Associated factors for mortality in a COVID-19 colombian cohort: is the third wave relevant when Mu variant was predominant epidemiologically?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between Colombia's third wave when the Mu variant was predominant epidemiologically (until 75%) in Colombia and COVID-19 all-cause in-hospital mortality. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort, we included hospitalized patients ≥18 years with SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 2020 to September 2021 in ten hospitals from three cities in Colombia. Description analysis, survival, and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between the third epidemic wave and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 25,371 patients were included. The age-stratified time-to-mortality curves showed differences according to epidemic waves in patients ≥75 years (log-rank test p = 0.012). In the multivariate Cox analysis, the third wave was not associated with increased mortality relative to the first wave (aHR 0.95; 95%CI 0.84-1.08), but there was an interaction between age ≥75 years and the third wave finding a lower HR for mortality (aHR 0.56, 95%CI 0.36-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find an increase in in-hospital mortality during the third epidemic wave in which the Mu variant was predominant in Colombia. The reduced hazard in mortality in patients ≥75 years hospitalized in the third wave could be explained by the high coverage of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in this population and patients with underlying conditions.

Viral reactivations and co-infections in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Viral reactivations and co-infections have been reported among COVID-19 patients. However, studies on the clinical outcomes of different viral reactivations and co-infections are currently in limit. Thus, the primary purpose of this review is to perform an overarching investigation on the cases of latent virus reactivation and co-infection in COVID-19 patients to build collective evidence contributing to improving patient health. The aim of the study was to conduct a literature review to compare the patient characteristics and outcomes of reactivations and co-infections of different viruses. METHODS: Our population of interest included confirmed COVID-19 patients who were diagnosed with a viral infection either concurrently or following their COVID-19 diagnosis. We extracted the relevant literature through a systematic search using the key terms in the online databases including the EMBASE, MEDLINE, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), from inception onwards up to June 2022. The authors independently extracted data from eligible studies and assessed the risk of bias using the Consensus-based Clinical Case Reporting (CARE) guidelines and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Main patient characteristics, frequency of each manifestation, and diagnostic criteria used in studies were summarized in tables. RESULTS: In total, 53 articles were included in this review. We identified 40 reactivation studies, 8 coinfection studies, and 5 studies where concomitant infection in COVID-19 patients was not distinguished as either reactivation or coinfection. Data were extracted for 12 viruses including IAV, IBV, EBV, CMV, VZV, HHV-1, HHV-2, HHV-6, HHV-7, HHV-8, HBV, and Parvovirus B19. EBV, HHV-1, and CMV were most frequently observed within the reactivation cohort, whereas IAV and EBV within the coinfection cohort. In both reactivation and coinfection groups, patients reported cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and immunosuppression as comorbidities, acute kidney injury as complication, and lymphopenia and elevated D-dimer and CRP levels from blood tests. Common pharmaceutical interventions in two groups included steroids and antivirals. CONCLUSION: Overall, these findings expand our knowledge on the characteristics of COVID-19 patients with viral reactivations and co-infections. Our experience with current review indicates a need for further investigations on virus reactivation and coinfection among COVID-19 patients.

Expert review of global real-world data on COVID-19 vaccine booster effectiveness and safety during the omicron-dominant phase of the pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 vaccines have been highly effective in reducing morbidity and mortality during the pandemic. However, the emergence of the Omicron variant and subvariants as the globally dominant strains have raised doubts about the effectiveness of currently available vaccines and prompted debate about potential future vaccination strategies. AREAS COVERED: Using the publicly available IVAC VIEW-hub platform, we reviewed 52 studies on vaccine effectiveness (VE) after booster vaccinations. VE were reported for SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic infection, severe disease and death and stratified by vaccine schedule and age. In addition, a non-systematic literature review of safety was performed to identify single or multi-country studies investigating adverse event rates for at least two of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines. EXPERT OPINION: Booster shots of the current COVID-19 vaccines provide consistently high protection against Omicron-related severe disease and death. Additionally, this protection appears to be conserved for at least 3 months, with a small but significant waning after that. The positive risk-benefit ratio of these vaccines is well established, giving us confidence to administer additional doses as required. Future vaccination strategies will likely include a combination of schedules based on risk profile, as overly frequent boosting may be neither beneficial nor sustainable for the general population.

