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

Revisiting the dimensions of universal vaccine with special focus on COVID-19: Efficacy versus methods of designing

Even though the use of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic showed unprecedented success in a short time, it also exposed a flaw in the current vaccine design strategy to offer broad protection against emerging variants of concern. However, developing broad-spectrum vaccines is still a challenge for immunologists. The development of universal vaccines against emerging pathogens and their variants appears to be a practical solution to mitigate the economic and physical effects of the pandemic on society. Very few reports are available to explain the basic concept of universal vaccine design and development. This review provides an overview of the innate and adaptive immune responses generated against vaccination and essential insight into immune mechanisms helpful in designing universal vaccines targeting influenza viruses and coronaviruses. In addition, the characteristics, safety, and factors affecting the efficacy of universal vaccines have been discussed. Furthermore, several advancements in methods worthy of designing universal vaccines are described, including chimeric immunogens, heterologous prime-boost vaccines, reverse vaccinology, structure-based antigen design, pan-reactive antibody vaccines, conserved neutralizing epitope-based vaccines, mosaic nanoparticle-based vaccines, etc. In addition to the several advantages, significant potential constraints, such as defocusing the immune response and subdominance, are also discussed.

The Ethical Obligation to Treat Infectious Patients: A Systematic Review of Reasons

During pandemics, healthcare providers struggle with balancing obligations to self, family, and patients. While HIV/AIDS seemed to settle this issue, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rekindled debates regarding treatment refusal. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, and Web of Science using terms including obligation, refusal, HIV/AIDS, COVID-19, and pandemics. After duplicate removal and dual, independent screening, we analyzed 156 articles for quality, ethical position, reasons, and concepts. Diseases in our sample included HIV/AIDS (72.2%), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) (10.2%), COVID-19 (10.2%), Ebola (7.0%), and influenza (7.0%). Most articles (81.9%, n = 128) indicated an obligation to treat. COVID-19 had the highest number of papers indicating ethical acceptability of refusal (60%, P < .001), while HIV had the least (13.3%, P = .026). Several reason domains were significantly different during COVID-19, including unreasonable risks to self/family (26.7%, P < .001) and labor rights/workers' protection (40%, P < .001). A surge in ethics literature during COVID-19 has advocated for permissibility of treatment refusal. Balancing healthcare provision with workforce protection is crucial in effectively responding to a global pandemic.

Association between COVID-19 infection and uveitis flare in patients with Behcet's disease, a retrospective multicenter cohort study

PURPOSE

To explore if COVID-19 infection and its subsequent immunosuppressant adjustment as well as previous vaccination status are associated with higher risks of uveitis flare in patients with Behcet's disease.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted in January 2023 among patients with Behcet's uveitis, during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in China, with an anticipated sample size of 250. The primary objective was to examine the association between COVID-19 infection and the occurrence of uveitis flare. The potential impact of other exposures, including the patient's vaccination status and treatment adjustments to the risk of uveitis flare and the course of COVID-19 infection were also analyzed.

RESULTS

207 patients with COVID-19 infection and 47 patients without COVID-19 infection were included. A total of 127 uveitis flares occurred in the observational period (14.29 events per 100 person-month). COVID-19 infection was found to be significantly associated with a higher rate of uveitis flare (adjusted rate ratio = 4.8, 95% CI 3.7 to 6.3, P < 0.001). However, neither systemic immunosuppressive adjustment nor COVID-19 vaccination status showed a significant association with uveitis flare or the course of COVID-19 infection.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence of an association between COVID-19 infection and an increased risk of uveitis flare in patients with Behcet's disease. However, there was no significant evidence to support that baseline immunosuppressive therapy regimens, treatment adjustment after COVID-19 infection, or vaccination status were associated with higher risks of uveitis flare or prolonged COVID-19 course.

Cost-effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for high-risk adult outpatients with COVID-19 in Japan

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Nir/Rit) for adult outpatients with COVID-19 from the perspective of a Japanese public healthcare payer.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness simulation was conducted comparing Nir/Rit for the outpatient treatment of high-risk COVID-19 patients to best supportive care (BSC) without antiviral or antibody drugs. The analytical model was divided into two phases: the treatment phase, lasting 35 days from the start of COVID-19 treatment, and the post-treatment phase. Patients who survived the treatment phase were assumed to follow a general population survival curve. Expected costs and expected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for both BSC and Nir/Rit were calculated for ages 40 to 80 to obtain the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The robustness of the results was evaluated through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA).

RESULTS

The ICERs for patients aged 40, 50, 60, 70, and 80 were 18,854,276 Japanese Yen (JPY)/QALY, 8,482,034 JPY/QALY, 4,976,612 JPY/QALY, 2,636,096 JPY/QALY, and 1,597,783 JPY/QALY, respectively. In the deterministic sensitivity analysis, both the mortality risk during the treatment phase and the relative mortality risk with Nir/Rit had a high impact on ICER across all ages. In the PSA, when the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at 5 million JPY/QALY, the probability of the ICER being below the WTP threshold was 0%, 0.2%, 45.4%, 99.9%, and 100% at ages 40, 50, 60, 70, and 80, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Nir/Rit is cost-effective for older individuals aged 60 and over but not for younger age groups.

Association of pulmonary function test abnormalities and quality-of-life measures after COVID-19 infection

BACKGROUND

Long-COVID is a multisystem disease that can lead to significant impairments in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Following COVID-19 infection, abnormalities on pulmonary function tests (PFT) are common. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate for any correlation between PFT abnormalities and impairment in HRQoL scores following COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

This is an analysis of a prospective cohort of patients in Louisville, KY who were infected with COVID-19. Data collected included demographics, past medical history, laboratory tests, PFTs, and several HRQoL questionnaires such as the EuroQol 5 Dimension HRQoL questionnaire (EQ-5D-5 L), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and Posttraumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). Descriptive statistics were performed, comparing PFTs (normal vs abnormal) and time since COVID-19 infection (3- vs 6- vs ≥ 12 months).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in FEV1, FVC, or the percentage of patients with abnormal PFTs over time after COVID-19 infection. Following COVID-19, patients with normal PFTs had worse impairment in mobility HRQoL scores and change in GAD-7 scores over time. There were no differences over time in any of the HRQoL scores among patients with abnormal PFTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with an abnormal PFT, there was no temporal association with HRQoL scores as measured by EQ-5D-5 L, GAD-7, PHQ-9, and PCL-5. Among patients with a normal PFT, mobility impairment and anxiety may be associated with COVID-19 infection. Following COVID-19 infection, impairment in HRQoL scores is not completely explained by the presence of abnormalities on spirometry.

COVID-19 Outcomes among People Living with HIV in Colorado

It is known that people who are immunocompromised or have a comorbidity are at an increased risk for acquiring COVID-19, having a longer duration of COVID-19 symptoms, and a greater likelihood of severe outcomes, including people living with HIV (PLHIV) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Basics of covid-19. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved October 31. 2022, from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/your-health/about-covid-19/basics-covid-19.html ). However, treatment for PLHIV can greatly reduce the amount of HIV in a person's blood, known as viral suppression. This study compared the outcome of COVID-associated hospitalization among virally suppressed and unsuppressed PLHIV in Colorado. A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted including all known PLHIV in Colorado that were diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 2020 and September 2022. Relevant covariates were identified including race/ethnicity, age at time of diagnosis, region of diagnosis, and vaccination status. An initial univariate logistic regression was then built to test the statistical significance of the association between viral suppression and hospitalization. The final model included all associated covariates and crude and adjusted odds ratios were analyzed. When controlling for covariates, PLHIV who were not virally suppressed at the time of their COVID-19 diagnosis were 2.5 (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.6-4.0) times as likely to be hospitalized at the time of their first COVID-19 diagnosis compared to those that were suppressed. These findings suggest that viral suppression among PLHIV is protective against poor COVID-19 outcomes. This study is an important first step in highlighting the importance of PLHIV being retained in care and achieving viral suppression in reducing hospitalizations due to COVID-19 in Colorado.

Evaluation of the relationship of treatment and vaccination with prognosis in patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19

PURPOSE

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected millions of people worldwide and caused mortality. Many factors have been reported to affect the prognosis of COVID-19. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of drug therapy and vaccination on prognosis in patients hospitalized with a COVID-19 diagnosis.

METHODS

In this single-center, cross-sectional study, data were retrospectively collected from patients receiving inpatient treatment at a university hospital with a diagnosis of COVID-19 between January 1, 2020, and April 30, 2022. The patients' demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded. The Chi-square, Cox and logistic regression was performed, P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Total 1723 patients (50.1% were men, mean age: 60.6 ± 16.90) who had not been vaccinated rate was 27.0% (> 3 doses: 45.7%). Mortality rate was 17.0%. Increasing age, male, a high Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and no vaccination significantly increased mortality (P < 0.05). The mortality rate was significantly lower in the chloroquine treatment group than in the other treatment groups. Increasing age, male, and a high CCI were determined to be factors that significantly increased the length of hospital stay (LOHS). LOHS found to be significantly lower in the favipiravir or chloroquine groups compared to the remaining treatment groups (P < 0.001). Both mortality and the LOHS significantly differed according to AST, d-dimer, ferritin, and GFR.

