Exclusion of older adults and immunocompromised individuals in influenza, pneumococcal and COVID-19 vaccine trials before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Older adults and immunocompromised individulas are often excluded from vaccine trials. AIM: We hypothesised that during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the proportion of trials excluding these patients decreased. METHODS: Using the US Food and Drug Administration and and European Medicines Agency search engines, we identified all vaccines approved against pneumococcal disease, influenza (quadrivalent vaccines), and COVID-19 from 2011 to 2021. Study protocols were screened for direct and indirect age exclusion criteria and exclusion of immunocompromised individuals. In addition, we reviewed the studies with no explicit exclusion criteria and investigated the actual inclusion of those individuals. RESULTS: We identified 2024 trial records; 1702 were excluded (e.g., use of other vaccine or risk group); and 322 studies were eligible for our review. Among the pneumococcal and influenza vaccine trials (n = 193), 81 (42%) had an explicit direct age exclusion, and 150 (78%) had an indirect age-related exclusion. In total, 163 trials (84%) trials were likely to exclude older adults. Among the COVID-19 vaccine trials (n = 129), 33 (26%) had direct age exclusion and 82 (64%) had indirect age exclusion; in total, 85 (66%) trials were likely to exclude older adults. Therefore was a 18% decrease in the proportion of trials with age-related exclusion between 2011 and 2021 (only influenza and pneumococcal vaccine trials) and 2020-2021 (only COVID-19 vaccine trials) (p = 0.014). In a sub-analysis assessing observational and randomised trials, the decrease was 25% and 9%, respectively. Immunocompromised individuals were included in 87 (45%) of the pneumococcal and influenza vaccine trials compared with 54 (42%) of the COVID-19 vaccine trials (p = 0.058). CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, we found a decrease in the exclusion of older adults from vaccine trials but no significant change in the inclusion of immunocompromised individulas.

Impact of vaccination on the presence and severity of symptoms in hospitalized patients with an infection of the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) of the SARS-CoV-2 (subvariant BA.1).

OBJECTIVES: The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants raised questions about the extent to which vaccines designed in 2020 have remained effective. We aimed to assess whether vaccine status was associated with the severity of Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients. METHODS: We conducted an international, multi-centric, retrospective study in 14 centres (Bulgaria, Croatia, France, and Turkey). We collected data on patients hospitalized for ≥24 hours between 1 December 2021 and 3 March 2022 with PCR-confirmed infection at a time of exclusive Omicron circulation and hospitalization related or not related to the infection. Patients who had received prophylaxis by monoclonal antibodies were excluded. Patients were considered fully vaccinated if they had received at least two injections of either mRNA and/or ChAdOx1-S or one injection of Ad26.CoV2-S vaccines. RESULTS: Among 1215 patients (median age, 73.0 years; interquartile range, 57.0-84.0; 51.3% men), 746 (61.4%) were fully vaccinated. In multivariate analysis, being vaccinated was associated with lower 28-day mortality (Odds Ratio [95% Confidence Interval] (OR [95CI]) = 0.50 [0.32-0.77]), intensive care unit admission (OR [95CI] = 0.40 [0.26-0.62]), and oxygen requirement (OR [95CI] = 0.34 [0.25-0.46]), independent of age and comorbidities. When co-analysing these patients with Omicron infection with 948 patients with Delta infection from a study we recently conducted, Omicron infection was associated with lower 28-day mortality (OR [95CI] = 0.53 [0.37-0.76]), intensive care unit admission (OR [95CI] = 0.19 [0.12-0.28]), and oxygen requirements (OR [95CI] = 0.50 [0.38-0.67]), independent of age, comorbidities, and vaccination status. DISCUSSION: Originally designed vaccines have remained effective on the severity of Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection. Omicron is associated with a lower risk of severe forms, independent of vaccination and patient characteristics.

SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibodies after a fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine in adult solid-organ transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: A fourth dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is recommended in solid-organ transplant (SOT) recipients, but the immunogenicity is poorly known. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational, monocentric study between the 1st January 2021 and 31st March 2022 of the anti-Spike antibody titers after one to four doses of vaccine in SOT. RESULTS: 825 SOT were included. Median age at first vaccine injection was 61.2 (IQR 50.9-69.3) years; 66.7 % were male; 63.4 % had received four vaccine doses. The proportion of participants with a strong humoral response (>260 BAU/mL) increased with the number of vaccine doses: 10.6 % after the 1st dose (D1), 35.1 % after the 2nd (D2), 48.5 % after the 3rd (D3), and 65.1 % after the 4th (D4) (p < 0.001). Among the tested patients, the proportion with a detectable humoral response was significantly higher after D4 than after D3 (47 % vs 22 %, p = 0.01). Liver transplant recipients had more frequently a strong humoral response after D2, D3 and D4 (OR = 5.3, 3.7 and 6.6 respectively when compared with other organ transplant recipients, p < 0.001). In kidney transplant recipients, belatacept-containing regimen was associated with a lower rate of detectable humoral (9 % vs 40 %, p = 0.025) after D3, but there was no statistical difference after D4. CONCLUSION: A fourth dose should be proposed to SOT recipients who did not developed an immune response after 3 doses. Kidney transplant recipients receiving belatacept have a poorer, although frequently detectable response.

Fine Analysis of Lymphocyte Subpopulations in SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients: Differential Profiling of Patients With Severe Outcome.

COVID-19 is caused by the human pathogen severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and has resulted in widespread morbidity and mortality. CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells and neutralizing antibodies all contribute to control SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, heterogeneity is a major factor in disease severity and in immune innate and adaptive responses to SARS-CoV-2. We performed a deep analysis by flow cytometry of lymphocyte populations of 125 hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 infected patients on the day of hospital admission. Five clusters of patients were identified using hierarchical classification on the basis of their immunophenotypic profile, with different mortality outcomes. Some characteristics were observed in all the clusters of patients, such as lymphopenia and an elevated level of effector CD8+CCR7- T cells. However, low levels of T cell activation are associated to a better disease outcome; on the other hand, profound CD8+ T-cell lymphopenia, a high level of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell activation and a high level of CD8+ T-cell senescence are associated with a higher mortality outcome. Furthermore, a cluster of patient was characterized by high B-cell responses with an extremely high level of plasmablasts. Our study points out the prognostic value of lymphocyte parameters such as T-cell activation and senescence and strengthen the interest in treating the patients early in course of the disease with targeted immunomodulatory therapies based on the type of adaptive response of each patient.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of heterologous and homologous mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 vaccination: A multicenter non-inferiority randomized trial.

Background: Although effective mRNA vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 infection have been deployed worldwide, their interchangeability could facilitate the scale-up of vaccination programs. The objective of the trial was to assess whether the immune response induced by a heterologous SARS-CoV-2 mRNA primo vaccination is non-inferior to that of a homologous mRNA vaccination. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial in adults 18 years of age and older who received a first dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a second dose of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, 28 to 49 days after the first dose. Randomization was stratified on the vaccine received at the first vaccination. The primary endpoint was the anti-spike IgG antibodies titer measured 28 days after the second vaccine dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, Trial, NCT04900467. Findings: Of the 414 randomized participants recruited from May 28 to July 2, 2021, 390 were included in the per protocol analysis: 94 participants in group 1 (BNT162b2/BNT162b2), 96 in group 2 (BNT162b2/mRNA-1273), 97 in group 3 (mRNA-1273/mRNA-1273), and 103 in group 4 (mRNA-1273/BNT162b2). The geometric mean titers ratios of anti-spike IgG antibodies for each heterologous regimen relative to the corresponding homologous regimen were 1·37 (two-sided 95% CI, 1·10 to 1·72) in the groups 1 and 2 and 0·67 (two-sided 95% CI, 0·55 to 0·82) in the groups 3 and 4. Levels of neutralizing antibodies to the main circulating SARS-Cov-2 viral strains were higher with the vaccine regimen containing mRNA-1273. Participants who received mRNA-1273 as a second dose experienced a higher rate of local adverse reactions and general symptoms than those who received BNT162b2 (p < 0·0001). Interpretation: The two SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines could be used with flexibility for the second dose of COVID-19 primo vaccination. Tolerance remains good regardless of vaccine sequence although mRNA-1273 was more reactogenic. Funding: French Ministries of Solidarity and Health and Research. BNT162b2 was provided by Pfizer/BioNTech. mRNA-1273 was provided by Moderna.

