Comparative Outcomes of Adults Hospitalized With Seasonal Influenza A or B Virus Infection: Application of the 7-Category Ordinal Scale

Effectiveness and safety of azvudine versus nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in adult patients infected with COVID-19 omicron strains: a retrospective study in Beijing

The study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of azvudine versus nirmatrelvir-ritonavir against omicron strains of coronavirus disease 2019 infections and determine their comparative effectiveness. This retrospective study included 716 patients who received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (NR group) or azvudine (FNC group) at Peking Union Medical College Hospital between 1 November 2022 and 27 February 2023. Patients in the FNC group (n = 304) were younger, exhibited less severe symptoms, started antiviral therapy later, received corticosteroids more frequently, and used tocilizumab less frequently than patients in the NR group (n = 412). Within 28 d of therapy, 40 (9.7%) and 20 (6.6%) deaths were in the NR and FNC groups, respectively. No differences were observed between drugs and mortality rates (odds ratio [OR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.40-1.5, P = 0.45), clinical improvement (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.79-1.3, P = 0.38), and clinical progression (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.58-1.8, P = 0.96). More patients in the NR group experienced platelet decline than those in the FNC group (17.6% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.034). This study indicated that the effectiveness and safety of azvudine were comparable to those of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir.

Evaluating the Public Health and Health Economic Impacts of Baloxavir Marboxil and Oseltamivir for Influenza Pandemic Control in China: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Using a Linked Dynamic Transmission-Economic Evaluation Model

BACKGROUND

Pandemic influenza poses a recurring threat to public health. Antiviral drugs are vital in combating influenza pandemics. Baloxavir marboxil (BXM) is a novel agent that provides clinical and public health benefits in influenza treatment.

METHODS

We constructed a linked dynamic transmission-economic evaluation model combining a modified susceptible-exposed-infected-recovered (SEIR) model and a decision tree model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding BXM to oseltamivir in China's influenza pandemic scenario. The cost-effectiveness was evaluated for the general population from the Chinese healthcare system perspective, although the users of BXM and oseltamivir were influenza-infected persons. The SEIR model simulated the transmission dynamics, dividing the population into four compartments: susceptible, exposed, infected, and recovered, while the decision tree model assessed disease severity and costs. We utilized data from clinical trials and observational studies in the literature to parameterize the models. Costs were based on 2021 CN¥ and not discounted due to a short time-frame of one year in the model. One-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also conducted.

RESULTS

The integrated model demonstrated that adding BXM to treatment choices reduced the cumulative incidence of infection from 49.49% to 43.26% and increased quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) by 0.00021 per person compared with oseltamivir alone in the base-case scenario. The intervention also amounted to a positive net monetary benefit of CN¥77.85 per person at the willingness to pay of CN¥80,976 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of these findings, with consistent results across varied key parameters and assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding BXM to treatment choices instead of only treating with oseltamivir for influenza pandemic control in China appears to be cost-effective compared with oseltamivir alone. The dual-agent strategy not only enhances population health outcomes and conserves resources, but also mitigates influenza transmission and alleviates healthcare burden.

Clinical effects of basic nursing combined with psychological intervention on treatment compliance of patients with Influenza-A(H1N1)

Objective

To investigate the effects of basic nursing combined with psychological intervention on treatment compliance, self-care ability, clinical efficacy, lung function and nursing satisfaction of patients with Influenza-A(H1N1).

Method

This was application research. Eighty patients with influenza-A (H1N1) admitted to The First Affiliated Hospital of Hebei North University from January 2020 to December 2022 were included as subjects and randomly divided into the observation group(n=40) and the control group(n=40). Patients in the control group were given routine basic nursing intervention, while those in the observation group were treated with combined psychological intervention in addition to basic nursing. The differences in treatment compliance, self-care ability, clinical efficacy, lung function and nursing satisfaction were compared between the two groups.

Results

After the intervention, the treatment compliance score and the total self-care ability score of the observation group were higher than those of the control group, with statistically significant differences(P<0.05). After treatment, the clinical efficacy of the observation group was significantly higher than that of the control group(P<0.05). Before treatment, no significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of various indexes of lung function, which were better in the observation group than in the control group after treatment(P<0.05).

Conclusion

Basic nursing combined with psychological intervention results in a variety of benefits in the treatment of patients with Influenza-A(H1N1), such as improved treatment compliance and self-care ability, ameliorated lung function, as well as enhanced treatment outcomes and nursing satisfaction, which needs to be promoted in clinical practice.

Evaluating equity-promoting interventions to prevent race-based inequities in influenza outcomes

Importance

Seasonal influenza hospitalizations pose a considerable burden in the United States, with BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color) communities being disproportionately affected.

Objective

To determine and quantify the effects of different types of mitigation strategies on inequities in influenza outcomes (symptomatic infections and hospitalizations).

Design

In this simulation study, we fit a race-stratified agent-based model of influenza transmission to demographic and hospitalization data of the United States.

Participants

We consider five racial-ethnic groups: non-Hispanic White persons, non- Hispanic Black persons, non-Hispanic Asian persons, non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native persons, and Hispanic or Latino persons.

Setting

We tested five idealized equity-promoting interventions to determine their effectiveness in reducing inequity in influenza outcomes. The interventions assumed (i) equalized vaccination rates, (ii) equalized comorbidities, (iii) work-risk distribution proportional to the distribution of the population, (iv) reduced work contacts for all, or (v) a combination of equalizing vaccination rates and comorbidities and reducing work contacts.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Reduction in symptomatic or hospitalization risk ratios, defined as the ratio of the number of symptomatic infections (hospitalizations respectively) in each age- and racial-ethnic group and their corresponding white counterpart. We also evaluated the reduction in the absolute mean number of symptomatic infections or hospitalizations in each age- and racial-ethnic group compared to the fitted scenario (baseline).

Results

Our analysis suggests that symptomatic infections were equalized and reduced (by up to 17% in BIPOC adults aged 18-49) by strategies reducing work contacts or equalizing vaccination rates. Reducing comorbidities resulted in significant decreases in hospitalizations, with a reduction of over 40% in BIPOC groups. All tested interventions reduced the inequity in influenza hospitalizations in all racial-ethnic groups, but interventions reducing comorbidities in marginalized populations were the most effective. Notably, these interventions resulted in better outcomes across all racial-ethnic groups, not only those prioritized by the interventions.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this simulation modeling study, equalizing vaccination rates and reducing number of work contacts (which are relatively simple strategies to implement) reduced the both the inequity in hospitalizations and the absolute number of symptomatic infections and hospitalizations in all age and racial-ethnic groups.

