COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations Among Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Adults 18 Years or Older in 13 US States, January 2021 to April 2022

Association of Sources of COVID-19 Information With Vaccine Uptake, Preventive Behaviors, and Perceived Severity of COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association of using informal sources and reliance on multiple sources of information with actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake, the number of doses of vaccine received, COVID-19 testing, essential preventive measures, and perceived severity of COVID-19.

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Our study sample consisted of 9584 community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries, representing a weighted 50,029,030 beneficiaries from the Winter 2021 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Supplement.

METHODS

Two key independent variables were whether a respondent relied on a formal source (ie, traditional news, government guidance, or health care providers) or an informal source (ie, social media, Internet, or friends/family) the most for the COVID-19 information and the total number of information sources a respondent relied on.

RESULTS

Compared with beneficiaries relying on formal sources of information, those relying on informal sources of information were less likely to receive COVID-19 vaccine (odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56-0.75) and COVID-19 testing (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74-0.98), to engage in preventive behaviors (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50-0.74), to have high perception of COVID-19 severity, and were more likely to be unvaccinated vs 2 doses of vaccine (relative risk ratio [RRR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.41-1.91). Relying on more information sources was significantly associated with higher odds of actual vaccine uptake (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17-1.26), COVID-19 testing (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07-1.15), engagement of essential preventive behaviors (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.25-1.42), having high perception of COVID-19 severity, and with lower likelihood of being unvaccinated vs 2 doses of vaccine (RRR, 0.82; 0.79-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has made communicating information about coronavirus more important than ever. Our findings suggest that information from formal sources with expertise and more balanced sources of information were key to effective communication to prevent from COVID-19 infection among older adults.

Transplacental Transfer of SARS-CoV-2 Receptor-Binding Domain IgG Antibodies from Mothers to Neonates in a Cohort of Pakistani Unvaccinated Mothers

The presence of COVID-19 antibodies in the maternal circulation is assumed to be protective for newborns against SARS-CoV-2 infection. We investigated whether maternal COVID-19 antibodies crossed the transplacental barrier and whether there was any difference in the hematological parameters of neonates born to mothers who recovered from COVID-19 during pregnancy. The cross-sectional study was conducted at the Saidu Group of Teaching Hospitals, located in Swat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. After obtaining written informed consent, 115 healthy, unvaccinated mother-neonate dyads were included. A clinical history of COVID-19-like illness, laboratory-confirmed diagnosis, and contact history were obtained. Serum samples from mothers and neonates were tested for SARS-CoV-2 anti-receptor-binding domain (anti-RBD) IgG antibodies. Hematological parameters were assessed with complete blood counts (CBC) and peripheral blood smear examinations. The study population consisted of 115 mothers, with a mean age of 29.44 ± 5.75 years, and most women (68/115 (59.1%)) were between 26 and 35 years of age. Of these mothers, 88/115 (76.5 percent) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 anti-RBD IgG antibodies, as did 83/115 (72.2 percent) neonatal cord blood samples. The mean levels of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in maternal and neonatal blood were 19.86 ± 13.82 (IU/mL) and 16.16 ± 12.90 (IU/mL), respectively, indicating that maternal antibodies efficiently crossed the transplacental barrier with an antibody transfer ratio of 0.83. The study found no significant difference in complete blood count (CBC) parameters between seropositive and seronegative mothers, nor between neonates born to seropositive and seronegative mothers.

A retrospective cohort study of incidence and risk factors for severe SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection among fully vaccinated people

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is currently the mainstay in combating the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are still people among vaccinated individuals suffering from severe forms of the disease. We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on data from nationwide e-health databases. The study included 184,132 individuals who were SARS-CoV-2 infection-naive and had received at least a primary series of COVID-19 vaccination. The incidence of BTI (breakthrough infection) was 8.03 (95% CI [confidence interval] 7.95⎼8.13/10,000 person-days), and for severe COVID-19 it was 0.093 (95% CI 0.084⎼ 0.104/10,000 person-days). The protective effect of vaccination against severe COVID-19 remained constant for up to six months, and the booster dose offered an additional pronounced benefit (hospitalization aHR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19⎼0.54). The risk of severe COVID-19 was higher among those ≥ 50 years of age (aHR [adjusted hazard ratio] 2.06, 95% CI 1.25⎼3.42) and increased constantly with every decade of life. Male sex (aHR 1.32, 95% CI 1.16⎼1.45), CCI (The Charlson Comorbidity Index) score ≥ 1 (aHR 2.09, 95% CI 1.54⎼2.83), and a range of comorbidities were associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 hospitalization. There are identifiable subgroups of COVID-19-vaccinated individuals at high risk of hospitalization due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. This information is crucial to driving vaccination programs and planning treatment strategies.

Lipoprotein(a) Does Not Predict Thrombotic Events and In-Hospital Outcomes in Patients with COVID-19

The prothrombotic and proinflammatory properties of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) have been hypothesized to play a role in the pathogenesis of severe COVID-19; however, the prognostic impact of Lp(a) on the clinical course of COVID-19 remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate whether Lp(a) may be associated with biomarkers of thrombo-inflammation and the occurrence of thrombotic events or adverse clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. We consecutively enrolled a cohort of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and collected blood samples for Lp(a) assessment at hospital admission. A prothrombotic state was evaluated through D-dimer levels, whereas a proinflammatory state was evaluated through C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, and white blood cell (WBC) levels. Thrombotic events were marked by the diagnosis of deep or superficial vein thrombosis (DVT or SVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and critical limb ischemia (CLI). The composite clinical end point of intensive care unit (ICU) admission/in-hospital death was used to evaluate adverse clinical outcomes. Among 564 patients (290 (51%) men, mean age of 74 ± 17 years) the median Lp(a) value at hospital admission was 13 (10-27) mg/dL. During hospitalization, 64 (11%) patients were diagnosed with at least one thrombotic event and 83 (15%) patients met the composite clinical end point. Lp(a), as either a continuous or categorical variable, was not associated with D-dimer, CRP, procalcitonin, and WBC levels (p > 0.05 for all correlation analyses). In addition, Lp(a) was not associated with a risk of thrombotic events (p > 0.05 for multi-adjusted odds ratios) nor with a risk of adverse clinical outcomes (p > 0.05 for multi-adjusted hazard ratios). In conclusion, Lp(a) does not influence biomarkers of plasma thrombotic activity and systemic inflammation nor has any impact on thrombotic events and adverse clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies linked to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review

