Search

Since the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, several treatments have been proposed to prevent the progression of the disease. Currently, three antiviral (molnupiravir, nirmaltrevir/r, remdesivir) and two monoclonal antibodies (casirivimab/imdevimab and sotrovimab) are available in Italy. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the presence of risk factors associated with disease progression. We conducted a retrospective cohort study, including all patients with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 evaluated between 01/01/2022 ad 10/05/2022 by our Unit of Infectious Diseases in Sassari. We defined disease progression as the necessity of starting O2 therapy. According to AIFA (Italian Medicines Agency) indications, preventive treatment was prescribed in patients with recent symptoms onset (≤five days), no need for oxygen supplementation, and risk factors for disease progression. Subgroup differences in quantitative variables were evaluated using Student's t -test. Pearson chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were used to assess differences for qualitative variables. Multivariate logistic regression modelling was performed to determine factors associated with progression. A two-tailed p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were performed with STATA version 17 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). We included 1145 people with SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, of which 336 (29.3%) developed severe disease with oxygen supplementation. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, age, dementia, haematologic tumors, heart failure, dyspnoea or fever at first evaluation, having ground glass opacities or consolidation at the first CT scan, and bacteria coinfection were associated with an increased risk of disease progression. Vaccination (at least two doses) and early treatment with antiviral or monoclonal antibodies were associated with a lower risk of disease progression. In conclusion, our study showed that vaccination and early treatment with antiviral and/or monoclonal antibodies significantly reduce the risk of disease progression.

Since the start of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, several treatments have been proposed to cure coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and prevent it. Molnupiravir is a ribonucleoside prodrug of N-hydroxycytidine with an in vitro and in vivo activity against SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included all people treated with molnupiravir between January 10, 2022, and March 31, 2022, at the University Hospital of Sassari. Molnupiravir was prescribed, according to the Italian Agency of Drug indications, to patients with recent symptom onset (≤5 days), no need for oxygen supplementation, and with a high risk of disease progression for the presence of chronic diseases. We included 192 people with a mean age of 70.4 ± 15.4 years, with 144 (75%) patients over 60 years. During the follow-up, 20 (10.4%) patients showed a disease progression. At the multivariate analysis, older age, having neurological disease, having dyspnea at the onset of the symptoms, and acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospital admission were associated with an increased risk of progression. In contrast, an early start of treatment was associated with a reduced risk of disease progression. Molnupiravir was also extremely safe since 13 (6.8%) adverse events were reported, with only one interruption. Our study shows that monlupiravir confirmed its efficacy and safety in a real-life cohort that included a high percentage of elderly people with a high comorbidity burden., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Medical Virology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The aims of this study were to characterize new SARS-CoV-2 genomes sampled all over Italy and to reconstruct the origin and the evolutionary dynamics in Italy and Europe between February and June 2020. The cluster analysis showed only small clusters including < 80 Italian isolates, while most of the Italian strains were intermixed in the whole tree. Pure Italian clusters were observed mainly after the lockdown and distancing measures were adopted. Lineage B and B.1 spread between late January and early February 2020, from China to Veneto and Lombardy, respectively. Lineage B.1.1 (20B) most probably evolved within Italy and spread from central to south Italian regions, and to European countries. The lineage B.1.1.1 (20D) developed most probably in other European countries entering Italy only in the second half of March and remained localized in Piedmont until June 2020. In conclusion, within the limitations of phylogeographical reconstruction, the estimated ancestral scenario suggests an important role of China and Italy in the widespread diffusion of the D614G variant in Europe in the early phase of the pandemic and more dispersed exchanges involving several European countries from the second half of March 2020., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical profile of patients who developed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after full vaccination. Demographic, epidemiological