Sex differences in the prognostic value of troponin and D-dimer in COVID-19 illness.

BACKGROUND: Male sex, elevated troponin levels, and elevated D-dimer levels are associated with more complicated COVID-19 illness and greater mortality; however, while there are known sex differences in the prognostic value of troponin and D-dimer in other disease states, it is unknown whether they exist in the setting of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether sex modified the relationship between troponin, D-dimer, and severe COVID-19 illness (defined as mechanical ventilation, ICU admission or transfer, discharge to hospice, or death). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at a large, academic health system. We used multivariable regression to assess associations between sex, troponin, D-dimer, and severe COVID-19 illness, adjusting for demographic, clinical, and laboratory covariates. To test whether sex modified the relationship between severe COVID-19 illness and troponin or D-dimer, models with interaction terms were utilized. RESULTS: Among 4,574 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, male sex was associated with higher levels of troponin and greater odds of severe COVID-19 illness, but lower levels of initial D-dimer when compared with female sex. While sex did not modify the relationship between troponin level and severe COVID-19 illness, peak D-dimer level was more strongly associated with severe COVID-19 illness in male patients compared to female patients (males: OR=2.91, 95%CI=2.63-2.34, p<0.001; females: OR=2.31, 95%CI=2.04-2.63, p<0.001; p-interaction=0.005). CONCLUSION: Sex did not modify the association between troponin level and severe COVID-19 illness, but did modify the association between peak D-dimer and severe COVID-19 illness, suggesting greater prognostic value for D-dimer in males with COVID-19.

Survival After Invasive or Conservative Management of Stable Coronary Disease.

Background: The ISCHEMIA trial compared an initial invasive versus an initial conservative management strategy for patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, with no major difference in most outcomes over a median of 3.2 years. Extended follow-up for mortality is ongoing. Methods: ISCHEMIA participants were randomized to an initial invasive strategy (INV) added to guideline-directed medical therapy or a conservative strategy (CON). Patients with moderate or severe ischemia, ejection fraction ≥35%, and no recent acute coronary syndromes were included. Those with an unacceptable level of angina were excluded. Extended follow-up for vital status is being conducted by sites or through central death index search. Data obtained through December 2021 are included in this interim report. We analyzed all-cause, cardiovascular, and non-cardiovascular mortality by randomized strategy, using nonparametric cumulative incidence estimators, Cox regression models and Bayesian methods. Undetermined deaths were classified as cardiovascular as pre-specified in the trial protocol. Results: Baseline characteristics for 5179 original ISCHEMIA trial participants included median age 65 years, 23 % women, 16% Hispanic, 4% Black, 42% diabetes, and median EF 0.60. A total of 557 deaths accrued over a median follow-up of 5.7 years, with 268 of these added in the extended follow-up phase. This included a total of 343 cardiovascular deaths, 192 non-cardiovascular deaths and 22 unclassified deaths. All-cause mortality was not different between randomized treatment groups (7-year rate 12.7% in INV, 13.4% in CON; adjusted hazard ratio (HR)=1.00, 95% CI: 0.85-1.18). There was a lower 7-year rate cardiovascular mortality (6.4% vs. 8.6%, adjusted HR=0.78, 95% CI: 0.63-0.96) with an initial invasive strategy but a higher 7-year rate of non-cardiovascular mortality (5.6% vs. 4.4%, adjusted HR=1.44, 95% CI: 1.08-1.91) compared with the conservative strategy. No heterogeneity of treatment effect was evident in prespecified subgroups, including multivessel coronary disease. Conclusions: There was no difference in all-cause mortality with an initial invasive strategy compared with an initial conservative strategy, but there was lower risk of cardiovascular mortality and higher risk of non-cardiovascular mortality with an initial invasive strategy over a median follow-up of 5.7 years. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04894877; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04894877.

Treating COVID-19 With Hydroxychloroquine (TEACH): A Multicenter, Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial in Hospitalized Patients.

BACKGROUND: Effective therapies to combat coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) are urgently needed. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has in vitro antiviral activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but the clinical benefit of HCQ in treating COVID-19 is unclear. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the safety and efficacy of HCQ for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind randomized clinical trial of HCQ among patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Subjects were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to HCQ or placebo for 5 days and followed for 30 days. The primary efficacy outcome was a severe disease progression composite end point (death, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and/or vasopressor use) at day 14. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Baseline demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics were similar between the HCQ (n = 67) and placebo (n = 61) arms. At day 14, 11 (16.4%) subjects assigned to HCQ and 6 (9.8%) subjects assigned to placebo met the severe disease progression end point, but this did not achieve statistical significance (P = .350). There were no significant differences in COVID-19 clinical scores, number of oxygen-free days, SARS-CoV-2 clearance, or adverse events between HCQ and placebo. HCQ was associated with a slight increase in mean corrected QT interval, an increased D-dimer, and a trend toward an increased length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, our data suggest that HCQ does not prevent severe outcomes or improve clinical scores. However, our conclusions are limited by a relatively small sample size, and larger randomized controlled trials or pooled analyses are needed.

