Traditional Chinese medicine shenhuang granule in patients with severe/critical COVID-19: A randomized controlled multicenter trial

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still a pandemic, with a high mortality rate in severe/critical cases. Therapies based on the Shenghuang Granule have proved helpful in viral infection and septic shock.Hypothesis/PurposeThe objective of the current study was to compare the efficacy and safety of the traditional Chinese medicine, Shenhuang Granule, with standard care in hospitalized patients with severe/critical COVID-19.Study Design and MethodsThis was an open-label, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial. At 4 medical centers, a total of 111 severe/critical patients were randomly assigned to receive Shenhuang Granule (SHG group) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, or to receive standard care alone (Control group). The maximal follow up time was 75 days. The clinical endpoint was clinical improvement and mortality.Results54 patients were assigned to the control group and 57 to the SHG group. The overall mortality was 75.9% (41/54) in the control group, and 38.6% (22/57) in the SHG group (p < 0.01 vs. control). The post hoc analysis showed that in the severe category, the mortality of the control group vs. the SHG group was 58.8% (10/17) vs. 5.3% (1/19) (p < 0.01); while in the critical category, it was 83.8% (31/37) vs. 55.3% (21/38) (p < 0.05). In the severe category, the mortality of patients who eventually received an invasive ventilator in the control vs. the SHG group was 58.8% (10/17) vs. 0 (0/19) (p < 0.01). Administration of SHG was associated with increased lymphocytes and decreased adverse events.ConclusionShenhuang Granule is a promising integrative therapy for severe and critical COVID-19.     

Incidence and impact of cardiac arrhythmias in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundStudies have shown that cardiac arrhythmias may occur in up to 44% of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been associated with an increased risk of death. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias in patients with COVID-19 and their implications on patient prognosis.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search from PubMed, SCOPUS, Europe PMC, Cochrane Central Databases, and Google Scholar + Preprint Servers. The primary endpoint of the study was poor outcomes including mortality, severe COVID-19, and the need for ICU care.ResultsA total of 4 studies including 784 patients were analyzed. The incidence of arrhythmia in patients with COVID-19 was 19% (9–28%; I²: 91.45). Arrhythmia occurred in 48% (38–57%; I²: 48.08) of patients with poor outcome and 6% (1–12%; I²: 85.33%) of patients without poor outcome. Patients with COVID-19 experiencing arrhythmia had an increased risk of poor outcome (RR 7.96 [3.77, 16.81], p < 0.001; I²: 71.1%). The funnel-plot analysis showed an asymmetrical funnel plot with most of the studies on the right side of the effect estimate. The regression-based Egger’s test showed indication of small-study effects (p = 0.001).ConclusionCardiac arrhythmias were significantly associated with an increased risk of poor outcome in COVID-19. Arrhythmias were observed in 19% of patients with COVID-19 and in 48% of patients with COVID-19 and poor outcomes.     

Overall and cause-specific hospitalisation and death after COVID-19 hospitalisation in England: A cohort study using linked primary care,secondary care,and death registration data in the OpenSAFELY platform

BackgroundThere is concern about medium to long-term adverse outcomes following acute Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but little relevant evidence exists. We aimed to investigate whether risks of hospital admission and death, overall and by specific cause, are raised following discharge from a COVID-19 hospitalisation.Methods and findingsWith the approval of NHS-England, we conducted a cohort study, using linked primary care and hospital data in OpenSAFELY to compare risks of hospital admission and death, overall and by specific cause, between people discharged from COVID-19 hospitalisation (February to December 2020) and surviving at least 1 week, and (i) demographically matched controls from the 2019 general population; and (ii) people discharged from influenza hospitalisation in 2017 to 2019. We used Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, obesity, smoking status, deprivation, and comorbidities considered potential risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes.We included 24,673 postdischarge COVID-19 patients, 123,362 general population controls, and 16,058 influenza controls, followed for ≤315 days. COVID-19 patients had median age of 66 years, 13,733 (56%) were male, and 19,061 (77%) were of white ethnicity. Overall risk of hospitalisation or death (30,968 events) was higher in the COVID-19 group than general population controls (fully adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.22, 2.14 to 2.30, p < 0.001) but slightly lower than the influenza group (aHR 0.95, 0.91 to 0.98, p = 0.004). All-cause mortality (7,439 events) was highest in the COVID-19 group (aHR 4.82, 4.48 to 5.19 versus general population controls [p < 0.001] and 1.74, 1.61 to 1.88 versus influenza controls [p < 0.001]). Risks for cause-specific outcomes were higher in COVID-19 survivors than in general population controls and largely similar or lower in COVID-19 compared with influenza patients. However, COVID-19 patients were more likely than influenza patients to be readmitted or die due to their initial infection or other lower respiratory tract infection (aHR 1.37, 1.22 to 1.54, p < 0.001) and to experience mental health or cognitive-related admission or death (aHR 1.37, 1.02 to 1.84, p = 0.039); in particular, COVID-19 survivors with preexisting dementia had higher risk of dementia hospitalisation or death (age- and sex-adjusted HR 2.47, 1.37 to 4.44, p = 0.002). Limitations of our study were that reasons for hospitalisation or death may have been misclassified in some cases due to inconsistent use of codes, and we did not have data to distinguish COVID-19 variants.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that people discharged from a COVID-19 hospital admission had markedly higher risks for rehospitalisation and death than the general population, suggesting a substantial extra burden on healthcare. Most risks were similar to those observed after influenza hospitalisations, but COVID-19 patients had higher risks of all-cause mortality, readmission or death due to the initial infection, and dementia death, highlighting the importance of postdischarge monitoring.

Krishnan Bhaskaran and co-workers study health outcomes after admission with COVID-19 and subsequent discharge.     

Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio is not associated with risk of sarcopenia in elderly COVID-19 patients

BackgroundTo assess the existence of association between neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the risk of sarcopenia in COVID-19 patients.MethodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted in a university hospital with patients with an active COVID-19 infection admitted to the nursing ward or intensive care unit (ICU) between September to December 2020. Sarcopenia risk was assessed using the Strength, Assistance for walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs and Falls (SARC-F). Biochemical analyses were assessed by circulating of C-reactive protein, D-dimer, neutrophils, lymphocytes count and NLR. Sixty-eight patients were evaluated and divided into tertiles of NLR values and the association between NLR and sarcopenia risk were tested using the linear regression analyses and p < 0.05 were considered as significant.ResultsSixty-eight patients were evaluated and divided in NLR tertiles being the 1st (men = 52.2%; 71.1 ± 9.0 y; NLR: 1.1–3.85), 2nd (women = 78.3%; 73.2 ± 9.1 y; NLR: 3.9–6.0) and 3rd (men = 72.7%; 71.7 ± 10.4 y; NLR: 6.5–20.0). There was a difference between the tertiles in relation to the first to the biochemical parameters of total neutrophils count (p = 0.001), C-reactive protein (p = 0.012), and D-dimer (p = 0.012). However, no difference was found in linear regression analysis between tertiles of NLR and SARC-F, if in total sample (p = 0.054) or divided by sex, if men (p = 0.369) or women (p = 0.064).ConclusionIn elderly patients hospitalized with COVID-19, we do not find an association between the risk of sarcopenia and NLR.     

Combination of Hua Shi Bai Du granule (Q-14) and standard care in the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A single-center,open-label,randomized controlled trial

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of Hua Shi Bai Du Granule (Q-14) plus standard care compared with standard care alone in adults with coronavirus disease (COVID-19).Study DesignA single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial.SettingWuhan Jinyintan Hospital, Wuhan, China, February 27 to March 27, 2020.ParticipantsA total of 204 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were randomized into the treatment group and control group, consisting of 102 patients in each group.InterventionsIn the treatment group, Q-14 was administered at 10 g (granules) twice daily for 14 days, plus standard care. In the control group, patients were provided standard care alone for 14 days.Main Outcome MeasureThe primary outcome was the conversion time for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral assay. Adverse events were analyzed in the safety population.ResultsAmong the 204 patients, 195 were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. A total of 149 patients (71 vs. 78 in the treatment and control groups, respectively) tested negative via the SARS-CoV-2 viral assay. There was no statistical significance in the conversion time between the treatment group and control group (Full analysis set: Median [interquartile range]: 10.00 [9.00-11.00] vs. 10.00 [9.00-11.00]; Mean rank: 67.92 vs. 81.44; P = 0.051). The recovery time for fever was shorter in the treatment group than in the control group. The disappearance rate of symptoms like cough, fatigue, and chest discomfort was significantly higher in the treatment group. In chest computed tomography (CT) examinations, the overall evaluation of chest CT examination after treatment compared with baseline showed that more patients improved in the treatment group. There were no significant differences in the other outcomes.ConclusionThe combination of Q-14 and standard care for COVID-19 was useful for the improvement of symptoms (such as fever, cough, fatigue, and chest discomfort), but did not result in a significantly higher probability of negative conversion in the SARS-CoV-2 viral assay. No serious adverse events were observed.Trial RegistrationChiCTR2000030288     

Clinical characteristics and treatment outcome of COVID-19 patients with stroke in China: A multicenter retrospective study

ObjectivePrevious studies mainly reported the clinical characteristics of novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infections, but the research on clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of COVID-19 patients with stroke is still rare.MethodsA multi-center retrospective study was conducted at 11 hospitals in 4 provinces of China, and COVID-19 patients with stroke were enrolled from February 24 to May 4, 2020. We analyzed epidemiological, demographic, and clinical characteristics of cases as well as the laboratory test results, treatment regimens and outcomes, and the clinical characteristics and therapeutic outcomes were compared between severe and nonsevere patients, and by age group, respectively.ResultsA total of 27 patients [mean age: 66.41 (SD 12.1) years] were enrolled. Among them, 9 (33.3%) were severe patients and 18 (66.7%) were nonsevere patients; 17 (63.0%) were female; 19 (70.4%) were aged 60 years and above. The most common symptoms were fever [19 (70.4%)], fatigue [12 (44.4%)] and cough [11 (40.7%)], respectively. Abnormal laboratory findings of COVID-19 patients with stroke included high levels of C-reactive protein [19 (73.1%)], D-dimer [14 (58.3%)], blood glucose [14 (53.8%)], fibrinogen [13 (50.0%)], and decreased lymphocytes [12 (44.4%)]. Comparing to nonsevere cases with stroke, severe patients with stroke were likely to be older, susceptible to receiving oxygen inhalation, and had more complications (p < 0.05). In addition, there were significant differences in lymphocytes, neutrophils, lactate dehydrogenase, C-reactive protein, creatine kinase between the severe cases and nonsevere cases (p < 0.05). The older patients had a decreased platelet count and elevated fibrinogen, compared with the younger (p < 0.05). All patients (100%) received antiviral treatment, 12 (44.4%) received antibiotics treatment, 26 (96.3%) received Traditional Chinese Medicine (Lung cleansing & detoxifying decoction), and oxygen inhalation was in 18 (66.7%). The median duration of hospitalization was 16 days. By May 4, 2020, a total of 26 (96.3%) patients were cured and discharged, and 1 (3.7%) patients died.ConclusionCOVID-19 patients with stroke had poor indicators of coagulation system, and severe and older patients might have a higher risk of complications and unfavorable coagulation system. However, the overall treatment outcome is favorable.     

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.     

COVID-19 severity and cardiovascular outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease

BackgroundData regarding outcomes among patients with cancer and co-morbid cardiovascular disease (CVD)/cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) after SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited.ObjectivesTo compare Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related complications among cancer patients with and without co-morbid CVD/CVRF.MethodsRetrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from 03/17/2020 to 12/31/2021. CVD/CVRF was defined as established CVD or no established CVD, male ≥ 55 or female ≥ 60 years, and one additional CVRF. The primary endpoint was an ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome including need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, ICU or mechanical ventilation plus vasopressors, and death. Secondary endpoints included incident adverse CV events. Ordinal logistic regression models estimated associations of CVD/CVRF with COVID-19 severity. Effect modification by recent cancer therapy was evaluated.ResultsAmong 10,876 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with cancer (median age 65 [IQR 54–74] years, 53% female, 52% White), 6253 patients (57%) had co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Co-morbid CVD/CVRF was associated with higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR: 1.25 [95% CI 1.11–1.40]). Adverse CV events were significantly higher in patients with CVD/CVRF (all p<0.001). CVD/CVRF was associated with worse COVID-19 severity in patients who had not received recent cancer therapy, but not in those undergoing active cancer therapy (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.31–1.74] vs. OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.90–1.20], p_interaction <0.001).ConclusionsCo-morbid CVD/CVRF is associated with higher COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer, particularly those not receiving active cancer therapy. While infrequent, COVID-19 related CV complications were higher in patients with comorbid CVD/CVRF. (COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium Registry [CCC19]; NCT04354701).     

Clinical Characteristics of 28 Patients with Diabetes and COVID-19 in Wuhan,China

Objective: Previous studies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were based on information from the general population. We aimed to further clarify the clinical characteristics of diabetes with COVID-19.Methods: Twenty-eight patients with diabetes and COVID-19 were enrolled from January 29, 2020, to February 10, 2020, with a final follow-up on February 22, 2020. Epidemiologic, demographic, clinical, laboratory, treatment, and outcome data were analyzed.Results: The average age of the 28 patients was 68.6 ± 9.0 years. Most (75%) patients were male. Only 39.3% of the patients had a clear exposure of COVID-19. Fever (92.9%), dry cough (82.1%), and fatigue (64.3%) were the most common symptoms, followed by dyspnea (57.1%), anorexia (57.1%), diarrhea (42.9%), expectoration (25.0%), and nausea (21.4%). Fourteen patients were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The hemoglobin A1c level was similar between ICU and non-ICU patients. ICU patients had a higher respiratory rate, higher levels of random blood glucose, aspartate transaminase, bilirubin, creatine, N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide, troponin I, D-dimers, procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, ferritin, interleukin (IL)-2R, IL-6, and IL-8 than non-ICU patients. Eleven of 14 ICU patients received noninvasive ventilation and 7 patients received invasive mechanical ventilation. Twelve patients died in the ICU group and no patients died in the non-ICU group.Conclusion: ICU cases showed higher rates of organ failure and mortality than non-ICU cases. The poor outcomes of patients with diabetes and COVID-19 indicated that more supervision is required in these patients.Abbreviations: COVID-19 = coronavirus disease 2019; ICU = intensive care unit; MERS-CoV = middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus; 2019- nCoV = 2019 novel coronavirus; NT-proBNP = N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide; SARS-CoV = severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus     

Income differences in COVID-19 incidence and severity in Finland among people with foreign and native background: A population-based cohort study of individuals nested within households

BackgroundAlthough intrahousehold transmission is a key source of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections, studies to date have not analysed socioeconomic risk factors on the household level or household clustering of severe COVID-19. We quantify household income differences and household clustering of COVID-19 incidence and severity.Methods and findingsWe used register-based cohort data with individual-level linkage across various administrative registers for the total Finnish population living in working-age private households (N = 4,315,342). Incident COVID-19 cases (N = 38,467) were identified from the National Infectious Diseases Register from 1 July 2020 to 22 February 2021. Severe cases (N = 625) were defined as having at least 3 consecutive days of inpatient care with a COVID-19 diagnosis and identified from the Care Register for Health Care between 1 July 2020 and 31 December 2020. We used 2-level logistic regression with individuals nested within households to estimate COVID-19 incidence and case severity among those infected.Adjusted for age, sex, and regional characteristics, the incidence of COVID-19 was higher (odds ratio [OR] 1.67, 95% CI 1.58 to 1.77, p < 0.001, 28.4% of infections) among individuals in the lowest household income quintile than among those in the highest quintile (18.9%). The difference attenuated (OR 1.23, 1.16 to 1.30, p < 0.001) when controlling for foreign background but not when controlling for other household-level risk factors. In fact, we found a clear income gradient in incidence only among people with foreign background but none among those with native background. The odds of severe illness among those infected were also higher in the lowest income quintile (OR 1.97, 1.52 to 2.56, p < 0.001, 28.0% versus 21.6% in the highest quintile), but this difference was fully attenuated (OR 1.08, 0.77 to 1.52, p = 0.64) when controlling for other individual-level risk factors—comorbidities, occupational status, and foreign background. Both incidence and severity were strongly clustered within households: Around 77% of the variation in incidence and 20% in severity were attributable to differences between households. The main limitation of our study was that the test uptake for COVID-19 may have differed between population subgroups.ConclusionsLow household income appears to be a strong risk factor for both COVID-19 incidence and case severity, but the income differences are largely driven by having foreign background. The strong household clustering of incidence and severity highlights the importance of household context in the prevention and mitigation of COVID-19 outcomes.

Sanni Saarinen and colleagues explore the association between income differences and COVID-19 incidence and severity among people with foreign and native background in Finland.     

Efficacy and safety of Lianhuaqingwen capsules,a repurposed Chinese herb,in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A multicenter,prospective, randomized controlled trial

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has resulted in a global outbreak. Few existing targeted medications are available. Lianhuaqingwen (LH) capsule, a repurposed marketed Chinese herb product, has been proven effective for influenza.PurposeTo determine the safety and efficacy of LH capsule in patients with Covid-19.MethodsWe did a prospective multicenter open-label randomized controlled trial on LH capsule in confirmed cases with Covid-19. Patients were randomized to receive usual treatment alone or in combination with LH capsules (4 capsules, thrice daily) for 14 days. The primary endpoint was the rate of symptom (fever, fatigue, coughing) recovery.ResultsWe included 284 patients (142 each in treatment and control group) in the full-analysis set. The recovery rate was significantly higher in treatment group as compared with control group (91.5% vs. 82.4%, p = 0.022). The median time to symptom recovery was markedly shorter in treatment group (median: 7 vs. 10 days, p < 0.001). Time to recovery of fever (2 vs. 3 days), fatigue (3 vs. 6 days) and coughing (7 vs. 10 days) was also significantly shorter in treatment group (all p < 0.001). The rate of improvement in chest computed tomographic manifestations (83.8% vs. 64.1%, p < 0.001) and clinical cure (78.9% vs. 66.2%, p = 0.017) was also higher in treatment group. However, both groups did not differ in the rate of conversion to severe cases or viral assay findings (both p > 0.05). No serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionIn light of the safety and effectiveness profiles, LH capsules could be considered to ameliorate clinical symptoms of Covid-19.     

Increased Incidence and Severity of New Graves Disease Diagnoses in Youth During the COVID-19 Pandemic

ObjectiveGraves disease (GD), an autoimmune disease of the thyroid, is likely caused by a combination of genetic predisposition and environmental triggers. Recent data suggest that COVID-19 may be associated with the development of autoimmune disease. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and characteristics of new GD diagnoses in youth prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe performed a retrospective chart review of all new GD diagnoses in patients aged 0 to 18 years diagnosed at a tertiary care pediatric hospital between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021.ResultsOver a 4-year period, 51 patients had been diagnosed with new-onset GD. We observed an increased incidence in new-onset GD during the pandemic compared with that in the 2 prior years (P = .01). During the pandemic period, heart rates (P = .03) as well as systolic (P = .005) and diastolic (P = .01) blood pressures were higher at initial evaluation, patients more frequently reported palpitations (P = .03) and tremors (P = .04), and an increased proportion of patients required beta-blockade treatment at diagnosis (P = .002). The percentage of patients requiring thionamide treatment and thionamide doses had been similar over time.ConclusionWe identified an increase in new-onset pediatric GD diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, youths had increased severity of symptoms and more frequently required beta-blockade treatment at diagnosis. Further study of the relationship between COVID-19 and autoimmune thyroid disease is needed.     

The psychological impact of the covid-19 pandemic on radiotherapy cancer patients

In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) characterized the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy.Were enrolled 210 patients in treatment and in follow-up who had access to the Radiation Oncology Department of the Campus Bio-Medico University Hospital Foundation between April and May 2020. The sample was subjected to structured interview and validated questionnaires. 37% of patients showed significant levels of distress; depressive symptoms were reported by 22.4% of patients and 99% of sample had clinically significant anxiety symptoms. All patients anxiety worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic (p=< 0.001). Patients on active treatment had higher levels of distress (3.5 vs 2.6; p = 0.04) and anxiety (3.5 vs 2.6; p = 0.04). Lung cancer patients appeared to be more afraid of COVID-19 than other patients (24.2 vs 22.2). This study highlights the presence of clinically significant anxiety in 99% of sample. This conclusion reflects the condition of emotional distress present during the pandemic which makes it necessary to treat patients in a multidisciplinary perspective that includes psychological support in the care plan.     

COVID-19 Outcomes of Patients With Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: A Multicenter Los Angeles Cohort Study

ObjectiveCancer may be a risk factor for worse outcomes in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infections. However, there is a significant variability across cancer types in the extent of disease burden and modalities of cancer treatment that may impact morbidity and mortality from coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Therefore, we evaluated COVID-19 outcomes in patients with a differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) history.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of patients with a history of DTC and SARS-CoV2 infection from 2 academic Los Angeles healthcare systems. Demographic, thyroid cancer, and treatment data were analyzed for associations with COVID-19 outcomes.ResultsOf 21 patients with DTC and COVID-19, 8 (38.1%) were hospitalized and 2 (9.5%) died from COVID-19. Thyroid cancer initial disease burden and extent, treatment, or current response to therapy (eg, excellent vs incomplete) were not associated with COVID-19 severity in DTC patients. However, older age and the presence of a comorbidity other than DTC were significantly associated with COVID-19 hospitalization (P = .047 and P = .024, respectively). COVID-19–attributed hospitalization and mortality in DTC patients was lower than that previously reported in cancer patients, although similar to patients with nonthyroid malignancies in these centers.ConclusionThese data suggest that among patients with DTC, advanced age and comorbid conditions are significant contributors to the risk of hospitalization from SARS-CoV2 infection, rather than factors associated with thyroid cancer diagnosis, treatment, or disease burden. This multicenter report of clinical outcomes provides additional data to providers to inform DTC patients regarding their risk of COVID-19.     

Association between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease with the susceptibility and outcome of COVID-19: A retrospective study

This study aims to evaluate the effect of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) on the susceptibility and consequences of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We retrospectively collected data from 218 adult COVID-19 patients who showed no evidence of excessive alcohol consumption and underwent abdominal ultrasound examinations. Of these patients, 39.4% patients had been diagnosed with NAFLD, which indicates a much higher prevalence of NAFLD than that reported in the general population. Significantly elevated white blood cell count (p = 0.008), alanine aminotransferase (p = 0.000), aspartate aminotransferase (p = 0.006) and C reactive protein (p = 0.012) were found in the patients with NAFLD. These patients also had significantly higher proportions of hypertension (p = 0.006) and diabetes (p = 0.049) than the non-NAFLD cases. No significant differences existed in the severity, mortality, viral shedding time and length of hospital stay between patients with or without NAFLD in the sample population. However, subgroup analyses found that in patients with normal body mass index (BMI), NAFLD sufferers were more likely to experience a severe event (30.0% vs 11.5%, p = 0.021). Kaplan-Meier curve (log-rank p = 0.017) and Cox regression (HR = 3.26, 95% CI: 1.17–9.04, p = 0.023) analyses confirmed that before and after adjusting for gender, age and comorbidities, NAFLD patients with normal BMI had a higher incidence of suffering severe events. People with NAFLD may have a higher proportion of COVID-19. NAFLD may be correlated with the severity of COVID-19 patients in the normal BMI group.     

Obstetrical outcomes and maternal morbidities associated with COVID-19 in pregnant women in France: A national retrospective cohort study

BackgroundTo the best of our knowledge, no study has exhaustively evaluated the association between maternal morbidities and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the first wave of the pandemic in pregnant women. We investigated, in natural conceptions and assisted reproductive technique (ART) pregnancies, whether maternal morbidities were more frequent in pregnant women with COVID-19 diagnosis compared to pregnant women without COVID-19 diagnosis during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods and findingsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in a national cohort of all hospitalizations for births ≥22 weeks of gestation in France from January to June 2020 using the French national hospitalization database (PMSI). Pregnant women with COVID-19 were identified if they had been recorded in the database using the ICD-10 (International Classification of Disease) code for presence of a hospitalization for COVID-19. A total of 244,645 births were included, of which 874 (0.36%) in the COVID-19 group. Maternal morbidities and adverse obstetrical outcomes among those with or without COVID-19 were analyzed with a multivariable logistic regression model adjusted on patient characteristics. Among pregnant women, older age (31.1 (±5.9) years old versus 30.5 (±5.4) years old, respectively, p < 0.001), obesity (0.7% versus 0.3%, respectively, p < 0.001), multiple pregnancy (0.7% versus 0.4%, respectively, p < 0.001), and history of hypertension (0.9% versus 0.3%, respectively, p < 0.001) were more frequent with COVID-19 diagnosis. Active smoking (0.2% versus 0.4%, respectively, p < 0.001) and primiparity (0.3% versus 0.4%, respectively, p < 0.03) were less frequent with COVID-19 diagnosis. Frequency of ART conception was not different between those with and without COVID-19 diagnosis (p = 0.28).When compared to the non-COVID-19 group, women in the COVID-19 group had a higher frequency of admission to ICU (5.9% versus 0.1%, p < 0.001), mortality (0.2% versus 0.005%, p < 0.001), preeclampsia/eclampsia (4.8% versus 2.2%, p < 0.001), gestational hypertension (2.3% versus 1.3%, p < 0.03), postpartum hemorrhage (10.0% versus 5.7%, p < 0.001), preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation (16.7% versus 7.1%, p < 0.001), <32 weeks of gestation (2.2% versus 0.8%, p < 0.001), <28 weeks of gestation (2.4% versus 0.8%, p < 0.001), induced preterm birth (5.4% versus 1.4%, p < 0.001), spontaneous preterm birth (11.3% versus 5.7%, p < 0.001), fetal distress (33.0% versus 26.0%, p < 0.001), and cesarean section (33.0% versus 20.2%, p < 0.001). Rates of pregnancy terminations ≥22 weeks of gestation, stillbirths, gestational diabetes, placenta praevia, and placenta abruption were not significantly different between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 groups. The number of venous thromboembolic events was too low to perform statistical analysis. A limitation of this study relies in the possibility that asymptomatic infected women were not systematically detected.ConclusionsWe observed an increased frequency of pregnant women with maternal morbidities and diagnosis of COVID-19 compared to pregnant women without COVID-19. It appears essential to be aware of this, notably in populations at known risk of developing a more severe form of infection or obstetrical morbidities and in order for obstetrical units to better inform pregnant women and provide the best care. Although causality cannot be determined from these associations, these results may be in line with recent recommendations in favor of vaccination for pregnant women.

In a national retrospective study, Sylvie Epelboin and colleagues investigate obstetrical outcomes and maternal morbidities among pregnant women with a COVID-19 diagnosis in France.     

Knowledge,attitude and practices of healthcare professionals of Riyadh,Saudi Arabia towards covid-19: A cross-sectional study

Background & objectivesCOVID-19 is an emerging pandemic that necessitates the implementation of effective infection prevention and control steps. The knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of healthcare professionals toward COVID-19 affect their compliance to prevention and control initiatives. During the evolving pandemic, we examined the KAP among healthcare professionals against COVID-19 in this research.Materials and methodsThis was a cross-sectional study conducted among Riyadh region health care professionals from the beginning of December 2020 to the end of February 2021 using a validated self-administered questionnaire. The knowledge questionnaire contained questions about COVID-19 clinical characteristics, prevention, and management. The evaluation of attitudes and practices included questions regarding actions and adjustments in COVID-19 response activities. Knowledge scores were measured and compared using demographic characteristics, as well as attitudes and practices toward COVID-19. Using SPSS-IBM 25, bivariate statistics were done to analyze the data.Results146 healthcare professionals completed the survey. Physicians were the most prominent party in the survey, accounting for 74 (51 percent), followed by nurses 44 (30 percent) and pharmacists 28 (19 percent). The participants' average age was 39.69 ± 8.48 years. The participant's mean knowledge, attitude, and practice scores were 11.43 ± 1.34, 3.89 ± 0.93, and 3.85 ± 0.81, respectively. With a positive attitude, the mean knowledge score was 11.52, and with proper practice, it was 11.32. With an improvement in knowledge, the attitude score increased significantly (r = 0.172, P = 0.001). Besides, there was a greater association between attitudes and practices (r = 0.170, P = 0.029). A significant enhancement in the practice score of the professionals was noted with an increase in knowledge score (r = 0.095, P = 0.010), an indicator for a positive correlation between practice and knowledge scores.Interpretation & conclusionHealthcare practitioners have a good understanding of COVID-19. Improved knowledge and a positive attitude toward COVID-19 infection are linked to appropriate practice. There is a need for more manpower, better COVID-19 management training, and strategies to reduce anxiety among healthcare professionals.