Impact of immunosuppression regimen on COVID-19 mortality in kidney transplant recipients: Analysis from a Colombian transplantation centers registry Impacto de los esquemas de inmunosupresión en la mortalidad por COVID-19 en receptores de trasplante renal: análisis en centros de trasplante renal en Colombia

Background The impact of immunosuppression in solid organ transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. The knowledge about the behavior of different immunosuppression schemes in clinical outcomes is scarce. This study aimed to determine the risk of death in kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19 under two different schemes of immunosuppression. Methods We describe our experience in kidney transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection in seven transplant centers during the first year of the pandemic before starting the vaccination programs in the city of Bogotá. Demographic characteristics, clinical presentation, immunosuppression schemes at presentation, and global treatment strategies were compared between recovered and dead patients;survival analysis was carried out between calcineurin inhibitors based regimen and free calcineurin inhibitors regimen. Results Among 165 confirmed cases, 28 died (17%);the risk factors for mortality identified in univariate analysis were age older than 60 years (p = .003) diabetes (p = .001), immunosuppression based on calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) (p = .025) and patients receiving steroids (p = .041). In multivariable analysis, hypoxemia (p = .000) and calcineurin inhibitors regimen (p = .002) were predictors of death. Survival analysis showed increased mortality risk in patients receiving CNI based immunosuppression regimen vs. CNI free regimens mortality rates were, respectively, 21.7% and 8.5% (p = .036). Conclusions Our results suggest that the calcineurin inhibitors probably do not provide greater protection compared to calcineurin inhibitor free schemes being necessary to carry out analyzes that allow us to evaluate the outcomes with different immunosuppression schemes in solid organ transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Impact of immunosuppression regimen on COVID-19 mortality in kidney transplant recipients: Analysis from a Colombian transplantation centers registry.

BACKGROUND: The impact of immunosuppression in solid organ transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. The knowledge about the behavior of different immunosuppression schemes in clinical outcomes is scarce. This study aimed to determine the risk of death in kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19 under two different schemes of immunosuppression. METHODS: We describe our experience in kidney transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection in seven transplant centers during the first year of the pandemic before starting the vaccination programs in the city of Bogotá. Demographic characteristics, clinical presentation, immunosuppression schemes at presentation, and global treatment strategies were compared between recovered and dead patients; survival analysis was carried out between calcineurin inhibitors based regimen and free calcineurin inhibitors regimen. RESULTS: Among 165 confirmed cases, 28 died (17%); the risk factors for mortality identified in univariate analysis were age older than 60 years (p=.003) diabetes (p=.001), immunosuppression based on calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) (p=.025) and patients receiving steroids (p=.041). In multivariable analysis, hypoxemia (p=.000) and calcineurin inhibitors regimen (p=.002) were predictors of death. Survival analysis showed increased mortality risk in patients receiving CNI based immunosuppression regimen vs. CNI free regimens mortality rates were, respectively, 21.7% and 8.5% (p=.036). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the calcineurin inhibitors probably do not provide greater protection compared to calcineurin inhibitor free schemes being necessary to carry out analyzes that allow us to evaluate the outcomes with different immunosuppression schemes in solid organ transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Understanding the Potential Impact of Different Drug Properties on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Transmission and Disease Burden: A Modelling Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The public health impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has motivated a rapid search for potential therapeutics, with some key successes. However, the potential impact of different treatments, and consequently research and procurement priorities, have not been clear. METHODS: Using a mathematical model of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission, COVID-19 disease and clinical care, we explore the public-health impact of different potential therapeutics, under a range of scenarios varying healthcare capacity, epidemic trajectories; and drug efficacy in the absence of supportive care. RESULTS: The impact of drugs like dexamethasone (delivered to the most critically-ill in hospital and whose therapeutic benefit is expected to depend on the availability of supportive care such as oxygen and mechanical ventilation) is likely to be limited in settings where healthcare capacity is lowest or where uncontrolled epidemics result in hospitals being overwhelmed. As such, it may avert 22% of deaths in high-income countries but only 8% in low-income countries (assuming R = 1.35). Therapeutics for different patient populations (those not in hospital, early in the course of infection) and types of benefit (reducing disease severity or infectiousness, preventing hospitalization) could have much greater benefits, particularly in resource-poor settings facing large epidemics. CONCLUSIONS: Advances in the treatment of COVID-19 to date have been focused on hospitalized-patients and predicated on an assumption of adequate access to supportive care. Therapeutics delivered earlier in the course of infection that reduce the need for healthcare or reduce infectiousness could have significant impact, and research into their efficacy and means of delivery should be a priority.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in healthcare workers in a network of clinics in Latin America.

