Search

Background: The efficacy and safety of high versus medium doses of glucocorticoids for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 has shown mixed outcomes in controlled trials and observational studies. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of methylprednisolone 250 mg bolus versus dexamethasone 6 mg in patients with severe COVID-19., Methods: A randomised, open-label, controlled trial was conducted between February and August 2021 at four hospitals in Spain. The trial was suspended after the first interim analysis since the investigators considered that continuing the trial would be futile. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive dexamethasone 6 mg once daily for up to 10 days or methylprednisolone 250 mg once daily for 3 days., Results: Of the 128 randomised patients, 125 were analysed (mean age 60 ± 17 years; 82 males [66%]). Mortality at 28 days was 4.8% in the 250 mg methylprednisolone group versus 4.8% in the 6 mg dexamethasone group (absolute risk difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -8.8 to 9.1%]; p = 0.98). None of the secondary outcomes (admission to the intensive care unit, non-invasive respiratory or high-flow oxygen support, additional immunosuppressive drugs, or length of stay), or prespecified sensitivity analyses were statistically significant. Hyperglycaemia was more frequent in the methylprednisolone group at 27.0 versus 8.1% (absolute risk difference, -18.9% [95% CI, -31.8 to - 5.6%]; p = 0.007)., Conclusions: Among severe but not critical patients with COVID-19, 250 mg/d for 3 days of methylprednisolone compared with 6 mg/d for 10 days of dexamethasone did not result in a decrease in mortality or intubation., (© 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Clinical Investigation published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Stichting European Society for Clinical Investigation Journal Foundation.)

Objectives: To evaluate if the detection of N antigen of SARS-CoV-2 in plasma by a rapid lateral flow test predicts 90-day mortality in COVID-19 patients hospitalized at the wards., Methods: The presence of N-antigenemia was evaluated in the first 36 hours after hospitalization in 600 unvaccinated COVID-19 patients, by using the Panbio COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device from Abbott (Abbott Laboratories Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The impact of N-antigenemia on 90-day mortality was assessed by multivariable Cox regression analysis., Results: Prevalence of N-antigenemia at hospitalization was higher in nonsurvivors (69% (82/118) vs. 52% (250/482); p < 0.001). The patients with N-antigenemia showed more frequently RNAemia (45.7% (148/324) vs. 19.8% (51/257); p < 0.001), absence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 N antibodies (80.7% (264/327) vs. 26.6% (69/259); p < 0.001) and absence of S1 antibodies (73.4% (240/327) vs. 23.6% (61/259); p < 0.001). The patients with antigenemia showed more frequently acute respiratory distress syndrome (30.1% (100/332) vs. 18.7% (50/268); p = 0.001) and nosocomial infections (13.6% (45/331) vs. 7.9% (21/267); p = 0.026). N-antigenemia was a risk factor for increased 90-day mortality in the multivariable analysis (HR, 1.99 (95% CI,1.09-3.61), whereas the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 N-antibodies represented a protective factor (HR, 0.47 (95% CI, 0.26-0.85)., Discussion: The presence of N-antigenemia or the absence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 N-antibodies after hospitalization is associated to increased 90-day mortality in unvaccinated COVID-19 patients. Detection of N-antigenemia by using lateral flow tests is a quick, widely available tool that could contribute to early identify those COVID-19 patients at risk of deterioration., (Copyright © 2022 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To compare the prognostic value of 3 severity scales: the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), the CURB-65 pneumonia severity score, and the Severity Community-Acquired Pneumonia (SCAP) score. To build a new predictive model for in-hospital mortality in patients over the age of 75 years admitted with pneumonia due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)., Material and Methods: Retrospective study of patients older than 75 years admitted from the emergency department for COVID-19 pneumonia between March 12 and April 27, 2020. We recorded demographic (age, sex, living in a care facility or not), clinical (symptoms, comorbidities, Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI]), and analytical (serum biochemistry, blood gases, blood count, and coagulation factors) variables. A risk model was constructed, and the ability of the 3 scales to predict all-cause in-hospital mortality was compared., Results: We included 186 patients with a median age of 85 years (interquartile range, 80-89 years); 44.1% were men. Mortality was 47.3%. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were as follows for each tool: PSI, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.64-0.82); CURB-65 score, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.62-0.79); and SCAP score, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.63-0.81). Risk factors included in the model were the presence or absence of symptoms (cough, dyspnea), the CCI, and analytical findings (aspartate aminotransferase, potassium, urea, and lactate dehydrogenase. The AUC for the model was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.73-0.88)., Conclusion: This study shows that the predictive power of the PSI for mortality is moderate and perceptibly higher than the CURB-65 and SCAP scores. We propose a new predictive model for mortality that offers significantly better performance than any of the 3 scales compared. However, our model must undergo external validation.

Background: COVID-19 can course with respiratory and extrapulmonary disease. SARS-CoV-2 RNA is detected in respiratory samples but also in blood, stool and urine. Severe COVID-19 is characterized by a dysregulated host response to this virus. We studied whether viral RNAemia or viral RNA load in plasma is associated with severe COVID-19 and also to this dysregulated response., Methods: A total of 250 patients with COVID-19 were recruited (50 outpatients, 100 hospitalized ward patients and 100 critically ill). Viral RNA detection and quantification in plasma was performed using droplet digital PCR, targeting the N1 and N2 regions of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein gene. The association between SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and viral RNA load in plasma with severity was evaluated by multivariate logistic regression. Correlations between viral RNA load and biomarkers evidencing dysregulation of host response were evaluated by calculating the Spearman correlation coefficients., Results: The frequency of viral RNAemia was higher in the critically ill patients (78%) compared to ward patients (27%) and outpatients (2%) (p < 0.001). Critical patients had higher viral RNA loads in plasma than non-critically ill patients, with non-survivors showing the highest values. When outpatients and ward patients were compared, viral RNAemia did not show significant associations in the multivariate analysis. In contrast, when ward patients were compared with ICU patients, both viral RNAemia and viral RNA load in plasma were associated with critical illness (OR [CI 95%], p): RNAemia (3.92 [1.183-12.968], 0.025), viral RNA load (N1) (1.962 [1.244-3.096], 0.004); viral RNA load (N2) (2.229 [1.382-3.595], 0.001). Viral RNA load in plasma correlated with higher levels of chemokines (CXCL10, CCL2), biomarkers indicative of a systemic inflammatory response (IL-6, CRP, ferritin), activation of NK cells (IL-15), endothelial dysfunction (VCAM-1, angiopoietin-2, ICAM-1), coagulation activation (D-Dimer and INR), tissue damage (LDH, GPT), neutrophil response (neutrophils counts, myeloperoxidase, GM-CSF) and immunodepression (PD-L1, IL-10, lymphopenia and monocytopenia)., Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and viral RNA load in plasma are associated with critical illness in COVID-19. Viral RNA load in plasma correlates with key signatures of dysregulated host responses, suggesting a major role of uncontrolled viral replication in the pathogenesis of this disease.