and clinical data were collected through medical records and online patient-reported outcome questionnaire from patients who developed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, confirmed by nasopharyngeal swab, at least 2 weeks after completion of vaccination. A total of 153 subjects were included. The most frequent symptoms were: asthenia (82.4%), chemosensory dysfunction (63.4%), headache (59.5%), runny nose (58.2%), muscle pain (54.9%), loss of appetite (54.3%), and nasal obstruction (51.6%). Particularly, 62.3% and 53.6% of subjects reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunction, respectively. Symptom severity was mild or moderate in almost all cases. Chemosensory dysfunctions have been observed to be a frequent symptom even in subjects who contracted the infection after full vaccination. For this reason, the sudden loss of smell and taste could continue to represent a useful and specific diagnostic marker to raise the suspicion of COVID-19 even in vaccinated subjects. In the future, it will be necessary to establish what the recovery rate is in these patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 132:419-421, 2022., (© 2021 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Objectives/hypothesis: The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlations between the severity and duration of olfactory dysfunctions (OD), assessed with psychophysical tests, and the viral load on the rhino-pharyngeal swab determined with a direct method, in patients affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)., Study Design: Prospective cohort study., Methods: Patients underwent psychophysical olfactory assessment with Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center test and determination of the normalized viral load on nasopharyngeal swab within 10 days of the clinical onset of COVID-19., Results: Sixty COVID-19 patients were included in this study. On psychophysical testing, 12 patients (20% of the cohort) presented with anosmia, 11 (18.3%) severe hyposmia, 13 (18.3%) moderate hyposmia, and 10 (16.7%) mild hyposmia with an overall prevalence of OD of 76.7%. The overall median olfactory score was 50 (interquartile range [IQR] 30-72.5) with no significant differences between clinical severity subgroups. The median normalized viral load detected in the series was 2.56E+06 viral copies/10 6 copies of human beta-2microglobulin mRNA present in the sample (IQR 3.17E+04-1.58E+07) without any significant correlations with COVID-19 severity. The correlation between viral load and olfactory scores at baseline (R 2  = 0.0007; P = .844) and 60-day follow-up (R 2  = 0.0077; P = .519) was weak and not significant., Conclusions: The presence of OD does not seem to be useful in identifying subjects at risk for being super-spreaders or who is at risk of developing long-term OD. Similarly, the pathogenesis of OD is probably related to individual factors rather than to viral load and activity., Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:2312-2318, 2021., (© 2021 The Authors. The Laryngoscope published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Background: Several scores aimed at predicting COVID-19 progression have been proposed. As the variables vaccination and early SARS-CoV-2 treatment were systematically excluded from the prognostic scores, the present study's objective was to develop a new model adapted to the current epidemiological scenario. Methods: We included all patients evaluated by the Infectious Disease Unit in Sassari, with SARS-CoV-2 infection and without signs of respiratory failure at the first evaluation (P/F > 300). Disease progression was defined by the prescription of supplemental oxygen. In addition, variables related to demographics, vaccines, comorbidities, symptoms, CT scans, blood tests, and therapies were collected. Multivariate logistic regression modelling was performed to determine factors associated with progression; any variable with significant univariate test or clinical relevance was selected as a candidate for multivariate analysis. Hosmer–Lemeshow (HL) goodness of fit statistic was calculated. Odds ratio values were used to derive an integer score for developing an easy-to-use progression risk score. The discrimination performance of the risk index was determined using the AUC, and the best cut-off point, according to the Youden index, sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and likelihood ratio, was chosen. Results: 1145 patients [median (IQR) age 74 (62–83) years; 53.5% males] were enrolled; 336 (29.3%) had disease progression. Patients with a clinical progression were older and showed more comorbidities; furthermore, they were less vaccinated and exposed to preventive therapy. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, age ≥ 60 years, COPD, dementia, haematological tumours, heart failure, exposure to no or one vaccine dose, fever, dyspnoea, GGO, consolidation, ferritin, De Ritis ≥ 1.2, LDH, and no exposure to early anti-SARS-CoV-2 treatment were associated with disease progression. The final risk score ranged from 0 to 45. The ROC curve analysis showed an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI 0.90–0.93) with a 93.7% specificity and 72.9% sensitivity. Low risk was defined when the cut-off value was less than 23. Three risk levels were identified: low (0–23 points), medium (24–35), and high (≥ 36). Conclusions: The proportion of patients with progression increases with high scores: the assessment of the risk could be helpful for clinicians to plan appropriate therapeutic strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical trials demonstrated the role of vaccines and antiviral treatments against SARS-CoV-2 in reducing the likelihood of disease progression and death. However, there are limited data available regarding the time to negativity of people who received these treatments. Further, several comorbidities and risk factors might affect the impact of vaccines and antiviral treatments. To this end, we aimed to evaluate and disentangle the impact of anti-SARS-CoV-2 treatments and that of underlying clinical factors associated with a shortened length of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Hence, we recorded the timeframe of positive nasopharyngeal swab in people infected while being hospitalized for reasons other than SARS-CoV-2 infection. All patients who died or were discharged with a positive swab were excluded from the study. A total of 175 patients were included in this study. Clinical conditions encompass malignancies, immunological disorders, cardiovascular, metabolic, neurodegenerative, and chronic kidney disease. Most of the participants (91.4%) were vaccinated before admission to the hospital, and 65.1% received antiviral treatment within three days after the symptom's onset. Unvaccinated patients had a longer median time to negativity than people who received at least two doses of vaccine (18 vs. 10 days). Concerning the clinical conditions of all patients, multivariate analysis highlighted a lower probability of 14-day conversion of antigenic test positivity in patients with hematological malignancy, including those vaccinated and those exposed to antiviral therapies. In conclusion, our data showed that prompt administration of antiviral treatments accelerates the clearance of SARS-CoV-2. Further, in the elderly patients under study, previous vaccination and antiviral treatment synergize to reduce time to negativity. This translates into a shorter hospitalization time and a lower risk of transmission through patients and connected healthcare workers in a hospital ward setting, with considerable improvement in cost-effective care management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Introduction: Since May 2021, sotrovimab has been available in Italy for early treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection and to prevent disease progression. However, some in vitro studies have questioned its efficacy on Omicron variants. Therefore, we aim to further investigate the efficacy of sotrovimab in real-life settings. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective study collecting medical records of people with SARS-CoV-2 infection evaluated in the infectious diseases units of Sassari, Foggia, and Bari, Italy. We included people with SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with sotrovimab and people who did not receive any treatment in 2022. The primary study outcome was to evaluate the efficacy of sotrovimab in reducing disease progression (defined as the necessity of starting oxygen supplementation) and COVID-19-related death. The secondary outcome was to evaluate the safety of sotrovimab. (3) Results: We included 689 people; of them, 341 were treated with sotrovimab, while 348 did not receive any treatment. Overall, we registered 161 (23.4%) disease progressions and 65 (9.4%) deaths, with a significant difference between treated and not-treated people (p < 0.001). In the multivariate logistic regression, increasing age [OR for ten years increasing age 1.23 (95%CI 1.04–1.45)] was associated with a higher risk of disease progression. In addition, cardiovascular disease [OR 1.69 (1.01–2.80), fever [OR 3.88 (95%CI 2.35–6.38)], and dyspnea [OR 7.24 (95%CI 4.17–12.58)] were associated with an increased risk of disease progression. In contrast, vaccination [OR 0.21 (95%CI 0.12–0.37)] and sotrovimab administration [OR 0.05 (95%CI 0.02–0.11)] were associated with a lower risk of developing severe COVID-19. Regarding mortality, people with older age [OR for ten years increasing age 1.36 (95%CI 1.09–1.69)] had a higher risk of death. In addition, in the multivariate analysis, cardiovascular disease lost statistical significance, while people on chemotherapy for haematological cancer [OR 4.07 (95%CI 1.45–11.4)] and those with dyspnea at diagnosis [OR 3.63 (95%CI 2.02–6.50)] had an increased risk of death. In contrast, vaccination [OR 0.37 (95%CI 0.20–0.68)] and sotrovimab treatment [OR 0.16 (95%CI 0.06–0.42)] were associated with lower risk. Only two adverse events were reported; one person complained of diarrhoea a few hours after sotrovimab administration, and one had an allergic reaction with cutaneous rash and itching. (4) Conclusions: Our study showed that sotrovimab treatment was associated with a reduction of the risk of disease progression and death in SARS-CoV-2-infected people, 70% of whom were over 65 years and a with