Objectives: Healthcare workers (HCWs) have been severely affected in terms of both morbidity and mortality since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the first few months of 2021, Colombia experienced a surge in positive cases. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of vaccination on the incidence of new positive cases in HCWs. Design: This was a retrospective cohort study of frontline employees in a network of clinics in Colombia, who were prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination from February to March 2021. Results: Our findings were consistent with recent reports. During early 2020, the incidence of HCWs positively diagnosed with COVID-19 in Colombia was higher than that for the general population. With the start of the national vaccination program, the incidence among HCWs decreased from April 2021, while that for the general population remained relatively unchanged. Our study identified lower infection rates among HCWs during April (odds ratio [OR], 0.72 [95% CI 0.58-0.90]; p < 0.01) and May (odds ratio [OR], 0.25 [95% CI 0.18-0.36]; p < 0.01). Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccination rollout in Colombia during early 2021 led to a decrease in the incidence of new positive cases among HCWs, in contrast to a continuing surge in the general population. Our findings suggested that COVID-19 vaccination provided adequate immunity, which guaranteed protection to HCWs.

A simplified alternative diagnostic algorithm for SARS-CoV-2 suspected symptomatic patients and confirmed close contacts (asymptomatic): A consensus of Latin American experts.

INTRODUCTION: Latin America accounts for one-quarter of global COVID-19 cases and one-third of deaths. Inequalities in the region lead to barriers to the best use of diagnostic tests during the pandemic. There is a need for simplified guidelines that consider the region's limited health resources, international guidelines, medical literature, and local expertise. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi method, 9 experts from Latin American countries developed a simplified algorithm for COVID-19 diagnosis on the basis of their answers to 24 questions related to diagnostic settings, and discussion of the literature and their experiences. RESULTS: The algorithm considers 3 timeframes (≤7 days, 8-13 days, and ≥14 days) and presents diagnostic options for each. SARS-CoV-2 real- time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction is the test of choice from day 1 to 14 after symptom onset or close contact, although antigen testing may be used in specific circumstances, from day 5 to 7. Antibody assays may be used for confirmation, usually after day 14; however, if clinical suspicion is very high, but other tests are negative, these assays may be used as an adjunct to decision-making from day 8 to 13. CONCLUSION: The proposed algorithm aims to support COVID-19 diagnosis decision-making in Latin America.

Implications of Antibiotic Use during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Example of Associated Antimicrobial Resistance in Latin America.

Antimicrobials are essential for infection management [...].

Socioeconomic inequalities associated with mortality for COVID-19 in Colombia: a cohort nationwide study.