CONCLUSION

This study primarily investigated the effect of treatment and vaccination on the prognosis of COVID-19. This was determined to be prepared for another potential pandemic that may arise due to COVID-19.

Time‑dependent ROC curve analysis to determine the predictive capacity of seven clinical scales for mortality in patients with COVID‑19: Study of a hospital cohort with very high mortality

Clinical data from hospital admissions are typically utilized to determine the prognostic capacity of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) indices. However, as disease status and severity markers evolve over time, time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis becomes more appropriate. The present analysis assessed predictive power for death at various time points throughout patient hospitalization. In a cohort study involving 515 hospitalized patients (General Hospital Number 1 of Mexican Social Security Institute, Colima, Mexico from February 2021 to December 2022) with COVID-19, seven severity indices [Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI) PaO2/FiO2 arterial oxygen pressure/fraction of inspired oxygen (Kirby index), the Critical Illness Risk Score (COVID-GRAM), the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS-2), the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (qSOFA), the Fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4) and the Viral Pneumonia Mortality Score (MuLBSTA were evaluated using time-dependent ROC curves. Clinical data were collected at admission and at 2, 4, 6 and 8 days into hospitalization. The study calculated the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for each index at these time points. Mortality was 43.9%. Throughout all time points, NEWS-2 demonstrated the highest predictive power for mortality, as indicated by its AUC values. PSI and COVID-GRAM followed, with predictive power increasing as hospitalization duration progressed. Additionally, NEWS-2 exhibited the highest sensitivity (>96% in all periods) but showed low specificity, which increased from 22.9% at admission to 58.1% by day 8. PSI displayed good predictive capacity from admission to day 6 and excellent predictive power at day 8 and its sensitivity remained >80% throughout all periods, with moderate specificity (70.6-77.3%). COVID-GRAM demonstrated good predictive capacity across all periods, with high sensitivity (84.2-87.3%) but low-to-moderate specificity (61.5-67.6%). The qSOFA index initially had poor predictive power upon admission but improved after 4 days. FIB-4 had a statistically significant predictive capacity in all periods (P=0.001), but with limited clinical value (AUC, 0.639-0.698), and with low sensitivity and specificity. MuLBSTA and IKIRBY exhibited low predictive power at admission and no power after 6 days. In conclusion, in COVID-19 patients with high mortality rates, NEWS-2 and PSI consistently exhibited predictive power for death during hospital stay, with PSI demonstrating the best balance between sensitivity and specificity.

The presence of broadly neutralizing anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD antibodies elicited by primary series and booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine

Antibody-mediated immunity plays a key role in protection against SARS-CoV-2. We characterized B-cell-derived anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD antibody repertoires from vaccinated and infected individuals and elucidate the mechanism of action of broadly neutralizing antibodies and dissect antibodies at the epitope level. The breadth and clonality of anti-RBD B cell response varies among individuals. The majority of neutralizing antibody clones lose or exhibit reduced activities against Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants. Nevertheless, a portion of anti-RBD antibody clones that develops after a primary series or booster dose of COVID-19 vaccination exhibit broad neutralization against emerging Omicron BA.2, BA.4, BA.5, BQ.1.1, XBB.1.5 and XBB.1.16 variants. These broadly neutralizing antibodies share genetic features including a conserved usage of the IGHV3-53 and 3-9 genes and recognize three clustered epitopes of the RBD, including epitopes that partially overlap the classically defined set identified early in the pandemic. The Fab-RBD crystal and Fab-Spike complex structures corroborate the epitope grouping of antibodies and reveal the detailed binding mode of broadly neutralizing antibodies. Structure-guided mutagenesis improves binding and neutralization potency of antibody with Omicron variants via a single amino-substitution. Together, these results provide an immunological basis for partial protection against severe COVID-19 by the ancestral strain-based vaccine and indicate guidance for next generation monoclonal antibody development and vaccine design.

Genetic Analysis of Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Its Relationship with Severe COVID-19

Rationale: Although patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) have a higher risk for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) hospitalization, the causal relationship has remained unexplored. Objectives: To understand the causal relationship between OSA and COVID-19 by leveraging data from vaccination and electronic health records, genetic risk factors from genome-wide association studies, and Mendelian randomization. Methods: We elucidated genetic risk factors for OSA using FinnGen (total N = 377,277), performing genome-wide association. We used the associated variants as instruments for univariate and multivariate Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses and computed absolute risk reduction against COVID-19 hospitalization with or without vaccination. Results: We identified nine novel loci for OSA and replicated our findings in the Million Veteran Program. Furthermore, MR analysis showed that OSA was a causal risk factor for severe COVID-19 (P = 9.41 × 10-4). Probabilistic modeling showed that the strongest genetic risk factor for OSA at the FTO locus reflected a signal of higher body mass index (BMI), whereas BMI-independent association was seen with the earlier reported SLC9A4 locus and a MECOM locus, which is a transcriptional regulator with 210-fold enrichment in the Finnish population. Similarly, multivariate MR analysis showed that the causality for severe COVID-19 was driven by BMI (multivariate MR P = 5.97 × 10-6, β = 0.47). Finally, vaccination reduced the risk for COVID-19 hospitalization more in the patients with OSA than in the non-OSA controls, with respective absolute risk reductions of 13.3% versus 6.3%. Conclusions: Our analysis identified novel genetic risk factors for OSA and showed that OSA is a causal risk factor for severe COVID-19. The effect is predominantly explained by higher BMI and suggests BMI-dependent effects at the level of individual variants and at the level of comorbid causality.

The Short and Long of COVID-19: A Review of Acute and Chronic Radiologic Pulmonary Manifestations of SARS-2-CoV and Their Clinical Significance

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia has had catastrophic effects worldwide. Radiology, in particular computed tomography (CT) imaging, has proven to be valuable in the diagnosis, prognostication, and longitudinal assessment of those diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia. This article will review acute and chronic pulmonary radiologic manifestations of COVID-19 pneumonia with an emphasis on CT and also highlighting histopathology, relevant clinical details, and some notable challenges when interpreting the literature.

Modeling mortality prediction in older adults with dementia receiving COVID-19 vaccination

OBJECTIVE

This study compared COVID-19 outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated older adults with and without cognitive impairment.

METHOD

Electronic health records from Israel from March 2020-February 2022 were analyzed for a large cohort (N = 85,288) aged 65 + . Machine learning constructed models to predict mortality risk from patient factors. Outcomes examined were COVID-19 mortality and hospitalization post-vaccination.

RESULTS

Our study highlights the significant reduction in mortality risk among older adults with cognitive disorders following COVID-19 vaccination, showcasing a survival rate improvement to 93%. Utilizing machine learning for mortality prediction, we found the XGBoost model, enhanced with inverse probability of treatment weighting, to be the most effective, achieving an AUC-PR value of 0.89. This underscores the importance of predictive analytics in identifying high-risk individuals, emphasizing the critical role of vaccination in mitigating mortality and supporting targeted healthcare interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination strongly reduced poor outcomes in older adults with cognitive impairment. Predictive analytics can help identify highest-risk cases requiring targeted interventions.

Trust and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the Dominican Republic: a national cross-sectional household survey, June-October 2021

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates the role of trust in shaping COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in the Dominican Republic (DR) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional household survey.

SETTING

Randomly selected households across 134 clusters in the DR, from 30 June 2021 to 12 October 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

5999 participants ≥16 years of age were enrolled.

OUTCOME MEASURES

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (CVH) data were collected from participants ≥16 years of age and analysed as both an ordinal and binary variable.

RESULTS

Overall, CVH was low (5.2% (95% CI 4.6% to 5.8%)), but more common among younger individuals, women and individuals of Mestizo ethnicity. Higher trust in local government, national government, scientists and local doctors (considered official sources) was associated with lower odds of CVH (OR 0.89 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.88), 0.89 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.98), 0.87 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.94) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.80), respectively). Higher trust in religious leaders, social media and traditional media (considered unofficial sources) was associated with higher odds of CVH, with respective ORs of 1.32 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.47), 1.30 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.41) and 1.08 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.22).

CONCLUSION

We report findings on CVH from a national household survey in the DR and identify overall low rates of CVH but marked heterogeneity by age, gender and ethnicity. Trust in unofficial versus official sources of information is associated with increased CVH. These findings highlight and quantify the importance of trust as a key parameter when considering public health communication strategies.

High-risk subgroups were not identified to benefit from thromboprophylaxis after hospitalization for COVID-19

Background

The Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines-4c (ACTIV-4c) trial investigated prophylactic apixaban for 30 days following hospitalization for COVID-19. The overall incidence of early postdischarge death or thromboembolism was low, and the trial was closed early.

Objectives

To identify a high-risk patient population who might benefit from postdischarge thromboprophylaxis through subgroup analyses stratified by age, race/ethnicity, obesity, D-dimer elevation, World Health Organization score, and modified International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism score on 30-day composite outcome of all-cause death, arterial thromboembolism (ATE), and venous thromboembolism (VTE).

Methods

Cumulative incidences of all-cause death, ATE, and VTE within 30 days were described for each subgroup. Time to death, ATE, or VTE by 30 days was analyzed using Cox proportional hazard models with interaction testing for each subgroup.