The COVID-19 pandemic represents a global health problem, which has been mitigated by the opportune introduction of vaccination programs. Although we already know the benefit that vaccines provide, these are not exempt from adverse events which can be mild to deadly, such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, in which a temporal association has not been defined. It is for this reason that we carried out a systematic review of all reported cases of vaccination against COVID-19 and myositis. To identify previously reported cases of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies associated with vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 we registered this protocol on the website of PROSPERO with identification number CRD42022355551. Of the 63 publications identified in MEDLINE and 117 in Scopus, 21 studies were included, reporting 31 cases of patients with vaccination-associated myositis. Most of these cases were women (61.3%); mean age was 52.3 years (range 19-76 years) and mean time of symptom onset post-vaccination was 6.8 days. More than half of the cases were associated with Comirnaty, 11 cases (35.5%) were classified as dermatomyositis, and 9 (29%) as amyopathic dermatomyositis. In 6 (19.3%) patients another probable trigger was identified. Case reports of inflammatory myopathies associated with vaccination have heterogeneous presentations without any specific characteristics: as a consequence, it is not possible to ensure a temporal association between vaccination and the development of inflammatory myopathies. Large epidemiological studies are required to determine the existence of a causal association.

NVX-CoV2373 vaccine efficacy against hospitalization: A post hoc analysis of the PREVENT-19 phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

PREVENT-19, the pivotal phase 3 trial of the Novavax adjuvanted, recombinant spike protein COVID-19 vaccine (NVX-CoV2373), demonstrated that the vaccine was well tolerated and efficacious (vaccine efficacy, VE = 90%) for the prevention of symptomatic COVID-19. In the trial, participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive 2 doses of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo 21 days apart. Throughout the study, the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant was alpha, but additional variants were in circulation (i.e., beta, gamma, epsilon, and iota). VE among the per-protocol efficacy analysis population was calculated according to pre-specified disease severity (mild, moderate, or severe) criteria, but the impact on the risk of COVID-19-associated hospitalization was not specifically investigated. During this analysis period (January 25, 2021, to April 30, 2021 [95 days]), 4 hospitalizations occurred among the 77 events analyzed for the primary endpoint using the per-protocol population, 0 among vaccine recipients and 4 among placebo recipients, yielding a post hoc VE against hospitalization of 100% (95% CI: 28.8, 100). Among an expanded efficacy population, also identified post hoc, which included COVID-19-associated hospitalizations without a requirement for diagnostic polymerase chain reaction testing performed at the study central laboratory, 12 total hospitalizations were identified, 0 among vaccine recipients and 12 among placebo recipients, yielding a post hoc VE against hospitalization of 100% (95% CI: 83.1, 100). These additional data from the PREVENT-19 trial provide relevant public health information concerning the attributes of NVX-CoV2373.

Vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac against SARS-CoV-2 omicron infection and related hospital admission among people with substance use disorder in Hong Kong: a matched case-control study

BACKGROUND

People with substance use disorder have a high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent poor outcomes. Few studies have evaluated COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among people with substance use disorder. We aimed to estimate the vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Fosun-BioNTech) and CoronaVac (Sinovac) against SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529) infection and related hospital admission in this population.

METHODS

We did a matched case-control study using electronic health databases in Hong Kong. Individuals diagnosed with substance use disorder between Jan 1, 2016, and Jan 1, 2022, were identified. People aged 18 years and older with SARS-CoV-2 infection from Jan 1 to May 31, 2022, and people with COVID-19-related hospital admission from Feb 16 to May 31, 2022, were included as cases and were matched by age, sex, and previous clinical history with controls from all individuals diagnosed with substance use disorder who attended the Hospital Authority health services: up to three controls for SARS-CoV-2 infection and up to ten controls for hospital admission. Conditional logistical regression was used to evaluate the association between vaccination status (ie, one, two, or three doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac) and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospital admission, adjusted for baseline comorbidities and medication use.

FINDINGS

Among 57 674 individuals with substance use disorder, 9523 people with SARS-CoV-2 infections (mean age 61·00 years, SD 14·90; 8075 [84·8%] males and 1448 [15·2%] females) were identified and matched to 28 217 controls (mean age 60·99 years, 14·67; 24 006 [85·1%] males and 4211 [14·9%] females), and 843 people with COVID-19-related hospital admissions (mean age 70·48 years, SD 14·68; 754 [89·4%] males and 89 [10·6%] females) were identified and matched to 7459 controls (mean age 70·24 years, 13·87; 6837 [91·7%] males and 622 [8·3%] females). Data on ethnicity were not available. We observed significant vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection for two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination (20·7%, 95% CI 14·0-27·0, p<0·0001) and three-dose vaccination (all BNT162b2 41·5%, 34·4-47·8, p<0·0001; all CoronaVac 13·6%, 5·4-21·0, p=0·0015; BNT162b2 booster after two-dose CoronaVac 31·3%, 19·8-41·1, p<0·0001), but not for one dose of either vaccine or two doses of CoronaVac. Significant vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related hospital admission was detected after one dose of BNT162b2 vaccination (35·7%, 3·8-57·1, p=0·032), two-dose vaccination (both BNT162b2 73·3%, 64·3 to 80·0, p<0·0001; both CoronaVac 59·9%, 50·2-67·7, p<0·0001), and three-dose vaccination (all BNT162b2 86·3%, 75·6-92·3, p<0·0001; all CoronaVac 73·5% 61·0-81·9, p<0·0001; BNT162b2 booster after two-dose CoronaVac 83·7%, 64·6-92·5, p<0·0001), but not after one dose of CoronaVac.

