Search

Open in new tab Download slide Open in new tab Download slide   Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine platforms are becoming available and are the most promising strategy to curb the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections. However, numerous uncertainties exist regarding the pros and cons of vaccination, especially in patients with (immune-mediated) kidney diseases on immunosuppressive drugs. Here, members of the Immunonephrology Working Group of the European Renal Association–European Dialysis and Transplant Association discuss 13 frequently asked questions regarding the safety and efficacy of the most promising vaccine candidates. Post-marketing surveillance should be performed to estimate the rate of vaccine response (humoral and cellular) of different vaccine platforms and disease activity following the administration of COVID-19 vaccines. Some of the candidates induce signalling pathways, which also promote autoimmune kidney diseases, e.g. type I interferons in systemic lupus erythematosus. Efficacy estimates would thus far favour the use of selected COVID-19 vaccines, such as BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 or Gam-COVID-Vac. Humoral immune response after vaccination should be monitored using appropriate assays. Even in the absence of neutralizing antibodies, patients might be protected by a sufficient cellular immune response capable of reducing the severity of COVID-19. A reduced vaccine response after the use of CD20-depleting agents is anticipated and it is particularly important to discuss strategies to improve vaccine response with these patients. Distancing and shielding measures remain important, as not all vaccines fully protect from coronavirus infection. In-depth information about the most pressing vaccine questions is essential to reduce vaccine hesitancy of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Asymptomatic patients with COVID-19 tend to be younger and may be more socially active. • Laboratory findings in most asymptomatic cases were unremarkable. • Around half of the cases had lung opacities, most frequently ground glass opacities. • Patients with normal CT were younger than patients with abnormal CT. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by an unpredictable disease course, ranging from asymptomatic to severe, life-threatening infections. Asymptomatic COVID-19 infections have been described, and the aim of this systematic review was to summarise their presentation forms. We searched PubMed® and Google® (1 December 2019 to 29 March 2020) and extracted age, laboratory findings, and computed tomography (CT) scans. Pooled incidence rates of clinical characteristics were analyzed using random-effect models. In total, 506 patients from 34 studies (68 single cases and 438 from case-series) with an asymptomatic course were identified. Patients with normal radiology were younger (19.59 ± 17.17 years) than patients with abnormal radiology (39.14 ± 26.70 years) (p -value = 0.013). Despite being asymptomatic, CT investigations revealed abnormalities in 62.2% of the cases; ground-glass opacities were most frequently observed (43.09% by meta-analysis). Most studies reported normal laboratory findings (61.74% by meta-analysis). More than half of the patients without any symptoms present with CT abnormalities. Asymptomatic patients may be contagious and thus a potential source of transmission of COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the first description of infections with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV- 2) in China in December 2019, it has evolved into a pandemic and emerged as an unprecedented worldwide crisis overwhelming healthcare systems globally. Analysis of the available literature to date suggests that, in addition to older age, patients with underlying co-morbidities including hypertension, diabetes, heart disease are at higher risk for severe disease with increased mortality. Practitioners around the world also have become increasingly concerned that immunosuppressed patients including those with autoimmune diseases may be at increased risk for developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) with serious complications. Very little is known about how anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis modifies the susceptibility, clinical presentation and disease course of COVID-19. In this review, we discuss the mechanism of action and challenges of the current therapeutic armamentarium of ANCA-associated vasculitis and outline approaches to management of ANCA-associated vasculitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Worldwide public interest in COVID-19 increased when numbers of newly infected patients started to increase exponentially in China. • The peak of worldwide interest was mid of March 2020 shortly after COVID-19 was declared a pandemic. • Public interest in COVID-19 correlates with the number of newly reported COVID-19 cases, with highest interest observed on average 11.5 days before the peak of newly reported COVID-19 cases. To assess the association of public interest in coronavirus infections with the actual number of infected cases for selected countries across the globe. We performed a Google TrendsTM search for "Coronavirus" and compared Relative Search Volumes (RSV) indices to the number of reported COVID-19 cases by the European Center for Disease Control (ECDC) using time-lag correlation analysis. Worldwide public interest in Coronavirus reached its first peak end of January when numbers of newly