions of residents in Italy suggested that mRNA vaccines were associated with myocarditis/pericarditis in the population younger than 40 years. According to our results, increased risk of myocarditis/pericarditis was associated with the second dose of BNT162b2 and both doses of mRNA-1273. The highest risks were observed in males of 12 to 39 years and in males and females 18 to 29 years vaccinated with mRNA-1273. The public health implication of these findings should be considered in the light of the proven mRNA vaccine effectiveness in preventing serious COVID-19 disease and death.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Myocarditis , Pericarditis , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , Adolescent , Adult , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Child , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Myocarditis/chemically induced , Myocarditis/epidemiology , Pericarditis/chemically induced , Pericarditis/epidemiology , Product Surveillance, Postmarketing , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/adverse effects , Young Adult
2.
Ann Ist Super Sanita ; 58(2): 100-108, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1903738

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers were faced with difficult decisions about maternity care practices. The evidence-based practices recommended by the WHO/UNICEF Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) were confirmed by Italian national guidance. AIM: To describe, in a number of facilities that are part of a national Baby-Friendly network, the adherence to some steps of BFHI standards during the COVID-19 emergency. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey, inviting all hospitals interested in the Initiative, to fill out a semi-structured questionnaire. RESULTS: Out of the 68 participating hospitals, 30.9% were hubs and 69.1% spokes. During May 2020, 61.8% of hospitals had COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 clinical pathways, while 38.8% were only non-COVID-19. None was dedicated exclusively to COVID-19 pathways. The BFHI was effective in guaranteeing ≥80% exclusive breastfeeding, the presence of companion of mother's choice, skin-to-skin and rooming-in. The type of accreditation was associated with the presence of a companion of the mother's choice during labour (p=0.022) and with skin-to-skin (p<0.001). According to the narratives, increased interpersonal distance made interactions with mothers difficult and the absence of a birth companion was reported as a major issue. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The BFHI is a highly-structured, evidence-based care model. Investing in strong collaborative care approaches contributes to hospitals' preparedness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Maternal Health Services , Breast Feeding , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Promotion , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Prevalence
3.
Expert Rev Vaccines ; 21(7): 975-982, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778823

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Consolidated information on the effectiveness of COVID-19 booster vaccination in Europe are scarce. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We assessed the effectiveness of a booster dose of an mRNA vaccine against any SARS-CoV-2 infection (symptomatic or asymptomatic) and severe COVID-19 (hospitalization or death) after over two months from administration among priority target groups (n = 18,524,568) during predominant circulation of the Delta variant in Italy (July-December 2021). RESULTS: Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and, to a lesser extent, against severe COVID-19, among people ≥60 years and other high-risk groups (i.e. healthcare workers, residents in long-term-care facilities, and persons with comorbidities or immunocompromised), peaked in the time-interval 3-13 weeks (VE against infection = 67.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 62.5-71.3; VE against severe disease = 89.5%, 95% CI: 86.1-92.0) and then declined, waning 26 weeks after full primary vaccination (VE against infection = 12.2%, 95% CI: -4.7-26.4; VE against severe disease = 65.3%, 95% CI: 50.3-75.8). After 3-10 weeks from the administration of a booster dose, VE against infection and severe disease increased to 76.1% (95% CI: 70.4-80.7) and 93.0% (95% CI: 90.2-95.0), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the ongoing vaccination campaign in Italy, where the administration of a booster dose four months after completion of primary vaccination is recommended.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccines, Synthetic , mRNA Vaccines
4.
BMJ ; 376: e069052, 2022 02 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1759321

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe covid-19 at different time after vaccination. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Italy, 27 December 2020 to 7 November 2021. PARTICIPANTS: 33 250 344 people aged ≥16 years who received a first dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine and did not have a previous diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe covid-19 (admission to hospital or death). Data were divided by weekly time intervals after vaccination. Incidence rate ratios at different time intervals were estimated by multilevel negative binomial models with robust variance estimator. Sex, age group, brand of vaccine, priority risk category, and regional weekly incidence in the general population were included as covariates. Geographic region was included as a random effect. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness was calculated as (1-IRR)×100, where IRR=incidence rate ratio, with the time interval 0-14 days after the first dose of vaccine as the reference. RESULTS: During the epidemic phase when the delta variant was the predominant strain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection significantly decreased (P<0.001) from 82% (95% confidence interval 80% to 84%) at 3-4 weeks after the second dose of vaccine to 33% (27% to 39%) at 27-30 weeks after the second dose. In the same time intervals, vaccine effectiveness against severe covid-19 also decreased (P<0.001), although to a lesser extent, from 96% (95% to 97%) to 80% (76% to 83%). High risk people (vaccine effectiveness -6%, -28% to 12%), those aged ≥80 years (11%, -15% to 31%), and those aged 60-79 years (2%, -11% to 14%) did not seem to be protected against infection at 27-30 weeks after the second dose of vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the vaccination campaigns targeting high risk people, those aged ≥60 years, and healthcare workers to receive a booster dose of vaccine six months after the primary vaccination cycle. The results also suggest that timing the booster dose earlier than six months after the primary vaccination cycle and extending the offer of the booster dose to the wider eligible population might be warranted.