A Randomized Double-Blinded Placebo Controlled Trial of Clazakizumab for the Treatment of COVID-19 Pneumonia With Hyperinflammation.

OBJECTIVES: We designed this study to test whether clazakizumab, a direct interleukin-6 inhibitor, benefits patients hospitalized with severe or critical COVID-19 disease accompanied by hyperinflammation. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, seamless phase II/III trial. SETTING: Five U.S. medical centers. PATIENTS: Adults inpatients with severe COVID-19 disease and hyperinflammation. INTERVENTIONS: Eighty-one patients enrolled in phase II, randomized 1:1:1 to low-dose (12.5 mg) or high-dose (25 mg) clazakizumab or placebo. Ninety-seven patients enrolled in phase III, randomized 1:1 to high-dose clazakizumab or placebo. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was 28-day ventilator-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, frequency and duration of intubation, and frequency and duration of ICU admission. Per Data Safety and Monitoring Board recommendations, additional secondary outcomes describing clinical status and status changes, as measured by an ordinal scale, were added. Bayesian cumulative proportional odds, logistic, and Poisson regression models were used. The low-dose arm was dropped when the phase II study suggested superiority of the high-dose arm. We report on 152 patients, 74 randomized to placebo and 78 to high-dose clazakizumab. Patients receiving clazakizumab had greater odds of 28-day ventilator-free survival (odds ratio [OR] = 3.84; p [OR > 1] 99.9%), as well as overall survival at 28 and 60 days (OR = 1.75; p [OR > 1] 86.5% and OR = 2.53; p [OR > 1] 97.7%). Clazakizumab was associated with lower odds of intubation (OR = 0.2; p [OR] < 1; 99.9%) and ICU admission (OR = 0.26; p [OR < 1] 99.6%); shorter durations of ventilation and ICU stay (risk ratio [RR] < 0.75; p [RR < 1] > 99% for both); and greater odds of improved clinical status at 14, 28, and 60 days (OR = 2.32, p [OR > 1] 98.1%; OR = 3.36, p [OR > 1] 99.6%; and OR = 3.52, p [OR > 1] 99.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Clazakizumab significantly improved 28-day ventilator-free survival, 28- and 60-day overall survival, as well as clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and hyperinflammation.

The National Institutes of Health COVID-19 NeuroDatabank and NeuroBiobank: A National Resource for Learning, Discovery, and Progress.

Patients suffering from COVID-19 experience a wide range of symptoms and sequelae, including increasingly recognized neurological problems. A concerted effort is necessary to identify and characterize these issues, whether newly appearing as a result of COVID-19 disease or exacerbations of underlying conditions. A national resource to collect information and/or biospecimens regarding neurological complications of COVID-19 offers an opportunity for broad representation, harmonization, and rapid learning, all while ensuring robust protection of confidential information through the use of global unique identifiers to protect patient privacy.

Acceptability of a community health worker intervention to improve the oral health of older Chinese Americans: A pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the acceptability of a community health worker (CHW) intervention designed to improve the oral health of low-income, urban Chinese immigrant adults. BACKGROUND: Given that both dental caries and periodontitis are behaviourally mediated, biofilm-based diseases that are largely preventable with attention to regular oral hygiene practices and preventive dental visits, strategies to arrest or even heal carious lesions and high-quality maintenance care and plaque control without the need to resort to aerosol-generating surgical approaches are evidence-based best practices. Older immigrants have poorer oral health than older US-born natives, motivating the need for delivery of more effective and affordable services to this vulnerable population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CHWs were trained by the NYU College of Dentistry dental hygienist faculty members using dental models and flip charts to instruct patients on proper brushing and flossing techniques. In addition, they discussed the presented oral health promotion information one-on-one with patients, addressed any expressed concerns and encouraged prevention of oral conditions through regular dental visits and brushing with fluoride toothpaste. RESULTS: More than 98% of the 74 older Chinese adult participants strongly agreed/agreed that the CHWs helped them to improve how they take care of their health, the CHWs answered their questions and concerns, the information and topics were informative, and the in-person demonstrations were helpful in improving oral health. CONCLUSION: The health of all communities depends on access to comprehensive care, including oral health care, in the wake of COVID-19. CHW interventions are acceptable to and may reach marginalised and immigrant communities.