Regional moderate hyperthermia for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 (TherMoCoV study): a randomized controlled trial

Background

To prevent COVID-19 progression, low-cost alternatives that are available to all patients are needed. Diverse forms of thermotherapy have been proposed to prevent progression to severe/critical COVID-19.

Objective

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of local thermotherapy to prevent disease progression in hospitalized adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

Methods

A multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, randomized, adaptive trial is used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of local thermotherapy to prevent disease progression in hospitalized adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Eligible hospitalized adult patients with symptoms of COVID-19 with ≤5 days from symptom onset, meeting criteria for mild or moderate COVID-19, were randomly assigned to the intervention consisting of local thermotherapy via an electric heat pad in the thorax (target temperature range 39.5–42°C) continuously for 90 min, twice daily, for 5 days, or standard care. The main outcome was the proportion of patients who progressed to severe-to-critical COVID-19 or death. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio through a centralized computer-generated sequence of minimization with a random component of 20%. Participants and medical staff were not blinded to the intervention.

Results

One-hundred and five participants (thermotherapy n = 54, control n = 51) with a median age of 53 (IQR: 41–64) years were included for analysis after the early cessation of recruitment due to the closure of all temporal COVID-19 units (target sample size = 274). The primary outcome of disease progression occurred in 31.4% (16/51) of patients in the control group vs. 25.9% (14/54) of those receiving thermotherapy (risk difference = 5.5%; 95%CI: −11.8–22.7, p = 0.54). Thermotherapy was well tolerated with a median total duration of thermotherapy of 900 (IQR: 877.5–900) min. Seven (13.7%) patients in the control group and seven (12.9%) in the thermotherapy group had at least one AE (p = 0.9), none of which were causally attributed to the intervention. No statistically significant differences in serum cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-17, and IFN-γ) were observed between day 5 and baseline among groups.

Conclusion

Local thermotherapy was safe and well-tolerated. A non-statistically significant lower proportion of patients who experienced disease progression was found in the thermotherapy group compared to standard care. Local thermotherapy could be further studied as a strategy to prevent disease progression in ambulatory settings.

Clinical Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT04363541.

Favipiravir in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (PIONEER trial): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial of early intervention versus standard care

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has overwhelmed health services globally. Oral antiviral therapies are licensed worldwide, but indications and efficacy rates vary. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of oral favipiravir in patients hospitalised with COVID-19.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial of oral favipiravir in adult patients who were newly admitted to hospital with proven or suspected COVID-19 across five sites in the UK (n=2), Brazil (n=2) and Mexico (n=1). Using a permuted block design, eligible and consenting participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral favipiravir (1800 mg twice daily for 1 day; 800 mg twice daily for 9 days) plus standard care, or standard care alone. All caregivers and patients were aware of allocation and those analysing data were aware of the treatment groups. The prespecified primary outcome was the time from randomisation to recovery, censored at 28 days, which was assessed using an intention-to-treat approach. Post-hoc analyses were used to assess the efficacy of favipiravir in patients aged younger than 60 years, and in patients aged 60 years and older. The trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04373733.

FINDINGS

Between May 5, 2020 and May 26, 2021, we assessed 503 patients for eligibility, of whom 499 were randomly assigned to favipiravir and standard care (n=251) or standard care alone (n=248). There was no significant difference between those who received favipiravir and standard care, relative to those who received standard care alone in time to recovery in the overall study population (hazard ratio [HR] 1·06 [95% CI 0·89-1·27]; n=499; p=0·52). Post-hoc analyses showed a faster rate of recovery in patients younger than 60 years who received favipiravir and standard care versus those who had standard care alone (HR 1·35 [1·06-1·72]; n=247; p=0·01). 36 serious adverse events were observed in 27 (11%) of 251 patients administered favipiravir and standard care, and 33 events were observed in 27 (11%) of 248 patients receiving standard care alone, with infectious, respiratory, and cardiovascular events being the most numerous. There was no significant between-group difference in serious adverse events per patient (p=0·87).

INTERPRETATION

Favipiravir does not improve clinical outcomes in all patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, however, patients younger than 60 years might have a beneficial clinical response. The indiscriminate use of favipiravir globally should be cautioned, and further high-quality studies of antiviral agents, and their potential treatment combinations, are warranted in COVID-19.

FUNDING

LifeArc and CW+.

Risk factors for in-hospital mortality and secondary bacterial pneumonia among hospitalized adult patients with community-acquired influenza: a large retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Secondary bacterial pneumonia is an important complication of seasonal influenza, but little data is available about impact on death and risk factors. This study identified risk factors for all-cause in-hospital mortality and secondary bacterial pneumonia among hospitalized adult patients with community-acquired influenza.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed at a tertiary teaching hospital in southwest China. The study cohort included all adult hospitalized patients with a laboratory-confirmed, community-acquired influenza virus infection during three consecutive influenza seasons from 2017 to 2020. Cause-specific Cox regression was used to analyze risk factors for mortality and secondary bacterial pneumonia, respectively, accounting for competing events (discharge alive and discharge alive or death without secondary bacterial pneumonia, respectively).

RESULTS

Among 174 patients enrolled in this study, 14.4% developed secondary bacterial pneumonia and 11.5% died during hospitalization. For all-cause in-hospital mortality, time-varying secondary bacterial pneumonia was a direct risk factor of death (cause-specific hazard ratio [csHR] 3.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-9.17); underlying disease indirectly increased death risk through decreasing the hazard of being discharged alive (csHR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39-0.77). For secondary bacterial pneumonia, the final model only confirmed direct risk factors: age ≥ 65 years (csHR 2.90, 95% CI 1.27-6.62), male gender (csHR 3.78, 95% CI 1.12-12.84) and mechanical ventilation on admission (csHR 2.96, 95% CI 1.32-6.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary bacterial pneumonia was a major risk factor for in-hospital mortality among adult hospitalized patients with community-acquired influenza. Prevention strategies for secondary bacterial pneumonia should target elderly male patients and critically ill patients under mechanical ventilation.

Incidence, Severity, and Mortality of Influenza During 2010-2020 in Korea: A Nationwide Study Based on the Population-Based National Health Insurance Service Database

BACKGROUND

The epidemiology of influenza is commonly used to understand and establish relevant health policies for emerging respiratory infections, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, Korea has no confirmed nationwide data on influenza incidence, severity, and mortality rate.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study to obtain epidemic data on influenza at the national level using National Health Insurance claims data during 2010 to 2020. Influenza cases were defined as 90-day timeframe episodes based on all inpatient and outpatient claims data with disease code J09, J10, and J11. Influenza incidence, severity, and mortality rate were calculated, and logistic regressions were performed to assess the associations of demographic characteristics and comorbidity with influenza-related hospitalization, severe illness, and death.

RESULTS

There were 0.4-5.9% influenza cases in the population from 2010 to 2020, with 9.7-18.9%, 0.2-0.9%, and 0.03-0.08% hospitalized, used in the intensive care unit, and dead, respectively. Age-standardized incidence and mortality rates were 424.3-6847.4 and 0.2-1.9 per 100,000 population, respectively. While more than half of the influenza cases occurred in populations aged younger than 20 years, deaths in older than 60 years accounted for more than two-thirds of all deaths.

CONCLUSION

This study provided the simplest but most important statistics regarding Korean influenza epidemics as a reference. These can be used to understand and manage other new acute respiratory diseases, including COVID-19, and establish influenza-related policies.

Clinical characteristics, diagnosis, outcomes and lung microbiome analysis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in the community-acquired pneumonia patients

BACKGROUND

Invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) remains underestimated in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). This study aims to describe clinical features and outcomes of IPA in CAP patients, assess diagnostic performance of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) for IPA and analyse lung microbiome via mNGS data.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included CAP patients from 22 April 2019 to 30 September 2021. Clinical and microbiological data were analysed. Diagnostic performance of mNGS was compared with traditional detection methods. The lung microbiome detected by mNGS was characterised and its association with clinical features was evaluated.

MAIN RESULTS

IPA was diagnosed in 26 (23.4%) of 111 CAP patients. Patients with IPA displayed depressed immunity, higher hospital mortality (30.8% vs 11.8%) and intensive care unit mortality (42.1% vs 17.5%) compared with patients without IPA. The galactomannan (GM) antigen test had the highest sensitivity (57.7%) in detecting the Aspergillus spp, followed by mNGS (42.3%), culture (30.8%) and smear (7.7%). The mNGS, culture and smear had 100% specificity, while GM test had 92.9% specificity. The microbial structure of IPA significantly differed from non-IPA patients (p<0.001; Wilcoxon test). Nineteen different species were significantly correlated with clinical outcomes and laboratory biomarkers, particularly for Streptococcus salivarius, Prevotella timonensis and Human betaherpesvirus 5.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results reveal that patients with Aspergillus infection tend to have a higher early mortality rate. The mNGS may be suggested as a complement to routine microbiological test in diagnosis of patients at risk of Aspergillus infection. The lung microbiota is associated with inflammatory, immune and metabolic conditions of IPA, and thus influences clinical outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of short-wave diathermy treatment for moderate COVID-19 patients: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical study

BACKGROUND

Millions of human beings have suffered in the epidemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but until now the effective treatment methods have been limited.

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of short-wave diathermy (SWD) treatment for moderate COVID-19 patients.

DESIGN

A prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical study.

SETTING

Inpatients Unit of a COVID-19 specialized hospital.

POPULATION

Forty-two patients with moderate COVID-19 were randomly allocated at a 2:1 ratio to two groups: the SWD group and the control group.

METHODS

Participants of the SWD group received SWD treatment, and participants of the control group received placebo SWD treatment for one session per day, 10 minutes per session, for no more than 14 days. Both groups were given standard care treatment. Primary outcome was the rate of clinical improvement according to a seven-category ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes included the rate of computed tomography (CT) improvement and the rate of potential adverse events.

RESULTS

Clinical improvement occurred in 92.6% of patients in the SWD group by day 14 compared with 69.2% of patients in the control group (P=0.001). The Cox model indicated that the SWD group had a higher clinical improvement probability than the control group (hazard ratio: 3.045; 95% CI: 1.391-6.666; P=0.005). Similarly, CT improvement occurred in 85.2% of patients in the SWD group and 46.2% of patients in the control group respectively by day 14 (P=0.001). The Cox model indicated SWD group had a higher CT improvement probability than control group (hazard ratio: 3.720; 95% CI: 1.486-9.311; P=0.005). There was no significant difference in adverse events between the SWD group and the control group (2 of 27 [7.4%] SWD vs. 1 of 13 [7.7%] control, P=1.000), the most frequent of which were headache (1 of 27 [3.7%] SWD vs. 1 of 13 [7.7%] control patients) and dizziness (1 of 27 [3.7%] SWD vs. 0 of 13 [0%] control patients).

CONCLUSIONS

SWD is a valid and reliable adjuvant therapy with a favorable safety profile for moderate COVID-19 patients.

CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT

Clinically relevant information is lacking regarding the efficacy and safety of SWD for patients with COVID-19. This study provides the first evidence that SWD is a promising adjuvant therapy for COVID-19.

Learning in times of stress: Lessons from COVID-19 that will last throughout this century

Systems tend toward inertia until an external pressure pushes them toward change; thus, a situation of crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic represents an opportunity for technological innovation. The prevailing need for treatments and vaccines has impelled innovation in the world of randomized clinical trials (RCT), resorting to ideas that had been floating around for a while. Is this merely a circumstantial phenomenon or are new methods here to stay?

Clinical characteristics and outcomes in hospitalized adult influenza patients: an observational study from Norway 2014-2018

BACKGROUND

Seasonal influenza causes substantial numbers of hospitalizations annually. We have characterized the clinical picture and treatment practice in hospitalized adult influenza patients and assessed whether clinical risk scores on admission or influenza type were associated with severe outcomes.

METHODS

Clinical characteristics and risk scores on admission (CRB65, CRB, SIRS and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [qSOFA]), treatment and severe outcomes (defined as: stay in intensive care unit (ICU), receiving oxygen supplementation or staying ≥5 days in hospital), were recorded in patients hospitalized with influenza at Oslo University Hospital, Norway, between 2014 and 2018.

RESULTS

Among the 156 included patients, 52.6% had influenza A(H3N2), 32.6% influenza B and 12.8% influenza A(H1N1). Median age was 70 years and 59.6% of patients were ≥65 years. Nine (5.8%) of the patients were treated in ICU, 43.0% received oxygen and 47.4% stayed ≥5 days in hospital. Overall, 34.6% of the patients had a high CRB score on admission which was associated with stay in ICU and oxygen supplementation. Multivariate analyses identified age, and pneumonia (46.8%), but not influenza type, to be associated with severe outcomes. Antiviral treatment was given to 37.2% of the patients, while 77.6% received antibiotics. Only 25.5% of patients with influenza B received antiviral therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The influenza patients were mostly elderly, and few patients were treated in ICU. A high CRB score was associated with severe outcomes with possible implications for patient monitoring. Less than 40% of the patients received antiviral therapy, whereas the majority were treated with antibiotics, indicating potential for optimising treatment strategies.

Evaluation of efficacy and safety of Qiangzhu-qinggan formula as an adjunctive therapy in adult patients with severe influenza: study protocol for a randomized parallel placebo-controlled double-blind multicenter trial

Background

Influenza can fall into three categories according to severity: mild influenza, severe influenza, and critical influenza. Severe influenza can result in critical illness and sometimes death particularly in patients with comorbidities, advanced age, or pregnancy. Neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) are the only antiviral drugs in widespread use for influenza. However, the effectiveness of NAIs against severe influenza is uncertain. New effective drugs or regimens are therefore urgently needed. Qiangzhu-qinggan (QZQG) formula has been found to be effective against influenza virus infection during long-term application in China, which lacks support of evidence-based clinical trial till now. This study is designed to assess the efficacy and safety of QZQG formula as an adjuvant therapy in adult patients with severe influenza.

Methods

This protocol is drawn up in accordance with the SPIRIT guidelines and CONSORT Extension for Chinese herbal medicine formulas. This is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial. Two hundred twenty-eight adults with severe influenza are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to QZQG or placebo for 7 days. All participants need to receive 1 day of screening before randomization, 7 days of intervention, and 21 days of observation after randomization. The primary outcome is the proportion of clinical improvement, defined as the proportion of patients who met the criteria of 3 points or less in the seven-category ordinal scale or 2 points or less in National Early Warning Score 2 within 7 days after randomization.

Discussion

This is the first randomized, controlled, parallel, double-blind clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese herbal formula granules as an adjuvant therapy in adult patients with severe influenza. This study aims to redefine the value of traditional Chinese herbal medicines in the treatment of virus-related respiratory infectious diseases and serves as an example of evidence-based clinical trials of other Chinese herbal medicines.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05929-8.

Clinical factors associated with composition of lung microbiota and important taxa predicting clinical prognosis in patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia

Few studies have described the key features and prognostic roles of lung microbiota in patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia (SCAP). We prospectively enrolled consecutive SCAP patients admitted to ICU. Bronchoscopy was performed at bedside within 48 h of ICU admission, and 16S rRNA gene sequencing was applied to the collected bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. The primary outcome was clinical improvements defined as a decrease of 2 categories and above on a 7-category ordinal scale within 14 days following bronchoscopy. Sixty-seven patients were included. Multivariable permutational multivariate analysis of variance found that positive bacteria lab test results had the strongest independent association with lung microbiota (R² = 0.033; P = 0.018), followed by acute kidney injury (AKI; R² = 0.032; P = 0.011) and plasma MIP-1β level (R² = 0.027; P = 0.044). Random forest identified that the families Prevotellaceae, Moraxellaceae, and Staphylococcaceae were the biomarkers related to the positive bacteria lab test results. Multivariable Cox regression showed that the increase in α-diversity and the abundance of the families Prevotellaceae and Actinomycetaceae were associated with clinical improvements. The positive bacteria lab test results, AKI, and plasma MIP-1β level were associated with patients’ lung microbiota composition on ICU admission. The families Prevotellaceae and Actinomycetaceae on admission predicted clinical improvements.

Empirical Assessment of U.S. Coronavirus Disease 2019 Crisis Standards of Care Guidelines

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

OBJECTIVES:

To establish the feasibility of empirically testing crisis standards of care guidelines.

DESIGN:

Retrospective single-center study.

SETTING:

ICUs at a large academic medical center in the United States.

SUBJECTS:

Adult, critically ill patients admitted to ICU, with 27 patients admitted for acute respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 and 37 patients admitted for diagnoses other than coronavirus disease 2019.

INTERVENTIONS:

Review of electronic health record.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:

Many U.S. states released crisis standards of care guidelines with algorithms to allocate scarce healthcare resources during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. We compared state guidelines that represent different approaches to incorporating disease severity and comorbidities: New York, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Colorado. Following each algorithm, we calculated priority scores at the time of ICU admission for a cohort of patients with primary diagnoses of coronavirus disease 2019 and diseases other than coronavirus disease 2019 (n = 64). We assessed discrimination of 28-day mortality by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. We simulated real-time decision-making by applying the triage algorithms to groups of two, five, or 10 patients. For prediction of 28-day mortality by priority scores, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.56, 0.49, 0.53, 0.66, and 0.69 for New York, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Colorado, and raw Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score algorithms, respectively. For groups of five patients, the percentage of decisions made without deferring to a lottery were 1%, 57%, 80%, 88%, and 95% for New York, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Colorado, and raw Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score algorithms, respectively. The percentage of decisions made without lottery was higher in the subcohort without coronavirus disease 2019, compared with the subcohort with coronavirus disease 2019.

CONCLUSIONS:

Inclusion of comorbidities does not consistently improve an algorithm’s performance in predicting 28-day mortality. Crisis standards of care algorithms result in a substantial percentage of tied priority scores. Crisis standards of care algorithms operate differently in cohorts with and without coronavirus disease 2019. This proof-of-principle study demonstrates the feasibility and importance of empirical testing of crisis standards of care guidelines to understand whether they meet their goals.

Hormonal intervention for the treatment of veterans with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization (HITCH): a multicenter, phase 2 randomized controlled trial of best supportive care vs best supportive care plus degarelix: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Therapeutic targeting of host-cell factors required for SARS-CoV-2 entry is an alternative strategy to ameliorate COVID-19 severity. SARS-CoV-2 entry into lung epithelium requires the TMPRSS2 cell surface protease. Pre-clinical and correlative data in humans suggest that anti-androgenic therapies can reduce the expression of TMPRSS2 on lung epithelium. Accordingly, we hypothesize that therapeutic targeting of androgen receptor signaling via degarelix, a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) antagonist, will suppress COVID-19 infection and ameliorate symptom severity.

Methods

This is a randomized phase 2, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial in 198 patients to compare efficacy of degarelix plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care on improving the clinical outcomes of male Veterans who have been hospitalized due to COVID-19. Enrolled patients must have documented infection with SARS-CoV-2 based on a positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction result performed on a nasopharyngeal swab and have a severity of illness of level 3–5 (hospitalized but not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation). Patients stratified by age, history of hypertension, and severity are centrally randomized 2:1 (degarelix: placebo). The composite primary endpoint is mortality, ongoing need for hospitalization, or requirement for mechanical ventilation at 15 after randomization. Important secondary endpoints include time to clinical improvement, inpatient mortality, length of hospitalization, duration of mechanical ventilation, time to achieve a normal temperature, and the maximum severity of COVID-19 illness. Exploratory analyses aim to assess the association of cytokines, viral load, and various comorbidities with outcome. In addition, TMPRSS2 expression in target tissue and development of anti-viral antibodies will also be investigated.

Discussion

In this trial, we repurpose the FDA approved LHRH antagonist degarelix, commonly used for prostate cancer, to suppress TMPRSS2, a host cell surface protease required for SARS-CoV-2 cell entry. The objective is to determine if temporary androgen suppression with a single dose of degarelix improves the clinical outcomes of patients hospitalized due to COVID-19.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04397718. Registered on May 21, 2020

Comparison of clinical characteristics and disease outcome of COVID-19 and seasonal influenza

While several studies have described the clinical course of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), direct comparisons with patients with seasonal influenza are scarce. We compared 166 patients with COVID-19 diagnosed between February 27 and June 14, 2020, and 255 patients with seasonal influenza diagnosed during the 2017-18 season at the same hospital to describe common features and differences in clinical characteristics and course of disease. Patients with COVID-19 were younger (median age [IQR], 59 [45-71] vs 66 [52-77]; P < 0001) and had fewer comorbidities at baseline with a lower mean overall age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (mean [SD], 3.0 [2.6] vs 4.0 [2.7]; P < 0.001) than patients with seasonal influenza. COVID-19 patients had a longer duration of hospitalization (mean [SD], 25.9 days [26.6 days] vs 17.2 days [21.0 days]; P = 0.002), a more frequent need for oxygen therapy (101 [60.8%] vs 103 [40.4%]; P < 0.001) and invasive ventilation (52 [31.3%] vs 32 [12.5%]; P < 0.001) and were more frequently admitted to the intensive care unit (70 [42.2%] vs 51 [20.0%]; P < 0.001) than seasonal influenza patients. Among immunocompromised patients, those in the COVID-19 group had a higher hospital mortality compared to those in the seasonal influenza group (13 [33.3%] vs 8 [11.6%], P = 0.01). In conclusion, we show that COVID-19 patients were younger and had fewer baseline comorbidities than seasonal influenza patients but were at increased risk for severe illness. The high mortality observed in immunocompromised COVID-19 patients emphasizes the importance of protecting these patient groups from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Comparison of clinical characteristics and disease outcome of COVID-19 and seasonal influenza

While several studies have described the clinical course of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), direct comparisons with patients with seasonal influenza are scarce. We compared 166 patients with COVID-19 diagnosed between February 27 and June 14, 2020, and 255 patients with seasonal influenza diagnosed during the 2017-18 season at the same hospital to describe common features and differences in clinical characteristics and course of disease. Patients with COVID-19 were younger (median age [IQR], 59 [45-71] vs 66 [52-77]; P < 0001) and had fewer comorbidities at baseline with a lower mean overall age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (mean [SD], 3.0 [2.6] vs 4.0 [2.7]; P < 0.001) than patients with seasonal influenza. COVID-19 patients had a longer duration of hospitalization (mean [SD], 25.9 days [26.6 days] vs 17.2 days [21.0 days]; P = 0.002), a more frequent need for oxygen therapy (101 [60.8%] vs 103 [40.4%]; P < 0.001) and invasive ventilation (52 [31.3%] vs 32 [12.5%]; P < 0.001) and were more frequently admitted to the intensive care unit (70 [42.2%] vs 51 [20.0%]; P < 0.001) than seasonal influenza patients. Among immunocompromised patients, those in the COVID-19 group had a higher hospital mortality compared to those in the seasonal influenza group (13 [33.3%] vs 8 [11.6%], P = 0.01). In conclusion, we show that COVID-19 patients were younger and had fewer baseline comorbidities than seasonal influenza patients but were at increased risk for severe illness. The high mortality observed in immunocompromised COVID-19 patients emphasizes the importance of protecting these patient groups from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Comparative efficacy assessment of antiviral alone and antiviral-antibiotic combination in prevention of influenza-B infection associated complications

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to compare the efficacy of antiviral drug alone and antiviral-antibiotic combination therapy in prevention of complications associated with influenza B hospitalized patients.

METHOD

Laboratory confirmed influenza B hospitalized patients presented in emergency room after 48 hours of symptoms onset were identified and divided into two groups; Group-1 patients were initiated on Antiviral drug (oseltamivir) alone while Group-2 patients were initiated on Antiviral drug (oseltamivir) in combination with Antibiotic for at least 3 days. Patients were evaluated for different clinical outcomes among both treatment group.

RESULTS

A total of 153 and 131 patients were identified for Group-1 and Group-2, respectively. Clinical outcomes such as secondary bacterial infections (20.9%-vs-9.1%; P = 0.031), need of respiratory support (28.7%-vs-12.9%; P = 0.002), length of hospitalization stay (6.57-vs-4.95 days; P = <0.001), incidences of ICU admission (15.7%-vs-7.6%; P = 0.036), early clinical failure (32.6%-vs-16.1%; P = 0.01), and time to clinical stability (4.83-vs-4.1 days; P = 0.001) were found to be statistically less significant (P-value <0.05) for Group-2 patients.

CONCLUSION

Early initiation of antibiotic therapy in combination with oseltamivir was found to be more efficacious than oseltamivir alone in prevention of influenza B-associated complications especially in high-risk influenza patients.

A retrospective analysis of clinical efficacy of ribavirin in adults hospitalized with severe COVID-19

Introduction

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) swept rapidly throughout the world. So far, no therapeutics have yet proven to be effective. Ribavirin was recommended for the treatment of COVID-19 in China because of its in vitro activity. However, evidence supporting its clinical use with good efficacy is still lacking.

Methods

A total of 208 confirmed severe COVID-19 patients who were hospitalized in Wuhan Union West Campus between 1 February 2020 and 10 March 2020 were enrolled in the retrospective study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the use of ribavirin. The primary endpoint was the time to clinical improvement. The secondary endpoints included mortality, survival time, time to throat swab SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid negative conversion, and the length of hospital stay.

Results

68 patients were treated with ribavirin while 140 not. There were no significant between-group differences in demographic characteristics, baseline laboratory test results, treatment, and distribution of ordinal scale scores at enrollment, except for coexisting diseases especially cancer (ribavirin group vs no ribavirin group, P = 0.01). Treatment with ribavirin was not associated with a difference in the time to clinical improvement (P = 0.48, HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.63–1.25). There were also no significant differences between-group in SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid negative conversion, mortality, survival time, and the length of hospital stay.

Conclusions

In hospitalized adult patients with severe COVID-19, no significant benefit was observed with ribavirin treatment.

Effect of High-Risk Obstructive Sleep Apnea on Clinical Outcomes in Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Cohort Study

Rationale: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an ongoing pandemic, in which obesity, hypertension, and diabetes have been linked to poor outcomes. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with these conditions and may influence the prognosis of adults with COVID-19.

Objectives: To determine the effect of OSA on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Methods: The current prospective observational study was conducted in three hospitals in Istanbul, Turkey from March 10 to June 22, 2020. The participants were categorized as high-risk or low-risk OSA according to the Berlin questionnaire that was administered in the out-patient clinic, in hospital, or shortly after discharge from hospital blinded to the clinical outcomes. A modified high-risk (mHR)–OSA score based on the snoring patterns (intensity and/or frequency), breathing pauses, and morning/daytime sleepiness, without taking obesity and hypertension into account, were used in the regression models.

Results: The primary outcome was the clinical improvement defined as a decline of two categories from admission on a 7-category ordinal scale that ranges from 1 (discharged with normal activity) to 7 (death) on Days 7, 14, 21, and 28, respectively. Secondary outcomes included clinical worsening (an increase of 1 category), need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, and intensive care. In total, 320 eligible patients (median [interquartile range] age, 53.2 [41.3–63.0] yr; 45.9% female) were enrolled. In all, 121 (37.8%) were categorized as known (n = 3) or high-risk OSA (n = 118). According to the modified scoring, 70 (21.9%) had mHR-OSA. Among 242 patients requiring hospitalization, clinical improvement within 2 weeks occurred in 75.4% of the mHR-OSA group compared with 88.4% of the modified low-risk–OSA group (P = 0.014). In multivariate regression analyses, mHR-OSA (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19–0.92) and male sex (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17–0.86) predicted the delayed clinical improvement. In the entire study population (n = 320), including the nonhospitalized patients, mHR-OSA was associated with clinical worsening (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.00–2.39) and with the need for supplemental oxygen (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.06–3.59). Snoring patterns, especially louder snoring, significantly predicted delayed clinical improvement, worsening, need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, and intensive care.

Conclusions: Adults with mHR-OSA in our COVID-19 cohort had poorer clinical outcomes than those with modified low-risk OSA independent of age, sex, and comorbidities. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04363333).

Comparative Effectiveness of Combined Favipiravir and Oseltamivir Therapy Versus Oseltamivir Monotherapy in Critically Ill Patients With Influenza Virus Infection

BACKGROUND

A synergistic effect of combination therapy with favipiravir and oseltamivir has been reported in preclinical models of influenza. However, no data are available on the clinical effectiveness of combination therapy in severe influenza.

METHODS

Data from 2 separate prospective studies of influenza adults were used to compare outcomes between combination and oseltamivir monotherapy. Outcomes included rate of clinical improvement (defined as a decrease of 2 categories on a 7-category ordinal scale) and viral RNA detectability over time. Subhazard ratios (sHRs) were estimated by the Fine and Gray model for competing risks.

RESULTS

In total, 40 patients were treated with combination therapy and 128 with oseltamivir alone. Clinical improvement on day 14 in the combination group was higher than in the monotherapy group (62.5% vs 42.2%; P = .0247). The adjusted sHR for combination therapy was 2.06 (95% confidence interval, 1.30-3.26). The proportion of undetectable viral RNA at day 10 was higher in the combination group than the oseltamivir group (67.5% vs 21.9%; P < .01). No significant differences were observed in mortality or other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Favipiravir and oseltamivir combination therapy may accelerate clinical recovery compared to oseltamivir monotherapy in severe influenza, and this strategy should be formally evaluated in a randomized controlled trial.

Statistical design of Phase II/III clinical trials for testing therapeutic interventions in COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUND

Because of unknown features of the COVID-19 and the complexity of the population affected, standard clinical trial designs on treatments may not be optimal in such patients. We propose two independent clinical trials designs based on careful grouping of patient and outcome measures.

METHODS

Using the World Health Organization ordinal scale on patient status, we classify treatable patients (Stages 3-7) into two risk groups. Patients in Stages 3, 4 and 5 are categorized as the intermediate-risk group, while patients in Stages 6 and 7 are categorized as the high-risk group. To ensure that an intervention, if deemed efficacious, is promptly made available to vulnerable patients, we propose a group sequential design incorporating four factors stratification, two interim analyses, and a toxicity monitoring rule for the intermediate-risk group. The primary response variable (binary variable) is based on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital by the 15^th day. The goal is to detect a significant improvement in this response rate. For the high-risk group, we propose a group sequential design incorporating three factors stratification, and two interim analyses, with no toxicity monitoring. The primary response variable for this design is 30 day mortality, with the goal of detecting a meaningful reduction in mortality rate.

RESULTS

Required sample size and toxicity boundaries are calculated for each scenario. Sample size requirements for designs with interim analyses are marginally greater than ones without. In addition, for both the intermediate-risk group and the high-risk group, the required sample size with two interim analyses is almost identical to analyses with just one interim analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend using a binary outcome with composite endpoints for patients in Stage 3, 4 or 5 with a power of 90% to detect an improvement of 20% in the response rate, and a 30 day mortality rate outcome for those in Stage 6 or 7 with a power of 90% to detect 15% (effect size) reduction in mortality rate. For the intermediate-risk group, two interim analyses for efficacy evaluation along with toxicity monitoring are encouraged. For the high-risk group, two interim analyses without toxicity monitoring is advised.

Statistical design of Phase II/III clinical trials for testing therapeutic interventions in COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUND

Because of unknown features of the COVID-19 and the complexity of the population affected, standard clinical trial designs on treatments may not be optimal in such patients. We propose two independent clinical trials designs based on careful grouping of patient and outcome measures.

METHODS

Using the World Health Organization ordinal scale on patient status, we classify treatable patients (Stages 3-7) into two risk groups. Patients in Stages 3, 4 and 5 are categorized as the intermediate-risk group, while patients in Stages 6 and 7 are categorized as the high-risk group. To ensure that an intervention, if deemed efficacious, is promptly made available to vulnerable patients, we propose a group sequential design incorporating four factors stratification, two interim analyses, and a toxicity monitoring rule for the intermediate-risk group. The primary response variable (binary variable) is based on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital by the 15th day. The goal is to detect a significant improvement in this response rate. For the high-risk group, we propose a group sequential design incorporating three factors stratification, and two interim analyses, with no toxicity monitoring. The primary response variable for this design is 30 day mortality, with the goal of detecting a meaningful reduction in mortality rate.

RESULTS

Required sample size and toxicity boundaries are calculated for each scenario. Sample size requirements for designs with interim analyses are marginally greater than ones without. In addition, for both the intermediate-risk group and the high-risk group, the required sample size with two interim analyses is almost identical to analyses with just one interim analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend using a binary outcome with composite endpoints for patients in Stage 3, 4 or 5 with a power of 90% to detect an improvement of 20% in the response rate, and a 30 day mortality rate outcome for those in Stage 6 or 7 with a power of 90% to detect 15% (effect size) reduction in mortality rate. For the intermediate-risk group, two interim analyses for efficacy evaluation along with toxicity monitoring are encouraged. For the high-risk group, two interim analyses without toxicity monitoring is advised.

Influenza and respiratory syncytial virus infections in the oldest-old continent

SARS-CoV-2 dramatically revealed the sudden impact of respiratory viruses in our lives. Influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections are associated with high rates of morbidity, mortality, and an important burden on healthcare systems worldwide, especially in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to identify severity predictors in the oldest-old admitted with influenza and/or RSV infections. This is a multicenter, retrospective study of all oldest-old patients (≥ 85 years old) admitted for laboratory-confirmed influenza and/or RSV infection in three tertiary hospitals in Portugal, Italy, and Cyprus over two consecutive winter seasons. The outcomes included the following: pneumonia on infection presentation, use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV), and in-hospital death (IHD). The association with possible predictors, including clinical features and type of virus infection, was assessed using uni- and multivariable analyses. A total of 251 oldest-old patients were included in the study. Pneumonia was evident in 32.3% (n = 81). NIV was implemented in 8.8% (n = 22), and IHD occurred in 13.9% (n = 35). Multivariable analyses revealed that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma was associated with pneumonia (OR 1.86; 95% CI 1.02-3.43; p = 0.045). COPD or asthma (OR 4.4; 95% CI 1.67-11.6; p = 0.003), RSV (OR 3.12; 95% CI 1.09-8.92; p = 0.023), and influenza B infections (OR 3.77; 95% CI 1.06-13.5; p = 0.041) were associated with NIV use, respectively, while chronic kidney disease was associated with IHD (OR 2.50; 95% CI 1.14-5.51; p = 0.023). Among the oldest-old, chronic organ failure, such as COPD or asthma, and CKD predicted pneumonia and IHD, respectively, beyond the importance of viral virulence itself. These findings could impact on public health policies, such as fostering influenza immunization campaigns, home-based care programs, and end-of-life care. Filling knowledge gaps is crucial to set priorities and advise on transition model of care that best fits the oldest-old.

Development of an Ordinal Scale Treatment Endpoint for Adults Hospitalized With Influenza

BACKGROUND

An obstacle in influenza therapeutics development is the lack of clinical endpoints, especially in hospitalized patients. A single time-point binary outcome measure is limited by patients' diverse clinical trajectories and low event rates.

METHODS

A 6-point ordinal scale with ascending clinical status severity (scoring: discharged; subacute care; acute care without/with respiratory failure; intensive care unit [ICU]; death) was proposed to study outcomes of adults hospitalized with influenza. Individual patient data from 2 active surveillance cohorts' datasets (2015/2016-2017/2018; Edmonton, Hong Kong) was used for evaluation. The impact of neuraminidase inhibitor (NAI) treatment on longitudinal ordinal outcome changes over 30 days was analyzed using mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression and group-based trajectory models.

RESULTS

Patient (n = 1226) baseline characteristics included age (mean 68.0 years), virus-type (A 78.1%, B 21.9%), respiratory failure (57.2%), ICU admittance (14.4%), and NAI treatment within 5 days of illness (69.2%). Outcomes at 30 days included discharged (75.2%), subacute care (13.7%), acute care (4.5%), and death (6.6%). Two main clinical trajectories were identified, predictive by baseline scoring (mean ± SD, 4.3 ± 0.6 vs 3.5 ± 0.6, P < .001). Improved outcomes with NAI treatment within 5 days were indicated by significantly lower clinical status scores over time (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], .41-.69; P < .001; adjusted OR, 0.62; 95% CI, .50-.77; P < .001, for baseline score, age, and within-patient correlations). In subanalysis, influenza vaccination was also associated with lower scores (adjusted OR, 0.67; 95% CI, .50-.90; P = .007). Analyses of binary endpoints showed insignificant results.

CONCLUSIONS

The ordinal outcome scale is a potentially useful clinical endpoint for influenza therapeutic trials, which could account for the diverse clinical trajectories of hospitalized patients, warranting further development.

Empirical Assessment of COVID-19 Crisis Standards of Care Guidelines

Background

Several states have released Crisis Standards of Care (CSC) guidelines for the allocation of scarce critical care resources. Most guidelines rely on Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores to maximize lives saved, but states have adopted different stances on whether to maximize long-term outcomes (life-years saved) by accounting for patient comorbidities.

Methods

We compared 4 representative state guidelines with varying approaches to comorbidities and analyzed how CSC prioritization correlates with clinical outcomes. We included 27 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs at Brigham and Women's Hospital from March 12 to April 3, 2020. We compared prioritization algorithms from New York, which assigns priority based on SOFA alone; Maryland, which uses SOFA plus severe comorbidities; Pennsylvania, which uses SOFA plus major and severe comorbidities; and Colorado, which uses SOFA plus a modified Charlson comorbidity index.

Results

In pairwise comparisons across all possible pairs, we found that state guidelines frequently resulted in tie-breakers based on age or lottery: New York 100% of the time (100% resolved by lottery), Pennsylvania 86% of the time (18% by lottery), Maryland 93% of the time (35% by lottery), and Colorado: 32% of the time (10% by lottery). The prioritization algorithm with the strongest correlation with 14-day outcomes was Colorado (r_s = -0.483. p = 0.011) followed by Maryland (r_s = -0.394, p =0.042), Pennsylvania (r_s = -0.382, p = 0.049), and New York (r_s = 0). An alternative model using raw SOFA scores alone was moderately correlated with outcomes (r_s = -0.448, p = 0.019).

Conclusions

State guidelines for scarce resource allocation frequently resulted in identical priority scores, requiring tie-breakers based on age or lottery. These findings suggest that state CSC guidelines should be further assessed empirically to understand whether they meet their goals.

Severity and outcomes of influenza-related pneumonia in type A and B strains in China, 2013-2019

Background

Inconsistencies exist regarding the severity of illness caused by different influenza strains. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of hospitalized adults and adolescents with influenza-related pneumonia (Flu-p) from type A and type B strains in China.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed data from Flu-p patients in five hospitals in China from January 2013 to May 2019. Multivariate logistic and Cox regression models were used to assess the effects of influenza virus subtypes on clinical outcomes, and to explore the risk factors of 30-day mortality for Flu-p patients.

Results

In total, 963 laboratory-confirmed influenza A-related pneumonia (FluA-p) and 386 influenza B-related pneumonia (FluB-p) patients were included. Upon adjustment for confounders, multivariate logistic regression models showed that FluA-p was associated with an increased risk of invasive ventilation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.824, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.279–6.414; P <  0.001), admittance to intensive care unit (aOR: 1.630, 95% CI: 1.074–2.473, P = 0.022) and 30-day mortality (aOR: 2.427, 95% CI: 1.568–3.756, P <  0.001) compared to FluB-p. Multivariate Cox regression models confirmed that influenza A virus infection (hazard ratio: 2.637, 95% CI: 1.134–6.131, P = 0.024) was an independent predictor for 30-day mortality in Flu-p patients.

Conclusions

The severity of illness and clinical outcomes of FluA-p patients are more severe than FluB-p. This highlights the importance of identifying the virus strain during the management of severe influenza.

Animal models for the risk assessment of viral pandemic potential

Pandemics affect human lives severely and globally. Experience predicts that there will be a pandemic for sure although the time is unknown. When a viral epidemic breaks out, assessing its pandemic risk is an important part of the process that characterizes genomic property, viral pathogenicity, transmission in animal model, and so forth. In this review, we intend to figure out how a pandemic may occur by looking into the past influenza pandemic events. We discuss interpretations of the experimental evidences resulted from animal model studies and extend implications of viral pandemic potentials and ingredients to emerging viral epidemics. Focusing on the pandemic potential of viral infectious diseases, we suggest what should be assessed to prevent global catastrophes from influenza virus, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, dengue and Zika viruses.

Rapid diagnosis of seasonal Influenza virus and cohorting of hospitalised patients on a 'flu ward'. A prospective analysis of outcomes

BACKGROUND

The influenza season of 2017/2018 was burdensome in comparison to previous years. In patient management of seasonal influenza patients is poorly described.

AIM

To assess the impact of managing influenza patients on a dedicated influenza ward on antimicrobial use and duration, and length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

A prospective cohort study from Jan 1st to Feb 28th 2018. Patients diagnosed with influenza in the Emergency Department (ED) were cohorted under infectious disease (ID) or a general internal medicine (GIM) firms on a 35 bed influenza ward. At times of maximum capacity some patients were managed on other wards by other firms 'non flu ward'.

FINDINGS

91 patients were admitted to the influenza ward from ED (64 ID, 27 GIM), 38 had influenza A. Patients managed by ID were more likely to be switched to oral antibiotics sooner median 3 vs 5 days p=.049. Antibiotic duration was shorter for patients managed by the ID firm median 7 vs 9 days p=.016. LOS was shorter for patients managed by the ID firm on the flu ward vs 'non flu ward', median 5 vs 9 days p=.007. No significant difference was seen between ID and GIM LOS on the flu ward, median 5 vs 7 days p=0.30.

CONCLUSION

Influenza patients managed by an infectious disease service on an influenza ward had reduced length of intravenous (IV) and total antimicrobial use compared to a GIM service and had reduced LOS compared to the standard of care, 'non flu ward' influenza patients.

Predictors of mortality of influenza virus infections in a Swiss Hospital during four influenza seasons: Role of quick sequential organ failure assessment

BACKGROUND

Influenza infections have been associated with high morbidity. The aims were to determine predictors of mortality among patients with influenza infections and to ascertain the role of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) in predicting poor outcomes.

METHODS

All adult patients with influenza infection at the Hospital of Jura, Switzerland during four influenza seasons (2014/15 to 2017/18) were included. Cepheid Xpert Xpress Flu/RSV was used during the first three influenza seasons and Cobas Influenza A/B and RSV during the 2017/18 season.

RESULTS

Among 1684 influenza virus tests performed, 441 patients with influenza infections were included (238 for influenza A virus and 203 for B). The majority of infections were community onset (369; 83.7%). Thirty-day mortality was 6.0% (25 patients). Multivariate analysis revealed that infection due to A virus (P 0.035; OR 7.1; 95% CI 1.1-43.8), malnutrition (P < 0.001; OR 25.0; 95% CI 4.5-138.8), hospital-acquired infection (P 0.003; OR 12.2; 95% CI 2.3-65.1), respiratory insufficiency (PaO₂/FiO₂ < 300) (P < 0.001; OR 125.8; 95% CI 9.6-1648.7) and pulmonary infiltrate on X-ray (P 0.020; OR 6.0; 95% CI 1.3-27.0) were identified as predictors of mortality. qSOFA showed a very good accuracy (0.89) equivalent to other more specific and burdensome scores such as CURB-65 and Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI).

CONCLUSION

qSOFA performed similarly to specific severity scores (PSI, CURB-65) in predicting mortality. Infection by influenza A virus, respiratory insufficiency and malnutrition were associated with worse prognosis.