Impact of vaccination on the symptoms of hospitalised patients with SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant (B.1.617.1) infection.

OBJECTIVES: The diffusion of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) variant and the waning of immune response after primary Covid-19 vaccination favoured the breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections in vaccinated subjects. To assess the impact of vaccination, we determined the severity of infection in hospitalised patients according to vaccine status. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational study on patients hospitalised in 10 centres with a SARS-CoV-2 infection (Delta variant) from July to November 2021 by including all patients who had completed their primary vaccination at least 14 days before hospital admission and the same number of completely unvaccinated patients. We assessed the impact of vaccination and other risk factors through logistic regression. RESULTS: We included 955 patients (474 vaccinated and 481 unvaccinated). Vaccinated patients were significantly older (75.0 [63.25-84.0] vs. 55.0 [38.0-73.0]; p < 0.001), more frequently males (55.1% (261/474) vs. 46.4% (223/481); p = 0.009), and had more comorbidities (2.0 [1.0-3.0] vs. 1.0 [0.0-2.0]; p < 0.001). Vaccinated patients were less often admitted for Covid-19 (59.3% (281/474) vs. 75.1% (361/481); p < 0.001), had less extended lung lesions (≤25%: 64.3% (117/182) vs. 38.4% (88/229); p < 0.001), required oxygen less frequently (57.5% (229/398) vs. 73.0% (270/370); p < 0.001), at a lower flow (3.0 [0.0-8.7] vs. 6.0 [2.0-50.0] L/min, p < 0.001), and for a shorter duration (3 [0.0-8.0] vs. 6 [2.0-12.0] days, p < 0.001)., and required less frequently intensive care unit admission (16.2% (60/370) vs. 36.0% (133/369); p < 0.001) but had comparable mortality in bivariate analysis (16.7% (74/443) vs. 12.2% (53/433); p = 0.075). Multivariate logistic regression showed that vaccination significantly decreased the risk of death (0.38 [0.20-0.70](p = 0.002), ICU admission (0.31 [0.21-0.47](p < 0.001) and oxygen requirement (0.16 [0.10-0.26](p < 0.001), even among older patients or with comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalised with a delta variant SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccination was associated with less severe forms, even in the presence of comorbidities.

"When did you decide to receive the Covid-19 vaccine?" Survey in a high-volume vaccination center.

Highly efficient and safe Covid-19 vaccines are available in Europe in amounts that theoretically allow for a high immune coverage. However, a notable proportion of the population is reluctant toward immunization. We aimed to determine, among people who chose to be vaccinated, when they made the decision and whether they would have preferred an earlier vaccination. A survey was conducted in a high-volume Covid-19 vaccination center in France from 28 May to 9 July 2021 through an anonymous questionnaire. The 2519 participants (54.1% males; median age 39 years) attributed lower efficacy and safety to Covid-19 vaccines than to vaccines in general. When asked when they decided to receive the vaccine, 15.5% and 16.0% answered "less than one month ago" and "less than one week ago," respectively; age <40 and female sex were independently associated with these responses. When asked whether they would have preferred to have been vaccinated earlier, 57.6% answered "definitely no," "rather no," or "neither yes nor no"; female sex (independently from age) was associated with these answers. When asked whether they would have preferred to receive the vaccine as early as January 2021, 65.2% answered "definitely no," "rather no," or "neither yes nor no"; age <40 and female sex were independently associated with these responses. In conclusion, one-third people had made the decision to be vaccinated only recently, while more than half would not have preferred an earlier vaccination, in particular women and those aged <40 years. Vaccine campaigns should take such short-term decision-making processes into account.

SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Immunocompromised Patient Given Antibody Monotherapy.

A 72-year-old immunocompromised man infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 received bamlanivimab monotherapy. Viral evolution was monitored in nasopharyngeal and blood samples by melting curve analysis of single-nucleotide polymorphisms and whole-genome sequencing. Rapid emergence of spike receptor binding domain mutations was found, associated with a compartmentalization of viral populations.

Complement Alternative and Mannose-Binding Lectin Pathway Activation Is Associated With COVID-19 Mortality.

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 infection triggers excessive immune response resulting in increased levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, endothelial injury, and intravascular coagulopathy. The complement system (CS) activation participates to this hyperinflammatory response. However, it is still unclear which activation pathways (classical, alternative, or lectin pathway) pilots the effector mechanisms that contribute to critical illness. To better understand the immune correlates of disease severity, we performed an analysis of CS activation pathways and components in samples collected from COVID-19 patients hospitalized in Grenoble Alpes University Hospital between 1 and 30 April 2020 and of their relationship with the clinical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, single-center study cohort in 74 hospitalized patients with RT-PCR-proven COVID-19. The functional activities of classical, alternative, and mannose-binding lectin (MBL) pathways and the antigenic levels of the individual components C1q, C4, C3, C5, Factor B, and MBL were measured in patients' samples during hospital admission. Hierarchical clustering with the Ward method was performed in order to identify clusters of patients with similar characteristics of complement markers. Age was included in the model. Then, the clusters were compared with the patient clinical features: rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, corticoid treatment, oxygen requirement, and mortality. Results: Four clusters were identified according to complement parameters. Among them, two clusters revealed remarkable profiles: in one cluster (n = 15), patients exhibited activation of alternative and lectin pathways and low antigenic levels of MBL, C4, C3, Factor B, and C5 compared to all the other clusters; this cluster had the higher proportion of patients who died (27%) and required oxygen support (80%) or ICU care (53%). In contrast, the second cluster (n = 19) presented inflammatory profile with high classical pathway activity and antigenic levels of complement components; a low proportion of patients required ICU care (26%) and no patient died in this group. Conclusion: These findings argue in favor of prominent activation of the alternative and MBL complement pathways in severe COVID-19, but the spectrum of complement involvement seems to be heterogeneous requiring larger studies.

An open-label randomized controlled trial of the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir plus IFN-ß-1a and hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the clinical, virological and safety outcomes of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-interferon (IFN)-ß-1a, hydroxychloroquine or remdesivir in comparison to standard of care (control) in coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) inpatients requiring oxygen and/or ventilatory support. METHODS: We conducted a phase III multicentre, open-label, randomized 1:1:1:1:1, adaptive, controlled trial (DisCoVeRy), an add-on to the Solidarity trial (NCT04315948, EudraCT2020-000936-23). The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15, measured by the WHO seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes included quantification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in respiratory specimens and pharmacokinetic and safety analyses. We report the results for the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms and for the hydroxychloroquine arm, trials of which were stopped prematurely. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 583 participants-lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 145), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-ß-1a (n = 145), hydroxychloroquine (n = 145), control (n = 148)-among whom 418 (71.7%) were male, the median age was 63 years (IQR 54-71), and 211 (36.2%) had a severe disease. The day-15 clinical status was not improved with the investigational treatments: lopinavir/ritonavir versus control, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.83, (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.26, p 0.39), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-ß-1a versus control, aOR 0.69 (95%CI 0.45-1.04, p 0.08), and hydroxychloroquine versus control, aOR 0.93 (95%CI 0.62-1.41, p 0.75). No significant effect of investigational treatment was observed on SARS-CoV-2 clearance. Trough plasma concentrations of lopinavir and ritonavir were higher than those expected, while those of hydroxychloroquine were those expected with the dosing regimen. The occurrence of serious adverse events was significantly higher in participants allocated to the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms. CONCLUSION: In adults hospitalized for COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-ß-1a and hydroxychloroquine improved neither the clinical status at day 15 nor SARS-CoV-2 clearance in respiratory tract specimens.

