The association between non-English primary language and COVID-19 clinical trial eligibility and enrollment: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Establishing equitable access to COVID-19 clinical trials is an important step in mitigating outcomes disparities. Historically, language has served as a barrier to equitable clinical trial participation. METHODS: A centralized research infrastructure was established at our institution to screen potential trial participants and to promote efficient and equitable access to COVID-19 clinical trials. Rates of eligibility and enrollment in COVID-19 clinical trials by primary language between April 9 and July 31, 2020 (during the first regional COVID-19 surge) were evaluated using logistic regression. Estimates were adjusted for potential confounders including age, sex, and time. RESULTS: A total of 1245 patients were admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 during the study period and screened for clinical trial eligibility. Among all screened patients, 487 (39%) had a non-English primary language. After adjustment, patients with a non-English primary language had 1.98 times higher odds (CI 1.51 to 2.59) of being eligible for 1 or more COVID-19 clinical trials. Among eligible patients, those with a non-English primary language had 1.83 times higher odds (CI 1.36 to 2.47) of enrolling in COVID-19 clinical trials than patients with English as the primary language. CONCULSION: These findings suggest that there are modifiable barriers that can be addressed to lessen the impact of language discordance on access to clinical trials and provide an opportunity to further investigate factors associated with clinical trial participation for patients whose primary language is not English.

Duration of viral shedding and culture positivity with postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 delta variant infections.

Isolation guidelines for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are largely derived from data collected prior to the emergence of the delta variant. We followed a cohort of ambulatory patients with postvaccination breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections with longitudinal collection of nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 viral load quantification, whole-genome sequencing, and viral culture. All delta variant infections in our cohort were symptomatic, compared with 64% of non-delta variant infections. Symptomatic delta variant breakthrough infections were characterized by higher initial viral load, longer duration of virologic shedding by PCR, greater likelihood of replication-competent virus at early stages of infection, and longer duration of culturable virus compared with non-delta variants. The duration of time since vaccination was also correlated with both duration of PCR positivity and duration of detection of replication-competent virus. Nonetheless, no individuals with symptomatic delta variant infections had replication-competent virus by day 10 after symptom onset or 24 hours after resolution of symptoms. These data support US CDC isolation guidelines as of November 2021, which recommend isolation for 10 days or until symptom resolution and reinforce the importance of prompt testing and isolation among symptomatic individuals with delta breakthrough infections. Additional data are needed to evaluate these relationships among asymptomatic and more severe delta variant breakthrough infections.

The Landscape of COVID-19 Research in the United States: a Cross-sectional Study of Randomized Trials Registered on ClinicalTrials.Gov.

IMPORTANCE: SARS-CoV-2 has infected over 200 million people worldwide, resulting in more than 4 million deaths. Randomized controlled trials are the single best tool to identify effective treatments against this novel pathogen. OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of randomized controlled trials of treatments for COVID-19 in the United States launched in the first 9 months of the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants We conducted a cross-sectional study of all completed or actively enrolling randomized, interventional, clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19 in the United States registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov as of August 10, 2020. We excluded trials of vaccines and other interventions intended to prevent COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures We used descriptive statistics to characterize the clinical trials and the statistical power for the available studies. For the late-phase trials (i.e., phase 3 and 2/3 studies), we compared the geographic distribution of the clinical trials with the geographic distribution of people diagnosed with COVID-19. RESULTS: We identified 200 randomized controlled trials of treatments for people with COVID-19. Across all trials, 87 (43.5%) were single-center, 64 (32.0%) were unblinded, and 80 (40.0%) were sponsored by industry. The most common treatments included monoclonal antibodies (N=46 trials), small molecule immunomodulators (N=28), antiviral medications (N=24 trials), and hydroxychloroquine (N=20 trials). Of the 9 trials completed by August 2020, the median sample size was 450 (IQR 67-1113); of the 191 ongoing trials, the median planned sample size was 150 (IQR 60-400). Of the late-phase trials (N=54), the most common primary outcome was a severity scale (N=23, 42.6%), followed by a composite of mortality and ventilation (N=10, 18.5%), and mortality alone (N=6, 11.1%). Among these late-phase trials, all trials of antivirals, monoclonal antibodies, or chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine had a power of less than 25% to detect a 20% relative risk reduction in mortality. Had the individual trials for a given class of treatments instead formed a single trial, the power to detect that same reduction in mortality would have been greater than 98%. There was large variability in access to trials with the highest number of trials per capita in the Northeast and the lowest in the Midwest. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A large number of randomized trials were launched early in the pandemic to evaluate treatments for COVID-19. However, many trials were underpowered for important clinical endpoints and substantial geographic disparities were observed, highlighting the importance of improving national clinical trial infrastructure.

Determining the Incidence of Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Among Early Recipients of COVID-19 Vaccines (DISCOVER-COVID-19): A Prospective Cohort Study of Healthcare Workers Before, During and After Vaccination.

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination on viral characteristics of breakthrough infections is unknown. In this prospective cohort study, incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection decreased following vaccination. Although asymptomatic positive tests were observed following vaccination, the higher cycle thresholds, repeat negative tests, and inability to culture virus raise questions about their clinical significance.

Efficacy of Tocilizumab in Patients Hospitalized with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor blockade in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) who are not receiving mechanical ventilation is unclear. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, hyperinflammatory states, and at least two of the following signs: fever (body temperature >38°C), pulmonary infiltrates, or the need for supplemental oxygen in order to maintain an oxygen saturation greater than 92%. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive standard care plus a single dose of either tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo. The primary outcome was intubation or death, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The secondary efficacy outcomes were clinical worsening and discontinuation of supplemental oxygen among patients who had been receiving it at baseline, both assessed in time-to-event analyses. RESULTS: We enrolled 243 patients; 141 (58%) were men, and 102 (42%) were women. The median age was 59.8 years (range, 21.7 to 85.4), and 45% of the patients were Hispanic or Latino. The hazard ratio for intubation or death in the tocilizumab group as compared with the placebo group was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 1.81; P = 0.64), and the hazard ratio for disease worsening was 1.11 (95% CI, 0.59 to 2.10; P = 0.73). At 14 days, 18.0% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 14.9% of the patients in the placebo group had had worsening of disease. The median time to discontinuation of supplemental oxygen was 5.0 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.6) in the tocilizumab group and 4.9 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.8) in the placebo group (P = 0.69). At 14 days, 24.6% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 21.2% of the patients in the placebo group were still receiving supplemental oxygen. Patients who received tocilizumab had fewer serious infections than patients who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab was not effective for preventing intubation or death in moderately ill hospitalized patients with Covid-19. Some benefit or harm cannot be ruled out, however, because the confidence intervals for efficacy comparisons were wide. (Funded by Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04356937.).

Lung Histopathology in Coronavirus Disease 2019 as Compared With Severe Acute Respiratory Sydrome and H1N1 Influenza: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have respiratory failure with hypoxemia and acute bilateral pulmonary infiltrates, consistent with ARDS. Respiratory failure in COVID-19 might represent a novel pathologic entity. RESEARCH QUESTION: How does the lung histopathology described in COVID-19 compare with the lung histopathology described in SARS and H1N1 influenza? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to characterize the lung histopathologic features of COVID-19 and compare them against findings of other recent viral pandemics, H1N1 influenza and SARS. We systematically searched MEDLINE and PubMed for studies published up to June 24, 2020, using search terms for COVID-19, H1N1 influenza, and SARS with keywords for pathology, biopsy, and autopsy. Using PRISMA-Individual Participant Data guidelines, our systematic review analysis included 26 articles representing 171 COVID-19 patients; 20 articles representing 287 H1N1 patients; and eight articles representing 64 SARS patients. RESULTS: In COVID-19, acute-phase diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) was reported in 88% of patients, which was similar to the proportion of cases with DAD in both H1N1 (90%) and SARS (98%). Pulmonary microthrombi were reported in 57% of COVID-19 and 58% of SARS patients, as compared with 24% of H1N1 influenza patients. INTERPRETATION: DAD, the histologic correlate of ARDS, is the predominant histopathologic pattern identified in lung pathology from patients with COVID-19, H1N1 influenza, and SARS. Microthrombi were reported more frequently in both patients with COVID-19 and SARS as compared with H1N1 influenza. Future work is needed to validate this histopathologic finding and, if confirmed, elucidate the mechanistic underpinnings and characterize any associations with clinically important outcomes.

Development and Prospective Validation of a Deep Learning Algorithm for Predicting Need for Mechanical Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Objective and early identification of hospitalized patients, and particularly those with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), who may require mechanical ventilation (MV) may aid in delivering timely treatment. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can a transparent deep learning (DL) model predict the need for MV in hospitalized patients and those with COVID-19 up to 24 h in advance? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We trained and externally validated a transparent DL algorithm to predict the future need for MV in hospitalized patients, including those with COVID-19, using commonly available data in electronic health records. Additionally, commonly used clinical criteria (heart rate, oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, Fio2, and pH) were used to assess future need for MV. Performance of the algorithm was evaluated using the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value. RESULTS: We obtained data from more than 30,000 ICU patients (including more than 700 patients with COVID-19) from two academic medical centers. The performance of the model with a 24-h prediction horizon at the development and validation sites was comparable (AUC, 0.895 vs 0.882, respectively), providing significant improvement over traditional clinical criteria (P < .001). Prospective validation of the algorithm among patients with COVID-19 yielded AUCs in the range of 0.918 to 0.943. INTERPRETATION: A transparent deep learning algorithm improves on traditional clinical criteria to predict the need for MV in hospitalized patients, including in those with COVID-19. Such an algorithm may help clinicians to optimize timing of tracheal intubation, to allocate resources and staff better, and to improve patient care.

Utility of Hypertonic Saline and Diazepam in COVID-19-Related Hydroxychloroquine Toxicity.

BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) poisoning is a life-threatening but treatable toxic ingestion. The scale of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (COVID-19) and the controversial suggestion that HCQ is a treatment option have led to a significant increase in HCQ use. HCQ poisoning should be at the top-of-mind for emergency providers in cases of toxic ingestion. Treatment for HCQ poisoning includes sodium bicarbonate, epinephrine, and aggressive electrolyte repletion. We highlight the use of hypertonic saline and diazepam. CASE REPORT: We describe the case of a 37-year-old man who presented to the emergency department after the ingestion of approximately 16 g of HCQ tablets (initial serum concentration 4270 ng/mL). He was treated with an epinephrine infusion, hypertonic sodium chloride, high-dose diazepam, sodium bicarbonate, and aggressive potassium repletion. Persistent altered mental status necessitated intubation, and he was managed in the medical intensive care unit until his QRS widening and QTc prolongation resolved. After his mental status improved and it was confirmed that his ingestion was not with the intent to self-harm, he was discharged home with outpatient follow-up. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: For patients presenting with HCQ overdose and an unknown initial serum potassium level, high-dose diazepam and hypertonic sodium chloride should be started immediately for the patient with widened QRS. The choice of hypertonic sodium chloride instead of sodium bicarbonate is to avoid exacerbating underlying hypokalemia which may in turn potentiate unstable dysrhythmia. In addition, early intubation should be a priority in vomiting patients because both HCQ toxicity and high-dose diazepam cause profound sedation.