INTERPRETATION

For both BNT162b2 and CoronaVac, two-dose or three-dose vaccination was protective against COVID-19-related hospital admission and the booster dose provided protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection among people with substance use disorder. Our findings confirm the importance of booster doses in this population during the period dominated by the omicron variant.

FUNDING

Health Bureau, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Clinical efficacy of the first two doses of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in solid cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

Cancer patients are frail individuals, thus the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection is essential. To date, vaccination is the most effective tool to prevent COVID-19. In a previous study, we evaluated the immunogenicity of two doses of mRNA-based vaccines (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) in solid cancer patients. We found that seroconversion rate in cancer patients without a previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was lower than in healthy controls (66.7% vs. 95%, p = 0.0020). The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the vaccination in the same population.

METHODS

This is a single-institution, prospective observational study. Data were collected through a predefined questionnaire through phone call in the period between the second and third vaccine dose. The primary objective was to describe the clinical efficacy of the vaccination, defined as the percentage of vaccinated subjects who did not develop symptomatic COVID-19 within 6 months after the second dose. The secondary objective was to describe the clinical features of patients who developed COVID-19.

RESULTS

From January to June 2021, 195 cancer patients were enrolled. Considering that 7 (3.59%) patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 5 developed symptomatic disease, the clinical efficacy of the vaccination was 97.4%. COVID-19 disease in most patients was mild and managed at home; only one hospitalization was recorded and no patient required hospitalization in the intensive care unit.

DISCUSSION

Our study suggests that increasing vaccination coverage, including booster doses, could improve the prevention of infection, hospitalization, serious illness, and death in the frail population of cancer patients.

YouTube and COVID-19 vaccines: A mini scoping review

YouTube is a highly popular social media platform capable of widespread information dissemination about COVID-19 vaccines. The aim of this mini scoping review was to summarize the content, quality, and methodology of studies that analyze YouTube videos related to COVID-19 vaccines. COVIDENCE was used to screen search results based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. PRISMA was used for data organization, and the final list of 9 articles used in the mini review were summarized and synthesized. YouTube videos included in each study, total number of cumulative views, results, and limitations were described. Overall, most of the videos were uploaded by television and internet news media and healthcare professionals. A variety of coding schemas were used in the studies. Videos with misleading, inaccurate, or anti-vaccination sentiment were more often uploaded by consumers. Officials seeking to encourage vaccination may utilize YouTube for widespread reach and to debunk misinformation and disinformation.

The importance of appropriate selection of clinical endpoints in outpatient COVID-19 clinical trials

Clinical trial endpoints must be carefully and intentionally selected so that the results of the trial can be used to inform policy- and decision-making. The relative importance of potential endpoints often depends on the stakeholder, with patients having different preferences to policymakers and regulators. The set up of clinical trials for COVID-19 was problematic, as endpoints that could be reasonably measured did not always match the efficacy endpoints usually required by guideline panels. Thus, different endpoints were used, which made the timely comparison and evaluation of interventions difficult. Here we discuss the evolution of the COVID-19 landscape and the effect this is having on the selection of consistent and measurable clinical trial endpoints. Using appropriate endpoints is crucial for researchers to offer the most reliable, valid, and interpretable results possible.

Maintenance of Potent Cellular and Humoral Immune Responses in Long-Term Hemodialysis Patients after 1273-mRNA SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination

Continuous evaluation of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness in hemodialysis (HD) patients is critical in this immunocompromised patient group with higher mortality rates due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The response towards vaccination in HD patients has been studied weeks after their first and second SARS-CoV-2 vaccination dose administration, but no further studies have been developed in a long-term manner, especially including both the humoral and cellular immune response. Longitudinal studies that monitor the immune response to COVID-19 vaccination in individuals undergoing HD are therefore necessary to prioritize vaccination strategies and minimize the pathogenic effects of SARS-CoV-2 in this high-risk group of patients. We followed up HD patients and healthy volunteers (HV) and monitored their humoral and cellular immune response three months after the second (V2+3M) and after the third vaccination dose (V3+3M), taking into consideration previous COVID-19 infections. Our cellular immunity results show that, while HD patients and HV individuals secrete comparable levels of IFN-γ and IL-2 in ex vivo stimulated whole blood at V2+3M in both naïve and COVID-19-recovered individuals, HD patients secrete higher levels of IFN-γ and IL-2 than HV at V3+3M. This is mainly due to a decay in the cellular immune response in HV individuals after the third dose. In contrast, our humoral immunity results show similar IgG binding antibody units (BAU) between HD patients and HV individuals at V3+3M, independently of their previous infection status. Overall, our results indicate that HD patients maintain strong cellular and humoral immune responses after repeated 1273-mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations over time. The data also highlights significant differences between cellular and humoral immunity after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, which emphasizes the importance of monitoring both arms of the immune response in the immunocompromised population.

