The Incidence of Immune Mediated Inflammatory Diseases Following COVID-19: a Matched Cohort Study in UK Primary Care

ObjectiveTo assess whether there is an association between Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) infection and the incidence of immune mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). DesignMatched cohort study. SettingPrimary care electronic health record data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum database. ParticipantsThe exposed cohort included 458,147 adults aged 18 years and older with a confirmed SARS CoV-2 infection by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or lateral flow antigen test, and no prior diagnosis of IMIDs. They were matched on age, sex, and general practice to 1,818,929 adults in the unexposed cohort with no diagnosis of confirmed or suspected SARS CoV-2 infection and no prior diagnosis of IMIDs. Main Outcome MeasuresThe primary outcome measure was a composite of the incidence of any of the following IMIDs: 1. autoimmune thyroiditis, 2. coeliac disease, 3. inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), 4. myasthenia gravis, 5. pernicious anaemia, 6. psoriasis, 7. rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 8. Sjogrens syndrome, 9. systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), 10. type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), and 11. vitiligo. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of each of these conditions separately. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the primary and secondary outcomes comparing the exposed to the unexposed cohorts, and adjusting for age, sex, ethnic group, smoking status, body mass index, relevant infections, and medications. Results537 patients (0.11%) in the exposed cohort developed an IMID during the follow-up period over 0.29 person years, giving a crude incidence rate of 3.54 per 1000 person years. This was compared 1723 patients (0.09%) over 0.29 person years in the unexposed cohort, with an incidence rate of 2.82 per 1000 person years. Patients in the exposed cohort had a 22% relative increased risk of developing an IMID, compared to the unexposed cohort (aHR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.34). The incidence of three IMIDs were statistically significantly associated with SARS CoV-2 infection. These were T1DM (aHR 1.56, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.23), IBD (1.52, 1.23 to 1.88), and psoriasis (1.23, 1.05 to 1.42). ConclusionsSARS CoV-2 was associated with an increased incidence of IMIDs including T1DM, IBD and psoriasis. Further research is needed to replicate these findings in other populations and to measure autoantibody profiles in cohorts of individuals with COVID-19, including Long COVID and matched controls. Summary Box What is already known on this topicO_LIA subsection of the population who tested positive for SARS CoV-2 is suffering from post-Covid-19 condition or long COVID. C_LIO_LIPreliminary findings, such as case reports of post-COVID-19 IMIDs, increased autoantibodies in COVID-19 patients, and molecular mimicry of the SARS-CoV-2 virus have given rise to the theory that long COVID may be due in part to a deranged immune response. C_LI What this study addsO_LICOVID-19 exposure was associated with a 22% relative increase in the risk of developing certain IMIDs, including type 1 diabetes mellitus, inflammatory bowel disease, and psoriasis. C_LIO_LIThese findings provide further support to the hypothesis that a subgroup of Long Covid may be caused by immune mediated mechanisms. C_LI

Non-pharmacological therapies for post-viral syndromes, including Long COVID: A systematic review