Persistent COVID-19 symptoms are highly prevalent 6 months after hospitalization: results from a large prospective cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Persistent COVID-19 symptoms have been reported up to 3 months after hospital discharge. Little is known on the frequency and the nature of persistent symptoms beyond 3 months. Here we have assessed, in the longitudinal prospective French COVID-19 cohort, symptoms that persisted 6 months after admission for COVID-19. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with virologically confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled. Follow-up was planned with a physician's visit at month (M)3 and M6 after admission. Associations between persistence of symptoms at M6 and clinical characteristics at admission were assessed through bivariate and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: M6 data were available for 1137 participants. Median age was 61 years (IQR 51-71) and 288 (29%, 95% CI 26-32%) were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) during the acute phase. Six hundred and fifty-five (68%, 95% CI 65-71%) and 639 (60%, 95% CI 57-63%) participants had at least one symptom at M3 and M6 visit, respectively, mostly fatigue, dyspnoea, joint pain and myalgia. At M6, 255 (24%, 95% CI 21-27%) of participants had three or more persistent symptoms. The presence of three or more symptoms at M6 was independently associated with female gender (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.40, 95% CI 1.75-3.30), having three or more symptoms at admission (aOR 2.04, 95% CI 1.45-2.89) and ICU admission/transfer during acute phase (aOR 1.55, 95% CI 1.09-2.18), but not significantly with age or having two or more comorbidities. One hundred and twenty-five (29%, 95% CI 25-34%) of those who initially had a professional occupation were not back to work at M6. DISCUSSION: A fourth of individuals admitted to hospital for COVID-19 still had three or more persistent symptoms at M6. Longitudinal follow-up of individuals with severe COVID-19 is warranted to better understand the pathophysiology underlying this long-term persistence.

Chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers and mortality in COVID-19: A multicenter prospective cohort and literature review.

AIMS: The role of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockers on the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is debated. We assessed the association between chronic use of RAAS blockers and mortality among inpatients with COVID-19 and explored reasons for discrepancies in the literature. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included adult hypertensive patients from a prospective nationwide cohort of 3512 inpatients with COVID-19 up to June 30, 2020. Cox proportional hazard models with various adjustment or propensity weighting methods were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) of 30-day mortality for chronic users versus non-users of RAAS blockers. We analyzed data of 1160 hypertensive patients: 719 (62%) were male and 777 (67%) were older than 65 years. The main comorbidities were diabetes (n = 416, 36%), chronic cardiac disease (n = 401, 35%), and obesity (n = 340, 29%); 705 (61%) received oxygen therapy. We recorded 135 (11.6%) deaths within 30 days of diagnosis. We found no association between chronic use of RAAS blockers and mortality (unadjusted HR = 1.13, 95% CI [0.8-1.6]; propensity inverse probability treatment weighted HR = 1.09 [0.86-1.39]; propensity standardized mortality ratio weighted HR = 1.08 [0.79-1.47]). Our comprehensive review of previous studies highlighted that significant associations were mostly found in unrestricted populations with inappropriate adjustment, or with biased in-hospital exposure measurement. CONCLUSION: Our results do not support previous concerns regarding these drugs, nor a potential protective effect as reported in previous poorly designed studies and meta-analyses. RAAS blockers should not be discontinued during the pandemic, while in-hospital management of these drugs will be clarified by randomized trials. NCT04262921.