Subject(s)
/immunology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , /administration & dosage , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Incidence , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
5.
EuropePMC;
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-327502

ABSTRACT

Objectives To investigate the association between SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, and myocarditis/pericarditis. Design Self-Controlled Case Series study (SCCS) using national data on COVID-19 vaccination and emergency care/hospital admissions. Setting Italian Regions (Lombardia, Friuli Venezia Giulia, Veneto, Lazio). Participants 2,861,809 individuals, aged 12-39 years, vaccinated with the first doses of mRNA vaccines (2,405,759 BNT162b2 and 456,050 mRNA-1273) between 27 December 2020 and 30 September 2021. Main outcome measures First diagnosis of myocarditis/pericarditis within the study period. The incidence of events in the exposure risk periods (0-21 days from the vaccination day, subdivided in three equal intervals) for first and second dose was compared with baseline period. The SCCS model was fitted using conditional Poisson regression to estimate Relative Incidences (RI) and Excess of Cases (EC) per 100,000 vaccinated by dose, age, gender and brand. Results During the study period, 441 participants aged 12-39 years developed myocarditis/pericarditis (346 BNT162b2 and 95 mRNA-1273). During the 21-day risk interval there were 114 cases of myocarditis/pericarditis (74 BNT162b2 and 40 mRNA-1273) corresponding to a RI of 1.27 (0.87-1.85) and 2.16 (1.50-3.10) after first and second dose, respectively. An increased risk of myocarditis/pericarditis at [0-7) days was observed after first [RI=6.55;95% Confidence Interval (2.73-15.72);EC per 100,000 vaccinated=2.0 (1.5-2.3)] and second dose [RI=7.59 (3.26-17.65);EC=5.5 (4.4-5.9)] of mRNA-1273 and after second dose of BNT162b2 [RI=3.39 (2.02-5.68);EC=0.8 (0.6-1.0)]. In males, an increased risk at [0-7) days was observed after first [RI=12.28, 4.09-36.83;EC=3.8 (3.1-4.0)] and second dose [RI=11.91 (3.88-36.53);EC=8.8 (7.2-9.4)] of mRNA-1273 and after second dose of BNT162b2 [RI=3.45 (1.78-6.68);EC=1.0 (0.6-1.2)]. In females, an increased risk at [0-7) days was observed after second dose of BNT162b2 [RI=3.38 (1.47-7.74);EC=0.7 (0.3-0.9)]. At [0-7) days an increased risk following second dose of BNT162b2 was observed in the 12-17 years old [RI=5.74, (1.52-21.72);EC=1.7 (0.7-1.9)] and in 18-29 years old [RI=4.02 (1.81-8.91);EC=1.1 (0.6-1.3)]. At [0-7) days an increased risk after first [RI=7.58 (2.62-21.94);EC=3.5 (2.4-3.8)] and second [RI=9.58 (3.32-27.58);EC=8.3 (6.7-9.2)] dose of mRNA-1273 was found in 18-29 years old and after first dose in 30-39 years old [RI=6.57 (1.32-32.63);EC=1.0 (0.3-1.1)]. Conclusions This population-based study indicates that mRNA vaccines were associated with myocarditis/pericarditis in the population younger than 40 years, whereas no association was observed in older subjects. The risk increased after the second dose and in the youngest for both vaccines, remained moderate following vaccination with BNT162b2, while was higher in males following vaccination with mRNA-1273. The public health implication of these findings should be weighed in the light of the overall efficacy and safety profile of both vaccines.

