Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
Cell Rep ; 38(2): 110210, 2022 01 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1568559

ABSTRACT

Emerging variants of concern for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can transmit more efficiently and partially evade protective immune responses, thus necessitating continued refinement of antibody therapies and immunogen design. Here, we elucidate the structural basis and mode of action for two potent SARS-CoV-2 spike (S)-neutralizing monoclonal antibodies, CV3-1 and CV3-25, which remain effective against emerging variants of concern in vitro and in vivo. CV3-1 binds to the (485-GFN-487) loop within the receptor-binding domain (RBD) in the "RBD-up" position and triggers potent shedding of the S1 subunit. In contrast, CV3-25 inhibits membrane fusion by binding to an epitope in the stem helix region of the S2 subunit that is highly conserved among ß-coronaviruses. Thus, vaccine immunogen designs that incorporate the conserved regions in the RBD and stem helix region are candidates to elicit pan-coronavirus protective immune responses.

2.
Sustainability ; 13(23):13492, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1560741

ABSTRACT

As an important means to deal with crisis, organizational resilience has attracted the attention of academia and industry. However, research on what factors influence organizational resilience has lagged behind. In view of this, this study proposes the concept of organizational resilience on the basis of existing research and extracts the influencing factors of organizational resilience based on a multi-case analysis approach, using the organizational behavior of five companies in crisis situations as the research object. Based on the Interpretive Structure Model (ISM), the internal logical relationship and hierarchical structure of the factors influencing organizational resilience are analyzed. In this study, the importance of influencing factors of organizational resilience was analyzed by using analytic network process (ANP). It is suggested that strengthening organizational resilience is the key, organizational learning is the important basis, emotion management is the necessary condition, and organizational resources are the basic guarantee, which provides theoretical supplement and practical guidance for the study of organizational resilience.

3.
mBio ; 12(5): e0254221, 2021 10 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462902

ABSTRACT

Damage in COVID-19 results from both the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its triggered overactive host immune responses. Therapeutic agents that focus solely on reducing viral load or hyperinflammation fail to provide satisfying outcomes in all cases. Although viral and cellular factors have been extensively profiled to identify potential anti-COVID-19 targets, new drugs with significant efficacy remain to be developed. Here, we report the potent preclinical efficacy of ALD-R491, a vimentin-targeting small molecule compound, in treating COVID-19 through its host-directed antiviral and anti-inflammatory actions. We found that by altering the physical properties of vimentin filaments, ALD-491 affected general cellular processes as well as specific cellular functions relevant to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Specifically, ALD-R491 reduced endocytosis, endosomal trafficking, and exosomal release, thus impeding the entry and egress of the virus; increased the microcidal capacity of macrophages, thus facilitating the pathogen clearance; and enhanced the activity of regulatory T cells, therefore suppressing the overactive immune responses. In cultured cells, ALD-R491 potently inhibited the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and human ACE2-mediated pseudoviral infection. In aged mice with ongoing, productive SARS-CoV-2 infection, ALD-R491 reduced disease symptoms as well as lung damage. In rats, ALD-R491 also reduced bleomycin-induced lung injury and fibrosis. Our results indicate a unique mechanism and significant therapeutic potential for ALD-R491 against COVID-19. We anticipate that ALD-R491, an oral, fast-acting, and non-cytotoxic agent targeting the cellular protein with multipart actions, will be convenient, safe, and broadly effective, regardless of viral mutations, for patients with early- or late-stage disease, post-COVID-19 complications, and other related diseases. IMPORTANCE With the Delta variant currently fueling a resurgence of new infections in the fully vaccinated population, developing an effective therapeutic drug is especially critical and urgent in fighting COVID-19. In contrast to the many efforts to repurpose existing drugs or address only one aspect of COVID-19, we are developing a novel agent with first-in-class mechanisms of action that address both the viral infection and the overactive immune system in the pathogenesis of the disease. Unlike virus-directed therapeutics that may lose efficacy due to viral mutations, and immunosuppressants that require ideal timing to be effective, this agent, with its unique host-directed antiviral and anti-inflammatory actions, can work against all variants of the virus, be effective during all stages of the disease, and even resolve post-disease damage and complications. Further development of the compound will provide an important tool in the fight against COVID-19 and its complications, as well as future outbreaks of new viruses.


Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/metabolism , Organic Chemicals/therapeutic use , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/metabolism , Vimentin/metabolism , Animals , Endocytosis/drug effects , Endosomes/drug effects , Endosomes/metabolism , Exosomes/drug effects , Exosomes/metabolism , HEK293 Cells , Humans , Mice , RAW 264.7 Cells
4.
BMC Pulm Med ; 21(1): 308, 2021 Sep 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1439539

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Whether procalcitonin (PCT) or C-reactive protein (CRP) combined with certain clinical characteristics can better distinguish viral from bacterial infections remains unclear. The aim of the study was to assess the ability of PCT or CRP combined with clinical characteristics to distinguish between viral and bacterial infections in hospitalized non-intensive care unit (ICU) adults with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI). METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial previously conducted among LRTI patients. The ability of PCT, CRP and PCT or CRP combined with clinical symptoms to discriminate between viral and bacterial infection were assessed by portraying receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves among patients with only a viral or a typical bacterial infection. RESULTS: In total, 209 infected patients (viral 69%, bacterial 31%) were included in the study. When using CRP or PCT to discriminate between viral and bacterial LRTI, the optimal cut-off points were 22 mg/L and 0.18 ng/mL, respectively. When the optimal cut-off for CRP (≤ 22 mg/L) or PCT (≤ 0.18 ng/mL) combined with rhinorrhea was used to discriminate viral from bacterial LRTI, the AUCs were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.75-0.87) and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.74-0.86), which was statistically significantly better than when CRP or PCT used alone (p < 0.001). When CRP ≤ 22 mg/L, PCT ≤ 0.18 ng/mL and rhinorrhea were combined, the AUC was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.80-0.91), which was statistically significantly higher than when CRP (≤ 22 mg/L) or PCT (≤ 0.18 ng/mL) was combined with rhinorrhea (p = 0.011 and p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Either CRP ≤ 22 mg/L or PCT ≤ 0.18 ng/mL combined with rhinorrhea could help distinguish viral from bacterial infections in hospitalized non-ICU adults with LRTI. When rhinorrhea was combined together, discrimination ability was further improved.

5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(10): e545-e551, 2021 05 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1232187

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The characteristics of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) and antibody against major antigen proteins related to clinical outcomes in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients were still less known. METHODS: NAbs and antibodies targeting nucleocapsid (N), spike protein (S), and the receptor-binding domain (RBD) in longitudinal plasma samples from the LOTUS China trial were measured by microneutralization assay and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Viral load was determined by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). A total of 576 plasma and 576 throat swabs were collected from 191 COVID-19 patients. Antibody titers related to adverse outcome and clinical improvement were analyzed. Multivariable adjusted generalized linear mixed model for random effects were developed. RESULTS: After day 28 post symptoms onset, the rate of antibody positivity reached 100% for RBD-immunoglobulin M (IgM), 97.8% for S-IgM, 100% for N-immunoglobulin G (IgG), 100% for RBD-IgG, 91.1% for N-IgM, and 91.1% for NAbs. The NAbs titers increased over time in both survivors and nonsurvivors and correlated to IgG antibodies against N, S, and RBD, whereas its presence showed no statistical correlation with death. N-IgG (slope -2.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.04 to -1.18, P < .0001), S-IgG (slope -2.44, 95% CI -3.35 to -1.54, P < .0001), and RBD-IgG (slope -1.43, 95% CI -1.98 to -.88, P < .0001) were negatively correlated with viral load. S-IgG titers were lower in nonsurvivors than survivors (P = .020) at week 4 after symptoms onset. CONCLUSIONS: IgM and IgG against N, S, and RBD and NAbs developed in most severe COVID-19 patients and do not correlate clearly with clinical outcomes. The levels of IgG antibodies against N, S, and RBD were related to viral clearance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Antibodies, Viral , Antibody Formation , China/epidemiology , Humans , Immunoglobulin M , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Lancet ; 395(10236): 1569-1578, 2020 05 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-824547

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: No specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2-10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir-ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656. FINDINGS: Between Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87-1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95-2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early. INTERPRETATION: In this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Aged , Alanine/adverse effects , Alanine/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , China , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Male , Middle Aged , Negative Results , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 27(1): 112-117, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-802088