Results

Among 1217 patients randomized to apixaban or placebo group, 32% were >60 years old. Modified International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism score was ≥4 in 2% and 2 or 3 with an elevated D-dimer in an additional 9% of participants. The overall incidence of the primary endpoint was 2.13% in the apixaban group and 2.31% in the placebo group. At day 30, similar rates of the primary endpoint occurred within subgroups, except for participants aged >60 years. No benefit of thromboprophylaxis was seen in any subgroup.

Conclusion

The combined incidence of 30-day death, ATE, and VTE was low in patients who survived COVID-19 hospitalization, except in patients over age 60 years. Due to the limited number of events, the findings remain inconclusive; nonetheless, the study did not identify a high-risk subgroup that would derive benefits from extended thromboprophylaxis.

Comparative effectiveness of dexamethasone in treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the United States during the first year of the pandemic: Findings from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) data repository

BACKGROUND

Dexamethasone was approved for use in hospitalized COVID-19 patients early in the pandemic based on the RECOVERY trial, but evidence is still needed to support its real-world effectiveness in heterogeneous populations of patients with a wide range of comorbidities.

METHODS

COVID-19 inpatients represented within the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) Data Enclave, prior to vaccine availability, were studied. Primary outcome was in-hospital death; secondary outcome was combined in-hospital death and severe outcome defined by use of ECMO or mechanical ventilation. Missing data were imputed with single imputation. Dexamethasone-treated patients were propensity score (PS) matched to non-dexamethasone-treated controls, stratified by remdesivir treatment and based on demographics, baseline laboratory values, comorbidities, and amount of missing data before imputation. Treatment benefit was quantified using logistic regression. Further sensitivity analyses were performed using clinical adjusters in matched groups and in strata defined by quartiles of PS.

RESULTS

Dexamethasone treatment was associated with reduced risk of in-hospital mortality for n = 1,263 treated, matched 1:3 to untreated, patients not receiving remdesivir (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.95, p = 0.017), and for n = 804 treated, matched 1:1 to untreated, patients receiving remdesivir (OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.53 to 1.02, p = 0.054). Treatment showed secondary outcome benefit. In sensitivity analyses, treatment effect generally remained similar with some heterogeneity of benefit across quartiles of PS, possibly reflecting concentration of benefit among the more severely affected.

CONCLUSIONS

We add evidence that dexamethasone provides benefit with respect to mortality and severe outcomes in a diverse, national hospitalized sample, prior to vaccine availability.

In-hospital mortality during the wild-type, alpha, delta, and omicron SARS-CoV-2 waves: a multinational cohort study in the EuCARE project

Background

Investigating outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients throughout the pandemic is crucial to understand the impact of different SARS-CoV-2 variants. We compared 28-day in-hospital mortality of Wild-type, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variant infections. Whether the difference in risk by variant varied by age was also evaluated.

Methods

We conducted a cohort study including patients ≥18 years, hospitalised between 2020 and 02-01 and 2022-10-15 with a SARS-CoV-2 positive test, from nine countries. Variant was classified based on sequenced viruses or from national public metadata. Mortality was compared using the cumulative incidence function and subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) adjusted for age, sex, calendar time, and comorbidities. Results were shown age-stratified due to effect measure modification (P < 0.0001 for interaction between age and variant).

Findings

We included 38,585 participants: 19,763 Wild-type, 6387 Alpha, 3640 Delta, and 8795 Omicron. The cumulative incidence of mortality decreased throughout the study period. Among participants ≥70 years, the adjusted SHR (95% confidence interval) for Delta vs. Omicron was 1.66 (1.29-2.13). This estimate was 1.66 (1.17-2.36) for Alpha vs. Omicron, and 1.34 (0.92-1.95) for Wild-type vs. Omicron. These were 1.21 (0.81-1.82), 1.21 (0.68-2.17), and 0.98 (0.53-1.82) among unvaccinated participants. When comparing Omicron sublineages, the aSHR for BA.1 was 1.92 (1.43-2.58) compared to BA.2 and 1.52 (1.11-2.08) compared to BA.5.

Interpretation

The herein observed decrease in in-hospital mortality seems to reflect a combined effect of immunity from vaccinations and previous infections, although differences in virulence between SARS-CoV-2 variants may also have contributed.

Funding

European Union's Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Programme.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of vaccinated patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection: Multi-IPV, a multicentre study in Northern Italy

BACKGROUND

Despite the well-known efficacy of anti-COVID-19 vaccines in preventing morbidity and mortality, several vaccinated individuals are diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection, which might require hospitalisation. This multicentre, observational, and retrospective study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of vaccinated vs. non-vaccinated patients, both hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 infection in 3 major hospitals in Northern Italy.

METHODS

Data collection was retrospective, and paper and electronic medical records of adult patients with a diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection were pseudo-anonymised and analysed. Vaccinated and non-vaccinated individuals were manually paired, using a predetermined matching criterion (similar age, gender, and date of hospitalisation). Demographic, clinical, treatment, and outcome data were compared between groups differing by vaccination status using Pearson's Chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests. Moreover, multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of vaccination status on ICU admission or intra-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Data from 360 patients were collected. Vaccinated patients presented with a higher prevalence of relevant comorbidities, like kidney replacement therapy or haematological malignancy, despite a milder clinical presentation at the first evaluation. Non-vaccinated patients required intensive care more often than their vaccinated counterparts (8.8% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.002). Contrariwise, no difference in intra-hospital mortality was observed between the two groups (19% vs. 20%, p = 0.853). These results were confirmed by multivariable logistic regressions, which showed that vaccination was significantly associated with decreased risk of ICU admission (aOR=0.172, 95%CI: 0.039-0.542, p = 0.007), but not of intra-hospital mortality (aOR=0.996, 95%CI: 0.582-1.703, p = 0.987).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides real-world data on vaccinated patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in Northern Italy. Our results suggest that COVID-19 vaccination has a protective role in individuals with higher risk profiles, especially regarding the need for ICU admission. These findings contribute to our understanding of SARS-CoV-2 infection outcomes among vaccinated individuals and emphasise the importance of vaccination in preventing severe disease, particularly in those countries with lower first-booster uptake rates.

UB-612 pan-SARS-CoV-2 T cell immunity-promoting vaccine protects against COVID-19 moderate-severe disease

UB-612 pan-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine targets the monomeric Spike S1-receptor binding domain (RBD) subunit protein along with five sequence-conserved T cell epitopes found on Spike S2 and non-Spike M and N proteins. UB-612 vaccination safely induces potent, broad, and long-lasting immunity against SARS-CoV-2. A phase-2 trial-extended observational study during the Omicron BA.2-/BA.5-dominated outbreak was conducted to investigate UB-612's protective effect against COVID-19 hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) admission (H-ICU). Additionally, memory viral-neutralizing titer and T cell immunity behind disease protection were explored. No cases of H-ICU were reported beyond 14 months post-second dose or beyond 10 months post-booster (third dose). The positive outcome correlates with strong cytotoxic CD8 T cell immunity, in line with the results of an ongoing phase-3 heterologous booster trial showing that UB-612 can enhance anti-BA.5 seroconversion rate and viral-neutralizing titer for mRNA, adeno-vectored, and virus-inactivated vaccine platforms. The UB-612 multitope vaccine may serve as an effective primer and booster for those at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Brief research report: impact of vaccination on antibody responses and mortality from severe COVID-19

Introduction

While it is established that vaccination reduces risk of hospitalization, there is conflicting data on whether it improves outcome among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This study evaluated clinical outcomes and antibody (Ab) responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection/vaccines in patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) and various comorbidities.

Methods

In this single-center study, 152 adult patients were admitted to Ohio State University hospital with ARF (05/2020 - 11/2022) including 112 COVID-19-positive and 40 COVID-19-negative patients. Of the COVID-19 positive patients, 23 were vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 (Vax), and 89 were not (NVax). Of the NVax COVID-19 patients, 46 were admitted before and 43 after SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were approved. SARS-CoV-2 Ab levels were measured/analyzed based on various demographic and clinical parameters of COVID-19 patients. Additionally, total IgG4 Ab concentrations were compared between the Vax and NVax patients.

Results

While mortality rates were 36% (n=25) and 27% (n=15) for non-COVID-19 NVax and Vax patients, respectively, in COVID-19 patients mortality rates were 37% (NVax, n=89) and 70% (Vax, n=23). Among COVID-19 patients, mortality rate was significantly higher among Vax vs. NVax patients (p=0.002). The Charlson's Comorbidity Index score (CCI) was also significantly higher among Vax vs. NVax COVID-19 patients. However, the mortality risk remained significantly higher (p=0.02) when we compared COVID-19 Vax vs. NVax patients with similar CCI score, suggesting that additional factors may increase risk of mortality. Higher levels of SARS-CoV-2 Abs were noted among survivors, suggestive of their protective role. We observed a trend for increased total IgG4 Ab, which promotes immune tolerance, in the Vax vs. NVax patients in week 3.

Conclusion

Although our cohort size is small, our results suggest that vaccination status of hospital-admitted COVID-19 patients may not be instructive in determining mortality risk. This may reflect that within the general population, those individuals at highest risk for COVID-19 mortality/immune failure are likely to be vaccinated. Importantly, the value of vaccination may be in preventing hospitalization as opposed to stratifying outcome among hospitalized patients, although our data do not address this possibility. Additional research to identify factors predictive of aberrant immunogenic responses to vaccination is warranted.