high vaccination rate, with excellent safety. Therefore, our results reinforce the evidence about the efficacy and safety of sotrovimab during the Omicron era in a real-world setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After 40 years of its appearance, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection remains a leading public health challenge worldwide. Since the introduction of antiretroviral treatment (ART), HIV infection has become a chronic condition, and people living with HIV could have life expectancies close to those of the general population. People with HIV often have an increased risk of infection or experience more severe morbidity following exposure to vaccine-preventable diseases. Nowadays, several vaccines are available against bacteria and viruses. However, national and international vaccination guidelines for people with HIV are heterogeneous, and not every vaccine is included. For these reasons, we aimed to perform a narrative review about the vaccinations available for adults living with HIV, reporting the most updated studies performed for each vaccine among this population. We performed a comprehensive literature search through electronic databases (Pubmed—MEDLINE and Embase) and search engines (Google Scholar). We included English peer-reviewed publications (articles and reviews) on HIV and vaccination. Despite widespread use and guideline recommendations, few vaccine trials have been conducted in people with HIV. In addition, not all vaccines are recommended for people with HIV, especially for those with low CD4 cells count. Clinicians should carefully collect the history of vaccinations and patients' acceptance and preferences and regularly check the presence of antibodies for vaccine-preventable pathogens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, several treatments have been proposed to prevent the progression of the disease. Currently, three antiviral (molnupiravir, nirmaltrevir/r, remdesivir) and two monoclonal antibodies (casirivimab/imdevimab and sotrovimab) are available in Italy. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the presence of risk factors associated with disease progression. We conducted a retrospective cohort study, including all patients with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 evaluated between 01/01/2022 ad 10/05/2022 by our Unit of Infectious Diseases in Sassari. We defined disease progression as the necessity of starting O2 therapy. According to AIFA (Italian Medicines Agency) indications, preventive treatment was prescribed in patients with recent symptoms onset (≤five days), no need for oxygen supplementation, and risk factors for disease progression. Subgroup differences in quantitative variables were evaluated using Student's t-test. Pearson chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were used to assess differences for qualitative variables. Multivariate logistic regression modelling was performed to determine factors associated with progression. A two-tailed p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were performed with STATA version 17 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). We included 1145 people with SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, of which 336 (29.3%) developed severe disease with oxygen supplementation. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, age, dementia, haematologic tumors, heart failure, dyspnoea or fever at first evaluation, having ground glass opacities or consolidation at the first CT scan, and bacteria coinfection were associated with an increased risk of disease progression. Vaccination (at least two doses) and early treatment with antiviral or monoclonal antibodies were associated with a lower risk of disease progression. In conclusion, our study showed that vaccination and early treatment with antiviral and/or monoclonal antibodies significantly reduce the risk of disease progression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, several scores have been proposed to identify infected individuals at a higher risk of progression and death. The most famous is the 4C score. However, it was developed in early 2020. Our study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the 4C score during the wave in which the Omicron variant was prevalent. An observational study was conducted at an Italian University Hospital between 1 January and 31 July 2022. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to evaluate the ability of the 4C score to predict mortality. Overall, 1186 people were recruited, of which 160 (13.5%) died. According to the 4C score, 177 (11.6%) were classified as having a low risk of mortality, 302 (25.5%) were intermediate, 596 (50.3%) were high, and 151 (12.7%) were very high. The ROC curve of the 4C score showed an AUC (95% CI) value of 0.78 (0.74–0.82). At the criterion value of > 10, the sensitivity was 76.2% and the specificity was 62.67%. Similar to previous studies, the 4C mortality score performed well in our sample, and it is still a useful tool for clinicians to identify patients with a high risk of progression. However, clinicians must be aware that the mortality rate reported in the original studies was higher than that observed in our