6.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(11): e2136246, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1540039

ABSTRACT

Importance: Convalescent plasma (CP) has been generally unsuccessful in preventing worsening of respiratory failure or death in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of CP plus standard therapy (ST) vs ST alone in preventing worsening respiratory failure or death in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial enrolled (1:1 ratio) hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia to receive CP plus ST or ST alone between July 15 and December 8, 2020, at 27 clinical sites in Italy. Hospitalized adults with COVID-19 pneumonia and a partial pressure of oxygen-to-fraction of inspired oxygen (Pao2/Fio2) ratio between 350 and 200 mm Hg were eligible. Interventions: Patients in the experimental group received intravenous high-titer CP (≥1:160, by microneutralization test) plus ST. The volume of infused CP was 200 mL given from 1 to a maximum of 3 infusions. Patients in the control group received ST, represented by remdesivir, glucocorticoids, and low-molecular weight heparin, according to the Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco recommendations. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of worsening respiratory failure (Pao2/Fio2 ratio <150 mm Hg) or death within 30 days from randomization. Results: Of the 487 randomized patients (241 to CP plus ST; 246 to ST alone), 312 (64.1%) were men; the median (IQR) age was 64 (54.0-74.0) years. The modified intention-to-treat population included 473 patients. The primary end point occurred in 59 of 231 patients (25.5%) treated with CP and ST and in 67 of 239 patients (28.0%) who received ST (odds ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.59-1.33; P = .54). Adverse events occurred more frequently in the CP group (12 of 241 [5.0%]) compared with the control group (4 of 246 [1.6%]; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia, high-titer anti-SARS-CoV-2 CP did not reduce the progression to severe respiratory failure or death within 30 days. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04716556.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Immunization, Passive , Plasma , Respiratory Insufficiency , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Standard of Care
7.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(SI): SI25-SI36, 2021 10 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462486

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To ascertain if the use of hydroxychloroquine(HCQ)/cloroquine(CLQ) and other conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) and rheumatic diseases per se may be associated with COVID-19-related risk of hospitalization and mortality. METHODS: This case-control study nested within a cohort of cDMARD users was conducted in the Lombardy, Veneto, Tuscany and Lazio regions and Reggio Emilia province. Claims databases were linked to COVID-19 surveillance registries. The risk of COVID-19-related outcomes was estimated using a multivariate conditional logistic regression analysis comparing HCQ/CLQ vs MTX, vs other cDMARDs and vs non-use of these drugs. The presence of rheumatic diseases vs their absence in a non-nested population was investigated. RESULTS: A total of 1275 patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 were matched to 12 734 controls. Compared with recent use of MTX, no association between HCQ/CLQ monotherapy and COVID-19 hospitalization [odds ratio (OR) 0.83 (95% CI 0.69, 1.00)] or mortality [OR 1.19 (95% CI 0.85, 1.67)] was observed. A lower risk was found when comparing HCQ/CLQ use with the concomitant use of other cDMARDs and glucocorticoids. HCQ/CLQ was not associated with COVID-19 hospitalization as compared with non-use. An increased risk for recent use of either MTX monotherapy [OR 1.19 (95% CI 1.05, 1.34)] or other cDMARDs [OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.08, 1.36)] vs non-use was found. Rheumatic diseases were not associated with COVID-19-related outcomes. CONCLUSION: HCQ/CLQ use in rheumatic patients was not associated with a protective effect against COVID-19-related outcomes. The use of other cDMARDs was associated with an increased risk when compared with non-use and, if concomitantly used with glucocorticoids, also vs HCQ/CLQ, probably due to immunosuppressive action.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Case-Control Studies , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Population Surveillance , Rheumatic Diseases/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
8.
BioDrugs ; 35(6): 749-764, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1460522