A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study of Tocilizumab in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

To determine the impact of tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody against the interleukin 6 receptor, on survival in patients with coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Observational cohort study of patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 between March 1, 2020, and April 24, 2020. A propensity-matched (1:1) analysis was used to compare patients who received tocilizumab to controls who did not. Competing risk survival analysis was used to determine the primary outcome of time to mortality, and adjusted log-linear and logistic regression for secondary outcomes. SETTING: Three hospitals within the NYU Langone Health system in New York. PATIENTS: Consecutive adult patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019. INTERVENTION: Tocilizumab 400-mg IV once in addition to standard of care or standard of care alone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data from 3,580 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 positive qualifying hospitalized patients were included, of whom 497 (13.9%) were treated with tocilizumab. In the analysis of tocilizumab-treated patients and matched controls, fewer tocilizumab-treated patients died (145/497, 29.2%) than did controls (211/497, 42.4%). In the adjusted competing risk regression model, tocilizumab therapy was associated with improved survival relative to controls (hazard ratio = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.18-0.33, p < 0.001). Tocilizumab-treated patients and controls had similar adjusted time to discharge from hospital (hazard ratio = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.78-1.17, p = 0.67). However, they had longer adjusted ICU length of stay (rate ratio = 3.1, 95% CI = 2.5-3.7, p < 0.001) and a higher adjusted infection rate (odds ratio = 4.18, 95% CI = 2.72-6.52, p < 0.001) than controls. CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab therapy was associated with significantly improved survival in coronavirus disease 2019 patients. This survival benefit was associated with increased ICU length of stay and increased infection rate, even as more patients in the tocilizumab group were rescued from rapid death. A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial is needed to confirm these findings.

Treatment with Zinc is Associated with Reduced In-Hospital Mortality Among COVID-19 Patients: A Multi-Center Cohort Study.

Background: Zinc impairs replication of RNA viruses such as SARS-CoV-1, and may be effective against SARS-CoV-2. However, to achieve adequate intracellular zinc levels, administration with an ionophore, which increases intracellular zinc levels, may be necessary. We evaluated the impact of zinc with an ionophore (Zn+ionophore) on COVID-19 in-hospital mortality rates. Methods: A multicenter cohort study was conducted of 3,473 adult hospitalized patients with reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) positive SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to four New York City hospitals between March 10 through May 20, 2020. Exclusion criteria were: death or discharge within 24h, comfort-care status, clinical trial enrollment, treatment with an IL-6 inhibitor or remdesivir. Patients who received Zn+ionophore were compared to patients who did not using multivariable time-dependent cox proportional hazards models for time to in-hospital death adjusting for confounders including age, sex, race, BMI, diabetes, week of admission, hospital location, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, intubation, acute renal failure, neurological events, treatment with corticosteroids, azithromycin or lopinavir/ritonavir and the propensity score of receiving Zn+ionophore. A sensitivity analysis was performed using a propensity score-matched cohort of patients who did or did not receive Zn+ionophore matched by age, sex and ventilator status. Results: Among 3,473 patients (median age 64, 1947 [56%] male, 522 [15%] ventilated, 545[16%] died), 1,006 (29%) received Zn+ionophore. Zn+ionophore was associated with a 24% reduced risk of in-hospital mortality (12% of those who received Zn+ionophore died versus 17% who did not; adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.96, P=0.023). More patients who received Zn+ionophore were discharged home (72% Zn+ionophore vs 67% no Zn+ionophore, P=0.003) Neither Zn nor the ionophore alone were associated with decreased mortality rates. Propensity score-matched sensitivity analysis (N=1356) validated these results (Zn+ionophore aHR for mortality 0.63, 95%CI 0.44-0.91, P=0.015). There were no significant interactions for Zn+ionophore with other COVID-19 specific medications. Conclusions: Zinc with an ionophore was associated with increased rates of discharge home and a 24% reduced risk of in-hospital mortality among COVID-19 patients, while neither zinc alone nor the ionophore alone reduced mortality. Further randomized trials are warranted.

COVID-19 in Patients With Inflammatory Arthritis: A Prospective Study on the Effects of Comorbidities and Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs on Clinical Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the hospitalization and death rates among patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to analyze the associations of comorbidities and immunomodulatory medications with infection outcomes. METHODS: Data on clinical and demographic features, maintenance treatment, disease course, and outcomes in individuals with IA (rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis) with symptomatic COVID-19 infection were prospectively assessed via web-based questionnaire followed by individual phone calls and electronic medical record review. Baseline characteristics and medication use were summarized for hospitalized and ambulatory patients, and outcomes with the different medication classes were compared using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients with IA were included in the study (80 with confirmed COVID-19 and 23 with high suspicion of COVID-19). Hospitalization was required in 26% of the participants, and 4% died. Patients who were hospitalized were significantly more likely to be older (P < 0.001) and have comorbid hypertension (P = 0.001) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = 0.02). IA patients taking oral glucocorticoids had an increased likelihood of being admitted for COVID-19 (P < 0.001), while those receiving maintenance anticytokine biologic therapies did not. CONCLUSION: Among patients with underlying IA, COVID-19 outcomes were worse in those receiving glucocorticoids but not in patients receiving maintenance anticytokine therapy. Further work is needed to understand whether immunomodulatory therapies affect COVID-19 incidence.