Comparative admission rates and infection severity of COVID-19 among unvaccinated and vaccinated patients

Vaccination efforts have limited the burden of the pandemic caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with substantial evidence showing reduced hospitalization rates among vaccinated populations. However, few studies have explored correlations between vaccination status and inpatient COVID-19 outcomes. This observational case-control study involved a retrospective chart review of adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection at a medium-sized hospital in Central Michigan between May 1, 2021 and September 30, 2021. Unadjusted analyses involved t-tests and chi-square tests followed by adjusted analyses using binary logistic and linear regression models. Of the 192 screened patients, 171 subjects met the inclusion criteria. Vaccinated patients were significantly older (71.09 vs 57.45, p < 0.001), more likely to identify as white (89.4% vs 66.9%, p = 0.026), and had a lower baseline 10-year survival rate predicted by the Charlson Comorbidity Index (42% vs 69%, p < 0.001) compared to unvaccinated patients. Common symptoms between both groups included shortness of breath (50%), malaise (23%-37%), cough (28%-32%), and fever or chills (25%). Upon matching, adjusted analysis showed significantly higher rates of remdesivir administration to unvaccinated patients (41.3% vs 13.3%, odds ratio (OR): 4.63, 90% confidence interval (CI): 1.98-11.31). Despite higher intensive care unit admission rates among unvaccinated patients (39.1% vs 23.9%, OR: 1.83, 90% CI: 0.74-4.64), this difference did not reach statistical significance. Accordingly, immunization status strongly correlates with patient demographics and differences in inpatient treatment. Larger studies are needed to further assess the vaccine's impact on inpatient outcomes outside of our community.

Effect of Thromboprophylaxis on Clinical Outcomes After COVID-19 Hospitalization

BACKGROUND

Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 have an increased incidence of thromboembolism. The role of extended thromboprophylaxis after hospital discharge is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether anticoagulation is superior to placebo in reducing death and thromboembolic complications among patients discharged after COVID-19 hospitalization.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04650087).

SETTING

Done during 2021 to 2022 among 127 U.S. hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 18 years or older hospitalized with COVID-19 for 48 hours or more and ready for discharge, excluding those with a requirement for, or contraindication to, anticoagulation.

INTERVENTION

2.5 mg of apixaban versus placebo twice daily for 30 days.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary efficacy end point was a 30-day composite of death, arterial thromboembolism, and venous thromboembolism. The primary safety end points were 30-day major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding.

RESULTS

Enrollment was terminated early, after 1217 participants were randomly assigned, because of a lower than anticipated event rate and a declining rate of COVID-19 hospitalizations. Median age was 54 years, 50.4% were women, 26.5% were Black, and 16.7% were Hispanic; 30.7% had a World Health Organization severity score of 5 or greater, and 11.0% had an International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism risk prediction score of greater than 4. Incidence of the primary end point was 2.13% (95% CI, 1.14 to 3.62) in the apixaban group and 2.31% (CI, 1.27 to 3.84) in the placebo group. Major bleeding occurred in 2 (0.4%) and 1 (0.2%) and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 3 (0.6%) and 6 (1.1%) apixaban-treated and placebo-treated participants, respectively. By day 30, thirty-six (3.0%) participants were lost to follow-up, and 8.5% of apixaban and 11.9% of placebo participants permanently discontinued the study drug treatment.

LIMITATIONS

The introduction of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines decreased the risk for hospitalization and death. Study enrollment spanned the peaks of the Delta and Omicron variants in the United States, which influenced illness severity.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of death or thromboembolism was low in this cohort of patients discharged after hospitalization with COVID-19. Because of early enrollment termination, the results were imprecise and the study was inconclusive.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

Retrospective Analysis of Vaccination Status and Predominant Viral Variants in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 in Reus, Spain

SARS-CoV-2 infection in already-vaccinated individuals is still possible and may require hospitalization. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical evolution of patients with COVID-19 admitted to a public hospital. The outcomes were assessed in relation to the predominant viral variant and the vaccination status. This retrospective study was performed on 1295 COVID-19-positive patients who attended a 352-bed university hospital between 2021 and 2022. Clinical variables and vaccination status were recorded. Of the patients, 799 had not been vaccinated (NV, 61.7%), 449 were partially vaccinated (PV, 34.7%), and 47 were completely vaccinated (CV, 3.6%). The mean age of the CV patients was significantly higher than that of PV and NV. Additionally, they had higher percentages of chronic diseases. The outcomes depended on age but not on vaccination status. There were 209 patients admitted during the Omicron-infection period, of whom 70 (33.5%) were NV, 135 (64.6%) were PV, and 4 (1.9%) were CV. In conclusion, correct vaccination greatly reduces the risk of acquiring severe COVID-19. Partial vaccination does not guarantee protection of the population. This highlights the need for continuous vaccination promotion with all recommended doses, while also investigating alternative treatments for those patients who do not respond to the vaccines.

Clinical Predictors for Abnormal ALT in Patients Infected with COVID-19—A Retrospective Single Centre Study

Objective: Abnormal liver tests have been associated with worse clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. This retrospective observational study from Singapore aims to elucidate simple clinical predictors of abnormal alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in COVID-19 infections. Design: 717 patients hospitalised with COVID-19 at the National Centre for Infectious Diseases (NCID), Singapore, from 23 January–15 April 2020 were screened, of which 163 patients with baseline normal alanine transferase (ALT) and at least two subsequent ALTs performed were included in the final analysis. Information on baseline demographics, clinical characteristics and biochemical laboratory tests were collected. Results: 30.7% of patients developed abnormal ALT. They were more likely to be older (60 vs. 55, p = 0.022) and have comorbidities of hyperlipidaemia and hypertension. The multivariate logistic regression showed that R-factor ≥1 on admission (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.13, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.41–6.95) and hypoxia (aOR 3.54, 95% CI 1.29–9.69) were independent risk factors for developing abnormal ALT. The patients who developed abnormal ALT also ran a more severe course of illness with a greater proportion needing supplementary oxygen (58% vs. 18.6%, p < 0.0005), admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU)/High Dependency Unit (HDU) (32% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.003) and intubation (20% vs. 2.7%, p < 0.0005). There was no difference in death rate between the two groups. Conclusions: Liver injury is associated with poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. R-factor ≥1 on admission and hypoxia are independent simple clinical predictors for developing abnormal ALT in COVID-19.

Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake: A mediation framework

BACKGROUND

Previous research suggests that racial and ethnic minority groups especially Black Americans showed stronger COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance, which may result from a lack of trust toward the government and vaccine manufacturers, among other sociodemographic and health factors.

OBJECTIVES

The current study explored potential social and economic, clinical, and psychological factors that may have mediated racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake among US adults.

METHODS

A sample of 6078 US individuals was selected from a national longitudinal survey administered in 2020-2021. Baseline characteristics were collected in December 2020, and respondents were followed up to July 2021. Racial and ethnic disparities in time to vaccine initiation and completion (based on a 2-dose regimen) were first assessed with the Kaplan-Meier Curve and log-rank test, and then explored with the Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for potential time-varying mediators, such as education, income, marital status, chronic health conditions, trust in vaccine development and approval processes, and perceived risk of infection.

RESULTS

Prior to mediator adjustment, Black and Hispanic Americans had slower vaccine initiation and completion than Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and White Americans (p's < 0.0001). After accounting for the mediators, there were no significant differences in vaccine initiation or completion between each minoritized group as compared to White Americans. Education, household income, marital status, chronic health conditions, trust, and perceived infection risk were potential mediators.

CONCLUSION

Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake were mediated through social and economic conditions, psychological influences, and chronic health conditions. To address the racial and ethnic inequity in vaccination, it is important to target the social, economic, and psychological forces behind it.

Use of wastewater metrics to track COVID-19 in the U.S.: a national time-series analysis over the first three quarters of 2022

Background

Widespread use of at-home COVID-19 tests hampers determination of community COVID-19 incidence. Using nationwide data available through the US National Wastewater Surveillance System, we examined the performance of two wastewater metrics in predicting high case and hospitalizations rates both before and after widespread use of at-home tests.

Methods

We performed area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis (AUC) for two wastewater metrics-viral concentration relative to the peak of January 2022 ("wastewater percentile") and 15-day percent change in SARS-CoV-2 ("percent change"). Dichotomized reported cases (≥ 200 or <200 cases per 100,000) and new hospitalizations (≥ 10 or <10 per 100,000) were our dependent variables, stratified by calendar quarter. Using logistic regression, we assessed the performance of combining wastewater metrics.

Results

Among 268 counties across 22 states, wastewater percentile detected high reported case and hospitalizations rates in the first quarter of 2022 (AUC 0.95 and 0.86 respectively) whereas the percent change did not (AUC 0.54 and 0.49 respectively). A wastewater percentile of 51% maximized sensitivity (0.93) and specificity (0.82) for detecting high case rates. A model inclusive of both metrics performed no better than using wastewater percentile alone. The predictive capability of wastewater percentile declined over time (AUC 0.84 and 0.72 for cases for second and third quarters of 2022).

Conclusion

Nationwide, county wastewater levels above 51% relative to the historic peak predicted high COVID rates and hospitalization in the first quarter of 2022, but performed less well in subsequent quarters. Decline over time in predictive performance of this metric likely reflects underreporting of cases, reduced testing, and possibly lower virulence of infection due to vaccines and treatments.

Mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers: A discussion paper

BACKGROUND

The devastating effects of COVID-19 sparked debates among professionals in the fields of health, law, and bioethics regarding policies on mandatory vaccination for healthcare workers. Suboptimal vaccine uptake among healthcare workers had been implicated in the increased risk of nosocomial spread of COVID infection and absenteeism among healthcare workers, impacting the quality of patient care. However, mandatory vaccine policies were also seen to encroach on the autonomy of healthcare workers.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To synthesise the arguments for and against mandatory vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) and its long-term impact on the healthcare workforce, through an analysis of texts and opinions of professionals from different fields of study.

METHODS

This is a systematic review of opinions published in peer-reviewed journals. After initial search in Cochrane and JBI systematic review databases to ensure no previous review had been done, five databases were searched (PsychInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline and Scopus). Inclusion criteria were: 1) focused on COVID-19; 2) healthcare workers specific; 3) specific to mandatory vaccination; 4) opinion piece with an identified author; and 5) in English.

EXCLUSION

1) focus on other vaccine preventable diseases, not COVID-19 and 2) discussion on mandatory vaccination not-specific to healthcare workers. The Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal tool for Text and Opinions was used to assess quality. Data were synthesised in the summary table.

RESULTS

The review included 28 opinion and viewpoint articles. Of these, 12 (43 %) adopted a pro-mandatory vaccination stance, 13 (46 %) were neutral or had presented arguments from both sides of the debate and only three (11 %) were against. The overall arguments among those who were pro-, neutral and anti-mandatory COVID-19 vaccination were underpinned by ethical, moral and legal principles of such a mandate on a vulnerable healthcare workforce. This review highlighted the polarised opinions concerning choices, human rights, professional responsibilities and personal risks (i.e. health risks, losing a job) with the introduction of vaccination mandate. However, the articles found in this review discussed mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers in the USA, Europe and Australia only.