BACKGROUND: After 8 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, Latin American countries have some of the highest rates in COVID-19 mortality. Despite being one of the most unequal regions of the world, there is a scarce report of the effect of socioeconomic conditions on COVID-19 mortality in their countries. We aimed to identify the effect of some socioeconomic inequality-related factors on COVID-19 mortality in Colombia. METHODS: We conducted a survival analysis in a nation-wide retrospective cohort study of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Colombia from 2 March 2020 to 26 October 2020. We calculated the time to death or recovery for each confirmed case in the cohort. We used an extended multivariable time-dependent Cox regression model to estimate the HR by age groups, sex, ethnicity, type of health insurance, area of residence and socioeconomic strata. RESULTS: There were 1 033 218 confirmed cases and 30 565 deaths for COVID-19 in Colombia between 2 March and 26 October. The risk of dying for COVID-19 among confirmed cases was higher in males (HR 1.68 95% CI 1.64 to 1.72), in people older than 60 years (HR 296.58 95% CI 199.22 to 441.51), in indigenous people (HR 1.20 95% CI 1.08 to 1.33), in people with subsidised health insurance regime (HR 1.89 95% CI 1.83 to 1.96) and in people living in the very low socioeconomic strata (HR 1.44 95% CI 1.24 to 1.68). CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence of socioeconomic inequalities in COVID-19 mortality in terms of age groups, sex, ethnicity, type of health insurance regimen and socioeconomic status.

Repurposed Antiviral Drugs for Covid-19 - Interim WHO Solidarity Trial Results.

BACKGROUND: World Health Organization expert groups recommended mortality trials of four repurposed antiviral drugs - remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon beta-1a - in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). METHODS: We randomly assigned inpatients with Covid-19 equally between one of the trial drug regimens that was locally available and open control (up to five options, four active and the local standard of care). The intention-to-treat primary analyses examined in-hospital mortality in the four pairwise comparisons of each trial drug and its control (drug available but patient assigned to the same care without that drug). Rate ratios for death were calculated with stratification according to age and status regarding mechanical ventilation at trial entry. RESULTS: At 405 hospitals in 30 countries, 11,330 adults underwent randomization; 2750 were assigned to receive remdesivir, 954 to hydroxychloroquine, 1411 to lopinavir (without interferon), 2063 to interferon (including 651 to interferon plus lopinavir), and 4088 to no trial drug. Adherence was 94 to 96% midway through treatment, with 2 to 6% crossover. In total, 1253 deaths were reported (median day of death, day 8; interquartile range, 4 to 14). The Kaplan-Meier 28-day mortality was 11.8% (39.0% if the patient was already receiving ventilation at randomization and 9.5% otherwise). Death occurred in 301 of 2743 patients receiving remdesivir and in 303 of 2708 receiving its control (rate ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.11; P = 0.50), in 104 of 947 patients receiving hydroxychloroquine and in 84 of 906 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.59; P = 0.23), in 148 of 1399 patients receiving lopinavir and in 146 of 1372 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.25; P = 0.97), and in 243 of 2050 patients receiving interferon and in 216 of 2050 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.39; P = 0.11). No drug definitely reduced mortality, overall or in any subgroup, or reduced initiation of ventilation or hospitalization duration. CONCLUSIONS: These remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon regimens had little or no effect on hospitalized patients with Covid-19, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation, and duration of hospital stay. (Funded by the World Health Organization; ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN83971151; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04315948.).

A new emerging zoonotic virus of concern: the 2019 novel Coronavirus (SARS CoV-2) / Un nuevo virus zoonótico emergente de preocupación: el Coronavirus novel 2019

Abstract We review here the origin, outbreak characteristics and main epidemiological features of the novel Coronavirus (2019nCoV) responsible of a new coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Rapid global health authorities' responses are now in course and international scientific collaboration is urgently need. Previous outbreaks experiences with similar viral agents have increased the capacity to containment and control of these recurrent health menaces.

Resumen Revisamos aquí el origen, características del brote y la epidemiología del nuevo Coronavirus (2019nCoV) responsable de una nueva enfermedad por coronavirus (COVID-19). Una rápida respuesta de las autoridades de salud mundiales está en marcha y se ha hecho un llamado urgente para colaboración científica internacional. Las lecciones aprendidas de brotes previos con agentes virales similares han aumentado las capacidades para contener y controlar estas amenazas recurrentes a la salud global.