Prepandemic Physical Activity and Risk of COVID-19 Diagnosis and Hospitalization in Older Adults

Importance

Higher prepandemic physical activity (PA) levels have been associated with lower risk and severity of COVID-19.

Objective

To investigate the association between self-reported prepandemic PA levels and the risk and severity of COVID-19 in older US adults.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study combined cohorts from 3 ongoing prospective randomized clinical trials of US adults aged 45 years or older who provided prepandemic self-reports of baseline leisure-time PA and risk factors for COVID-19 outcomes using the most recent questionnaire completed as of December 31, 2019, as the baseline PA assessment. In multiple surveys from May 2020 through May 2022, participants indicated whether they had at least 1 positive COVID-19 test result or were diagnosed with or hospitalized for COVID-19.

Exposure

Prepandemic PA, categorized into 3 groups by metabolic equivalent hours per week: inactive (0-3.5), insufficiently active (>3.5 to <7.5), and sufficiently active (≥7.5).

Main Outcome and Measures

Primary outcomes were risk of COVID-19 and hospitalization for COVID-19. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odd ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for the association of COVID-19 diagnosis and/or hospitalization with each of the 2 upper PA categories vs the lowest PA category.

Results

The pooled cohort included 61 557 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.7 [6.4] years; 70.7% female), 20.2% of whom were inactive; 11.4%, insufficiently active; and 68.5%, sufficiently active. A total of 5890 confirmed incident cases of COVID-19 were reported through May 2022, including 626 hospitalizations. After controlling for demographics, body mass index, lifestyle factors, comorbidities, and medications used, compared with inactive individuals, those insufficiently active had no significant reduction in infection (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.86-1.06) or hospitalization (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.76-1.28), whereas those sufficiently active had a significant reduction in infection (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.97) and hospitalization (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60-0.90). In subgroup analyses, the association between PA and SARS-CoV-2 infection differed by sex, with only sufficiently active women having decreased odds (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.95; P = .04 for interaction).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of adults aged 45 years or older, those who adhered to PA guidelines before the pandemic had lower odds of developing or being hospitalized for COVID-19. Thus, higher prepandemic PA levels may be associated with reduced odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospitalization for COVID-19.

Clinical course and management of COVID-19 in the era of widespread population immunity

The clinical implications of COVID-19 have changed since SARS-CoV-2 first emerged in humans. The current high levels of population immunity, due to prior infection and/or vaccination, have been associated with a vastly decreased overall risk of severe disease. Some people, particularly those with immunocompromising conditions, remain at risk for severe outcomes. Through the course of the pandemic, variants with somewhat different symptom profiles from the original SARS-CoV-2 virus have emerged. The management of COVID-19 has also changed since 2020, with the increasing availability of evidence-based treatments in two main classes: antivirals and immunomodulators. Selecting the appropriate treatment(s) for patients with COVID-19 requires a deep understanding of the evidence and an awareness of the limitations of applying data that have been largely based on immune-naive populations to patients today who most likely have vaccine-derived and/or infection-derived immunity. In this Review, we provide a summary of the clinical manifestations and approaches to caring for adult patients with COVID-19 in the era of vaccine availability and the dominance of the Omicron subvariants, with a focus on the management of COVID-19 in different patient groups, including immunocompromised, pregnant, vaccinated and unvaccinated patients.

Association between vaccination rates and COVID-19 health outcomes in the United States: a population-level statistical analysis

BACKGROUND

Population-level vaccine efficacy is a critical component of understanding COVID-19 risk, informing public health policy, and mitigating disease impacts. Unlike individual-level clinical trials, population-level analysis characterizes how well vaccines worked in the face of real-world challenges like emerging variants, differing mobility patterns, and policy changes.

METHODS

In this study, we analyze the association between time-dependent vaccination rates and COVID-19 health outcomes for 48 U.S. states. We primarily focus on case-hospitalization risk (CHR) as the outcome of interest, using it as a population-level proxy for disease burden on healthcare systems. Performing the analysis using Generalized Additive Models (GAMs) allowed us to incorporate real-world nonlinearities and control for critical dynamic (time-changing) and static (temporally constant) factors. Dynamic factors include testing rates, activity-related engagement levels in the population, underlying population immunity, and policy. Static factors incorporate comorbidities, social vulnerability, race, and state healthcare expenditures. We used SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance data to model the different COVID-19 variant-driven waves separately, and evaluate if there is a changing role of the potential drivers of health outcomes across waves.

RESULTS

Our study revealed a strong and statistically significant negative association between vaccine uptake and COVID-19 CHR across each variant wave, with boosters providing additional protection during the Omicron wave. Higher underlying population immunity is shown to be associated with reduced COVID-19 CHR. Additionally, more stringent government policies are generally associated with decreased CHR. However, the impact of activity-related engagement levels on COVID-19 health outcomes varied across different waves. Regarding static variables, the social vulnerability index consistently exhibits positive associations with CHR, while Medicaid spending per person consistently shows a negative association. However, the impacts of other static factors vary in magnitude and significance across different waves.

CONCLUSIONS

This study concludes that despite the emergence of new variants, vaccines remain highly correlated with reduced COVID-19 harm. Therefore, given the ongoing threat posed by COVID-19, vaccines remain a critical line of defense for protecting the public and reducing the burden on healthcare systems.

Who Gets Sick From COVID-19? Sociodemographic Correlates of Severe Adult Health Outcomes During Alpha- and Delta-Variant Predominant Periods: September 2020-November 2021

BACKGROUND

Because COVID-19 case data do not capture most SARS-CoV-2 infections, the actual risk of severe disease and death per infection is unknown. Integrating sociodemographic data into analysis can show consequential health disparities.

METHODS

Data were merged from September 2020 to November 2021 from 6 national surveillance systems in matched geographic areas and analyzed to estimate numbers of COVID-19-associated cases, emergency department visits, and deaths per 100 000 infections. Relative risks of outcomes per infection were compared by sociodemographic factors in a data set including 1490 counties from 50 states and the District of Columbia, covering 71% of the US population.

RESULTS

Per infection with SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality were higher among non-Hispanic American Indian and Alaska Native persons, non-Hispanic Black persons, and Hispanic or Latino persons vs non-Hispanic White persons; males vs females; older people vs younger; residents in more socially vulnerable counties vs less; those in large central metro areas vs rural; and people in the South vs the Northeast.

DISCUSSION

Meaningful disparities in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality per infection were associated with sociodemography and geography. Addressing these disparities could have helped prevent the loss of tens of thousands of lives.

Differences in the Evolution of Clinical, Biochemical, and Hematological Indicators in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 According to Their Vaccination Scheme: A Cohort Study in One of the World's Highest Hospital Mortality Populations

COVID-19 vaccines primarily prevent severe illnesses or hospitalization, but there is limited data on their impact during hospitalization for seriously ill patients. In a Mexican cohort with high COVID-19 mortality, a study assessed vaccination's effects. From 2021 to 2022, 462 patients with 4455 hospital days were analyzed. The generalized multivariate linear mixed model (GENLINMIXED) with binary logistic regression link, survival analysis and ROC curves were used to identify risk factors for death. The results showed that the vaccinated individuals were almost half as likely to die (adRR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.30-0.97, p = 0.041). When stratifying by vaccine, the Pfizer group (BNT162b2) had a 2.4-times lower risk of death (adRR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.2-0.8, p = 0.008), while the AstraZeneca group (ChAdOx1-S) group did not significantly differ from the non-vaccinated (adRR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.5-2.3, p = 0.915). The Pfizer group exhibited a higher survival, the unvaccinated showed increasing mortality, and the AstraZeneca group remained intermediate (p = 0.003, multigroup log-rank test). Additionally, BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals had lower values for markers, such as ferritin and D-dimer. Biochemical and hematological indicators suggested a protective effect of both types of vaccines, possibly linked to higher lymphocyte counts and lower platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR). It is imperative to highlight that these results reinforce the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines. However, further studies are warranted for a comprehensive understanding of these findings.

Immunogenicity, clinical efficacy and safety of additional second COVID-19 booster vaccines against Omicron and its subvariants: A systematic review

The Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is a new variant of concern (VOC) and an emerging subvariant that exhibits heightened infectivity, transmissibility, and immune evasion, escalating the incidence of moderate to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It resists monoclonal antibodies and diminishes vaccine efficacy. Notably, new sublineages have outpaced earlier predominant sublineages. Although the primary vaccination series and initial boosters were robust against previous VOCs, their efficacy waned against Omicron and its subvariants. In this systematic review, we assessed real-world evidence on the immunogenicity, clinical efficacy, and safety of a second booster or fourth COVID-19 vaccine dose against the Omicron VOC and its subvariants. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in Medline/PubMed, Google Scholar, bioRxiv, and medRxiv, and relevant studies published between 2022 and 30 May 2023 were reviewed. We found a total of 40 relevant articles focusing on a second booster dose for COVID-19, including clinical trials and observational studies, involving 3,972,856 patients. The results consistently revealed that an additional second booster dose restored and prolonged waning immunity, activating both humoral and cellular responses against Omicron and its subvariants. A second booster treatment correlated with enduring protection against COVID-19, notably preventing substantial symptomatic disease and mortality associated with severe Omicron infection. Both monovalent messenger RNA (mRNA) and nonmRNA vaccines demonstrated similar efficacy and safety, with bivalent mRNA vaccines exhibiting broader protection against emerging subvariants of Omicron. The safety profiles of second booster were favourable with only mild systemic and local symptoms reported in some recipients. In conclusion, this systematic review underscores the additional COVID-19 vaccine boosters, particularly with bivalent or multivalent mRNA vaccines, for countering the highly infectious emerging subvariants of Omicron.