CONCLUSION

The review underscores the need to balance the rights of the public to safe and quality care with the rights and moral obligations of healthcare workers during a public health emergency. This can be achieved when policies and mandates are guided by reliable scientific evidence which are flexible in considering legal and ethical dilemmas.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

To mandate or not to mandate COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers: A synthesis of published opinions in health, law, and bioethics.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and Clinical Presentation of COVID-19 in Patients Hospitalized during the Delta- and Omicron-Predominant Periods

Evidence suggests that monovalent vaccine formulations are less effective against the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 than against previous variants. In this retrospective cohort study of hospitalized adults with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 during the Delta (October-November 2021) and Omicron (January-April 2022) variant predominant periods in Slovenia, we assessed the association between primary vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and progression to critically severe disease (mechanical ventilation or death). Compared with the 529 patients hospitalized for acute COVID-19 during the Delta period (median age 65 years; 58.4% men), the 407 patients hospitalized during the Omicron period (median age 75 years; 50.6% men) were older, more often resided in long-term care facilities, and had higher Charlson comorbidity index scores. After adjusting for age, sex, the Charlson comorbidity index, the presence of immunocompromising conditions, and vaccination status, the patients admitted during the Omicron period had comparable odds of progressing to critically severe disease to those admitted during the Delta period. The 334/936 (35.7%) patients completing at least primary vaccination had lower odds of progression to critically severe disease and shorter hospital stay than unvaccinated patients; however, the protective effect of vaccination was less pronounced during the Omicron than during the Delta period. Although the Omicron variant appeared to better evade immunity induced by monovalent vaccines than the Delta variant, vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 remained an effective intervention to decrease morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 patients infected with the Omicron variant.

Outcomes of Elderly Patients Hospitalized with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron B.1.1.529 Variant: A Systematic Review

The Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of the severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had an increased rate of spreading among the general population. Although this virus mutation resulted in milder symptoms, those on the vulnerable side of the population are still in danger of developing severe symptoms. Thus, this systematic review focused on identifying the clinical outcomes of older age patients (>65) that are hospitalized with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. The research was conducted using four electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Central), with a search query in December 2022 that comprised the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic. The inclusion criteria comprised (1) a population of patients older than 65 years, (2) a history of hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 infection, and (3) infection with Omicron B.1.1.529 variant. The initial search generated 295 articles, out of which six were included in the systematic review, and a total of 7398 patients. The main findings were that when looking at the elderly population, the mortality and hospitalization rates remained high. This is because older people are more vulnerable and have more comorbidities that interfere with the virus's progress. However, there is inconsistency in mortality rates, since the data reported by the included studies had different selection criteria based on the severity of the COVID-19 infection. Although no statistically significant differences were found between the unvaccinated and vaccinated groups, patients who got booster doses of vaccination had a lower likelihood of developing severe symptoms, serving as a protective factor for this population.

Alarming antibody evasion properties of rising SARS-CoV-2 BQ and XBB subvariants

The BQ and XBB subvariants of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron are now rapidly expanding, possibly due to altered antibody evasion properties deriving from their additional spike mutations. Here, we report that neutralization of BQ.1, BQ.1.1, XBB, and XBB.1 by sera from vaccinees and infected persons was markedly impaired, including sera from individuals boosted with a WA1/BA.5 bivalent mRNA vaccine. Titers against BQ and XBB subvariants were lower by 13- to 81-fold and 66- to 155-fold, respectively, far beyond what had been observed to date. Monoclonal antibodies capable of neutralizing the original Omicron variant were largely inactive against these new subvariants, and the responsible individual spike mutations were identified. These subvariants were found to have similar ACE2-binding affinities as their predecessors. Together, our findings indicate that BQ and XBB subvariants present serious threats to current COVID-19 vaccines, render inactive all authorized antibodies, and may have gained dominance in the population because of their advantage in evading antibodies.

COVID-19 as an Occupational Disease-Temporal Trends in the Number and Severity of Claims in Germany

COVID-19 is considered an occupational disease (OD), when infection occurs at the workplace for health workers (HW). Because of the increased infection risk of these workers, they were deemed to be a priority group when the vaccination campaign started in Germany in December 2020. By December 2021, more than 90% of HW had been vaccinated twice. We studied the number and the time trend concerning the severity of OD claims related to COVID-19. Workers' compensation claims for OD are recorded in a standardized database of the Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW). We analyzed all notifiable COVID-19 related claims filed between 1 March 2020 and 30 September 2022. The proportion of severe cases was estimated by inpatient stays, injury benefit payments, rehabilitation measures, and deaths. The data analysis was descriptive. Due to COVID-19, 317,403 notifiable cases were reported to the BGW. Of these, 200,505 (63.2%) had thus far been recognized as OD. The number of notifiable cases was highest in 2022 and lowest in 2020. In total, 3289 insured individuals were admitted to rehabilitation management. This represented 1.6% of all recognized ODs due to COVID-19 at the BGW. The proportion of cases admitted to rehabilitation management decreased from 4.5% of all recognized ODs in 2020 to 3.2% in 2021 and to 0.1% of all recognized cases in 2022. For inpatient stays, injury benefit payment, and death, a similar trend was observed. Therefore, it might be concluded that the successful vaccination campaign mitigated the negative health effects of COVID-19 on HW. Even with vaccination, severe cases can occur. Therefore, infection prevention at the workplace remains paramount.

Clinical Characteristics in the Acute Phase of COVID-19 That Predict Long COVID: Tachycardia, Myalgias, Severity, and Use of Antibiotics as Main Risk Factors, While Education and Blood Group B Are Protective

BACKGROUND

Risk factors for developing long COVID are not clearly established. The present study was designed to determine if any sign, symptom, or treatment of the acute phase, or personal characteristics of the patient, is associated with the development of long COVID.

METHODS

A cohort study was carried out, randomly selecting symptomatic COVID-19 patients and not vaccinated. The severity of the acute illness was assessed through the number of compatible COVID-19 symptoms, hospitalizations, and the symptom severity score using a 10-point visual analog scale.

