Assessment of risk management and control measures against coronavirus disease

This article presents the COVID-19 situation and control measures taken by the Government of Pakistan. Two waves of pandemic are faced globally and similar in the study area. We have investigated the risk management decision in two phases. Primarily, strict lockdown was observed from March 2020 to July 2020 and smart lockdown was enforced from August 2020 to December 2020. It has been studied that during strict lockdown, COVID cases reduced gradually but reopening of institutes and smart lockdown strategy resulted gradual increase in confirmed cases and death rates. During first wave of COVID-19 in Pakistan, a total confirmed number of patients of COVID-19 were 263,496 till 18th of July 2020 with total deaths of 5,568 people and 204,276 recoveries, while total number of COVID-19 patients reached 555,511 till 9th of February 2021 with total deaths of 12,026 people. Province of Sindh was affected badly with total number of 251,434 COVID-19 cases followed by Punjab Province with total number of 161,347 COVID-19 till 9th of February 2020.     

Disparities in distribution of COVID-19 vaccines across US counties: A geographic information system–based cross-sectional study

BackgroundThe US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has repeatedly called for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine equity. The objective our study was to measure equity in the early distribution of COVID-19 vaccines to healthcare facilities across the US. Specifically, we tested whether the likelihood of a healthcare facility administering COVID-19 vaccines in May 2021 differed by county-level racial composition and degree of urbanicity.Methods and findingsThe outcome was whether an eligible vaccination facility actually administered COVID-19 vaccines as of May 2021, and was defined by spatially matching locations of eligible and actual COVID-19 vaccine administration locations. The outcome was regressed against county-level measures for racial/ethnic composition, urbanicity, income, social vulnerability index, COVID-19 mortality, 2020 election results, and availability of nontraditional vaccination locations using generalized estimating equations.Across the US, 61.4% of eligible healthcare facilities and 76.0% of eligible pharmacies provided COVID-19 vaccinations as of May 2021. Facilities in counties with >42.2% non-Hispanic Black population (i.e., > 95th county percentile of Black race composition) were less likely to serve as COVID-19 vaccine administration locations compared to facilities in counties with <12.5% non-Hispanic Black population (i.e., lower than US average), with OR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.98, p = 0.030. Location of a facility in a rural county (OR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.90, p < 0.001, versus metropolitan county) or in a county in the top quintile of COVID-19 mortality (OR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.93, p = 0.001, versus bottom 4 quintiles) was associated with decreased odds of serving as a COVID-19 vaccine administration location.There was a significant interaction of urbanicity and racial/ethnic composition: In metropolitan counties, facilities in counties with >42.2% non-Hispanic Black population (i.e., >95th county percentile of Black race composition) had 32% (95% CI 14% to 47%, p = 0.001) lower odds of serving as COVID administration facility compared to facilities in counties with below US average Black population. This association between Black composition and odds of a facility serving as vaccine administration facility was not observed in rural or suburban counties. In rural counties, facilities in counties with above US average Hispanic population had 26% (95% CI 11% to 38%, p = 0.002) lower odds of serving as vaccine administration facility compared to facilities in counties with below US average Hispanic population. This association between Hispanic ethnicity and odds of a facility serving as vaccine administration facility was not observed in metropolitan or suburban counties.Our analyses did not include nontraditional vaccination sites and are based on data as of May 2021, thus they represent the early distribution of COVID-19 vaccines. Our results based on this cross-sectional analysis may not be generalizable to later phases of the COVID-19 vaccine distribution process.ConclusionsHealthcare facilities in counties with higher Black composition, in rural areas, and in hardest-hit communities were less likely to serve as COVID-19 vaccine administration locations in May 2021. The lower uptake of COVID-19 vaccinations among minority populations and rural areas has been attributed to vaccine hesitancy; however, decreased access to vaccination sites may be an additional overlooked barrier.

Inmaculada Hernandez and colleagues investigate the disparities in early-phase distribution of COVID-19 Vaccines across U.S. Counties.     