infected patients started to increase exponentially in China. The worldwide Google TrendsTM index reached its peak on the 12th of March 2020 at a time when numbers of infected patients started to increase in Europe and COVID-19 was declared a pandemic. At this time the general interest in China but also the Republic of Korea has already been significantly decreased as compared to end of January. Correlations between RSV indices and number of new COVID-19 cases were observed across all investigated countries with highest correlations observed with a time lag of −11.5 days, i.e. highest interest in coronavirus observed 11.5 days before the peak of newly infected cases. This pattern was very consistent across European countries but also holds true for the US. In Brazil and Australia, highest correlations were observed with a time lag of −7 days. In Egypt the highest correlation is given with a time lag of 0, potentially indicating that in this country, numbers of newly infected patients will increase exponentially within the course of April. Public interest indicated by RSV indices can help to monitor the progression of an outbreak such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Public interest is on average highest 11.5 days before the peak of newly infected cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known about the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We aimed to investigate the long-term trends in CKD prevalence from South Korea including the early pandemic. We used data from 108,152 Korean adults from 2007 to 2020 obtained from a representative longitudinal serial study. We defined CKD as a condition when the participant's estimated glomerular filtration rate was < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, or one-time spot proteinuria was ≥ 1 +, and then examined the overall trends in the prevalence of CKD. Among the included adults (n = 80,010), the overall national prevalence of CKD was 6.2%. The trend slope gradually increased from 2007 to 2019, however, there was a sudden decrease in 2020 (2007–2010, 5.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.7–5.5]; 2017–2019, 7.1% [95% CI 6.6–7.6]; pandemic period, 6.5% [95% CI 5.7–7.3]; and βdiff, − 0.19; 95% CI − 0.24 to − 0.13). The prevalence of CKD among younger adults and those with poor medical utilization significantly decreased during the early pandemic. This study was the first large-scale study to investigate the longitudinal prevalence of CKD from 2007 to 2020. Further research is needed to fully understand the exact causes for this decline and to identify healthcare policy strategies for preventing and managing CKD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases are at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The international rollout of COVID-19 vaccines has provided varying degrees of protection and enabled the understanding of vaccine efficacy and safety. The immune response to COVID-19 vaccines is lower in most patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases; either related to immunosuppression or comorbidities and complications caused by the underlying disease. Humoral vaccine response, measured by the presence of antibodies, is impaired or absent in patients receiving rituximab, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), higher doses of glucocorticoids and likely other immunosuppressants, such as cyclophosphamide. The timing between the use of these agents and administration of vaccines is associated with the level of immune response: with rituximab, vaccine response can only be expected once B cells start to recover and patients with transient discontinuation of MMF mount a humoral response more frequently. The emergence of new COVID-19 variants and waning of vaccine-induced immunity highlight the value of a booster dose and the need to develop mutant-proof vaccines. COVID-19 vaccines are safe, exhibiting a very low risk of de novo or relapsing immune-mediated kidney disease. Population-based studies will determine whether this is causal or coincidental. Such cases respond to standard management, including the use of immunosuppression. The Immunonephrology Working Group and European Vasculitis Society recommend that patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases follow national guidance on vaccination. Booster doses based on antibody measurements could be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On October 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved remdesivir as the first drug for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), increasing remdesivir prescriptions worldwide. However, potential cardiovascular (CV) toxicities associated with remdesivir remain unknown. We aimed to characterize the CV adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with remdesivir using VigiBase, an individual case safety report database of the World Health Organization (WHO). Disproportionality analyses of CV‐ADRs associated with remdesivir were performed using reported odds ratios and information components. We conducted in vitro experiments using cardiomyocytes derived from human pluripotent stem cell cardiomyocytes (hPSC‐CMs) to confirm cardiotoxicity of remdesivir. To distinguish drug‐induced CV‐ADRs from COVID‐19 effects, we restricted analyses to patients with COVID‐19 and found that, after adjusting for multiple confounders, cardiac arrest (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08–3.29), bradycardia (aOR: 2.09, 95% CI: 1.24–3.53), and hypotension (aOR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.03–2.73) were