A Preference-Based Value Assessment of the Fear of COVID-19 Contagion

Purpose

To assess the preference-based value of the fear of COVID-19 contagion.

Patients and Methods

We conducted a web-based, cross-sectional discrete choice experiment among 544 US adults. We used a Bayesian efficient design to generate choice sets. Each choice set comprised two hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine options characterized by seven attributes: chance of COVID-19 infection, chance of having severe symptoms from COVID-19 infection, vaccine protection duration, chance of mild to moderate adverse events from vaccination, chance of serious adverse events from vaccination, chance of future exposure to COVID-19 after vaccination, and out-of-pocket cost. We used mixed logit (ML) and latent class (LC) models to analyze data. Furthermore, we calculated the willingness-to-pay for eliminating the chance of future exposure to COVID-19, shedding light on the value attributed to the fear of contagion.

Results

The ML model demonstrated all attributes, including the chance of future exposure to COVID-19, were statistically significant. The participants were willing to pay approximately $13,046 to eliminate the chance of future exposure to COVID-19 or their fear of contagion when COVID-19 was still pandemic. The LC model unveiled two participant classes with distinct preference weights for the chance of future exposure to COVID-19 and out-of-pocket cost attributes. Nevertheless, the chance of future exposure to COVID-19 exposure held a significant degree of importance in both classes.

Conclusion

The chance of future exposure to COVID-19 exposure or fear of contagion was a significant element in the value assessment of COVID-19 vaccines. Further studies should be conducted to verify the value of fear of contagion and include it in the value assessment of healthcare technologies for infectious diseases.

Respiratory torque teno virus load at emergency department visit predicts intensive care unit admission of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients

Accurate prediction of COVID-19 severity remains a challenge. Torque teno virus (TTV), recognized as a surrogate marker of functional immunity in solid organ transplant recipients, holds the potential for assessing infection outcomes. We investigated whether quantifying TTV in nasopharyngeal samples upon emergency department (ED) admission could serve as an early predictor of COVID-19 severity. Retrospective single-center study in the ED of Saint-Louis Hospital in Paris, France. TTV DNA was quantified in nasopharyngeal swab samples collected for SARS-CoV-2 testing. Among 295 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients, 92 returned home, 160 were admitted to medical wards, and 43 to the intensive care unit (ICU). Elevated TTV loads were observed in ICU patients (median: 3.02 log copies/mL, interquartile range [IQR]: 2.215-3.825), exceeding those in discharged (2.215, [0; 2.962]) or hospitalized patients (2.24, [0; 3.29]) (p = 0.006). Multivariate analysis identified diabetes, obesity, hepatitis, fever, dyspnea, oxygen requirement, and TTV load as predictors of ICU admission. A 2.91 log10 copies/mL TTV threshold independently predicted ICU admission. Nasopharyngeal TTV quantification in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients is linked to the likelihood of ICU admission and might reflect respiratory immunosuppression.

A comparative study on COVID-19 disease severity and outcome among patients admitted before and after vaccination at tertiary care hospital

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a novel infectious disease caused by SARS CoV-2 that emerged in Wuhan, China, and has rapidly spread worldwide. The mortality rate of critically ill COVID-19 patients is high. The objective of the study was to assess the COVID-19 disease severity and outcome among COVID-19 positive patients admitted before and after vaccination.

Methodology

A prospective observational study conducted among all patients aged more than 18 years were included in the study. The patients who were positive before vaccination and received at least one dose of vaccine and positive after receiving two doses of vaccination included in the study. Disease severity was assessed in terms of high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) score, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, SpO2 maintained, oxygen, plasma exchange, steroids received and on mechanical ventilation, and outcome was assessed on prognosis and stabilized/discharged to home.

Results

A total of 172 were participated in the study with 101 (58.7%) males and 71 (41.3) females, respectively. Amongst them, 92 were affected before vaccination and 80 were affected before vaccination. The patients admitted in the ICU were 56 (32.6%) and 116 (67.4%) were not admitted in the ICU; among the patient admitted in ICU 42 (45.7%) before vaccination, and 14 (17.5%) were after vaccination, and difference was statistically significant with P- value <0.001. SPO2, steroids given, plasma exchange, oxygen >10 litres given and mechanical ventilation were positively associated with the vaccine received and disease severity with P- value <0.05.

Conclusion

The severe COVID-19 had the worst outcome in the unvaccinated patients in terms of severity. Most partially vaccinated patients got infected before developing immunity; receiving at least one vaccination dose significantly reduced illness severity.

Trends in the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy during the Summers of 2020 (before Mass Vaccination), 2021 (after Primary Mass Vaccination) and 2022 (after Booster Mass Vaccination): A Real-World Nationwide Study Based on a Population of 58.85 Million People

Like all RNA viruses, SARS-CoV-2 shows a high mutation rate, which has led to the emergence of new variants. Among them, Gamma and Delta developed at the turn of 2020-2021 in Amazonas and India, two ecoregions characterized by hot-humid weather, very similar to that of the summer season in Italy due to climate change, the first Western country to be hit hard by COVID-19 and to experience lockdown restrictions in a democratic framework of 58.85 million people. The aim of our research has been to evaluate the impact of climate on the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy during the summers of 2020 (before mass vaccination), 2021 (after primary mass vaccination) and 2022 (after booster mass vaccination), also taking into account the emergence of these two variants.

METHODS

During the state of national health emergency and the Draghi government, the Civil Defense Department released the aggregate data coming from the Ministry of Health, the Higher Institute of Health, the Independent Provinces and the Italian Regions daily, in order to inform about the pandemic situation in Italy. Among these data there were the number of deaths, hospitalizations in intensive care units (ICU), non-ICU patients, contagions and performed swabs. By means of a team effort, we have collected and elaborated all these data, comparing the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy during the summers of 2020 (following the nationwide lockdown), 2021 and 2022.

RESULTS

from the summer of 2020 to the summers of 2021 and 2022 all pandemic trend indicators have shown a sharp worsening in Italy. COVID-19 deaths increased by ≈298% and ≈834%, ICU hospitalizations by ≈386% and ≈310%, non-ICU hospitalizations by ≈224% and ≈600%, contagions by ≈627% and ≈6850% (i.e., ≈68.50 times), swabs by ≈354% and ≈370%, and the mean positivity rate passed from ≈1% to ≈2% and ≈20%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 can be transmitted in any climate, including areas with hot and humid weather, and the emergence of variants adapted to hot-humid climates may result in summer COVID-19 outbreaks, even in neither tropical nor subtropical countries. Although COVID-19 vaccines can confer cross-protection against newly emerging variants, this cross-immunity is naturally not absolute but limited, considering that vaccine protection wanes significantly after 6 months. It follows that a subject vaccinated at the beginning of the winter will not be completely covered in the height of the summer, and we should not forget the unvaccinated. As a final remark, the long and strict nationwide lockdown made it possible to flatten SARS-CoV-2 circulation and, therefore, its negative impact on Italy during the summer of 2020.

A multi-country analysis of COVID-19 hospitalizations by vaccination status

BACKGROUND

Individuals vaccinated against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), when infected, can still develop disease that requires hospitalization. It remains unclear whether these patients differ from hospitalized unvaccinated patients with regard to presentation, coexisting comorbidities, and outcomes.

METHODS

Here, we use data from an international consortium to study this question and assess whether differences between these groups are context specific. Data from 83,163 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (34,843 vaccinated, 48,320 unvaccinated) from 38 countries were analyzed.

FINDINGS

While typical symptoms were more often reported in unvaccinated patients, comorbidities, including some associated with worse prognosis in previous studies, were more common in vaccinated patients. Considerable between-country variation in both in-hospital fatality risk and vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated difference in this outcome was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings will inform allocation of healthcare resources in future surges as well as design of longer-term international studies to characterize changes in clinical profile of hospitalized COVID-19 patients related to vaccination history.

FUNDING

This work was made possible by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and Wellcome (215091/Z/18/Z, 222410/Z/21/Z, 225288/Z/22/Z, and 220757/Z/20/Z); the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1209135); and the philanthropic support of the donors to the University of Oxford's COVID-19 Research Response Fund (0009109). Additional funders are listed in the "acknowledgments" section.

Safety and efficacy of inhaled interferon-β1a (SNG001) in adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19: a randomized, controlled, phase II trial

Background

With the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants resistant to monoclonal antibody therapies and limited global access to therapeutics, the evaluation of novel therapeutics to prevent progression to severe COVID-19 remains a critical need.