Colonoscopy screening and surveillance disparities during the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has increased barriers to accessing preventive healthcare. This study identifies populations disproportionately underrepresented in screening and surveillance colonoscopies during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsIn this single-center cohort study, colonoscopy procedures were reviewed during 6-month intervals before the pandemic (July 1, 2019 - December 31, 2019) and during the pandemic (July 1, 2020 - December 31, 2020 and January 1, 2021 - June 30, 2021). 7095 patients were categorized based on procedure indication, demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index and Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). Statistics performed using VassarStats.Results2387 (2019) colonoscopies pre-pandemic and 2585 (2020) and 2123 (2021) during the pandemic were identified. There was a decrease in colonoscopies performed during months when COVID-19 cases peaked. The total number of average CRC risk patients presenting for first colonoscopy declined during the pandemic: 232 (10 %) pre-pandemic to 190 (7 %) in 2020, 145 (7 %) in 2021 (p < 0.001). Fewer of these patients presented from highly vulnerable communities, SVI > 0.8, during the pandemic, 39 in 2019 vs 16 in 2020 and 22 in 2021. Of all screening and surveillance patients, fewer presented from communities with SVI > 0.8 during the pandemic, 106 in 2019 versus 67 in 2020 and 77 in 2021.ConclusionIt is important to address the decline in CRC preventive care during this pandemic among average CRC risk first-time screeners and vulnerable community patients. An emphasis on addressing social determinants of health and establishing patients in gastroenterology clinics is imperative to promote future health in these populations.     

Euthyroid Sick Syndrome as a Prognostic Indicator of COVID-19 Pulmonary Involvement,Associated With Poorer Disease Prognosis and Increased Mortality

ObjectiveThe prevalence of euthyroid sick syndrome (ESS) and its association with the prognosis of COVID-19 and mortality in patients with lung involvement in COVID-19 have not yet been elucidated.MethodsClinical and laboratory data of patients with COVID-19 with or without ESS were collected retrospectively and analyzed on admission. All subjects were admitted to the Department of Internal Diseases and Clinical Pharmacology at Bieganski Hospital between December 2020 and April 2021.ResultsIn total, 310 medical records of patients with COVID-19 were analyzed retrospectively. Among 215 enrolled patients, 82 cases of ESS were diagnosed. The patients with ESS had higher pro-inflammatory factor levels, longer hospitalizations, and a higher risk of requiring high-flow nasal oxygen therapy or intubation than the patients without ESS. The Kaplan-Meier curve indicated that the patients with ESS had a lower probability of survival when computed tomography showed ≤50% parenchymal involvement compared with that in patients without ESS. However, no differences in mortality were noted in those with more than 50% parenchymal involvement. The survival curve showed that ESS was associated with a higher risk of mortality during hospitalization.ConclusionESS is closely associated with a poor prognosis, including longer hospitalizations, more frequent intubation, transfer to the intensive care unit, and a higher mortality rate in patients with COVID-19. ESS is a potential prognostic predictor of survival, regardless of lung involvement in COVID-19.     

Ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake and comparison to seasonal influenza vaccine uptake in Greater Manchester,UK: A cohort study