BackgroundPost-viral syndromes (PVS), including Long COVID, are symptoms sustained from weeks to years following an acute viral infection. Non-pharmacological treatments for these symptoms are poorly understood. This review summarises evidence for the effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments for symptoms of PVS. It also summarises the symptoms and health impacts of PVS in individuals recruited to studies evaluating treatments. Methods and findingsWe conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for PVS, as compared to either standard care, alternative non-pharmacological therapy, or placebo. The outcomes of interest were changes in symptoms, exercise capacity, quality of life (including mental health and wellbeing), and work capability. We searched five databases (Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, MedRxiv) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1st January 2001 to 29th October 2021. We anticipated that there would be few RCTs specifically pertaining to Long COVID, so we also included observational studies only if they assessed interventions in individuals where the viral pathogen was SARS-COV-2. Relevant outcome data were extracted, study quality appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and the findings were synthesised narratively. Quantitative synthesis was not planned due to substantial heterogeneity between the studies. Overall, five studies of five different interventions (Pilates, music therapy, telerehabilitation, resistance exercise, neuromodulation) met the inclusion criteria. Aside from music-based intervention, all other selected interventions demonstrated some support in the management of PVS in some patients. ConclusionsIn this study, we observed a lack of robust evidence evaluating non-pharmacological treatments for PVS, including Long COVID. Considering the prevalence of prolonged symptoms following acute viral infections, there is an urgent need for clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments for patients with PVS as well as what may work for certain sub-groups of patients with differential symptom presentation. RegistrationThe study protocol was registered with PROSPERO [CRD42021282074] in October 2021 and published in BMJ Open in 2022. Author summaryWhy was this study done? O_LIThe prevalence of Long COVID following exposure to SARS CoV-2 is substantial, and the current guidance provides few evidence-based treatment options for clinicians to suggest to their patients. C_LIO_LIDue to the similarities in presentation of other post-viral syndromes (PVS), and the lack of consensus in management approaches, there is a need to synthesise the available data on PVS to both support patients with PVS predating the pandemic, and those with Long COVID. C_LI What did the researchers do and find? O_LIThis is the first comprehensive systematic review of the effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments for patients with PVS, including Long COVID. C_LIO_LIWe identified four non-pharmacological treatments (Pilates, telerehabilitation, resistance exercises and neuromodulation) which have shown promise in those who have experienced signs and symptoms related to PVS. C_LI What do these findings mean? O_LIIn this study, we identified few trials assessing the effectiveness of non-pharmacological therapies to support the management of symptoms of PVS. Considering the prevalence of PVS, including Long COVID, there is an urgent need for clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of non-pharmacological therapies to support these patients. C_LI

Development and validation of the Symptom Burden Questionnaire™ for Long COVID: a Rasch analysis

ObjectiveTo describe the development and initial validation of a novel patient-reported outcome measure of Long COVID symptom burden, the Symptom-Burden Questionnaire for Long COVID (SBQ-LC). Method and FindingsThis multi-phase, prospective mixed-methods study took place between April and August 2021 in the United Kingdom (UK). A conceptual framework and initial item pool were developed from published systematic reviews. Further concept elicitation and content validation was undertaken with adults with lived experience (n = 13) and clinicians (n = 10), and face validity was confirmed by the Therapies for Long COVID Study Patient and Public Involvement group (n = 25). The draft SBQ-LC was field tested by adults with self-reported Long COVID recruited via social media and international Long COVID support groups (n = 274). Thematic analysis of interview and survey transcripts established content validity and informed construction of the draft questionnaire. Rasch analysis of field test data guided item and scale refinement and provided evidence of the final SBQ-LCs measurement properties. The Rasch-derived SBQ-LC is composed of 17 independent scales with promising psychometric properties. Respondents rate symptom burden during the past 7-days using a dichotomous response or 4-point rating scale. Each scale provides coverage of a different symptom domain and returns a summed raw score that may be converted to a linear (0 - 100) score. Higher scores represent higher symptom burden. ConclusionsThe SBQ-LC is a comprehensive patient-reported assessment of Long COVID symptom burden developed using modern psychometric methods. It measures symptoms of Long COVID important to individuals with lived experience and may be used to evaluate the impact of interventions and inform best practice in clinical management.

Therapies for Long COVID in non-hospitalised individuals - from symptoms, patient-reported outcomes, and immunology to targeted therapies (The TLC Study): Study protocol