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Use of corticosteroids is common in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019, but clinical effectiveness is controversial. We aimed to investigate the association of corticosteroids therapy with clinical outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: In this single-centre, retrospective cohort study, adult patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 and dead or discharged between 29 December 2019 and 15 February 2020 were studied; 1:1 propensity score matchings were performed between patients with or without corticosteroid treatment. A multivariable COX proportional hazards model was used to estimate the association between corticosteroid treatment and in-hospital mortality by taking corticosteroids as a time-varying covariate. RESULTS: Among 646 patients, the in-hospital death rate was higher in 158 patients with corticosteroid administration (72/158, 45.6% vs. 56/488, 11.5%, p < 0.0001). After propensity score matching analysis, no significant differences were observed in in-hospital death between patients with and without corticosteroid treatment (47/124, 37.9% vs. 47/124, 37.9%, p 1.000). When patients received corticosteroids before they required nasal high-flow oxygen therapy or mechanical ventilation, the in-hospital death rate was lower than that in patients who were not administered corticosteroids (17/86, 19.8% vs. 26/86, 30.2%, log rank p 0.0102), whereas the time from admission to clinical improvement was longer (13 (IQR 10-17) days vs. 10 (IQR 8-13) days; p < 0.001). Using the Cox proportional hazards regression model accounting for time varying exposures in matched pairs, corticosteroid therapy was not associated with mortality difference (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93-1.03, p 0.4694). DISCUSSION: Corticosteroids use in COVID-19 patients may not be associated with in-hospital mortality.


Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Aged , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/pathology , China , Critical Illness , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Hospitals , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
9.
Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban ; 45(6): 633-640, 2020 Jun 28.
Article in English, Chinese | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-745309

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To explore the psychological status of medical staff in the epidemic period of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to analyze its influential factors. METHODS: A total of 373 medical staff from Xiangya Hospital and the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University were enrolled for this study. The General Sociological Data Questionnaire, Symptom Check-List 90 (SCL-90), and self-designed public opinion response questionnaire were used to assess general sociological data, mental health scores, and ability to respond to COVID-19 related public opinion information of medical staff. The mental health scores of medical staff with different general sociological data and public opinion information coping abilities were compared. Influential factors of mental health were analyzed. RESULTS: The average score of 10 factors in SCL-90 of 373 medical staff was less than 2 points. 14.21% medical staff had one or more factor scores more than two points, including 11.26% with terror symptoms, 7.77% with compulsive symptoms, and 5.63% with anxiety. The main sources of COVID-19 information for medical staff included WeChat, microblog, Jinri toutiao, TV and radio. 66.22% medical staff regularly verified information about COVID-19 through official websites or formal channels. A great deal of COVID-19 information in WeChat could make medical staff nervous (34.05%), anxious (30.29%), and insecure (29.22%). 68.63% medical staff sometimes were worried about getting infected because they knew information about COVID-19. Different departments of medical staff, getting cough or having a fever recently, and the degree of fear of infection had an impact on the SCL-90 score of medical staff, the differences were all statistically significant (all P<0.05). Stepwise regression analysis showed that the impact of COVID-19 information on their life in WeChat, getting cough or having a fever recently, insomnia-early caused by COVID-19 information in WeChat, different departments, and the degree of fear of infection COVID-19 were the influential factors for the mental health of medical staff (all P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: During the epidemic of COVID-19, medical staff suffered from psychological problems to various degrees. It is necessary to establish a psychological assistance platform and guide the direction of public opinion correctly to promote the mental health of medical staff.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Health Status , Medical Staff/psychology , Mental Health , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Anxiety , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , China , Compulsive Behavior , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Fear , Humans , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
11.
Eur Respir Rev ; 29(157)2020 Sep 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-662439

ABSTRACT

According to the Third International Consensus Definition for Sepsis and Septic Shock, sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction resulting from dysregulated host responses to infection. Epidemiological data about sepsis from the 2017 Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factor Study showed that the global burden of sepsis was greater than previously estimated. Bacteria have been shown to be the predominant pathogen of sepsis among patients with pathogens detected, while sepsis caused by viruses is underdiagnosed worldwide. The coronavirus disease that emerged in 2019 in China and now in many other countries has brought viral sepsis back into the vision of physicians and researchers worldwide. Although the current understanding of the pathophysiology of sepsis has improved, the differences between viral and bacterial sepsis at the level of pathophysiology are not well understood. Diagnosis methods that can broadly differentiate between bacterial and viral sepsis at the initial stage after the development of sepsis are limited. New treatments that can be applied at clinics for sepsis are scarce and this situation is not consistent with the growing understanding of pathophysiology. This review aims to give a brief summary of current knowledge of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment of viral sepsis.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Tract Infections/diagnosis , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Sepsis/diagnosis , Sepsis/epidemiology , Cause of Death , China/epidemiology , Consensus , Coronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Respiratory Syncytial Viruses/isolation & purification , Respiratory Tract Infections/therapy , Risk Assessment , Sepsis/therapy , Shock, Septic/diagnosis , Shock, Septic/epidemiology , Shock, Septic/therapy , Survival Analysis
13.
Front Med ; 14(5): 601-612, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-632554

