Heightened COVID-19 Mortality in People With Severe Mental Illness Persists After Vaccination: A Cohort Study of Greater Manchester Residents

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines in People with Severe Mental Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Prior to the introduction of COVID-19 vaccines, patients with severe mental illness (SMI) were at greater risk of COVID-19-related outcomes than the general population. It is not yet clear whether COVID-19 vaccines have reduced the risk gap. We systematically searched nine international databases and three Chinese databases to identify relevant studies from December 2020 to December 2023 to compare the risk of COVID-19-related outcomes for SMI patients to those without SMI after vaccination. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias analysis were conducted with R software 4.3.0. A total of 11 observational studies were included. Compared with controls, SMI patients were associated with a slightly increased risk of infection (pooled OR = 1.10, 95% CI, 1.03-1.17, I2 = 43.4%), while showing a 2-fold higher risk of hospitalization (pooled OR = 2.66, 95% CI, 1.13-6.22, I2 = 99.6%), even after both groups have received COVID-19 vaccines. Limited evidence suggests a higher mortality risk among SMI patients compared to controls post vaccination, but the findings did not reach statistical significance. SMI patients remain at increased risk compared to their peers in COVID-19-related outcomes even after vaccination. Vaccination appears an effective approach to prevent severe COVID-19 illness in SMI patients, and actions should be taken by healthcare providers to improve vaccination coverage in these vulnerable groups.

Increased COVID-19 mortality in patients with schizophrenia: A retrospective study in Brazil

The risk that COVID-19 poses for mortality risk in individuals with schizophrenia in low- and middle-income countries has only been the subject of a few studies. In this retrospective study, we examined the standardized mortality ratio (SMR), by age group and sex, in a cohort of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia (n = 20,417), with second-generation antipsychotics, in a South Brazilian State database (Paraná-Brazil). We performed a linkage with the Brazilian Mortality Information System database between 2020 and 2021. We also assessed in a logistic regression how clozapine could affect COVID-19 mortality controlling by sex, age, and presence of obesity. A secondary analysis was to compare mortality with SMR due to COVID-19 in individuals with and without obesity. Compared to the State population (8,850,682 individuals), those with schizophrenia had more than two times greater risk of dying from COVID-19 (SMR = 2.21, 95 % CI: 1.90-2.55). Between the ages of 16 and 29, their risk is more than ten times higher than the state population (SMR = 10.18, 95 % CI: 4.73-19.33). Obesity showed an almost twofold risk of dying from COVID-19 in the patient's group (OR = 1.89, 95 % CI: 1.39-2.57). Clozapine was not found as a protector or a risk factor for COVID-19 mortality. In Brazil, a middle-income nation, people with schizophrenia are more likely to die prematurely from COVID-19. The burden of schizophrenia is higher in younger and in patients with obesity.

Deaths with COVID-19 and from all-causes following first-ever SARS-CoV-2 infection in individuals with preexisting mental disorders: A national cohort study from Czechia