Neglecting Plasma Protein Binding in COVID-19 Patients Leads to a Wrong Interpretation of Lopinavir Overexposure.

Boffito et al. recalled the critical importance to correctly interpret protein binding. Changes of lopinavir pharmacokinetics in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are a perfect illustration. Indeed, several studies described that total lopinavir plasma concentrations were considerably higher in patients with severe COVID-19 than those reported in patients with HIV. These findings have led to a reduction of the dose of lopinavir in some patients, hypothesizing an inhibitory effect of inflammation on lopinavir metabolism. Unfortunately, changes in plasma protein binding were never investigated. We performed a retrospective cohort study. Data were collected from the medical records of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 treated with lopinavir/ritonavir in intensive care units or infectious disease departments of Toulouse University Hospital (France). Total and unbound concentrations of lopinavir, C reactive protein, albumin, and alpha-1-acid glycoprotein (AAG) levels were measured during routine care on the same samples. In patients with COVID-19, increased total lopinavir concentration is the result of an increased AAG-bound lopinavir concentration, whereas the unbound concentration remains constant, and insufficient to reduce the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load. Although international guidelines have recently recommended against using lopinavir/ritonavir to treat severe COVID-19, the description of lopinavir pharmacokinetics changes in COVID-19 is a textbook case of the high risk of misinterpretation of a total drug exposure when changes in protein binding are not taken into consideration.

Cluster of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the French Alps, February 2020.

BACKGROUND: On 7 February 2020, French Health authorities were informed of a confirmed case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in an Englishman infected in Singapore who had recently stayed in a chalet in the French Alps. We conducted an investigation to identify secondary cases and interrupt transmission. METHODS: We defined as a confirmed case a person linked to the chalet with a positive reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction sample for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: The index case stayed 4 days in the chalet with 10 English tourists and a family of 5 French residents; SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 5 individuals in France, 6 in England (including the index case), and 1 in Spain (overall attack rate in the chalet: 75%). One pediatric case, with picornavirus and influenza A coinfection, visited 3 different schools while symptomatic. One case was asymptomatic, with similar viral load as that of a symptomatic case. Seven days after the first cases were diagnosed, 1 tertiary case was detected in a symptomatic patient with from the chalet a positive endotracheal aspirate; all previous and concurrent nasopharyngeal specimens were negative. Additionally, 172 contacts were monitored; all contacts tested for SARS-CoV-2 (N = 73) were negative. CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence in this cluster of 1 asymptomatic case with similar viral load as a symptomatic patient suggests transmission potential of asymptomatic individuals. The fact that an infected child did not transmit the disease despite close interactions within schools suggests potential different transmission dynamics in children. Finally, the dissociation between upper and lower respiratory tract results underscores the need for close monitoring of the clinical evolution of suspected cases of coronavirus disease 2019.

COVID-19: Underlying Adipokine Storm and Angiotensin 1-7 Umbrella.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the third coronavirus leading to a global health outbreak. Despite the high mortality rates from SARS-CoV-1 and Middle-East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV infections, which both sparked the interest of the scientific community, the underlying physiopathology of the SARS-CoV-2 infection, remains partially unclear. SARS-CoV-2 shares similar features with SARS-CoV-1, notably the use of the angiotensin conversion enzyme 2 (ACE2) as a receptor to enter the host cells. However, some features of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic are unique. In this work, we focus on the association between obesity, metabolic syndrome, and type 2 diabetes on the one hand, and the severity of COVID-19 infection on the other, as it seems greater in these patients. We discuss how adipocyte dysfunction leads to a specific immune environment that predisposes obese patients to respiratory failure during COVID-19. We also hypothesize that an ACE2-cleaved protein, angiotensin 1-7, has a beneficial action on immune deregulation and that its low expression during the SARS-CoV-2 infection could explain the severity of infection. This introduces angiotensin 1-7 as a potential candidate of interest in therapeutic research on CoV infections.