Methods

Safety, clinical and antiviral efficacy of inhaled interferon-β1a (SNG001) were evaluated in a phase II randomized controlled trial on the ACTIV-2/A5401 platform (ClinicalTrials.govNCT04518410). Adult outpatients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 10 days of symptom onset were randomized and initiated either orally inhaled nebulized SNG001 given once daily for 14 days (n = 110) or blinded pooled placebo (n = 110) between February 10 and August 18, 2021.

Findings

The proportion of participants reporting premature treatment discontinuation was 9% among SNG001 and 13% among placebo participants. There were no differences between participants who received SNG001 or placebo in the primary outcomes of treatment emergent Grade 3 or higher adverse events (3.6% and 8.2%, respectively), time to symptom improvement (median 13 and 9 days, respectively), or proportion with unquantifiable nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA at days 3 (28% [26/93] vs. 39% [37/94], respectively), 7 (65% [60/93] vs. 66% [62/94]) and 14 (91% [86/95] vs. 91% [83/81]). There were fewer hospitalizations with SNG001 (n = 1; 1%) compared with placebo (n = 7; 6%), representing an 86% relative risk reduction (p = 0.07). There were no deaths in either arm.

Interpretation

In this trial, SNG001 was safe and associated with a non-statistically significant decrease in hospitalization for COVID-19 pneumonia.

Funding

The ACTIV-2 platform study is funded by the NIH. Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number UM1 AI068634, UM1 AI068636 and UM1 AI106701. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against ICU admission during Omicron surge in Saudi Arabia: a nationwide retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused significant economic damage and forced a slew of limitations to be placed by regulatory bodies worldwide. As the SARS-CoV-2 virus continuously mutates over time, it's crucial to understand how well the vaccines are effective against a new variant.

OBJECTIVES

To measure COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against ICU admission with the Omicron variant in Saudi Arabia regions.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted of vaccinated and non-vaccinated individuals who tested positive during Omicron dominant period (Jan 1, 2020- Jun 11, 2022). We used a Cox proportional hazards model based on calendar time to assess the vaccine's effectiveness while controlling for age and gender.

RESULTS

A total of 14103 individuals who were divided into fully vaccinated included 8388 (59.5%) individuals, partially vaccinated included 1851 (13.5%) individuals, and un-vaccinated included 3864 (27.4%) individuals. Higher age was associated with a higher risk of ICU admission (HR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.04). Three doses are associated with a lower risk of ICU admission compared to the single dose (HR = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.20). By studying the distribution of Omicron infection among different regions, Al-Madinah Al-Monawarah had the highest proportion at 60.23 per 100,000 population (95% CI: 57.05, 63.53). In contrast, Al-jouf had the lowest proportion at 4.51 per 100,000 population (95%CI: 2.891, 6.713). The vaccination status was significantly different in different regions, as the highest proportion of fully vaccinated participants inhabited in Tabouk region, with 71.8% of its cases. Out of all regions, Najran had the highest proportion of ICU admission among Omicron cases with 20% (95% CI: 9.94%, 34.22%). While the lowest rates existed in Riyadh with 0.86% (95%CI: 0.61%, 1.17%).

CONCLUSION

We found that a booster significantly enhanced protection against severe COVID-19. The partially vaccinated and unvaccinated participants were at significantly higher risk of ICU admission when compared to the fully vaccinated participants. Furthermore, in future, it is worth investigating the effectiveness of a booster when other potential factors (e.g., region, comorbidities, etc.) are included, particularly among future variants of COVID-19.

A summary of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) use of a benefit-risk assessment framework during the first year of COVID-19 vaccine administration in the United States

To inform Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) COVID-19 vaccine policy decisions, we developed a benefit-risk assessment framework that directly compared the estimated benefits of COVID-19 vaccination to individuals (e.g., prevention of COVID-19-associated hospitalization) with risks associated with COVID-19 vaccines. This assessment framework originated following the identification of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Janssen COVID-19 vaccination in April 2021. We adapted the benefit-risk assessment framework for use in subsequent policy decisions, including the adverse events of myocarditis and Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) following mRNA and Janssen COVID-19 vaccination respectively, expansion of COVID-19 vaccine approvals or authorizations to new age groups, and use of booster doses. Over the first year of COVID-19 vaccine administration in the United States (December 2020-December 2021), we used the benefit-risk assessment framework to inform seven different ACIP policy decisions. This framework allowed for rapid and direct comparison of the benefits and potential harms of vaccination, which may be helpful in informing other vaccine policy decisions. The assessments were a useful tool for decision-making but required reliable and granular data to stratify analyses and appropriately focus on populations most at risk for a specific adverse event. Additionally, careful decision-making was needed on parameters for data inputs. Sensitivity analyses were used where data were limited or uncertain; adjustments in the methodology were made over time to ensure the assessments remained relevant and applicable to the policy questions under consideration.

Comparison between available early antiviral treatments in outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a real-life study

PURPOSE

To investigate the clinical impact of three available antivirals for early COVID-19 treatment in a large real-life cohort.

METHODS

Between January and October 2022 all outpatients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 referring to IRCCS S. Orsola hospital treated with an early antiviral therapy were enrolled. A comparison between patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NTV/r), molnupiravir (MPV) and remdesivir (RDV) was conducted in term of indications and outcome. To account for differences between treatment groups a propensity score analysis was performed. After estimating the weights, we fitted a survey-weighted Cox regression model with inverse-probability weighting with hospital admission/death versus clinical recovery as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Overall 1342 patients were enrolled, 775 (57.8%), 360 (26.8%) and 207 (15.4%) in MPV, NTV/r and RDV group, respectively. Median age was 73 (59-82) years, male sex was 53.4%. Primary indication was immunosuppression (438, 32.6%), the median time from symptom onset to drug administration was 3 [2-4] days. Overall, clinical recovery was reached in 96.9% of patients, with hospital admission rate of 2.6%. No significant differences were found in clinical recovery nor hospitalization. Cox regression showed a decreased probability of hospital admission/ death among prior vaccinated patients compared with unvaccinated (HR 0.31 [95%CI 0.14-0.70], p = 0.005]). No difference in hospitalization rates in early treatment compared to late treatment were found.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences among MPV, NTV/r and RDV in terms of clinical recovery or hospitalization were found. Patients not vaccinated had a significant increased risk of hospitalization.

Post-recovery impact of the second and third SARS-CoV-2 infection waves on healthcare resource utilization in Lombardy, Italy

The administrative claims database of the Italian region Lombardy, the first in Europe to be hit by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, was employed to evaluate the impact on healthcare resource utilization following recovery from the second (mainly alpha-related variant) and third (delta-related) infection waves. 317,164 individuals recovered from the infection and became negative after the second wave, 271,180 after the third. Of them, 1571 (0.5%) and 1575 (0.6%) died in the first 6 post-negativization months. In the remaining cases (315,593 after the second wave and 269,605 after the third), hospitalizations, attendances to emergency rooms and outpatient visits were compared with those recorded in the same pre-pandemic time periods in 2019. Dispensation of drugs as well as of imaging, and functional and biochemical diagnostic tests were also compared as additional proxies of the healthcare impact of the SARS-CoV-2 infection waves. Following both waves, hospitalizations, attendances at emergency rooms, and outpatient visits were similar in number and rates to the pre-pandemic periods. However, there was an increased dispensation a number of drugs and diagnostic tests, particularly those addressing the cardiorespiratory and blood systems. In a large region such as Lombardy taken as a relevant model because early and severely hit by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the post-COVID burden on healthcare facilities was mildly relevant in cases who recovered from the second and third infection waves regarding such pivotal events as deaths, hospitalizations, and need for emergency room and outpatient visits, but was high regarding the dispensation of some drug classes and types of diagnostic tests.

Real-world nirmatrelvir-ritonavir outpatient treatment in reducing hospitalization for high-risk patients with COVID-19 during Omicron BA.4, BA.5 and XBB subvariants dominance in Malaysia: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To determine if nirmatrelvir-ritonavir 300mg/100mg treatment for 5 days in high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 symptoms was associated with a reduction in hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and death.

METHODS

This 1:1 propensity score matched cohort study from 647 public health clinics in Malaysia included all patients with COVID-19 with positive tests aged 18 years and older, who were eligible for nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment within 5 days of illness from July 14, 2022, to November 14, 2022. The exposed group was patients with COVID-19 initiated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment, whereas those not initiated with the drug served as the control group. Data was analyzed from July 14, 2022 to December 31, 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 20,966 COVID-19 high-risk outpatients (n = 10,483 for nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and n = 10,483 for control group) were included in the study. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment was associated with a 36% reduction (adjusted hazard ratio 0.64 [95% CI 0.43, 0.94]) in hospitalization compared with those not given the drug. There was a single ICU admission for the control group and one death each was reported in the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and control group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment was associated with reduced hospitalization in high-risk patients with COVID-19 even in highly vaccinated populations.