RESULTS

After multivariate analysis, a severity score ≥8 (RR 2.0, 95%CI 1.1-3.5, p = 0.022), hospitalization (RR 2.1, 95%CI 1.0-4.4, p = 0.039), myalgia (RR 1.9, 95%CI 1.08-3.6, p = 0.027), tachycardia (RR 10.4, 95%CI 2.2-47.7, p = 0.003), and use of antibiotics (RR 2.0, 95%CI 1.1-3.5, p = 0.022), was positively associated with the risk of having long COVID. Higher levels of education (RR 0.6, 95%CI 0.4-0.9, p = 0.029) and type positive B blood group (B + AB, RR 0.44, 95%CI 0.2-0.9, p = 0.044) were protective factors. The most important population attributable fractions (PAFs) for long COVID were myalgia (37%), severity score ≥8 (31%), and use of antibiotics (27%).

CONCLUSIONS

Further studies in diverse populations over time are needed to expand the knowledge that could lead us to prevent and/or treat long COVID.

Primary and booster vaccination in reducing severe clinical outcomes associated with Omicron Naïve infection

BACKGROUND

Little is known about long-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine in reducing severity and deaths associated with Omicron VOC not perturbed by prior infection and independent of oral anti-viral therapy and non-pharmaceutical (NPI).

METHODS

A retrospective observational cohort study was applied to Taiwan community during the unprecedent large-scale outbreaks of Omicron BA.2 between April and August, 2022. Primary vaccination since March, 2021 and booster vaccination since January, 2022 were offered on population level. Oral Anti-viral therapy was also offered as of mid-May 2022. The population-based effectiveness of vaccination in reducing the risk of moderate and severe cases of and death from Omicron BA.2 with the consideration of NPI and oral anti-viral therapy were assessed by using Bayesian hierarchical models.

RESULTS

The risks of three clinical outcomes associated with Omicron VOC infection were lowest for booster vaccination, followed by primary vaccination, and highest for incomplete vaccination with the consistent trends of being at increased risk for three outcomes from the young people aged 12 years or below until the elderly people aged 75 years or older with 7 age groups. Before the period using oral anti-viral therapy, complete primary vaccination with the duration more than 9 months before outbreaks conferred the statistically significant 47 % (23-64 %) reduction of death, 48 % (30-61 %) of severe disease, and 46 % (95 % CI: 37-54 %) of moderate disease after adjusting for 10-20 % independent effect of NPI. The benefits of booster vaccination within three months were further enhanced to 76 % (95 % CI: 67-86 %), 74 % (95 % CI: 67-80 %), and 61 % (95 % CI: 56-65 %) for three corresponding outcomes. The additional effectiveness of oral anti-viral therapy in reducing moderate disease was 13 % for the booster group and 5.8 % for primary vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

We corroborated population effectiveness of primary vaccination and its booster vaccination, independent of oral anti-viral therapy and NPI, in reducing severe clinical outcomes associated with Omicron BA.2 naïve infection population.

Association between body-mass index, patient characteristics, and obesity-related comorbidities among COVID-19 patients: A prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Obesity is a major risk factor for adverse outcomes after COVID-19 infection. However, it is unknown if the worse outcomes are due to the confounding effect of demographic and obesity-related comorbidities. The study objective is to analyze associations between body mass index, patient characteristics, obesity-related comorbidity, and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, we chose patient records between March 1st, 2020, and December 1st, 2022, in a large tertiary care center in southeast Wisconsin in the United States. Patients over the age of 18 who tested positive were included in the study. Clinical outcomes included hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and mortality rates. We examined the characteristics of patients who had positive clinical outcomes. We created unadjusted logistic regression models, sequentially adjusting for demographic and comorbidity variables, to assess the independent associations between BMI, patient characteristics, obesity-related comorbidities, and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

From a record of 1.67 million inpatients and outpatients at Froedtert Health Center, 55,299 (BMI: 30.5 ± 7.4 kg/m2, 62.5 % female) tested COVID-19 positive during the study period. 17,580 (31.8 %) patients were admitted to hospitals, and of hospitalized patients required ICU admission. 1038 (36.3 %) required mechanical ventilation, and 462 (44.5 %) died after a positive test for COVID-19. We found female patients show a higher hospitalization rate, while male patients have a higher rate of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and mortality. Obesity-related comorbidities are associated with worse outcomes compared to simple obesity without comorbidities. In logistic regression models, we found four similar V-shaped associations between BMI and four clinical outcomes. Patients with a BMI of 25 kg/m2 are at the lowest risk for clinical outcomes. Patients with a BMI lower than 18 kg/m2 or higher than 30 kg/m2 are associated with a higher risk of hospitalization, ICU, mechanical ventilation, and death. After adjusting the model for demographic factors and hypertension and diabetes as two common comorbidities, we found that demographic factors do not significantly increase the risk. Obesity alone does not significantly increase the risk of severe clinical outcomes. Obesity-related comorbidities, on the other hand, resulted in a significantly higher risk of outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Obesity alone does not increase the risk of worse clinical outcomes after COVID-19 infection. It may suggest that the worse clinical outcomes of patients with obesity are mediated via hypertension and type 2 diabetes. Patients with obesity and comorbidities have a higher risk of poor outcomes. Obesity-related comorbidities, including hypertension and diabetes, are independently associated with poorer clinical outcomes among COVID-19 patients. At a BMI of more than 30 kg/m2 or less than 18 kg/m2, we found an increase in the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes leading to hospitalization, ICU, mechanical ventilation, and death. The increased risk of severe outcomes is not attributed to patient characteristics but can be attributed to hypertension and diabetes.