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests reduced survival rates following Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in people with preexisting mental disorders, especially psychotic disorders, before the broad introduction of vaccines. It remains unknown whether this elevated mortality risk persisted at later phases of the pandemic and when accounting for the confounding effect of vaccination uptake and clinically recorded physical comorbidities.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We used data from Czech national health registers to identify first-ever serologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections in 5 epochs related to different phases of the pandemic: 1st March 2020 to 30th September 2020, 1st October 2020 to 26th December 2020, 27th December 2020 to 31st March 2021, 1st April 2021 to 31st October 2021, and 1st November 2021 to 29th February 2022. In these people, we ascertained cases of mental disorders using 2 approaches: (1) per the International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10) diagnostic codes for substance use, psychotic, affective, and anxiety disorders; and (2) per ICD-10 diagnostic codes for the above mental disorders coupled with a prescription for anxiolytics/hypnotics/sedatives, antidepressants, antipsychotics, or stimulants per the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification codes. We matched individuals with preexisting mental disorders with counterparts who had no recorded mental disorders on age, sex, month and year of infection, vaccination status, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). We assessed deaths with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and from all-causes in the time period of 28 and 60 days following the infection using stratified Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for matching variables and additional confounders. The number of individuals in matched-cohorts ranged from 1,328 in epoch 1 to 854,079 in epoch 5. The proportion of females ranged from 34.98% in people diagnosed with substance use disorders in epoch 3 to 71.16% in individuals diagnosed and treated with anxiety disorders in epoch 5. The mean age ranged from 40.97 years (standard deviation [SD] = 15.69 years) in individuals diagnosed with substance use disorders in epoch 5 to 56.04 years (SD = 18.37 years) in people diagnosed with psychotic disorders in epoch 2. People diagnosed with or diagnosed and treated for psychotic disorders had a consistently elevated risk of dying with COVID-19 in epochs 2, 3, 4, and 5, with adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) ranging from 1.46 [95% confidence intervals (CIs), 1.18, 1.79] to 1.93 [95% CIs, 1.12, 3.32]. This patient group demonstrated also a consistently elevated risk of all-cause mortality in epochs 2, 3, 4, and 5 (aHR from 1.43 [95% CIs, 1.23, 1.66] to 1.99 [95% CIs, 1.25, 3.16]). The models could not be reliably fit for psychotic disorders in epoch 1. People diagnosed with substance use disorders had an increased risk of all-cause mortality 28 days postinfection in epoch 3, 4, and 5 (aHR from 1.30 [95% CIs, 1.14, 1.47] to 1.59 [95% CIs, 1.19, 2.12]) and 60 days postinfection in epoch 2, 3, 4, and 5 (aHR from 1.22 [95% CIs, 1.08, 1.38] to 1.52 [95% CIs, 1.16, 1.98]). Cases ascertained based on diagnosis of substance use disorders and treatment had increased risk of all-cause mortality in epoch 2, 3, 4, and 5 (aHR from 1.22 [95% CIs, 1.03, 1.43] to 1.91 [95% CIs, 1.25, 2.91]). The models could not be reliably fit for substance use disorders in epoch 1. In contrast to these, people diagnosed with anxiety disorders had a decreased risk of death with COVID-19 in epoch 2, 3, and 5 (aHR from 0.78 [95% CIs, 0.69, 0.88] to 0.89 [95% CIs, 0.81, 0.98]) and all-cause mortality in epoch 2, 3, 4, and 5 (aHR from 0.83 [95% CIs, 0.77, 0.90] to 0.88 [95% CIs, 0.83, 0.93]). People diagnosed and treated for affective disorders had a decreased risk of both death with COVID-19 and from all-causes in epoch 3 (aHR from 0.87 [95% CIs, 0.79, 0.96] to 0.90 [95% CIs, 0.83, 0.99]), but demonstrated broadly null effects in other epochs. Given the unavailability of data on a number of potentially influential confounders, particularly body mass index, tobacco smoking status, and socioeconomic status, part of the detected associations might be due to residual confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

People with preexisting psychotic, and, less robustly, substance use disorders demonstrated a persistently elevated risk of death following SARS-CoV-2 infection throughout the pandemic. While it cannot be ruled out that part of the detected associations is due to residual confounding, this excess mortality cannot be fully explained by lower vaccination uptake and more clinically recorded physical comorbidities in these patient groups.

The anxiety response of patients with severe psychiatric disorders to the recent public health crisis

BACKGROUND

The devastating health, economic, and social consequences of COVID-19 may harm the already vulnerable groups, particularly people with severe psychiatric disorders (SPDs). The present study was conducted to investigate the anxiety response of patients with SPDs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A total of 351 patients with SPDs [Schizophrenia Spectrum (SSD), Bipolar (BD), Major Depressive (MDD), and Obsessive-Compulsive (OCD) Disorders] and healthy controls in Guilan province, Iran, throughout 2021-2022 were included in this cross-sectional analytical study. The anxiety response consisted of four concepts: COVID-19-related anxiety, general health anxiety, anxiety sensitivity, and safety behaviors. We conducted an unstructured interview and provided sociodemographic and clinical information. Also, the participants were asked to complete four self-report measures of the Corona Disease Anxiety Scale, the Anxiety Sensitivity Index-Revised, the Short Health Anxiety Inventory, and the Checklist of Safety Behaviors.

RESULTS

Analysis of variance showed a significant difference between the groups of patients with SPDs and the control group in COVID-19-related anxiety (F = 6.92, p = 0.0001), health anxiety (F = 6.21, p = 0.0001), and safety behaviors (F = 2.52, p = 0.41). No significant difference was observed between them in anxiety sensitivity (F = 1.77, p = 0.134). The Games-Howell test showed that the control group obtained a higher mean than the groups of people with BD (p < 0.0001), SSD (p = 0.033), and OCD (p = 0.003) disorders in COVID-19-related anxiety. The patients with MDD (p = 0.014) and OCD (p = 0.01) had a higher mean score than the control group in health anxiety. Tukey's test showed that the mean of safety behaviors of the control group was significantly higher than the OCD group (p = 0.21). No significant difference was found between the groups of patients with MDD, BD, SSD, and OCD in terms of COVID-19-related anxiety, health anxiety, and safety behaviors.