Evaluation of the Effects of Coronavirus Vaccination Status on Inpatient Demographics and Clinical and Laboratory Data

Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been largely controlled by vaccines. However, a notable increase in COVID-19 infections has been observed among vaccinated individuals. The protection conferred by vaccination remains a topic of ongoing discussion and research. Our study aims to assess the impact of vaccination status on the demographics, clinical presentations, and laboratory characteristics of patients who were admitted to the hospital and subsequently hospitalized for further evaluation and treatment. Methods We examined hospitalized COVID-19 patients in terms of demographics, immunization status, clinical and laboratory findings, and outcomes over a seven-month period during which the delta variant was prevalent. Patients were categorized into three groups based on their vaccination status: unvaccinated (n=1,321, 53.3%), partially vaccinated (n=214, 8.6%), and fully vaccinated (n=944, 38.1%). Data from these patients were compared across groups. Results The study included 2,479 polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The median ages (range) for the unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, and fully vaccinated patients who required hospitalization due to COVID-19 infection were 51 (18-98), 61 (21-91), and 71 (23-99), respectively (p<0.001). White blood cell count, neutrophils, monocytes, platelet count, and inflammatory markers such as erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, and IL-6, as well as fibrinogen and troponin T levels, were observed to be higher in the fully vaccinated patients compared to the unvaccinated and partially vaccinated patients. Clinical follow-ups showed that the intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates, length of hospital stay, and mortality rates were also higher in the fully vaccinated group compared to the other groups. Conclusion Our findings indicate that full vaccination significantly reduces hospitalization rates in younger individuals with average risk. However, patients with high-risk factors, such as advanced age and multiple comorbidities, exhibited higher hospitalization rates, increased need for intensive care, longer hospital stays, elevated inflammatory markers, and higher mortality even when fully vaccinated. It is crucial for elderly patients to receive thorough evaluations during emergency visits and to be provided with early treatment to reduce potential morbidity and mortality.

Reduction in preterm birth among COVID-19-vaccinated pregnant individuals in the United States

BACKGROUND

Most studies investigating preterm birth and COVID-19 vaccination have suggested no difference in preterm birth rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant individuals; however, 1 recent study suggested a protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination on preterm birth rates in Australia.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether a similar association and protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination on preterm birth would be found in our multistate, US cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

A cohort study was conducted using the Vizient Clinical Database, which included data from 192 hospitals in 38 states. Pregnant individuals who delivered between January 2021 and April 2022 were included. Propensity score matching was used to match a "treated" group of pregnant individuals with any COVID-19 vaccination (incomplete or complete vaccination) to a group that had not received any COVID-19 vaccination (the "untreated" group). A complete vaccination series of ≥2 doses of the Moderna or Pfizer vaccines or at least 1 dose of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was considered. An incomplete series was receipt of 1 dose of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine. We examined the association between COVID-19 vaccination status and preterm birth at <28, <34, and <37 weeks of gestation. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for potential confounders, with adjusted odds ratios as the measure of treatment effect.

RESULTS

Matching with replacement was performed for 5749 treated participants. After propensity score matching, there was no difference in maternal demographics of age, race, insurance status, parity, or comorbid conditions. Vaccinated individuals were 26% less likely to deliver at <37 weeks of gestation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.75; P<.001), 37% less likely to deliver at <34 weeks of gestation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.64; P<.001), and 43% less likely to deliver at <28 weeks of gestation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.60; P<0.001) than unvaccinated individuals.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination against COVID-19 may be protective against preterm birth.

Vaccination Status and Trends in Adult Coronavirus Disease 2019-Associated Hospitalizations by Race and Ethnicity: March 2020-August 2022

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine whether race/ethnicity disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes persist in the era of vaccination.

METHODS

Population-based age-adjusted monthly rate ratios (RRs) of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were calculated among adult patients from the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network, March 2020 - August 2022 by race/ethnicity. Among randomly sampled patients July 2021 - August 2022, RRs for hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality were calculated for Hispanic, Black, American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN), and Asian/Pacific Islander (API) persons vs White persons.

RESULTS

Based on data from 353 807 patients, hospitalization rates were higher among Hispanic, Black, and AI/AN vs White persons March 2020 - August 2022, yet the magnitude declined over time (for Hispanic persons, RR = 6.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.5-7.1 in June 2020 vs RR < 2.0 after July 2021; for AI/AN persons, RR = 8.4; 95% CI, 8.2-8.7 in May 2020 vs RR < 2.0 after March 2022; and for Black persons RR = 5.3; 95% CI, 4.6-4.9 in July 2020 vs RR < 2.0 after February 2022; all P ≤ .001). Among 8706 sampled patients July 2021 - August 2022, hospitalization and ICU admission RRs were higher for Hispanic, Black, and AI/AN patients (range for both, 1.4-2.4) and lower for API (range for both, 0.6-0.9) vs White patients. All other race and ethnicity groups had higher in-hospital mortality rates vs White persons (RR range, 1.4-2.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Race/ethnicity disparities in COVID-19-associated hospitalizations declined but persist in the era of vaccination. Developing strategies to ensure equitable access to vaccination and treatment remains important.

Memory B cell development elicited by mRNA booster vaccinations in the elderly

Despite mRNA vaccination, elderly individuals remain especially vulnerable to severe consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here, we compare the memory B cell responses in a cohort of elderly and younger individuals who received mRNA booster vaccinations. Plasma neutralizing potency and breadth were similar between the two groups. By contrast, the absolute number of SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B cells was lower in the elderly. Antibody sequencing revealed that the SARS-CoV-2-specific elderly memory compartments were more clonal and less diverse. Notably, memory antibodies from the elderly preferentially targeted the ACE2-binding site on the RBD, while those from younger individuals targeted less accessible but more conserved epitopes. Nevertheless, individual memory antibodies elicited by booster vaccines in the elderly and younger individuals showed similar levels of neutralizing activity and breadth against SARS-CoV-2 variants. Thus, the relatively diminished protective effects of vaccination against serious disease in the elderly are associated with a smaller number of antigen-specific memory B cells that express altered antibody repertoires.

Clusters of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Across Six Schools for Students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

INTRODUCTION

Individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities are at increased risk for adverse outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019. Clusters of COVID-19 infections can be used to track SARS-CoV-2 transmission. This is particularly important in environments frequently used for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, such as schools. The objective of this study was to compare the number of clusters of student and staff cases identified during three distinct periods (pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron) of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Weekly COVID-19 testing occurred from November 23, 2020 to May 27, 2022 during three phases of the COVID-19 pandemic: pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron. Structured interviews were conducted with positive cases to determine if they contracted COVID-19 in the school environment, and interviews with school administrators responsible for contact tracing determined school-based clusters.

RESULTS

160 cases of COVID-19 were identified and 55 cluster positives were recorded during the study period. 0 (0%) cluster positives were recorded during the pre-Delta variant wave, 3 (5%) cluster positives were recorded during the Delta variant wave, and 52 (95%) cluster positives were recorded during the Omicron variant wave. Additionally, 23 (85%) of all positives during pre-Delta, 12 (50%) of all positives during Delta, 66 (61%) of all positives during Omicron, and 36 (69%) of cluster positives during Omicron did not receive CDC-recommended dosages of the COVID-19 vaccine.

CONCLUSION

The Omicron variant led to an increase in cluster-based transmission, and staying up to date with vaccination guidelines was crucial in limiting transmission.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prior to enrollment, this study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on September 25, 2020 (identifier NCT04565509; titled "Supporting the Health and Well-being of Children with Intellectual and Developmental Disability During COVID-19 Pandemic").

Molecular and Clinical Epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 Infection among Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Individuals in a Large Healthcare Organization from New Jersey

New Jersey was among the first states impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, with one of the highest overall death rates in the nation. Nevertheless, relatively few reports have been published focusing specifically on New Jersey. Here we report on molecular, clinical, and epidemiologic observations, from the largest healthcare network in the state, in a cohort of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We conducted molecular surveillance of SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal swabs collected in nine hospitals from December 2020 through June 2022, using both whole genome sequencing (WGS) and a real-time RT-PCR screening assay targeting spike protein mutations found in variants of concern (VOCs) within our region. De-identified clinical data were obtained retrospectively, including demographics, COVID-19 vaccination status, ICU admission, ventilator support, mortality, and medical history. Statistical analyses were performed to identify associations between SARS-CoV-2 variants, vaccination status, clinical outcomes, and medical risk factors. A total of 5007 SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal swabs were successfully screened and/or sequenced. Variant screening identified three predominant VOCs, including Alpha (n = 714), Delta (n = 1877), and Omicron (n = 1802). Omicron isolates were further sub-typed as BA.1 (n = 899), BA.2 (n = 853), or BA.4/BA.5 (n = 50); the remaining 614 isolates were classified as "Other". Approximately 31.5% (1577/5007) of the samples were associated with vaccine breakthrough infections, which increased in frequency following the emergence of Delta and Omicron. Severe clinical outcomes included ICU admission (336/5007 = 6.7%), ventilator support (236/5007 = 4.7%), and mortality (430/5007 = 8.6%), with increasing age being the most significant contributor to each (p < 0.001). Unvaccinated individuals accounted for 79.7% (268/336) of ICU admissions, 78.3% (185/236) of ventilator cases, and 74.4% (320/430) of deaths. Highly significant (p < 0.001) increases in mortality were observed in individuals with cardiovascular disease, hypertension, cancer, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia, but not with obesity, thyroid disease, or respiratory disease. Significant differences (p < 0.001) in clinical outcomes were also noted between SARS-CoV-2 variants, including Delta, Omicron BA.1, and Omicron BA.2. Vaccination was associated with significantly improved clinical outcomes in our study, despite an increase in breakthrough infections associated with waning immunity, greater antigenic variability, or both. Underlying comorbidities contributed significantly to mortality in both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, with increasing risk based on the total number of comorbidities. Real-time RT-PCR-based screening facilitated timely identification of predominant variants using a minimal number of spike protein mutations, with faster turnaround time and reduced cost compared to WGS. Continued evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants will likely require ongoing surveillance for new VOCs, with real-time assessment of clinical impact.