study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, several treatment options have been proposed (e.g. steroids, heparin, antivirals and monoclonal antibodies). Remdesivir was the first antiviral approved for the treatment of COVID-19, even though controversial evidence exists concerning the efficacy. Therefore, we aimed to conduct a study to evaluate whether the use of remdesivir was associated with lower mortality in patients with COVID-19. We conducted a nested case–control study of a retrospective cohort collecting medical records of people with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted in the infectious Disease Unit of Sassari University Hospital (S.C. Clinica di Malattie Infettive, AOU di Sassari, Italy), or in the Infectious Disease Unit of Foggia (AOU "Ospedali Riuniti" Foggia), between 1 July 2020 and 10 November 2021. The outcome considered was death; thus, we matched death (cases) to survivors (controls) by sex and age (1:1). We included in the study 342 patients, with 171 deaths (cases) and 171 survivors (controls). Remdesivir was administered to 60 people in the control group and to 18 people in the case group (35.1% vs. 10.5%, p <.0001). In the multivariate analysis, treatment with remdesivir and heparin was associated with lower mortality (OR: 0.19 [95% CI :0.10–0.38], p <.0001; OR: 0.39 [95% CI: 0.21–0.74] p =.004, respectively). On the contrary, diabetes, oxygen therapy and CPAP/NIV were associated with higher mortality. Our study showed lower mortality in people with SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with remdesivir. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Our study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of Vitamin D3 (VitD3) among patients hospitalized for COVID-19. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the difference in survival rates between patients receiving and not VitD3. The secondary endpoints were to evaluate clinical outcomes, such as needing non-invasive ventilation (NIV), ICU transfer, and laboratory findings (inflammatory parameters). Methods: We conducted a retrospective, monocentric matched-cohort study, including patients attending our ward for COVID-19. Patients were divided into two groups depending on VitD3 administration (Group A) or not (Group B) among patients with low VitD levels (defined as blood levels < 30 ng/mL), which depended on physicians' judgment. Our internal protocol provides VitD3 100,000 UI/daily for two days. Findings: 58 patients were included in Group A, and 58 in Group B. Patients were matched for age, sex, comorbidities, COVID-19-related symptoms, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, blood exams, and medical treatments. Regarding the principal endpoint, there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in survival rates [Group A vs. Group B = 3 vs. 11 (p = 0.042)]. When considering secondary endpoints, Group A patients were less likely to undergo NIV [Group A vs. Group B = 12 vs. 23 (p = 0.026)] and showed an improvement in almost all inflammatory parameters. Conclusions: The link between VitD3 deficiency and the clinical course of COVID-19 during hospitalization suggests that VitD3 level is a useful prognostic marker. Considering the safety of supplementation and the low cost, VitD3 replacement should be considered among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients needing hospitalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We aimed to investigate the presence and severity of depressive symptoms among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) inpatients and any possible changes after their discharge.Subject and Methods: We collected data of patients admitted to the Infectious Disease Unit in Sassari, Italy, for COVID-19, from March 8 to May 8, 2020. The Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) was performed 1 week after admission (T0) and 1 week after discharge (T1). The cutoff point chosen to define the clinical significance of depressive symptoms was 20 (at least moderate).Results: Forty-eight subjects were included. Mean age was 64.3 ± 17.6 years, and 32 (66.7%) were male. Most frequent comorbidities were cardiovascular diseases (19; 39.6%) and hypertension (17; 35.4%). When performing BDI-II at T0, 21 (43.7%) patients reported depressive symptoms at T0, according to the chosen cutoff point (BDI-II = 20). Eight (16.7%) patients had minimal symptoms. Mild mood disturbance and moderate and severe depressive symptoms were found in 24 (50%), 14 (29.2%), and 2 (4.2%) patients, respectively, at T0. The comparison of the BDI-II questionnaire at T0 with T1 showed a significant improvement in the total score (p < 0.0001), as well as in 4 out of the 5 selected questions of interest (p < 0.05). Univariate analysis showed that kidney failure and the death of a roommate were significantly associated with severity of mood disorders.Conclusion: Mood disturbances and depressive symptoms commonly occur among COVID-19 inpatients. Our results show that COVID-19 inpatients might be at higher risk for developing depressive reactive disorders and could benefit from an early psychological evaluation and strategies improving sleep quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]