ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe imposition of restrictions on social mixing early in the COVID-19 pandemic was followed by a reduction in asthma exacerbations in multiple settings internationally. Temporal trends in social mixing, incident acute respiratory infections (ARI) and asthma exacerbations following relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions have not yet been described. MethodsWe conducted a population-based longitudinal study in 2,312 UK adults with asthma between November 2020 and April 2022. Details of face covering use, social mixing, incident ARI and moderate/severe asthma exacerbations were collected via monthly on-line questionnaires. Temporal changes in these parameters were visualised using Poisson generalised additive models. Multilevel logistic regression was used to test for associations between incident ARI and risk of asthma exacerbations, adjusting for potential confounders. ResultsRelaxation of COVID-19 restrictions from April 2021 coincided with reduced face covering use (p<0.001), increased frequency of indoor visits to public places and other households (p<0.001) and rising incidence of COVID-19 (p<0.001), non-COVID-19 ARI (p<0.001) and moderate/severe asthma exacerbations (p=0.007). Incident non-COVID-19 ARI associated independently with increased risk of asthma exacerbation (adjusted odds ratio 5.75, 95% CI 4.75 to 6.97) as did incident COVID-19, both prior to emergence of the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (5.89, 3.45 to 10.04) and subsequently (5.69, 3.89 to 8.31). ConclusionsRelaxation of COVID-19 restrictions coincided with decreased face covering use, increased social mixing and a rebound in ARI and asthma exacerbations. Associations between incident ARI and risk of moderate/severe asthma exacerbation were similar for non-COVID-19 ARI and COVID-19, both before and after emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant. FundingBarts Charity, UKRI
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVESTo determine whether population-level implementation of a test-and- treat approach to correction of sub-optimal vitamin D status (25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] <75 nmol/L) influences risk of all-cause acute respiratory infection (ARI) or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DESIGNPhase 3 open-label randomised controlled trial (CORONAVIT) utilising trials-within-cohorts (TwiCs) methodology. SETTINGUnited Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS6200 adults aged 16 years or older, who were not already taking vitamin D supplements at baseline. INTERVENTIONSOffer of a postal finger-prick test of blood 25(OH)D concentration with provision of a 6-month supply of higher-dose vitamin D (3200 IU/day, n=1550) or lower-dose vitamin D (800 IU/day, n=1550) to those with blood 25(OH)D concentration <75 nmol/L, vs. no offer of testing or supplementation (n=3100). Follow-up was from 17th December 2020 to 16th June 2021. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURESThe primary outcome was the proportion of participants experiencing at least one doctor- or swab test-confirmed ARI of any cause. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of participants developing swab test-confirmed COVID-19. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and associated 95% confidence intervals. RESULTSOf 3100 participants offered 25(OH)D testing, 2958 (95.4%) accepted, and 2690 (86.8%) had 25(OH)D <75 nmol/L and were sent vitamin D supplements (1356 higher-dose, 1334 lower-dose). 76 (5.0%) vs. 87 (5.7%) vs. 136 (4.6%) participants in higher-dose vs. lower-dose vs. no offer groups experienced at least one ARI of any cause (odds ratio [OR] for higher-dose vs. no offer 1.09, 95% CI 0.82-1.46; lower-dose vs. no offer 1.26, 0.96-1.66). 45 (3.0%) vs. 55 (3.6%) vs. 78 (2.6%) participants in higher-dose vs. lower-dose vs. no offer groups developed COVID-19 (OR for higher-dose vs. no offer 1.13, 0.78-1.63; lower-dose vs. no offer 1.39, 0.98-1.97). CONCLUSIONSAmong adults with a high baseline prevalence of sub-optimal vitamin D status, implementation of a population-level test-and-treat approach to vitamin D replacement did not reduce risk of all-cause ARI or COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT04579640 SUMMARY BOXO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on this topic?C_ST_ABSVitamin D metabolites support innate immune responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory pathogens. Sub-optimal vitamin D status (25-hydroxyvitamin D <75 nmol/L) associates with increased susceptibility to all-cause acute respiratory infections (ARI) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Phase 3 randomised controlled trials of vitamin D to prevent COVID-19 have not yet reported. What this study addsThis phase 3 randomised controlled trial, including 6200 participants, shows that implementation of a population-level test-and-treat approach to oral vitamin D replacement at a dose of 800 IU or 3200 IU per day did not reduce risk of all-cause ARI or COVID-19 among adults with a high baseline prevalence of sub-optimal vitamin D status.
ABSTRACT
ObjectivesTo assess the overall effect of vitamin D supplementation on risk of acute respiratory infection (ARI), and to identify factors modifying this effect. DesignWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of vitamin D for ARI prevention using a random effects model. Pre-specified sub-group analyses were done to determine whether effects of vitamin D on risk of ARI varied according to baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) concentration or dosing regimen. Data SourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Standard RCT Number (ISRCTN) registry from inception to May 2020. Eligibility Criteria for Selecting StudiesDouble-blind RCTs of supplementation with vitamin D or calcidiol, of any duration, were eligible if they were approved by a Research Ethics Committee and if ARI incidence was collected prospectively and pre-specified as an efficacy outcome. ResultsWe identified 40 eligible RCTs (total 30,956 participants, aged 0 to 95 years). Data were obtained for 29,841 (96.5%) of 30,909 participants in 39 studies. For the primary comparison of vitamin D supplementation vs. placebo, the intervention reduced risk of ARI overall (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98; P for heterogeneity 0.009). No statistically significant effect of vitamin D was seen for any of the sub-groups defined by baseline 25(OH)D concentration. However, protective effects were seen for trials in which vitamin D was given using a daily dosing regimen (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93); at daily dose equivalents of 400-1000 IU (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89); and for a duration of [≤]12 months (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.94). Vitamin D did not influence the proportion of participants experiencing at least one serious adverse event (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.08). Risk of bias within individual studies was assessed as being low for all but two trials. A funnel plot showed asymmetry, suggesting that small trials showing non-protective effects of vitamin D may have been omitted from the meta-analysis. ConclusionsVitamin D supplementation was safe and reduced risk of ARI, despite evidence of significant heterogeneity across trials. The overall effect size may have been over-estimated due to publication bias. Protection was associated with administration of daily doses of 400-1000 IU vitamin D for up to 12 months. The relevance of these findings to COVID-19 is not known and requires investigation. Systematic Review RegistrationCRD42020190633 O_TEXTBOXSummary Box What is already known on this subject?O_LIA previous individual participant data meta-analysis from 10,933 participants in 25 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of vitamin D supplementation for the prevention of acute respiratory infection (ARI) demonstrated an overall protective effect (number needed to treat to prevent one ARI [NNT]=33).Sub-group analysis revealed most benefit in those with the lowest vitamin D status at baseline and not receiving bolus doses. C_LI What this study addsO_LIWe updated this meta-analysis with trial-level data from an additional 14 placebo-controlled RCTs published since December 2015 (i.e. new total of 39 studies with 29,841 participants). C_LIO_LIAn overall protective effect of vitamin D supplementation against ARI was seen (NNT=36). C_LIO_LIA funnel plot revealed evidence of publication bias, which could have led to an over-estimate of the protective effect. C_LIO_LINo statistically significant effect of vitamin D was seen for any of the sub-groups defined by baseline 25(OH)D concentration. C_LIO_LIStrongest protective effects were associated with administration of daily doses of 400-1000 IU vitamin D for [≤]12 months (NNT=8). C_LI C_TEXTBOX