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccine uptake is lower amongst most minority ethnic groups compared to the White British group in England, despite higher COVID-19 mortality rates. Here, we add to existing evidence by estimating inequalities for 16 minority ethnic groups, examining ethnic inequalities within population subgroups, and comparing the magnitudes of ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake to those for routine seasonal influenza vaccine uptake.Methods and findingsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Greater Manchester Care Record, which contains de-identified electronic health record data for the population of Greater Manchester, England. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate ethnic inequalities in time to COVID-19 vaccination amongst people eligible for vaccination on health or age (50+ years) criteria between 1 December 2020 and 18 April 2021 (138 days of follow-up). We included vaccination with any approved COVID-19 vaccine, and analysed first-dose vaccination only. We compared inequalities between COVID-19 and influenza vaccine uptake adjusting by age group and clinical risk, and used subgroup analysis to identify populations where inequalities were widest. The majority of individuals (871,231; 79.24%) were White British. The largest minority ethnic groups were Pakistani (50,268; 4.75%), ‘other White background’ (43,195; 3.93%), ‘other ethnic group’ (34,568; 3.14%), and Black African (18,802; 1.71%). In total, 83.64% (919,636/1,099,503) of eligible individuals received a COVID-19 vaccine. Uptake was lower compared to the White British group for 15 of 16 minority ethnic groups, with particularly wide inequalities amongst the groups ‘other Black background’ (hazard ratio [HR] 0.42, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.44), Black African (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.44), Arab (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.48), and Black Caribbean (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.45). In total, 55.71% (419,314/752,715) of eligible individuals took up influenza vaccination. Compared to the White British group, inequalities in influenza vaccine uptake were widest amongst the groups ‘White and Black Caribbean’ (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.68) and ‘White and Black African’ (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.72). In contrast, uptake was slightly higher than the White British group amongst the groups ‘other ethnic group’ (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.12) and Bangladeshi (HR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.11). Overall, ethnic inequalities in vaccine uptake were wider for COVID-19 than influenza vaccination for 15 of 16 minority ethnic groups. COVID-19 vaccine uptake inequalities also existed amongst individuals who previously took up influenza vaccination. Ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake were concentrated amongst older and extremely clinically vulnerable adults, and the most income-deprived. A limitation of this study is the focus on uptake of the first dose of COVID-19 vaccination, rather than full COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsEthnic inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake exceeded those for influenza vaccine uptake, existed amongst those recently vaccinated against influenza, and were widest amongst those with greatest COVID-19 risk. This suggests the COVID-19 vaccination programme has created additional and different inequalities beyond pre-existing health inequalities. We suggest that further research and policy action is needed to understand and remove barriers to vaccine uptake, and to build trust and confidence amongst minority ethnic communities.

Ruth Elizabeth Watkinson and colleagues estimate inequalities in Covid-19 vaccine uptake for 16 minority ethnic groups and compare them to those in routine seasonal Influenza vaccine uptake.     

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the early-onset colorectal cancer

The COVID19 pandemic has affected the spectrum of cancer care worldwide. Early onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) is defined as diagnosis below the age of 50. Patients with EOCRC faced multiple challenges during the COVID19 pandemic and in some institutions it jeopardized cancer diagnosis and care delivery. Our study aims to identify the clinicopathological features and outcomes of patients with EOCRC in our Centre during the first wave of the pandemic in comparison with the same period in 2019 and 2021.Patients with EOCRC visited for the first time at Vall d'Hebron University Hospital in Spain from the 1st March to 31st August of 2019, 2020 and 2021 were included in the analysis. 177 patients with EOCRC were visited for the first time between 2019 and 2021, of which 90 patients met the inclusion criteria (2019: 30 patients, 2020: 29 patients, 2021: 31 patients). Neither differences in frequency nor in stage at diagnosis or at first visit during the given periods were observed. Of note, indication of systemic therapy in the adjuvant or metastatic setting was not altered. Days to treatment initiation and enrollment in clinical trials in this subpopulation was not affected due to the COVID-19 outbreak.     

Epidemiological determinants for the spread of COVID-19 in Riyadh Province of Saudi Arabia

Background and objectiveCoronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected millions of individuals all over the world. In addition to the patients' compelling indications, various sociodemographic characteristics were identified to influence infection complications. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the aforementioned parameters on the dissemination of COVID-19 among residents of Saudi Arabia's Riyadh region.Materials and methodsIn the Saudi Arabian province of Riyadh, a cross-sectional retrospective analysis of COVID-19 incidences, recoveries, and case-fatality ratio (CFR) was undertaken. The study was carried out by gathering daily COVID-19 records from the ministry of health's official websites between October 2020 and September 2021. The influencing factors were obtained from the statistical authority. Using the SPSS IBM 25 software, the data was examined. The association between demographic factors as well as the presence of comorbidity on the COVID-19 outcome was determined using Spearman's correlation and regression tests. P < 0.05 was considered to indicate the significance of the results.ResultsThe data from the study indicated that the highest number of COVID-19 cases were recorded in June 2021, and peak recovery was observed in July 2021. The CFR declined progressively from October 2020 to just over 1, even when the cases peaked. A significant (p < 0.05) correlation between diabetes and COVID-19 incidences was observed. The recovery rate had a significant (p < 0.05) association with the literacy rate and those aged 14–49 years old. Presences of co-morbidities such as Dyslipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, asthma, stroke and heart failure have negatively affected the recovery from COVID-19 in the population. The CFR is significantly (p < 0.05) associated with people over 60, hypertensive patients, and asthma patients. Regression analysis suggested that the risk of complications due to COVID-19 infection is more in males, people above 60 years age and those suffering from co-morbidities.ConclusionsThe findings of the study indicate an association between several of the characteristics studied, such as gender, age, and comorbidity, and the spread of infection, recovery, and mortality. To restrict the spread of COVID-19 and prevent its complications, effective measures are required to control the modifiable risk factors.     