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Biological drugs have improved the management of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) despite being associated with important safety issues such as immunogenicity, infections, and malignancies in real-world settings. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the potential of a large Italian multi-database distributed network for use in the postmarketing surveillance of biological drugs, including biosimilars, in patients with IMID. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using 13 Italian regional claims databases during 2010-2019. A tailor-made R-based tool developed for distributed analysis of claims data using a study-specific common data model was customized for this study. We measured the yearly prevalence of biological drug users and the frequency of switches between originator and biosimilars for infliximab, etanercept, and adalimumab separately and stratified them by calendar year and region. We then calculated the cumulative number of users and person-years (PYs) of exposure to individual biological drugs approved for IMIDs. For a number of safety outcomes (e.g., severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-COV-2] infection), we conducted a sample power calculation to estimate the PYs of exposure required to investigate their association with individual biological drugs approved for IMIDs, considering different strengths of association. RESULTS: From a total underlying population of almost 50 million inhabitants from 13 Italian regions, we identified 143,602 (0.3%) biological drug users, with a cumulative exposure of 507,745 PYs during the entire follow-up. The mean age ± standard deviation of biological drug users was 49.3 ± 16.3, with a female-to-male ratio of 1.2. The age-adjusted yearly prevalence of biological drug users increased threefold from 0.7 per 1000 in 2010 to 2.1 per 1000 in 2019. Overall, we identified 40,996 users of biosimilars of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors (i.e., etanercept, adalimumab, and infliximab) in the years 2015-2019. Of these, 46% (N = 18,845) switched at any time between originator and biosimilars or vice versa. To investigate a moderate association (incidence rate ratio 2) between biological drugs approved for IMIDs and safety events of interest, such as optic neuritis (lowest background incidence rate 10.4/100,000 PYs) or severe infection (highest background incidence rate 4312/100,000 PYs), a total of 43,311 PYs and 104 PYs of exposure to individual biological drugs, respectively, would be required. As such, using this network, of 15 individual biological drugs approved for IMIDs, the association with those adverse events could be investigated for four (27%) and 14 (93%), respectively. CONCLUSION: The VALORE project multi-database network has access to data on more than 140,000 biological drug users (and > 0.5 million PYs) from 13 Italian regions during the years 2010-2019, which will be further expanded with the inclusion of data from other regions and more recent calendar years. Overall, the cumulated amount of person-time of exposure to biological drugs approved for IMIDs provides enough statistical power to investigate weak/moderate associations of almost all individual compounds and the most relevant safety outcomes. Moreover, this network may offer the opportunity to investigate the interchangeability of originator and biosimilars of several TNFα inhibitors in different therapeutic areas in real-world settings.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care , Female , Humans , Infliximab/adverse effects , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 9(7)2021 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317265

ABSTRACT

To investigate the association of the 2019-2020 influenza vaccine with prognosis of patients positive for SARS-CoV-2A, a large multi-database cohort study was conducted in four Italian regions (i.e., Lazio, Lombardy, Veneto, and Tuscany) and the Reggio Emilia province (Emilia-Romagna). More than 21 million adults were residing in the study area (42% of the population). We included 115,945 COVID-19 cases diagnosed during the first wave of the pandemic (February-May, 2020); 34.6% of these had been vaccinated against influenza. Three outcomes were considered: hospitalization, death, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission/death. The adjusted relative risk (RR) of being hospitalized in the vaccinated group when compared with the non-vaccinated group was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.86-0.88). This reduction in risk was not confirmed for death (RR = 1.04; 95% CI: 1.01-1.06), or for the combined outcome of ICU admission or death. In conclusion, our study, conducted on the vast majority of the population during the first wave of the pandemic in Italy, showed a 13% statistically significant reduction in the risk of hospitalization in some geographical areas and in the younger population. No impact of seasonal influenza vaccination on COVID-19 prognosis in terms of death and death or ICU admission was estimated.

10.
Euro Surveill ; 26(25)2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1288763

ABSTRACT

To assess the real-world impact of vaccines on COVID-19 related outcomes, we analysed data from over 7 million recipients of at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose in Italy. Taking 0-14 days post-first dose as reference, the SARS-CoV-2 infection risk subsequently decreased, reaching a reduction by 78% (incidence rate ratios (IRR): 0.22; 95% CI: 0.21-0.24) 43-49 days post-first dose. Similarly, hospitalisation and death risks decreased, with 89% (IRR: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.09-0.15) and 93% (IRR: 0.07; 95% CI: 0.04-0.11) reductions 36-42 days post-first dose. Our results support ongoing vaccination campaigns.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19 Vaccines , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(SI): SI25-SI36, 2021 10 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1185985

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To ascertain if the use of hydroxychloroquine(HCQ)/cloroquine(CLQ) and other conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) and rheumatic diseases per se may be associated with COVID-19-related risk of hospitalization and mortality. METHODS: This case-control study nested within a cohort of cDMARD users was conducted in the Lombardy, Veneto, Tuscany and Lazio regions and Reggio Emilia province. Claims databases were linked to COVID-19 surveillance registries. The risk of COVID-19-related outcomes was estimated using a multivariate conditional logistic regression analysis comparing HCQ/CLQ vs MTX, vs other cDMARDs and vs non-use of these drugs. The presence of rheumatic diseases vs their absence in a non-nested population was investigated. RESULTS: A total of 1275 patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 were matched to 12 734 controls. Compared with recent use of MTX, no association between HCQ/CLQ monotherapy and COVID-19 hospitalization [odds ratio (OR) 0.83 (95% CI 0.69, 1.00)] or mortality [OR 1.19 (95% CI 0.85, 1.67)] was observed. A lower risk was found when comparing HCQ/CLQ use with the concomitant use of other cDMARDs and glucocorticoids. HCQ/CLQ was not associated with COVID-19 hospitalization as compared with non-use. An increased risk for recent use of either MTX monotherapy [OR 1.19 (95% CI 1.05, 1.34)] or other cDMARDs [OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.08, 1.36)] vs non-use was found. Rheumatic diseases were not associated with COVID-19-related outcomes. CONCLUSION: HCQ/CLQ use in rheumatic patients was not associated with a protective effect against COVID-19-related outcomes. The use of other cDMARDs was associated with an increased risk when compared with non-use and, if concomitantly used with glucocorticoids, also vs HCQ/CLQ, probably due to immunosuppressive action.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Case-Control Studies , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Population Surveillance , Rheumatic Diseases/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
12.
Drug Saf ; 43(12): 1297-1308, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1092868