associated with remdesivir. In vitro data demonstrated that remdesivir reduced the cell viability of hPSC‐CMs in time‐ and dose‐dependent manners. Physicians should be aware of potential CV consequences following remdesivir use and implement adequate CV monitoring to maintain a tolerable safety margin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis (MPGN) comprises a histologic pattern of glomerular injury with different underlying diseases. Here we report on a 47-year-old female with rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis (RPGN) on top of a previously diagnosed idiopathic MPGN after receiving the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccine. After aggressive immunosuppression her serum creatinine returned to normal values, along with reduction of proteinuria. Recently, numerous publications have reported an association of glomerular diseases with COVID-19 vaccination. Our case presents to the best of our knowledge the first occurrence of possible association of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination with a crescentic form of MPGN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Estimating the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic's case fatality rate (CFR) has been the focus and interest of many stakeholders as it plays a key role in understanding this pandemic and guides appropriate responses and efficient mitigation strategies. • The traditional cumulative CFR estimation is static; however, it is a dynamic value. Moreover, the estimation of the global CFR of COVID-19 according to either the calendar date or the days since the outbreak of the first confirmed case, is different. • We propose that the estimated kinetics of CFR according to days since the outbreak of the first confirmed case could be a useful predictor to design COVID-19 mitigation strategies. Since the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in December of 2019 in China, estimating the pandemic's case fatality rate (CFR) has been the focus and interest of many stakeholders. In this manuscript, we prove that the method of using the cumulative CFR is static and does not reflect the trend according to the daily change per unit of time. A proportion meta-analysis was carried out on the CFR in every country reporting COVID-19 cases. Based on these results, we performed a meta-analysis for a global COVID-19 CFR. Each analysis was performed using two different calculations of CFR: according to the calendar date and according to the days since the outbreak of the first confirmed case. We thus explored an innovative and original calculation of CFR, concurrently based on the date of the first confirmed case as well as on a daily basis. For the first time, we showed that using meta-analyses according to the calendar date and days since the outbreak of the first confirmed case, were different. We propose that a CFR according to days since the outbreak of the first confirmed case might be a better predictor of the current CFR of COVID-19 and its kinetics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: Until now, several reports about pregnant women with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been published. However, there are no comprehensive systematic reviews collecting all case series studies on data regarding adverse pregnancy outcomes, especially association with treatment modalities. (2) Objective: We aimed to synthesize the most up-to-date and relevant available evidence on the outcomes of pregnant women with laboratory-confirmed infection with COVID-19. (3) Methods: PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, Google scholar, and Embase were explored for studies and papers regarding pregnant women with COVID-19, including obstetrical, perinatal, and neonatal outcomes and complications published from 1 January 2020 to 4 May 2020. Systematic review and search of the published literature was done using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). (4) Results: In total, 11 case series studies comprising 104 pregnant women with COVID-19 were included in our review. Fever (58.6%) and cough (30.7%) were the most common symptoms. Other symptoms included dyspnea (14.4%), chest discomfort (3.9%), sputum production (1.0%), sore throat (2.9%), and nasal obstruction (1.0%). Fifty-two patients (50.0%) eventually demonstrated abnormal chest CT, and of those with ground glass opacity (GGO), 23 (22.1%) were bilateral and 10 (9.6%) were unilateral. The most common treatment for COVID-19 was administration of antibiotics (25.9%) followed by antivirals (17.3%). Cesarean section was the mode of delivery for half of the women (50.0%), although no information was available for 28.8% of the cases. Regarding obstetrical and neonatal outcomes, fetal distress (13.5%), pre-labor rupture of membranes (9.6%), prematurity (8.7%), fetal death (4.8%), and abortion (2.9%) were reported. There are no positive results of neonatal infection by RT-PCR. (5) Conclusions: Although we have found that pregnancy with COVID-19 has significantly higher maternal mortality ratio compared to that of pregnancy without the disease, the evidence is too weak to state that COVID-19 results in poorer maternal outcome due to multiple factors. The number of COVID-19 pregnancy outcomes was not large enough to draw a conclusion and long-term outcomes are yet to be determined as the pandemic is still unfolding. Active and intensive follow-up is needed in order to provide robust data for future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]