Prognostic factors and predictors of outcome in patients with COVID-19 and related pneumonia: a retrospective cohort study

The aim of the present study was to simultaneously assess several potential predictors of outcome (co-morbidity, previous and in-hospital treatment, radiologic Brixia score) in patients with COVID-19.This retrospective cohort study included 258 consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to a medical ward at Montichiari Hospital, Brescia, Italy from February 28th to April 30rd, 2020. Patients had SARS-CoV-2 related pneumonia with respiratory failure, and were treated with hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir plus ritonavir. In some patients, additional treatment with tocilizumab, dexamethasone and enoxaparin was adopted. Outcomes (death or recovery) were assessed at the end of the discharge period or at the end of the follow-up (August 2020).During hospitalization, 59 patients died, while 6 died after discharge. The following variables were demonstrated to be associated with a worse prognosis: Radiologic Brixia score higher than 8, presence at baseline of hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart disease, cancer, previous treatment with ACE-inhibitors or anti-platelet drugs. Anticoagulant treatment during hospital admission with enoxaparin at a dose higher than 4000 U once daily was associated with a better prognosis.In conclusion, our study demonstrates that some co-morbidities and cardiovascular risk factors may affect prognosis. The radiologic Brixia score may be a useful tool to stratify the risk of death at baseline. Anticoagulant treatment with enoxaparin might be associated to a clinical benefit in terms of survival in patients with COVID-19.     

COVID-19 and excess mortality in the United States: A county-level analysis

BackgroundCoronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) excess deaths refer to increases in mortality over what would normally have been expected in the absence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Several prior studies have calculated excess deaths in the United States but were limited to the national or state level, precluding an examination of area-level variation in excess mortality and excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19. In this study, we take advantage of county-level variation in COVID-19 mortality to estimate excess deaths associated with the pandemic and examine how the extent of excess mortality not assigned to COVID-19 varies across subsets of counties defined by sociodemographic and health characteristics.Methods and findingsIn this ecological, cross-sectional study, we made use of provisional National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) data on direct COVID-19 and all-cause mortality occurring in US counties from January 1 to December 31, 2020 and reported before March 12, 2021. We used data with a 10-week time lag between the final day that deaths occurred and the last day that deaths could be reported to improve the completeness of data. Our sample included 2,096 counties with 20 or more COVID-19 deaths. The total number of residents living in these counties was 319.1 million. On average, the counties were 18.7% Hispanic, 12.7% non-Hispanic Black, and 59.6% non-Hispanic White. A total of 15.9% of the population was older than 65 years. We first modeled the relationship between 2020 all-cause mortality and COVID-19 mortality across all counties and then produced fully stratified models to explore differences in this relationship among strata of sociodemographic and health factors. Overall, we found that for every 100 deaths assigned to COVID-19, 120 all-cause deaths occurred (95% CI, 116 to 124), implying that 17% (95% CI, 14% to 19%) of excess deaths were ascribed to causes of death other than COVID-19 itself. Our stratified models revealed that the percentage of excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19 was substantially higher among counties with lower median household incomes and less formal education, counties with poorer health and more diabetes, and counties in the South and West. Counties with more non-Hispanic Black residents, who were already at high risk of COVID-19 death based on direct counts, also reported higher percentages of excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19. Study limitations include the use of provisional data that may be incomplete and the lack of disaggregated data on county-level mortality by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and sociodemographic and health characteristics.ConclusionsIn this study, we found that direct COVID-19 death counts in the US in 2020 substantially underestimated total excess mortality attributable to COVID-19. Racial and socioeconomic inequities in COVID-19 mortality also increased when excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19 were considered. Our results highlight the importance of considering health equity in the policy response to the pandemic.

Andrew Stokes and co-workers report a county-level analysis of excess deaths owing to COVID-19 in the United States.     

HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors and COVID-19 mortality in Stockholm,Sweden: A registry-based cohort study

BackgroundThe relationship between statin treatment and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality has been discussed due to the pleiotropic effects of statins on coagulation and immune mechanisms. However, available observational studies are hampered by study design flaws, resulting in substantial heterogeneity and ambiguities. Here, we aim to determine the relationship between statin treatment and COVID-19 mortality.Methods and findingsThis cohort study included all Stockholm residents aged 45 or older (N = 963,876), followed up from 1 March 2020 until 11 November 2020. The exposure was statin treatment initiated before the COVID-19-pandemic, defined as recorded statin dispensation in the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register between 1 March 2019 and 29 February 2020. COVID-19-specific mortality was ascertained from the Swedish Cause of Death Registry. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using multivariable Cox regression models. We further performed a target trial emulation restricted to initiators of statins.In the cohort (51.6% female), 169,642 individuals (17.6%) were statin users. Statin users were older (71.0 versus 58.0 years), more likely to be male (53.3% versus 46.7%), more often diagnosed with comorbidities (for example, ischemic heart disease 23.3% versus 1.6%), more frequently on anticoagulant and antihypertensive treatments, less likely to have a university-level education (34.5% versus 45.4%), and more likely to have a low disposable income (20.6% versus 25.2%), but less likely to reside in crowded housing (6.1% versus 10.3%).A total of 2,545 individuals died from COVID-19 during follow-up, including 765 (0.5%) of the statin users and 1,780 (0.2%) of the nonusers. Statin treatment was associated with a lowered COVID-19 mortality (adjusted HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.97, P = 0.01), and this association did not vary appreciably across age groups, sexes, or COVID-19 risk groups. The confounder adjusted HR for statin treatment initiators was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.59 to 1.05, P = 0.10) in the emulated target trial. Limitations of this study include the observational design, reliance on dispensation data, and the inability to study specific drug regimens.ConclusionsStatin treatment had a modest negative association with COVID-19 mortality. While this finding needs confirmation from randomized clinical trials, it supports the continued use of statin treatment for medical prevention according to current recommendations also during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In this cohort study, Rita Bergqvist and colleagues investigate the relationship between statin treatment and COVID-19 mortality.     

Clinical characteristics,risk factors,and rate of severity of a nationwide COVID-19 Saudi cohort

ObjectiveTo evaluate COVID19 patients’ clinical characteristics, risk factors, and COVID-19 severity at baseline and over one month following hospitalization.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective cohort study of 598 Saudi COVID19 patients recruited from 4 major medical institutions nationwide between June 01, 2020, and February 28, 2021. Patients were stratified into different demographic characteristics and COVID-19 severity scale.ResultsOf the 598 hospitalized adult COVID19 patients (mean [range] age, 57 [46 to 65] years; 59% male), 300 (50.16%) had severe clinical COVID-19. Comorbidity was high among hospitalized patients (73.5 %), with diabetes mellitus (n=; 46%) and hypertension (n=; 41%) being the most common prevalent. In a multivariate logistic regression model, patient demographics and clinical factors such as age (odds ratio [OR], 1.014 per year; 95% CI, 1.003–1.025), male sex (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.02–2.62), diabetes mellitus (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.06–2.49), obesity (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.26–2.94), oxygen saturation<92% (OR, 4.83; 95% CI, 2.96–7.86), and high neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (OR, 3.74 per unit; 95% CI, 1.96–7.14) were independently associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Moreover, more than 60% of male patients and middle-aged patients (40–60 years) were associated with the use of COVID-19 medications, including favipiravir and dexamethasone, during their hospital stay. Additionally, the rate of invasive mechanical ventilation was the highest in female patients (61.5%) and in middle-aged patients (46.2%). However, the death rate was slightly higher in males (56%) than in female patients and in elderly patients (52%). In Cox proportional analysis, age associated with increased risk of 60-days mortality (Hazard ratio; HR, 1.05 per year; 95% CI, 1.018–1.098). Additionally, the Riyadh region associated with more COVID-19 cases required invasive respiratory support (57.7%) and Jeddah was associated with more deceased COVID-19 cases (44%).ConclusionsThe data shows that comorbidity is associated with hospitalization among COVID-19 patients, which indicates the level of severity. Infection during the winter season (November), male gender, elderly, and those with pre-existing diabetes mellitus or obesity were associated with higher COVID-19 clinical severity.     

Epidemiological,socio-demographic and clinical features of the early phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Ecuador

The SARS-CoV-2 virus has spread rapidly around the globe. Nevertheless, there is limited information describing the characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients in Latin America. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 9,468 confirmed COVID-19 cases reported in Ecuador. We calculated overall incidence, mortality, case fatality rates, disability adjusted life years, attack and crude mortality rates, as well as relative risk and relative odds of death, adjusted for age, sex and presence of comorbidities. A total of 9,468 positive COVID-19 cases and 474 deaths were included in the analysis. Men accounted for 55.4% (n = 5, 247) of cases and women for 44.6% (n = 4, 221). We found the presence of comorbidities, being male and older than 65 years were important determinants of mortality. Coastal regions were most affected by COVID-19, with higher mortality rates than the highlands. Fatigue was reported in 53.2% of the patients, followed by headache (43%), dry cough (41.7%), ageusia (37.1%) and anosmia (36.1%). We present an analysis of the burden of COVID-19 in Ecuador. Our findings show that men are at higher risk of dying from COVID-19 than women, and risk increases with age and the presence of comorbidities. We also found that blue-collar workers and the unemployed are at greater risk of dying. These early observations offer clinical insights for the medical community to help improve patient care and for public health officials to strengthen Ecuador’s response to the outbreak.     

Early versus deferred anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in patients admitted for COVID-19: A randomized phase II clinical trial

BackgroundConvalescent plasma (CP), despite limited evidence on its efficacy, is being widely used as a compassionate therapy for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of early CP therapy in COVID-19 progression.Methods and findingsThe study was an open-label, single-center randomized clinical trial performed in an academic medical center in Santiago, Chile, from May 10, 2020, to July 18, 2020, with final follow-up until August 17, 2020. The trial included patients hospitalized within the first 7 days of COVID-19 symptom onset, presenting risk factors for illness progression and not on mechanical ventilation. The intervention consisted of immediate CP (early plasma group) versus no CP unless developing prespecified criteria of deterioration (deferred plasma group). Additional standard treatment was allowed in both arms. The primary outcome was a composite of mechanical ventilation, hospitalization for >14 days, or death. The key secondary outcomes included time to respiratory failure, days of mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay, mortality at 30 days, and SARS-CoV-2 real-time PCR clearance rate. Of 58 randomized patients (mean age, 65.8 years; 50% male), 57 (98.3%) completed the trial. A total of 13 (43.3%) participants from the deferred group received plasma based on clinical aggravation. We failed to find benefit in the primary outcome (32.1% versus 33.3%, odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.32–2.84, p > 0.999) in the early versus deferred CP group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 17.9% versus 6.7% (OR 3.04, 95% CI 0.54–17.17 p = 0.246), mechanical ventilation 17.9% versus 6.7% (OR 3.04, 95% CI 0.54–17.17, p = 0.246), and prolonged hospitalization 21.4% versus 30.0% (OR 0.64, 95% CI, 0.19–2.10, p = 0.554) in the early versus deferred CP group, respectively. The viral clearance rate on day 3 (26% versus 8%, p = 0.204) and day 7 (38% versus 19%, p = 0.374) did not differ between groups. Two patients experienced serious adverse events within 6 hours after plasma transfusion. The main limitation of this study is the lack of statistical power to detect a smaller but clinically relevant therapeutic effect of CP, as well as not having confirmed neutralizing antibodies in donor before plasma infusion.ConclusionsIn the present study, we failed to find evidence of benefit in mortality, length of hospitalization, or mechanical ventilation requirement by immediate addition of CP therapy in the early stages of COVID-19 compared to its use only in case of patient deterioration.Trial registration{"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04375098","term_id":"NCT04375098"}}NCT04375098.

In this randomized trial, María Elvira Balcells and colleagues demonstrate that there is no benefit in immediate versus delayed convalescent plasma administration for COVID-19 patients.     

Epidemiological,Clinical and Serological Characteristics of Children with Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Wuhan: A Single-centered,Retrospective Study

In December 2019, SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in the samples obtained from three adult patients who suffered from an unknown viral pneumonia in Wuhan (Li et al. 2020). This unknown viral pneumonia is further named as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by the World Health Organization. To date, the number of new COVID-19 cases has continued to skyrocket and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on humans is far greater than any pathogen of this century in both breadth and depth. Previous studies have shown that adults with COVID-19 have symptoms of fever, dry cough, dyspnea, fatigue and lymphocytopenia. Moreover, COVID-19 is more likely to cause death in the elderly, especially those with chronic comorbidities (Huang et al. 2020). In Wuhan, more than 50, 000 COVID-19 cases have been confirmed, including over 780 pediatric patients, and only one child death case (Lu et al. 2020). Although the number of children cases was far fewer than that of adults, COVID-19 might endanger children's health and the information on children remains limited, especially in serological study. In the retrospective study, the investigators analyzed the epidemiological, clinical and serological characteristics of children with COVID-19 in Wuhan in the early stages of the outbreak, which might provide theoretical and practical help in controlling COVID-19 and similar emerging infectious diseases in the future.     

Association between use of Qingfei Paidu Tang and mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A national retrospective registry study

BackgroundQingfei Paidu Tang (QPT), a formula of traditional Chinese medicine, which was suggested to be able to ease symptoms in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), has been recommended by clinical guidelines and widely used to treat COVID-19 in China. However, whether it decreases mortality remains unknown.PurposeWe aimed to explore the association between QPT use and in-hospital mortality among patients hospitalized for COVID-19.Study designA retrospective study based on a real-world database was conducted.MethodsWe identified patients consecutively hospitalized with COVID-19 in 15 hospitals from a national retrospective registry in China, from January through May 2020. Data on patients’ characteristics, treatments, and outcomes were extracted from the electronic medical records. The association of QPT use with COVID-19 related mortality was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models based on propensity score analysis.ResultsOf the 8939 patients included, 28.7% received QPT. The COVID-19 related mortality was 1.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8% to 1.7%) among the patients receiving QPT and 4.8% (95% CI 4.3% to 5.3%) among those not receiving QPT. After adjustment for patient characteristics and concomitant treatments, QPT use was associated with a relative reduction of 50% in-hospital COVID-19 related mortality (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.66 p < 0.001). This association was consistent across subgroups by sex and age. Meanwhile, the incidences of acute liver injury (8.9% [95% CI, 7.8% to 10.1%] vs. 9.9% [95% CI, 9.2% to 10.7%]; odds ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.81% to 1.14%], p = 0.658) and acute kidney injury (1.6% [95% CI, 1.2% to 2.2%] vs. 3.0% [95% CI, 2.6% to 3.5%]; odds ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.17], p = 0.318) were comparable between patients receiving QPT and those not receiving QPT. The major study limitations included that the study was an observational study based on real-world data rather than a randomized control trial, and the quality of data could be affected by the accuracy and completeness of medical records.ConclusionsQPT was associated with a substantially lower risk of in-hospital mortality, without extra risk of acute liver injury or acute kidney injury among patients hospitalized with COVID-19.     

新冠疫情对全球生物多样性热点地区森林面积的影响

森林是维持生物多样性的重要保障,森林面积的损失常常会导致区域生物多样性的降低或丧失。为探讨新冠疫情对全球生物多样性的影响,该文利用Image J软件筛选出全球生物多样性热点地区占国土面积超60%的国家作为研究对象,以全球生物多样性热点地区的森林损失面积、生物多样性完整性数据、年度(2020年和2021年)新冠疫情感染数据、国内生产总值(GDP)为研究对象,进行关联分析、线性混合效应模型构建和回归预测。结果表明:虽然新冠病毒的每百万人口感染数量与森林损失面积表现为显著负相关,具体表现为新冠疫情显著减少了因城市和农业大规模扩张而导致的森林损失面积,但在新冠疫情暴发的2年(2020年和2021年)期间,全球生物多样性热点地区的森林损失总量仍然持续上升,主要原因是新冠疫情间接加速了人工林和天然林的采伐。回归模型预测显示,新冠疫情期间,全球生物多样性热点地区的森林损失面积在2020年和2021年分别增加了5.83%和21.78%。综上表明,虽然新冠疫情对生物多样性热点地区的森林损失具有一定的抑制作用,但森林损失面积仍然在增加。该研究结果为制定生物多样性的保护措施提供了数据支撑。     

Covid-19 in end-stage renal disease patients with renal replacement therapies: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundThe novel coronavirus (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, showed various prevalence and case-fatality rates (CFR) among patients with different pre-existing chronic conditions. End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients with renal replacement therapy (RRT) might have a higher prevalence and CFR due to reduced immune function from uremia and kidney tropism of SARS-CoV-2, but there was a lack of systematic study on the infection and mortality of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in ESRD patients with various RRT.Methodology/Principal findingsWe searched five electronic databases and performed a systematic review and meta-analysis up to June 30, 2020, to evaluate the prevalence and case fatality rate (CFR) of the COVID-19 infection among ESRD patients with RRT. The global COVID-19 data were retrieved from the international database on June 30, 2020, for estimating the prevalence and CFR of the general population as referencing points. Of 3,272 potential studies, 34 were eligible studies consisted of 1,944 COVID-19 confirmed cases in 21,873 ESRD patients with RRT from 12 countries in four WHO regions. The overall pooled prevalence in ESRD patients with RRT was 3.10% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25–5.72] which was higher than referencing 0.14% global average prevalence. The overall estimated CFR of COVID-19 in ESRD patients with RRT was 18.06% (95% CI 14.09–22.32) which was higher than the global average at 4.98%.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggested high COVID-19 prevalence and CFR in ESRD patients with RRT. ESRD patients with RRT should have their specific protocol of COVID-19 prevention and treatment to mitigate excess cases and deaths.     

Correlation of Hemoglobin A1C and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19

ObjectiveDiabetes is a known risk factor for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted this study to determine if there is a correlation between hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) level and poor outcomes in hospitalized patients with diabetes and COVID-19.MethodsThis is a retrospective, single-center, observational study of patients with diabetes (defined by an HbA1C level of ≥6.5% or known medical history of diabetes) who had a confirmed case of COVID-19 and required hospitalization. All patients were admitted to our institution between March 3, 2020, and May 5, 2020. HbA1C results for each patient were divided into quartiles: 5.1% to 6.7% (32-50 mmol/mol), 6.8% to 7.5% (51-58 mmol/mol), 7.6% to 8.9% (60-74 mmol/mol), and >9% (>75 mmol/mol). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included admission to an intensive care unit, invasive mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, acute thrombosis, and length of hospital stay.ResultsA total of 506 patients were included. The number of deaths within quartiles 1 through 4 were 30 (25%), 37 (27%), 34 (27%), and 24 (19%), respectively. There was no statistical difference in the primary or secondary outcomes among the quartiles, except that acute kidney injury was less frequent in quartile 4.ConclusionThere was no significant association between HbA1C level and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes who are hospitalized with COVID-19. HbA1C levels should not be used for risk stratification in these patients.