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The epidemic due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been spreading globally, raising increasing concerns. There are several controversial hypotheses on the potentially harmful or beneficial effects of antihypertensive drugs acting on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Furthermore, there is accumulating evidence, based on several observational studies, that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) do not increase the risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 infection. On the other hand, conflicting findings regarding the role of ACEIs/ARBs as prognosis modifiers in COVID-19 hospitalised patients have been reported. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this large-scale, retrospective cohort study was to investigate whether prior exposure to ACEIs and/or ARBs was associated with all-cause mortality among over 40,000 hospitalised COVID-19 patients compared with calcium channel blockers (CCBs), a potential therapeutic alternative. METHODS: This study was conducted using COVID-19 registries linked to claims databases from Lombardy, Veneto and Reggio Emilia (overall, 25% of Italian population). Overall, 42,926 patients hospitalised between 21 February and 21 April 2020 with a diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by real-time polymerase chain reaction tests were included in this study. All-cause mortality occurring in or out of hospital, as reported in the COVID-19 registry, was estimated. Using Cox models, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of all-cause mortality (along with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) were estimated separately for ACEIs/ARBs and other antihypertensives versus CCBs and non-use. RESULTS: Overall, 11,205 in- and out-of-hospital deaths occurred over a median of 24 days of follow-up after hospital admission due to COVID-19. Compared with CCBs, adjusted analyses showed no difference in the risk of death among ACEI (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.89-1.06) or ARB (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89-1.06) users. When non-use of antihypertensives was considered as a comparator, a modest statistically significant increase in mortality risk was observed for any antihypertensive use. However, when restricting to drugs with antihypertensive indications only, these marginal increases disappeared. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses confirmed our main findings. CONCLUSIONS: ACEI/ARB use is not associated with either an increased or decreased risk of all-cause mortality, compared with CCB use, in the largest cohort of hospitalised COVID-19 patients exposed to these drugs studied to date. The use of these drugs therefore does not affect the prognosis of COVID-19. This finding strengthens recommendations of international regulatory agencies about not withdrawing/switching ACEI/ARB treatments to modify COVID-19 prognosis.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , COVID-19/mortality , Hospitalization , Renin-Angiotensin System , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Calcium Channel Blockers/therapeutic use , Case-Control Studies , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Young Adult
13.
Clin Epidemiol ; 12: 1337-1346, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-992953

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 case fatality rate in hospitalized patients varies across countries and studies. Reliable estimates, specific for age, sex, and comorbidities, are needed to monitor the epidemic, to compare the outcome in different settings, and to correctly design trials for COVID-19 interventions. The aim of this study was to provide population-based survival curves of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cohort study was conducted in three areas of Northern Italy, heavily affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection (Lombardy and Veneto Regions, and Reggio Emilia province), using a loco-regional COVID-19 surveillance system, linked to hospital discharge databases. We included all patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal/throat swab samples who were hospitalized from 21 February to 21 April 2020. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were calculated at 14 and 30 days for death in any setting, stratifying by age, sex, and the Charlson Index. RESULTS: Overall, 42,926 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were identified. Patients' median age was 69 years (IQR: 57-79), 62.6% were males, and 6.0% had a Charlson Index ≥3. Survival curves showed that 22.0% (95% CI 21.6-22.4) of patients died within 14 days and 27.6% (95% CI 27.2-28.1) within 30 days from hospitalization. Survival was higher in younger patients and in females. The negative impact of comorbidities on survival was more pronounced in younger age groups. CONCLUSION: The high fatality rate observed in the study (28% at 30 days) suggests that studies should focus on death as primary endpoint during a follow-up of at least one month.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL