Distinct durability of IgM/IgG antibody responses in COVID-19 patients with differing severity

Science China Life Sciences -     

Inflammation characteristics and anti-inflammation treatment with tocilizumab of severe/critical COVID-19 patients: A retrospective cohort study

The efficacy of tocilizumab on the prognosis of severe/critical COVID-19 patients is still controversial so far. We aimed to delineate the inflammation characteristics of severe/critical COVID-19 patients and determine the impact of tocilizumab on hospital mortality. Here, we performed a retrospective cohort study which enrolled 727 severe or critical inpatients (≥18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from Huoshenshan Hospital (Wuhan, China), among which 50 patients received tocilizumab. This study confirmed that most recovered patients manifested relatively normal inflammation levels at admission, whereas most of the deceased cases presented visibly severe inflammation at admission and even progressed into extremely aggravated inflammation before their deaths, proved by some extremely high concentrations of interleukin-6, procalcitonin, C-reactive protein and neutrophil count. Moreover, based on the Cox proportional-hazards models before or after propensity score matching, we demonstrated that tocilizumab treatment could lessen mortality by gradually alleviating excessive inflammation and meanwhile continuously enhancing the levels of lymphocytes within 14 days for severe/critical COVID-19 patients, indicating potential effectiveness for treating COVID-19.     

Clinical characteristics and co-infections of 354 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan,China: a retrospective cohort study

From December 2019, a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, caused an outbreak of pneumonia in Wuhan city and rapidly spread throughout China and globally. However, the clinical characteristics and co-infection with other respiratory pathogens of patients with COVID-19 and the factors associated with severity of COVID-19 are still limited. In this retrospective cohort study, we included 354 inpatients with COVID-19 admitted to Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University from February 4, 2020 to February 28, 2020. We found levels of interleukin-6, interleukin-10, C-reactive protein, D-dimer, white blood cell count and neutrophil count were clearly elevated in males and critical cases compared with females and severe and mild cases, respectively. However, lymphopenia was more severe in males than females and levels of tumor necrosis factor alpha were reduced significantly in critical cases than severe and mild cases. 23.5% of severe cases and 24.4% of critical cases were co-infected with other respiratory pathogens. Additionally, stepwise multivariable regression analysis suggested that co-infection, lymphocyte count and levels of D-dimer were associated with severity of COVID-19.These findings provide crucial clues for further identification of the mechanisms, characteristics and treatments of patients with COVID-19.     

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.     

Vitamin D and COVID-19 susceptibility and severity in the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative: A Mendelian randomization study

BackgroundIncreased vitamin D levels, as reflected by 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25OHD) measurements, have been proposed to protect against COVID-19 based on in vitro, observational, and ecological studies. However, vitamin D levels are associated with many confounding variables, and thus associations described to date may not be causal. Vitamin D Mendelian randomization (MR) studies have provided results that are concordant with large-scale vitamin D randomized trials. Here, we used 2-sample MR to assess evidence supporting a causal effect of circulating 25OHD levels on COVID-19 susceptibility and severity.Methods and findingsGenetic variants strongly associated with 25OHD levels in a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 443,734 participants of European ancestry (including 401,460 from the UK Biobank) were used as instrumental variables. GWASs of COVID-19 susceptibility, hospitalization, and severe disease from the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative were used as outcome GWASs. These included up to 14,134 individuals with COVID-19, and up to 1,284,876 without COVID-19, from up to 11 countries. SARS-CoV-2 positivity was determined by laboratory testing or medical chart review. Population controls without COVID-19 were also included in the control groups for all outcomes, including hospitalization and severe disease. Analyses were restricted to individuals of European descent when possible. Using inverse-weighted MR, genetically increased 25OHD levels by 1 standard deviation on the logarithmic scale had no significant association with COVID-19 susceptibility (odds ratio [OR] = 0.95; 95% CI 0.84, 1.08; p = 0.44), hospitalization (OR = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.89, 1.33; p = 0.41), and severe disease (OR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.77, 1.22; p = 0.77). We used an additional 6 meta-analytic methods, as well as conducting sensitivity analyses after removal of variants at risk of horizontal pleiotropy, and obtained similar results. These results may be limited by weak instrument bias in some analyses. Further, our results do not apply to individuals with vitamin D deficiency.ConclusionsIn this 2-sample MR study, we did not observe evidence to support an association between 25OHD levels and COVID-19 susceptibility, severity, or hospitalization. Hence, vitamin D supplementation as a means of protecting against worsened COVID-19 outcomes is not supported by genetic evidence. Other therapeutic or preventative avenues should be given higher priority for COVID-19 randomized controlled trials.

In a Mendelian randomization analysis, Guillaume Butler-Laporte, Tomoki Nakanishi, and colleages study genetic evidence for a relationship between vitamin D and COVID-19 outcomes.     

Association between long-term exposure to ambient air pollution and COVID-19 severity: a prospective cohort study

Background:The tremendous global health burden related to COVID-19 means that identifying determinants of COVID-19 severity is important for prevention and intervention. We aimed to explore long-term exposure to ambient air pollution as a potential contributor to COVID-19 severity, given its known impact on the respiratory system.Methods:We used a cohort of all people with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, aged 20 years and older and not residing in a long-term care facility in Ontario, Canada, during 2020. We evaluated the association between long-term exposure to fine particulate matter (PM_2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) and ground-level ozone (O₃), and risk of COVID-19-related hospital admission, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death. We ascertained individuals’ long-term exposures to each air pollutant based on their residence from 2015 to 2019. We used logistic regression and adjusted for confounders and selection bias using various individual and contextual covariates obtained through data linkage.Results:Among the 151 105 people with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in Ontario in 2020, we observed 8630 hospital admissions, 1912 ICU admissions and 2137 deaths related to COVID-19. For each interquartile range increase in exposure to PM_2.5 (1.70 μg/m³), we estimated odds ratios of 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01–1.12), 1.09 (95% CI 0.98–1.21) and 1.00 (95% CI 0.90–1.11) for hospital admission, ICU admission and death, respectively. Estimates were smaller for NO₂. We also estimated odds ratios of 1.15 (95% CI 1.06–1.23), 1.30 (95% CI 1.12–1.50) and 1.18 (95% CI 1.02–1.36) per interquartile range increase of 5.14 ppb in O₃ for hospital admission, ICU admission and death, respectively.Interpretation:Chronic exposure to air pollution may contribute to severe outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly exposure to O₃.

By November 2021, COVID-19 had caused more than 5 million deaths globally¹ and more than 29 400 in Canada.² The clinical manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection range from being asymptomatic to multiple organ failure and death. Identifying risk factors for COVID-19 severity is important to better understand etiological mechanisms and identify populations to prioritize for screening, vaccination and medical treatment. Risk factors for severity of COVID-19 include male sex, older age, pre-existing medical conditions and being from racialized communities.^3–5 More recently, ambient air pollution has been implicated as a potential driver of COVID-19 severity.^6–10Long-term exposure to ambient air pollution, a major contributor to global disease burden,¹¹ could increase the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes by several mechanisms. Air pollutants can reduce individuals’ pulmonary immune responses and antimicrobial activities, boosting viral loads.⁸ Air pollution can also induce chronic inflammation and overexpression of the alveolar angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE) receptor,⁷ the key receptor that facilitates SARS-CoV-2 entry into cells.^12,13 Exposure to air pollution contributes to chronic conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, that are associated with unfavourable COVID-19 prognosis, possibly owing to persistent immune activation and excessive amplification of cytokine development.¹⁰ Thus, greater exposure to long-term air pollution may lead to severe COVID-19 outcomes.Reports exist of positive associations between long-term exposure to particulate matter with diameters equal to or smaller than 2.5 or 10 μm (PM_2.5 and PM₁₀), ground-level ozone (O₃) and nitrogen dioxide (NO₂), and metrics of COVID-19 severity (e.g., mortality and case fatality rate).^8–10 However, most studies to date have used ecological and cross-sectional designs, owing to limited access to individual data, which leads to ambiguity in interpreting the results, thus hindering their influence on policy. ^6,14 Ecological designs do not allow for disentangling the relative impacts of air pollution on individual susceptibility to infection and disease severity.¹⁴ Residual confounding by factors such as population mobility and social interactions is also problematic. Therefore, a cohort study with data on individuals with SARS-CoV-2 is a more appropriate design.^6,14 Studies that have used individual data were conducted in specific subpopulations^15,16 or populations with few severe cases,¹⁷ or had limited data on individual exposure to air pollutants.¹⁸ In Canada, 1 ecological study found a positive association between long-term exposure to PM_2.5 and COVID-19 incidence,¹⁹ but no published study has explored the association between air pollution and COVID-19 severity.We aimed to examine the associations between long-term exposure to 3 common air pollutants (PM_2.5, NO₂ and O₃) and key indicators of COVID-19 severity, including hospital admission, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death, using a large prospective cohort of people with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in Ontario, Canada, in 2020. The air contaminants PM_2.5, NO₂ and O₃ are regularly monitored by the Canadian government, and are key pollutants that are considered when setting air-quality policies. They originate from varying sources (NO₂ is primarily emitted during combustion of fuel, O₃ is primarily formed in air by chemical reactions of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds, and PM_2.5 can be emitted during combustion or formed by reactions of chemicals like sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides in air) and they may affect human health differently.^20,21,22     

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.     

Outcomes in patients with and without disability admitted to hospital with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study

Background:Disability-related considerations have largely been absent from the COVID-19 response, despite evidence that people with disabilities are at elevated risk for acquiring COVID-19. We evaluated clinical outcomes in patients who were admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with a disability compared with patients without a disability.Methods:We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included adults with COVID-19 who were admitted to hospital and discharged between Jan. 1, 2020, and Nov. 30, 2020, at 7 hospitals in Ontario, Canada. We compared in-hospital death, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), hospital length of stay and unplanned 30-day readmission among patients with and without a physical disability, hearing or vision impairment, traumatic brain injury, or intellectual or developmental disability, overall and stratified by age (≤ 64 and ≥ 65 yr) using multivariable regression, controlling for sex, residence in a long-term care facility and comorbidity.Results:Among 1279 admissions to hospital for COVID-19, 22.3% had a disability. We found that patients with a disability were more likely to die than those without a disability (28.1% v. 17.6%), had longer hospital stays (median 13.9 v. 7.8 d) and more readmissions (17.6% v. 7.9%), but had lower ICU admission rates (22.5% v. 28.3%). After adjustment, there were no statistically significant differences between those with and without disabilities for in-hospital death or admission to ICU. After adjustment, patients with a disability had longer hospital stays (rate ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19–1.56) and greater risk of readmission (relative risk 1.77, 95% CI 1.14–2.75). In age-stratified analyses, we observed longer hospital stays among patients with a disability than in those without, in both younger and older subgroups; readmission risk was driven by younger patients with a disability.Interpretation:Patients with a disability who were admitted to hospital with COVID-19 had longer stays and elevated readmission risk than those without disabilities. Disability-related needs should be addressed to support these patients in hospital and after discharge.

A successful public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic requires accurate and timely identification of, and support for, high-risk groups. There is increasing recognition that marginalized groups, including congregate care residents, racial and ethnic minorities, and people experiencing poverty, have elevated incidence of COVID-19.^1,2 Older age and comorbidities such as diabetes are also risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes.^3,4 One potential high-risk group that has received relatively little attention is people with disabilities.The World Health Organization estimates there are 1 billion people with disabilities globally.⁵ In North America, the prevalence of disability is 20%, with one-third of people older than 65 years having a disability.⁶ Disabilities include physical disabilities, hearing and vision impairments, traumatic brain injury and intellectual or developmental disabilities.^5,6 Although activity limitations experienced by people with disabilities are heterogeneous,^5,6 people with disabilities share high rates of risk factors for acquiring COVID-19, including poverty, residence in congregate care and being members of racialized communities.^7–9 People with disabilities may be more reliant on close contact with others to meet their daily needs, and some people with disabilities, especially intellectual developmental disabilities, may have difficulty following public health rules. Once they acquire SARS-CoV-2 infection, people with disabilities may be at risk for severe outcomes because they have elevated rates of comorbidities.¹⁰ Some disabilities (e.g., spinal cord injuries and neurologic disabilities) result in physiologic changes that increase vulnerability to respiratory diseases and may mask symptoms of acute respiratory disease, which may delay diagnosis.^11–13 There have also been reports of barriers to high-quality hospital care for patients with disabilities who have COVID-19, including communication issues caused by the use of masks and restricted access to support persons.^14–17Some studies have suggested that patients with disabilities and COVID-19 are at elevated risk for severe disease and death, with most evaluating intellectual or developmental disability.^13,18–26 Yet, consideration of disability-related needs has largely been absent from the COVID-19 response, with vaccine eligibility driven primarily by age and medical comorbidity, limited accommodations made for patients with disabilities who are in hospital, and disability data often not being captured in surveillance programs.^14–17 To inform equitable pandemic supports, there is a need for data on patients with a broad range of disabilities who have COVID-19. We sought to evaluate standard clinical outcomes in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19²⁷ (i.e., in-hospital death, intensive care unit [ICU] admission, hospital length of stay and unplanned 30-d readmission) for patients with and without a disability, overall and stratified by age. We hypothesized that patients with a disability would have worse outcomes because of a greater prevalence of comorbidities,¹⁰ physiologic characteristics that increase morbidity risk^11–13 and barriers to high-quality hospital care.^14–17     

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.     

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.     

Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19

This paper aimed to analyze antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in various populations. Two hundred and six COVID-19 patients, 46 convalescent patients, and 270 healthy population were enrolled. Antibodies against nucleocapsid protein (N) and spike protein's receptor-binding domain (RBD), and neutralizing antibody were detected. The results demonstrated both anti-N and anti-RBD antibodies could be detected in about 80% of COVID-19 patients and 90% of convalescent patients, while no antibodies could be detected in some convalescents and patients even after 14 days post-onset of symptoms. The level of anti-RBD antibody strongly correlated with the neutralizing activity of sera from these two cohorts. The titer of neutralizing antibody was lower in convalescents than that in active COVID-19 patients. In addition, the titer of neutralizing antibody was less than 1:80 in none of the severe COVID-19 patients, 18.8% in non-severe COVID-19 patients, and 32.6% in convalescents. The study suggests that the level of anti-RBD antibody is closely related to neutralization activity in COVID-19 patients and convalescents. Some SARS-CoV-2-infected cases trigger a weak antiviral immune response, and the level of neutralizing antibody may have a faster decay rate.     

Shorter leukocyte telomere length is associated with severity of COVID-19 infection.

The infection by COVID-19 is a serious global public health problem. An efficient way to improve this disease's clinical management would be to characterize patients at higher risk of progressing to critically severe infection using prognostic biomarkers. The telomere length could be used for this purpose. Telomeres are responsible for controlling the number of maximum cell divisions. The telomere length is a biomarker of aging and several diseases. We aimed to compare leukocyte telomere length (LTL) between patients without COVID-19 and patients with different clinical severity of the infection. Were included 53 patients who underwent SARS-CoV-2 PCR divided in four groups. The first group was composed by patients with a negative diagnosis for COVID-19 (n = 12). The other three groups consisted of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 divided according to the severity of the disease: mild (n = 15), moderate (n = 17) and severe (n = 9). The LTL was determined by Q-PCR. The severe group had the shortest LTL, followed by the moderate group. The negative and mild groups showed no differences. There is an increase of patients with hypertension (p = 0.0099) and diabetes (p = 0.0067) in moderate and severe groups. Severe group was composed by older patients in comparison with the other three groups (p = 0.0083). Regarding sex, there was no significant difference between groups (p = 0.6279). In an ordinal regression model, only LTL and diabetes were significantly associated with disease severity. Shorter telomere length was significantly associated with the severity of COVID-19 infection, which can be useful as a biomarker or to better understand the SARS-CoV-2 pathophysiology.     

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.     

Probiotics,prebiotics, and COVID-19 infection: A review article

The beneficial live microbes of humans and animals are termed probiotics, and the chemical compounds that improve the growth of probiotics are known as prebiotics. Paraprobiotics and postbiotics refer to dead or inactivated living cells of probiotics and healthful metabolic products that are produced by the living cells of probiotics, respectively. Although the healthful, functional, nutritional, and immune benefits of probiotics and prebiotics are scientifically well established beyond a reasonable doubt, their potential biological roles against COVID-19 infection still warrant further clinical and laboratory investigation.     

Cytokine storm in COVID-19: from viral infection to immune responses,diagnosis and therapy

The COVID-19 outbreak is emerging as a significant public health challenge. Excessive production of proinflammatory cytokines, also known as cytokine storm, is a severe clinical syndrome known to develop as a complication of infectious or inflammatory diseases. Clinical evidence suggests that the occurrence of cytokine storm in severe acute respiratory syndrome secondary to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is closely associated with the rapid deterioration and high mortality of severe cases. In this review, we aim to summarize the mechanism of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the subsequent immunological events related to excessive cytokine production and inflammatory responses associated with ACE2-AngII signaling. An overview of the diagnosis and an update on current therapeutic regimens and vaccinations is also provided.     

Profiling metabolites and lipoproteins in COMETA,an Italian cohort of COVID-19 patients

Metabolomics and lipidomics have been used in several studies to define the biochemical alterations induced by COVID-19 in comparison with healthy controls. Those studies highlighted the presence of a strong signature, attributable to both metabolites and lipoproteins/lipids. Here, ¹H NMR spectra were acquired on EDTA-plasma from three groups of subjects: i) hospitalized COVID-19 positive patients (≤21 days from the first positive nasopharyngeal swab); ii) hospitalized COVID-19 positive patients (>21 days from the first positive nasopharyngeal swab); iii) subjects after 2–6 months from SARS-CoV-2 eradication. A Random Forest model built using the EDTA-plasma spectra of COVID-19 patients ≤21 days and Post COVID-19 subjects, provided a high discrimination accuracy (93.6%), indicating both the presence of a strong fingerprint of the acute infection and the substantial metabolic healing of Post COVID-19 subjects. The differences originate from significant alterations in the concentrations of 16 metabolites and 74 lipoprotein components. The model was then used to predict the spectra of COVID-19>21 days subjects. In this group, the metabolite levels are closer to those of the Post COVID-19 subjects than to those of the COVID-19≤21 days; the opposite occurs for the lipoproteins. Within the acute phase patients, characteristic trends in metabolite levels are observed as a function of the disease severity. The metabolites found altered in COVID-19≤21 days patients with respect to Post COVID-19 individuals overlap with acute infection biomarkers identified previously in comparison with healthy subjects. Along the trajectory towards healing, the metabolome reverts back to the “healthy” state faster than the lipoproteome.     

Bradyarrhythmias in patients with COVID-19: A case series

Novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) can have variety of cardiac manifestations; however, less is known about the prevalence, clinical characteristics and outcomes of bradyarrhythmias in patients with COVID-19. In the present case series of bradyarrhythmia in patients with COVID-19, we report complete heart block requiring intervention in 5 patients and sinus node dysfunction in 2 patients.     

Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 hospitalization with the Alpha,Delta, or Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant: A nationwide Danish cohort study

BackgroundThe continued occurrence of more contagious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants and waning immunity over time require ongoing reevaluation of the vaccine effectiveness (VE). This study aimed to estimate the effectiveness in 2 age groups (12 to 59 and 60 years or above) of 2 or 3 vaccine doses (BNT162b2 mRNA or mRNA-1273) by time since vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization in an Alpha-, Delta-, or Omicron-dominated period.Methods and findingsA Danish nationwide cohort study design was used to estimate VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalization with the Alpha, Delta, or Omicron variant. Information was obtained from nationwide registries and linked using a unique personal identification number. The study included all previously uninfected residents in Denmark aged 12 years or above (18 years or above for the analysis of 3 doses) in the Alpha (February 20 to June 15, 2021), Delta (July 4 to November 20, 2021), and Omicron (December 21, 2021 to January 31, 2022) dominated periods. VE estimates including 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated (1-hazard ratio∙100) using Cox proportional hazard regression models with underlying calendar time and adjustments for age, sex, comorbidity, and geographical region. Vaccination status was included as a time-varying exposure. In the oldest age group, VE against infection after 2 doses was 90.7% (95% CI: 88.2; 92.7) for the Alpha variant, 82.3% (95% CI: 75.5; 87.2) for the Delta variant, and 39.9% (95% CI: 26.3; 50.9) for the Omicron variant 14 to 30 days since vaccination. The VE waned over time and was 73.2% (Alpha, 95% CI: 57.1; 83.3), 50.0% (Delta, 95% CI: 46.7; 53.0), and 4.4% (Omicron, 95% CI: −0.1; 8.7) >120 days since vaccination. Higher estimates were observed after the third dose with VE estimates against infection of 86.1% (Delta, 95% CI: 83.3; 88.4) and 57.7% (Omicron, 95% CI: 55.9; 59.5) 14 to 30 days since vaccination. Among both age groups, VE against COVID-19 hospitalization 14 to 30 days since vaccination with 2 or 3 doses was 98.1% or above for the Alpha and Delta variants. Among both age groups, VE against COVID-19 hospitalization 14 to 30 days since vaccination with 2 or 3 doses was 95.5% or above for the Omicron variant. The main limitation of this study is the nonrandomized study design including potential differences between the unvaccinated (reference group) and vaccinated individuals.ConclusionsTwo vaccine doses provided high protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalization with the Alpha and Delta variants with protection, notably against infection, waning over time. Two vaccine doses provided only limited and short-lived protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection with Omicron. However, the protection against COVID-19 hospitalization following Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher. The third vaccine dose substantially increased the level and duration of protection against infection with the Omicron variant and provided a high level of sustained protection against COVID-19 hospitalization among the +60-year-olds.

Mie Agermose Gram and colleagues estimate vaccine effectiveness against infection and COVID-19 hospitalization with the Alpha, Delta or Omicron variant in Denmark.