Search

There are many pharmacologic therapies that are being used or considered for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with rapidly changing efficacy and safety evidence from trials. The objective was to develop evidence-based, rapid, living guidelines intended to support patients, clinicians, and other healthcare professionals in their decisions about treatment and management of patients with COVID-19. In March 2020, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel of infectious disease clinicians, pharmacists, and methodologists with varied areas of expertise to regularly review the evidence and make recommendations about the treatment and management of persons with COVID-19. The process used a living guideline approach and followed a rapid recommendation development checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. A systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted at regular intervals. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. Based on the most recent search conducted on 31 May 2022, the IDSA guideline panel has made 32 recommendations for the treatment and management of the following groups/populations: pre- and postexposure prophylaxis, ambulatory with mild-to-moderate disease, and hospitalized with mild-to-moderate, severe but not critical, and critical disease. As these are living guidelines, the most recent recommendations can be found online at: https://idsociety.org/COVID19guidelines. At the inception of its work, the panel has expressed the overarching goal that patients be recruited into ongoing trials. Since then, many trials were conducted that provided much-needed evidence for COVID-19 therapies. There still remain many unanswered questions as the pandemic evolved, which we hope future trials can answer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to present global challenges, sufficient time has passed to reflect on lessons learned and use those insights to inform policy and approaches to prepare for the next pandemic. In May 2022, the Duke Clinical Research Institute convened a think tank with thought leaders from academia, clinical practice, the pharmaceutical industry, patient advocacy, the National Institutes of Health, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to share, firsthand, expert knowledge of the insights gained from the COVID-19 pandemic and how this acquired knowledge can help inform the next pandemic response. The think tank focused on pandemic preparedness, therapeutics, vaccines, and challenges related to clinical trial design and scale-up during the early phase of a pandemic. Based on the multi-faceted discussions, we outline 10 key steps to an improved and equitable pandemic response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Although severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination reduces the risk and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), several variables may impact the humoral response among patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted among SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated HSCT recipients between 2020 and 2022 at a single center in Boston, Massachusetts. Patients age ≥18 years who received doses of Pfizer, Moderna, or J&J vaccines were included. Anti-spike (S) immunoglobulin G (IgG) titer levels were measured using the Roche assay. Responders (≥0.8 U/mL) and nonresponders (<0.8 U/mL) were categorized and analyzed. Multivariable linear and logistic regression were used to estimate the correlation coefficient and odds ratio of response magnitude and status. Results Of 152 HSCT recipients, 141 (92.8%) were responders, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) anti-S IgG titer of 2500 (107.9–2500) U/mL at a median (IQR) of 80.5 (36–153.5) days from last dose, regardless of the number of doses received. Higher quantitative titers were associated with receipt of more vaccine doses (coeff, 205.79; 95% CI, 30.10 to 381.47; P =.022), being female (coeff, 343.5; 95% CI, −682.6 to −4.4; P =.047), being younger (<65 years; coeff, 365.2; 95% CI, −711.3 to 19.1; P =.039), and not being on anti-CD20 therapy (coeff, −1163.7; 95% CI, −1717.7 to −609.7; P =.001). Being male (odds ratio [OR], 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.93; P =.04) and being on anti-CD20 therapy (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.70; P =.016) were associated with nonresponse. Conclusions Overall, most HSCT recipients had high SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses. More vaccine doses improved the magnitude of immune responses. Anti-S IgG monitoring may be useful for identifying attenuated vaccine-induced responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Serologic assays for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been proposed to assist with the acute diagnosis of infection, support epidemiological studies, identify convalescent plasma donors, and evaluate vaccine response. We report an evaluation of nine serologic assays: Abbott (AB) and Epitope (EP) IgG and IgM, EUROIMMUN (EU) IgG and IgA, Roche anti-N (RN TOT) and anti-S (RS TOT) total antibody, and DiaSorin (DS) IgG. We evaluated 291 negative controls (NEG CTRL), 91 PCR positive (PCR POS) patients (179 samples), 126 convalescent plasma donors (CPD), 27 healthy vaccinated donors (VD), and 20 allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients (45 samples). We observed good agreement with the method performance claims for specificity (93–100%) in NEG CTRL but only 85% for EU IgA. The sensitivity claims in the first 2 weeks of symptom onset was lower (26–61%) than performance claims based on > 2 weeks since PCR positivity. We observed high sensitivities (94–100%) in CPD except for AB IgM (77%), EP IgM (0%). Significantly higher RS TOT was observed for Moderna vaccine recipients then Pfizer (p-values < 0.0001). A sustained RS TOT response was observed for the five months following vaccination. HSCT recipients demonstrated significantly lower RS TOT than healthy VD (p < 0.0001) at dose 2 and 4 weeks after. Our data suggests against the use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays to aid in acute diagnosis. RN TOT and RS TOT can readily identify past-resolved infection and vaccine response in the absence of native infection. We provide an estimate of expected antibody response in healthy VD over the time course of vaccination for which to compare antibody responses in immunosuppressed patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are limited data for the clinical efficacy of bebtelovimab in preventing severe coronavirus disease 2019. Among outpatients unable to take nirmatrelvir-ritonavir at a large health system, 10 of 377 (2.7%) patients who received bebtelovimab and 17 of 377 (4.5%) matched untreated patients were hospitalized or died. The 43% observed risk reduction with bebtelovimab was not statistically significant (P = 0.14). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Patients with lymphoid malignancies are at risk for poor coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related outcomes and have reduced vaccine-induced immune responses. Currently, a 3-dose primary regimen of mRNA vaccines is recommended in the United States for immunocompromised hosts. Methods A prospective cohort study of healthy adults (n  = 27) and patients with lymphoid malignancies (n  = 94) was conducted, with longitudinal follow-up through completion of a 2- or 3-dose primary mRNA COVID vaccine series, respectively. Humoral responses were assessed in all participants, and cellular immunity was assessed in a subset of participants. Results The rate of seroconversion (68.1% vs 100%) and the magnitude of peak anti-S immunoglobulin G (IgG) titer (median anti-S IgG = 32.4, IQR = 0.48–75.0 vs median anti-S IgG = 72.6, IQR 51.1–100.1; P  = .0202) were both significantly lower in patients with lymphoid malignancies compared to the healthy cohort. However, peak titers of patients with lymphoid malignancies who responded to vaccination were similar to healthy cohort titers (median anti-S IgG = 64.3; IQR, 23.7–161.5; P  = .7424). The third dose seroconverted 7 of 41 (17.1%) patients who were seronegative after the first 2 doses. Although most patients with lymphoid malignancies produced vaccine-induced T-cell responses in the subset studied, B-cell frequencies were low with minimal memory cell formation. Conclusions A 3-dose primary mRNA series enhanced anti-S IgG responses to titers equivalent to healthy adults in patients with lymphoid malignancies who were seropositive after the first 2 doses and seroconverted 17.1% who were seronegative after the first 2 doses. T-cell responses were present, raising the possibility that the vaccines may confer some cell-based protection even if not measurable by anti-S IgG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]