IntroductionIndividuals with COVID-19 frequently experience symptoms and impaired quality of life beyond 4-12 weeks, commonly referred to as Long COVID. Whether Long COVID is one or several distinct syndromes is unknown. Establishing the evidence base for appropriate therapies is needed. We aim to evaluate the symptom burden and underlying pathophysiology of Long COVID syndromes in non-hospitalised individuals and evaluate potential therapies. Methods and analysisA cohort of 4000 non-hospitalised individuals with a past COVID-19 diagnosis and 1000 matched controls will be selected from anonymised primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and invited by their general practitioners to participate on a digital platform (Atom5). Individuals will report symptoms, quality of life, work capability, and patient reported outcome measures. Data will be collected monthly for one year. Statistical clustering methods will be used to identify distinct Long COVID symptom clusters. Individuals from the four most prevalent clusters and two control groups will be invited to participate in the BioWear sub-study which will further phenotype Long COVID symptom clusters by measurement of immunological parameters and actigraphy. We will review existing evidence on interventions for post-viral syndromes and Long COVID to map and prioritise interventions for each newly characterised Long COVID syndrome. Recommendations will be made using the cumulated evidence in an expert consensus workshop. A virtual supportive intervention will be coproduced with patients and health service providers for future evaluation. Individuals with lived experience of Long COVID will be involved throughout this programme through a patient and public involvement group. Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Solihull Research Ethics Committee, West Midlands (21/WM/0203). The study is registered on the ISRCTN Registry (1567490). Research findings will be presented at international conferences, in peer-reviewed journals, to Long COVID patient support groups and to policymakers. Article SummaryO_ST_ABSStrengths and limitations of the studyC_ST_ABSO_LIThe study will generate a nationally representative cohort of individuals with Long COVID recruited from primary care. C_LIO_LIWe will recruit controls matched on a wide range of demographic and clinical factors to assess differences in symptoms between people with Long COVID and similar individuals without a history of COVID-19. C_LIO_LIWe will use a newly developed electronic patient reported outcome measure (Symptom Burden Questionnaire) for Long COVID to comprehensively assess a wide range of symptoms highlighted by existing literature, patients, and clinicians. C_LIO_LIImmunological, proteomic, genetic, and wearable data captured in the study will allow deep phenotyping of Long COVID syndromes to help better target therapies. C_LIO_LIA limitation is that a significant proportion of non-hospitalised individuals affected by COVID-19 in the first wave of the pandemic will lack confirmatory testing and will be excluded from recruitment to the study. C_LI

Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors and susceptibility to COVID-19 in patients with hypertension: a propensity score-matched cohort study in primary care

Introduction A significant proportion of patients with Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) have hypertension and are treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, namely angiotensin-converting enzyme I inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) or angiotensin II type-1 receptor blockers (ARBs). These medications have been postulated to influence susceptibility to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). The objective of this study was to assess a possible association between prescription of RAS inhibitors and the incidence of COVID-19 and all-cause mortality. Methods We conducted a propensity-score matched cohort study to assess the incidence of COVID-19 among patients with hypertension who were prescribed ACE inhibitors or ARBs compared to patients treated with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in a large UK-based primary care database (The Health Improvement Network). We estimated crude incidence rates for confirmed/suspected COVID-19 among those prescribed ACE inhibitors, ARBs and CCBs. We used a Cox proportional hazards model to produce adjusted hazard ratios for COVID-19 comparing patients prescribed ACE inhibitors or ARBs to those prescribed CCBs. We further assessed all-cause mortality as a secondary outcome and a composite of accidents, trauma or fractures as a negative control outcome to assess for residual confounding. Results In the propensity score matched analysis, 83 of 18,895 users (0.44%) of ACE inhibitors developed COVID-19 over 8,923 person-years, an incidence rate of 9.3 per 1000 person-years. 85 of 18,895 (0.45%) users of CCBs developed COVID-19 over 8,932 person-years, an incidence rate of 9.5 per 1000 person-years. The adjusted hazard ratio for suspected/confirmed COVID-19 for users of ACE inhibitors compared to CCBs was 0.92 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.26). 79 out of 10,623 users (0.74%) of ARBs developed COVID-19 over 5010 person-years, an incidence rate of 15.8 per 1000 person-years, compared to 11.6 per 1000 person-years among users of CCBs. The adjusted hazard ratio for suspected/confirmed COVID-19 for users of ARBs compared to CCBs was 1.38 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.95). There were no significant associations between use of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and all-cause mortality, compared to use of CCBs. We found no evidence of significant residual confounding with the negative control analysis. Conclusion Current use of ACE inhibitors was not associated with the risk of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 whereas use of ARBs was associated with a statistically non-significant 38% relative increase in risk compared to use of CCBs. However, no significant associations were observed between prescription of either ACE inhibitors or ARBs and all-cause mortality during the peak of the pandemic.