ABSTRACT

The possible effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) on COVID-19 disease severity have generated considerable debate. We performed a single-center, retrospective analysis of hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China, who had definite clinical outcome (dead or discharged) by February 15, 2020. Patients on anti-hypertensive treatment with or without ACEI/ARB were compared on their clinical characteristics and outcomes. The medical records from 702 patients were screened. Among the 101 patients with a history of hypertension and taking at least one anti-hypertensive medication, 40 patients were receiving ACEI/ARB as part of their regimen, and 61 patients were on antihypertensive medication other than ACEI/ARB. We observed no statistically significant differences in percentages of in-hospital mortality (28% vs. 34%, P = 0.46), ICU admission (20% vs. 28%, P = 0.37) or invasive mechanical ventilation (18% vs. 26%, P = 0.31) between patients with or without ACEI/ARB treatment. Further multivariable adjustment of age and gender did not provide evidence for a significant association between ACEI/ARB treatment and severe COVID-19 outcomes. Our findings confirm the lack of an association between chronic receipt of renin-angiotensin system antagonists and severe outcomes of COVID-19. Patients should continue previous anti-hypertensive therapy until further evidence is available.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections , Hypertension/drug therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/drug effects , Betacoronavirus/physiology , COVID-19 , China/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Hypertension/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
14.
Front Med ; 15(1): 139-143, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-597942

ABSTRACT

The rationale for the antibiotic treatment of viral community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in adults was analyzed to develop a clinical reference standard for this condition. Clinical data from 166 patients diagnosed with viral pneumonia across 14 hospitals in Beijing from November 2010 to December 2017 were collected. The indications for medications were evaluated, and the rationale for the use of antibiotics was analyzed. A total of 163 (98.3%) patients with viral pneumonia were treated with antibiotics. A combination of C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) was used as markers to analyze the possible indications for antibiotic use. With threshold levels set at 0.25 µg/L for PCT and 20 mg/L for CRP, the rate of unreasonable use of antibiotics was 55.2%. By contrast, at a CRP level threshold of 60 mg/L, the rate of antibiotic misuse was 77.3%. A total of 39 of the 163 (23.9%) patients did not meet the guidelines for drug selection for viral CAP in adults. The unreasonable use of antibacterial drugs for the treatment of viral CAP in adults is a serious concern. Clinicians must reduce the unnecessary use of antibiotics.


Subject(s)
Community-Acquired Infections , Pneumonia , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Biomarkers , Calcitonin , Community-Acquired Infections/drug therapy , Humans , Pneumonia/drug therapy , Protein Precursors
15.
Trials ; 21(1): 422, 2020 May 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-342726

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a novel corinavirus (later named SARS-CoV-2 virus), was fistly reported in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China towards the end of 2019. Large-scale spread within China and internationally led the World Health Organization to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30th January 2020. The clinical manifestations of COVID-19 virus infection include asymptomatic infection, mild upper respiratory symptoms, severe viral pneumonia with respiratory failure, and even death. There are no antivirals of proven clinical efficacy in coronavirus infections. Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue, has inhibitory effects on animal and human highly pathogenic coronaviruses, including MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, in in vitro and in vivo experiments. It is also inhibitory against the COVID-19 virus in vitro. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of remdesivir in adult patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: The protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. This is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Adults (≥ 18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 virus infection, severe pneumonia signs or symptoms, and radiologically confirmed severe pneumonia are randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenously administered remdesivir or placebo for 10 days. The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement (censored at day 28), defined as the time (in days) from randomization of study treatment (remdesivir or placebo) until a decline of two categories on a six-category ordinal scale of clinical status (1 = discharged; 6 = death) or live discharge from hospital. One interim analysis for efficacy and futility will be conducted once half of the total number of events required has been observed. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized, placebo-controlled trial in COVID-19. Enrolment began in sites in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China on 6th February 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04257656. Registered on 6 February 2020.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Betacoronavirus/drug effects , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/administration & dosage , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Alanine/administration & dosage , Alanine/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , China , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Double-Blind Method , Equivalence Trials as Topic , Female , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Male , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Pandemics , Patient Safety , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
16.
Eur J Radiol ; 126: 108972, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-14043