CONCLUSION

Anxiety response to health crisis is different in groups with SPDs and control group. The findings of this study suggest that although health anxiety is present in many of these patients during the pandemic, their anxiety response to the health crisis may be less than expected. There can be various explanations, such as pre-existing symptoms, low health literacy, and possible co-occurring cognitive impairment. The results of this study have many practical and policy implications in meeting the treatment needs of this group of patients during public health crises and indicate that their needs may not be compatible with the expectations and estimates that health professionals and policymakers already have.

An Overview of Real-World Data Infrastructure for Cancer Research

AIMS

There is increasing interest in the opportunities offered by Real World Data (RWD) to provide evidence where clinical trial data does not exist, but access to appropriate data sources is frequently cited as a barrier to RWD research. This paper discusses current RWD resources and how they can be accessed for cancer research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

There has been significant progress on facilitating RWD access in the last few years across a range of scales, from local hospital research databases, through regional care records and national repositories, to the impact of federated learning approaches on internationally collaborative studies. We use a series of case studies, principally from the UK, to illustrate how RWD can be accessed for research and healthcare improvement at each of these scales.

RESULTS

For each example we discuss infrastructure and governance requirements with the aim of encouraging further work in this space that will help to fill evidence gaps in oncology.

CONCLUSION

There are challenges, but real-world data research across a range of scales is already a reality. Taking advantage of the current generation of data sources requires researchers to carefully define their research question and the scale at which it would be best addressed.

COVID-19-associated mortality in individuals with serious mental disorders in Sweden during the first two years of the pandemic- a population-based register study

BACKGROUND

Reports at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic suggested differences in COVID-19-associated mortality between individuals with serious mental disorders (SMD) and the population at large.

AIM

To compare the pattern of COVID-19-associated mortality in individuals with and without SMD in Sweden over the two main pandemic years.

METHODS

We compared the pattern of COVID-19-associated mortality in individuals with and without SMD in Sweden during 2020 and 2021. For SMD, we included psychotic disorder, bipolar disorder, and severe depression. The analysis was based on summary data from the Swedish Board of Health and Welfare covering the entire adult Swedish population.

RESULTS

The overall relative risk (RR) for experiencing a COVID-19-associated death was 1.66 (CI 1.50-1.83; p < 0.001) for individuals with SMD versus individuals without SMD. The corresponding RRs were 3.25 (CI 2.84-3.71; p < 0.001) for individuals with psychotic disorder, 1.06 (CI 0.88-1.26; p = 0.54) for individuals with bipolar disorder, and 1.03 (CI 0.80-1.32; p = 0.80) for individuals with severe depression. Compared to their respective counterparts in the non-SMD group, in the psychotic disorder and severe depression group, the RR were higher in women than in men. In the bipolar disorder group, the RR was higher in men than in women. The RR of COVID-19-associated death was generally higher in younger individuals with SMD. Individuals with psychosis between 18 and 59 years had the highest RR of COVID-19-associated death with 7.25 (CI 4.54-11.59; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with SMD, and particularly those with psychotic disorders, had a higher risk of COVID-19-associated death than the general population. As this is a pattern also seen with other infections, people with SMD may be similarly vulnerable in future pandemics.

Repurposing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for severity of COVID-19: a population-based study

The World Health Organization has proposed that a search be made for alternatives to vaccines for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, with one such alternative being selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). This study thus sought to assess: the impact of previous treatment with SSRI antidepressants on the severity of COVID-19 (risk of hospitalisation, admission to an intensive care unit [ICU], and mortality), its influence on susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 and progression to severe COVID-19. We conducted a population-based multiple case-control study in a region in the north-west of Spain. Data were sourced from electronic health records. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95%CIs were calculated using multilevel logistic regression. We collected data from a total of 86 602 subjects: 3060 cases PCR+, 26 757 non-hospitalised cases PCR+ and 56 785 controls (without PCR+). Citalopram displayed a statistically significant decrease in the risk of hospitalisation (aOR=0.70; 95% CI 0.49-0.99, p=0.049) and progression to severe COVID-19 (aOR=0.64; 95% CI 0.43-0.96, p=0.032). Paroxetine was associated with a statistically significant decrease in risk of mortality (aOR=0.34; 95% CI 0.12 – 0.94, p=0.039). No class effect was observed for SSRIs overall, nor was any other effect found for the remaining SSRIs. The results of this large-scale, real-world data study indicate that, citalopram, could be a candidate drug for being repurposed as preventive treatment aimed at reducing COVID-19 patients’ risk of progressing to severe stages of the disease.