The impact of vaccination and outpatient treatment on the economic burden of Covid-19 in the United States omicron era: a systematic literature review

AIMS

To identify and synthesize evidence regarding how coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) interventions, including vaccines and outpatient treatments, have impacted healthcare resource use (HCRU) and costs in the United States (US) during the Omicron era.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to identify articles published between 1 January 2021 and 10 March 2023 that assessed the impact of vaccination and outpatient treatment on costs and HCRU outcomes associated with COVID-19. Screening was performed by two independent researchers using predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight unique studies were included in the SLR, of which all reported HCRU outcomes, and one reported costs. Overall, there was a significant reduction in the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization for patients who received an original monovalent primary series vaccine plus booster dose vs. no vaccination. Moreover, receipt of a booster vaccine was associated with a lower risk of hospitalization vs. primary series vaccination. Evidence also indicated a significantly reduced risk of hospitalizations among recipients of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r), remdesivir, sotrovimab, and molnupiravir compared to non-recipients. Treated and/or vaccinated patients also experienced reductions in intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, length of stay, and emergency department (ED)/urgent care clinic encounters.

LIMITATIONS

The identified studies may not represent unique patient populations as many utilized the same regional/national data sources. Synthesis of the evidence was also limited by differences in populations, outcome definitions, and varying duration of follow-up across studies. Additionally, significant gaps, including HCRU associated with long COVID and various high-risk populations and cost data, were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite evidence gaps, findings from the SLR highlight the significant positive impact that vaccination and outpatient treatment have had on HCRU in the US, including periods of Omicron predominance. Continued research is needed to inform clinical and policy decision-making in the US as COVID-19 continues to evolve as an endemic disease.

Willingness to Pay (WTP) for COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Dose and Its Determinants in Indonesia

Willingness to pay (WTP) for booster doses of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines is an under studied research topic. Therefore, the current study aimed to investigate the WTP for the booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines and its predictors in Indonesia using an online survey distributed all over the provinces of this low-middle-income country. The WTP was evaluated using a basic dichotomous contingent valuation approach, and its associated determinants were evaluated using a linear regression model. Out of 2935 responders, 66.2% (1942/2935) were willing to pay for a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. The majority of respondents (63.5%) were willing to pay within a price range of 100,000-500,000 Indonesian rupiah (IDR), i.e., USD 6.71-33.57. Being older than 40 years, having a higher educational level, having a higher income, knowing and understanding that booster doses were important, and having a vaccine status that is certified halal (permissible in Islamic law), were all associated with a higher WTP for the booster dose of COVID-19 vaccines. The study findings imply that the WTP for a booster dose of COVID-19 vaccination in Indonesia is lower compared to acceptance of vaccines provided free of charge. This WTP data can be utilized to develop a pricing scheme for the booster doses of COVID-19 vaccination in the country with potential benefits in other low-income countries. The government may be required to provide subsidies for the herd immunity vaccination process to proceed as anticipated. Furthermore, the public community must be educated on the importance of vaccination as well as the fact that the COVID-19 epidemic is far from being over.

Effect of Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 on Long COVID-19: A Narrative Review

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have saved millions of lives and played an important role in containing the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is also associated with reduced disease severity and, perhaps, with COVID-19 symptom burden. In this narrative review, we present, in a clinically relevant question-and-answer manner, the evidence regarding the association between vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and long COVID-19. We discuss how the mechanism of action of vaccines could interplay with the pathophysiology of post-COVID-19 condition. Furthermore, we describe how specific factors, such as the number of vaccine doses and the type of SARS-CoV-2 variants, may affect post-COVID-19 condition. We also discuss the role of timing for vaccination in relation to the onset of long COVID-19 symptoms, as it seems to affect the frequency and severity of the condition. Additionally, we describe the potential modifying effect of age, as well as the association of type and level of immune response with long COVID-19. We also describe how system-specific long COVID-19 sequelae, namely neurocognitive-psychologic symptoms and cardiovascular pathology, could be altered by vaccination. Last, we address the question of whether seasonal influenza vaccination has a meaningful impact on the frequency of long COVID-19.

Prolonged higher dose methylprednisolone vs. conventional dexamethasone in COVID-19 pneumonia: a randomised controlled trial (MEDEAS)

Introduction

Dysregulated systemic inflammation is the primary driver of mortality in severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Current guidelines favor a 7–10-day course of any glucocorticoid equivalent to dexamethasone 6 mg·day−1. A comparative RCT with a higher dose and a longer duration of intervention was lacking.

Methods

We conducted a multi-center, open-label RCT to investigate methylprednisolone 80 mg as a continuous daily infusion for 8 days followed by slow taperingversusdexamethasone 6 mg daily for up to 10 days in adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring oxygen or noninvasive respiratory support. Primary outcome: reduction in 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes: mechanical ventilation-free days at 28 days, need for ICU referral, length of hospitalisation, need for tracheostomy, changes in PaO2:FiO2 ratio, C-reactive protein levels and WHO clinical progression scale at days 3, 7, and 14.

Results

677 randomised patients were included. Findings are reported as methylprednisolone (n=337)versusdexamethasone (n=340). By day 28, there were no significant differences in mortality (35[10.4%]versus41[12.1%]; p=0.49), nor in the median mechanical ventilation-free days (23[14]versus24[16]; p=0.49). ICU referral was necessary in 41[12.2%]versus45[13.2%]; p=0.68 and tracheostomy in 8[2.4%]versus9[2.6%]; p=0.82. Survivors in the methylprednisolone group required a longer median hospitalisation (15[11]versus14[11] days; p=0.005) and experienced an improvement in C-reactive protein levels, but not in PaO2:FiO2ratio, at days 7 and 14. There were no differences in disease progression at the prespecified timepoints.

Conclusion

Prolonged, higher dose methylprednisolone did not reduce mortality at 28 days compared to conventional dexamethasone in COVID-19 pneumonia.