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: We aimed to compare chest HRCT lung signs identified in scans of differently aged patients with COVID-19 infections. METHODS: Case data of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection in Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province in China were collected, and chest HRCT signs of infected patients in four age groups (<18 years, 18-44 years, 45-59 years, ≥60 years) were compared. RESULTS: Small patchy, ground-glass opacity (GGO), and consolidations were the main HRCT signs in 98 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infections. Patients aged 45-59 years and aged ≥60 years had more bilateral lung, lung lobe, and lung field involvement, and greater lesion numbers than patients <18 years. GGO accompanied with the interlobular septa thickening or a crazy-paving pattern, consolidation, and air bronchogram sign were more common in patients aged 45-59 years, and ≥60 years, than in those aged <18 years, and aged 18-44 years. CONCLUSIONS: Chest HRCT manifestations in patients with COVID-19 are related to patient's age, and HRCT signs may be milder in younger patients.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19 , China , Female , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Thorax/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Young Adult
17.
N Engl J Med ; 382(19): 1787-1799, 2020 05 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-9371

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, which causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, and an oxygen saturation (Sao2) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pao2) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) of less than 300 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lopinavir-ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, or standard care alone. The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent randomization; 99 were assigned to the lopinavir-ritonavir group, and 100 to the standard-care group. Treatment with lopinavir-ritonavir was not associated with a difference from standard care in the time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio for clinical improvement, 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.80). Mortality at 28 days was similar in the lopinavir-ritonavir group and the standard-care group (19.2% vs. 25.0%; difference, -5.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -17.3 to 5.7). The percentages of patients with detectable viral RNA at various time points were similar. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir-ritonavir led to a median time to clinical improvement that was shorter by 1 day than that observed with standard care (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.91). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the lopinavir-ritonavir group, but serious adverse events were more common in the standard-care group. Lopinavir-ritonavir treatment was stopped early in 13 patients (13.8%) because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir-ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308.).


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus/genetics , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A Inhibitors/adverse effects , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intention to Treat Analysis , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Patient Acuity , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Proportional Hazards Models , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Ritonavir/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , Time-to-Treatment , Treatment Failure , Viral Load
18.
Lancet ; 395(10229): 1054-1062, 2020 03 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-6685

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since December, 2019, Wuhan, China, has experienced an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 have been reported but risk factors for mortality and a detailed clinical course of illness, including viral shedding, have not been well described. METHODS: In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study, we included all adult inpatients (≥18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from Jinyintan Hospital and Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital (Wuhan, China) who had been discharged or had died by Jan 31, 2020. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and laboratory data, including serial samples for viral RNA detection, were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between survivors and non-survivors. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression methods to explore the risk factors associated with in-hospital death. FINDINGS: 191 patients (135 from Jinyintan Hospital and 56 from Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital) were included in this study, of whom 137 were discharged and 54 died in hospital. 91 (48%) patients had a comorbidity, with hypertension being the most common (58 [30%] patients), followed by diabetes (36 [19%] patients) and coronary heart disease (15 [8%] patients). Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital death associated with older age (odds ratio 1·10, 95% CI 1·03-1·17, per year increase; p=0·0043), higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (5·65, 2·61-12·23; p<0·0001), and d-dimer greater than 1 µg/mL (18·42, 2·64-128·55; p=0·0033) on admission. Median duration of viral shedding was 20·0 days (IQR 17·0-24·0) in survivors, but SARS-CoV-2 was detectable until death in non-survivors. The longest observed duration of viral shedding in survivors was 37 days. INTERPRETATION: The potential risk factors of older age, high SOFA score, and d-dimer greater than 1 µg/mL could help clinicians to identify patients with poor prognosis at an early stage. Prolonged viral shedding provides the rationale for a strategy of isolation of infected patients and optimal antiviral interventions in the future. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences; National Science Grant for Distinguished Young Scholars; National Key Research and Development Program of China; The Beijing Science and Technology Project; and Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Patient Care Planning , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Risk Assessment , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Cardiovascular Diseases/complications , China , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Diabetes Complications , Disease Progression , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Humans , Hypertension/complications , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality/trends , Pandemics , Patient Isolation , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...