Unveiling the Impact of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Meta-Analysis of Survival Rates Among Patients in the United States Based on Vaccination Status

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in a significant number of cases and deaths worldwide. Vaccination is the most effective preventive measure against the disease. This study aimed to assess the mortality rates of COVID-19 patients in the United States and the effectiveness of Pfizer (Pfizer, NY, USA), Moderna (Moderna, MA, USA), and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson, NJ, USA) vaccines in preventing mortality. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-2020) guidelines. Eligible studies reporting on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines on patient outcomes were included. The search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases. The data were extracted, and risk ratios (RR) were calculated for mortality outcomes. The analysis was performed using Review Manager software, and bias assessments were conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Meta-Analysis tools. A total of seven studies with 21,618,297 COVID-19 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The odds ratio (OR) for mortality among unvaccinated patients compared to vaccinated patients was 2.46 (95% CI: 1.71-3.53), indicating that unvaccinated patients were 2.46 times more likely to die from COVID-19. The findings of this study support the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in reducing mortality among infected individuals. Unvaccinated patients had a significantly higher risk of mortality compared to vaccinated patients. Vaccination remains a crucial strategy to mitigate the severity of the disease and reduce mortality rates. Efforts should be made to address vaccine hesitancy and ensure widespread vaccine coverage.

Impact of prior SARS-COV-2 infection and vaccination on COVID-19 hospital admission and mortality amongst nursing home residents

BACKGROUND

Nursing home residents (NHRs) have experienced disproportionately high risk of severe outcomes due to COVID-19 infection.

AIM

We investigated the impact of COVID-19 vaccinations and previous SARS-CoV-2 episodes in preventing hospitalization and mortality in NHRs.

METHODS

Retrospective study of a cohort of all NHRs in our area who were alive at the start of the vaccination campaign. The first three doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and prior COVID-19 infections were registered. The main outcomes were hospital admission and mortality during each follow up. Random effects time-varying Cox models adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidities were fitted to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) according to vaccination status.

RESULTS

COVID-19 hospitalization and death rates for unvaccinated NHRs were respectively 2.39 and 1.42 per 10,000 person-days, falling after administration of the second dose (0.37 and 0.34) and rising with the third dose (1.08 and 0.8). Rates were much lower amongst people who had previously had COVID-19. Adjusted HRs indicated a significant decrease in hospital admission amongst those with a two- and three-dose status; those who had had a previous COVID-19 infection had even lower hospital admission rates. Death rates decreased as NHRs received two and three doses, and the probability of death was much lower among those who had previously had the infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of current vaccines against severe COVID-19 disease in NHRs remains high and SARS-CoV-2 episodes prior to vaccination entail a major reduction in hospitalization and mortality rates. The protection conferred by vaccines appears to decline in the following months.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04463706.

Considerations for de-escalating universal masking in healthcare centers

Three years after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, better knowledge on the transmission of respiratory viral infections (RVI) including the contribution of asymptomatic infections encouraged most healthcare centers to implement universal masking. The evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology and improved immunization of the population call for the infection and prevention control community to revisit the masking strategy in healthcare. In this narrative review, we consider factors for de-escalating universal masking in healthcare centers, addressing compliance with the mask policy, local epidemiology, the level of protection provided by medical face masks, the consequences of absenteeism and presenteeism, as well as logistics, costs, and ecological impact. Most current national and international guidelines for mask use are based on the level of community transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Actions are now required to refine future recommendations, such as establishing a list of the most relevant RVI to consider, implement reliable local RVI surveillance, and define thresholds for activating masking strategies. Considering the epidemiological context (measured via sentinel networks or wastewater analysis), and, if not available, considering a time period (winter season) may guide to three gradual levels of masking: (i) standard and transmission-based precautions and respiratory etiquette, (ii) systematic face mask wearing when in direct contact with patients, and (iii) universal masking. Cost-effectiveness analysis of the different strategies is warranted in the coming years. Masking is just one element to be considered along with other preventive measures such as staff and patient immunization, and efficient ventilation.

Longitudinal study of humoral immunity against SARS-CoV-2 of health professionals in Brazil: the impact of booster dose and reinfection on antibody dynamics

Introduction

The pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has had a major impact on health systems. Vaccines have been shown to be effective in improving the clinical outcome of COVID-19, but they are not able to fully prevent infection and reinfection, especially that caused by new variants.

Methods

Here, we tracked for 450 days the humoral immune response and reinfection in 52 healthcare workers from Brazil. Infection and reinfection were confirmed by RT-qPCR, while IgM and IgG antibody levels were monitored by rapid test.

Results

Of the 52 participants, 19 (36%) got reinfected during the follow-up period, all presenting mild symptoms. For all participants, IgM levels dropped sharply, with over 47% of them becoming seronegative by the 60th day. For IgG, 90% of the participants became seropositive within the first 30 days of follow-up. IgG antibodies also dropped after this period reaching the lowest level on day 270 (68.5 ± 72.3, p<0.0001). Booster dose and reinfection increased the levels of both antibodies, with the interaction between them resulting in an increase in IgG levels of 130.3 arbitrary units.

Conclusions

Overall, our data indicate that acquired humoral immunity declines over time and suggests that IgM and IgG antibody levels are not associated with the prevention of reinfection.

Age-related changes in plasma biomarkers and their association with mortality in COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-induced mortality occurs predominantly in older patients. Several immunomodulating therapies seem less beneficial in these patients. The biological substrate behind these observations is unknown. The aim of this study was to obtain insight into the association between ageing, the host response and mortality in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We determined 43 biomarkers reflective of alterations in four pathophysiological domains: endothelial cell and coagulation activation, inflammation and organ damage, and cytokine and chemokine release. We used mediation analysis to associate ageing-driven alterations in the host response with 30-day mortality. Biomarkers associated with both ageing and mortality were validated in an intensive care unit and external cohort.

RESULTS

464 general ward patients with COVID-19 were stratified according to age decades. Increasing age was an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality. Ageing was associated with alterations in each of the host response domains, characterised by greater activation of the endothelium and coagulation system and stronger elevation of inflammation and organ damage markers, which was independent of an increase in age-related comorbidities. Soluble tumour necrosis factor receptor 1, soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 1 and soluble thrombomodulin showed the strongest correlation with ageing and explained part of the ageing-driven increase in 30-day mortality (proportion mediated: 13.0%, 12.9% and 12.6%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Ageing is associated with a strong and broad modification of the host response to COVID-19, and specific immune changes likely contribute to increased mortality in older patients. These results may provide insight into potential age-specific immunomodulatory targets in COVID-19.

MR-proADM as Prognostic Factor of Outcome in COVID-19 Patients

BACKGROUND

Serum mid-regional proadrenomedullin (MR-proADM) has emerged as a marker of organ failure (mainly lungs and kidneys) and poor prognosis in patients admitted to intensive care (IC); some reports also suggest it and other markers, such as Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) and interleukin-6 (IL-6), as a prognostic biomarker of COVID-19. The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance MR-proADM in hospitalized COVID-19 patients for predicting in-hospital mortality and need for non-invasive or invasive respiratory support.

METHODS

We enrolled 74 patients hospitalized in the COVID Unit of Siena Hospital from March to May 2020, for whom serum samples were available on admission for assay of MR-proADM, KL-6 and IL-6. Demographic data, comorbidities, medical history and clinical laboratory data on days 1-3 of admission and Simplified Acute Physiology Score and Simplified Organ Failure Assessment scores calculated at day 1 were collected retrospectively, as well as mortality and IC admission data.

RESULTS

12 patients died in hospital (16%) and 14 patients were admitted to IC (19%). Serum concentrations of MR-proADM on admission and on day 1 were higher among non-survivors than among survivors (p = 0.015 and p = 0.045, respectively), while those on day 3 were not significantly different. Patients needing respiratory support had higher MR-proADM concentrations on admission than the others (p = 0.046), and those requiring invasive mechanical ventilation had higher MR-proADM on day 1 (p = 0.017). Serum concentrations of KL-6 and IL-6 were significantly higher in non-survivors (p = 0.03 and p = 0.004, respectively). ROC curve analysis showed that serum MR-proADM on day 1 had the best accuracy in predicting death and/or IC admission (AUC = 0.9583, p = 0.0006); the combination of all three biomarkers further improved the accuracy of prediction of death or IC admission (AUC = 0.9793; p = 0.00004).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data sustain the potential of serum MR-proADM as a reliable prognostic biomarker of hospitalized COVID-19 patients and confirms the utility of the three markers in the management and risk stratification of hospitalized patients. The markers are collected mini-invasively and are quick to analyze and cost-effective.

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.