Outpatient Antipsychotic Use and Severe COVID-19: Avoiding the Impact of Age in a Real-World Data Study.

BACKGROUND: The association between use of antipsychotics and COVID-19 outcomes is inconsistent, which may be linked to use of these drugs in age-related diseases. Furthermore, there is little evidence regarding their effect in the nongeriatric population. We aim to assess the association between antipsychotic use and risk of disease progression and hospitalization due to COVID-19 among the general population, stratifying by age. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, multiple case-control study to assess risk of hospitalization, with cases being patients with a PCR(+) test who required hospitalization and controls being individuals without a PCR(+) test; and risk of progression to hospitalization, with cases being the same as those used in the hospitalization substudy and controls being nonhospitalized PCR(+) patients. We calculated adjusted odds-ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), both overall and stratified by age. RESULTS: Antipsychotic treatment in patients younger than 65 years was not associated with a higher risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19 (aOR 0.94 [95%CI = 0.69-1.27]) and disease progression among PCR(+) patients (aOR 0.96 [95%CI = 0.70-1.33]). For patients aged 65 years or older, however, there was a significant, increased risk of hospitalization (aOR 1.58 [95% CI = 1.38-1.80]) and disease progression (aOR 1.31 [95% CI = 1.12-1.55]). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our large-scale real-world data study suggest that antipsychotic use is not associated with a greater risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19 and progression to hospitalization among patients younger than 65 years. The effect found in the group aged 65 years or older might be associated with off-label use of antipsychotics.

Impact of prior antihypertensive treatment on COVID-19 outcomes, by active ingredient.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of prior chronic treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/ angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), both as a group and by active ingredient, on severity (risk of hospitalization and mortality), progression of and susceptibility to COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multiple population-based case-control study in Galicia (north-west Spain). The study data were sourced from medical, administrative and clinical databases. We assessed: (1) risk of hospitalization, by selecting all patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 with PCR + as cases, and a random sample of subjects without a PCR + as controls; (2) COVID-19 mortality risk; (3) risk of disease progression; and (4) susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2, considering all patients with PCR + as cases, and the same subjects used in the previous model as controls. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were calculated. RESULTS: ACEIs and ARBs were shown to decrease the risk of hospitalization (aOR = 0.78 [95%CI 0.69-0.89] and aOR = 0.80 [95%CI 0.72-0.90] respectively), risk of mortality (aOR = 0.71 [95%CI 0.52-0.98] and aOR = 0.69 [95%CI 0.52-0.91] respectively), and susceptibility to the virus (aOR = 0.88 [95%CI 0.82-0.94] and aOR = 0.92 [95%CI 0.86-0.97] respectively). By active ingredient: use of enalapril was associated with a significantly lower risk of hospitalization (aOR = 0.72 [95%CI 0.61-0.85]), mortality (aOR = 0.59 [95%CI 0.38-0.92]) and susceptibility to COVID-19 (aOR = 0.86 [95%CI 0.79-0.94]); and use of candesartan was associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization (aOR = 0.76 [95%CI 0.60-0.95]), mortality (aOR = 0.36 [95%CI 0.17-0.75]) and disease progression (aOR = 0.73 [95%CI 0.56-0.95]). CONCLUSION: This large-scale real-world data study suggest that enalapril and candesartan are associated with a considerable reduction in risk of severe COVID19 outcomes.

Outpatient glucocorticoid use and COVID-19 outcomes: a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Owing to controversy information surrounds effect of glucocorticoids on the evolution of COVID-19, we evaluate the effects of outpatient glucocorticoid use on the severity and progression of COVID-19 and risk of infection and analyse the effect of window of exposure and dose. METHODS: We conducted a population-based case - control study, involving 4 substudies: (i) Hospitalisation; (ii) Mortality, using subjects hospitalised with a PCR + as cases and subjects without a PCR + as controls; (iii) Progression, including subjects with a PCR + (hospitalised versus non-hospitalised); and (iv) Susceptibility, with all subjects with a PCR + and subjects without a PCR + . Adjusted odds ratios (ORa) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. RESULTS: The outpatient glucocorticoid use was associated with an increased risk of hospitalisation (aOR 1.79; 95% CI 1.56-2.05), mortality (aOR 2.30; 95% CI 1.68-3.15), progression (aOR 1.69; 95% CI 1.43-2.00) and susceptibility (aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.19-1.41). Furthermore, the effects was observed to be greater at higher doses and the closer that drug use approached the outcome date, with an almost fourfold increase in mortality among users in the previous month (aOR 3.85; 95% CI 2.63-5.62). CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of this real-world data study, outpatient glucocorticoid use should be considered in making decisions about intrahospital treatment.

Impact of prior use of antiplatelets on COVID-19 susceptibility, progression, and severity: a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Hypercoagulability and thromboembolism are processes that arise from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and are responsible for a high degree of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related morbidity and mortality. This study sought to assess the effect of antiplatelet drugs on COVID-19 severity (risk of hospitalization and mortality), susceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, and progression to severe COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a population-based case-control study in a northwestern region of Spain in 2020. The study involved 3060 participants with a positive polymerase chain reaction test who were hospitalized, 26 757 participants with a positive polymerase chain reaction test who were not hospitalized, and 56 785 healthy controls. RESULTS: Triflusal seemed to be associated with a significant increase in risk of hospitalization (aOR, 1.97; 95%CI, 1.27-3.04) and susceptibility to infection (OR, 1.45; 95%CI, 1.07-1.96). It also appeared to lead to a nonsignificant increase in the risk of mortality (OR, 2.23; 95%CI, 0.89-5.55) and/or progression to more severe disease stages (OR, 1.42; 95%CI, 0.8-2.51). Aspirin seemed to be associated with a statistically significant decrease in susceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (OR, 0.92; 95%CI, 0.86-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Triflusal use appears to increase the risk of susceptibility to COVID-19 infection and an even higher risk of hospitalization, whereas the other antiplatelets could be associated with a reduction in the risk of the various outcomes or have no effect on risk. These findings could support reconsideration of triflusal prescription in COVID-19 pandemic situations.

Liquid Biopsies Based on Cell-Free DNA Integrity as a Biomarker for Cancer Diagnosis: A Meta-Analysis.

Liquid biopsies have been identified as a viable source of cancer biomarkers. We aim to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of cell-free DNA integrity (cfDI) in liquid biopsies for cancer. A comprehensive literature search was conducted through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to June 2024. Seventy-two study units from forty-six studies, comprising 4286 cancer patients, were identified and evaluated. The Quality Assessment for Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy-2 (QUADAS-2) was used to assess study quality. Meta-regression analysis was employed to investigate the underlying factors contributing to heterogeneity, alongside an evaluation of publication bias. The bivariate random-effect model was utilized to compute the primary diagnostic outcomes and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios of cfDI in cancer diagnosis were 0.70 and 0.77, 3.26 and 0.34, respectively. The overall area under the curve was 0.84, with a diagnostic odds ratio of 10.63. This meta-analysis suggested that the cfDI index has a promising potential as a non-invasive and accurate diagnostic tool for cancer. Study registration: The study was registered at PROSPERO (reference No. CRD42021276290).

Efecto del nivel socioeconómico sobre la mortalidad en áreas urbanas: revisión crítica y sistemática / Effect of socioeconomic status on mortality in urban areas: a systematic critical review / Efeito do status socioeconômico na mortalidade em áreas urbanas: análise crítica sistemática

Las desigualdades socioeconómicas son una causa de mortalidad y morbilidad superior a la mayoría de factores de riesgo, especialmente en el entorno urbano. Se llevó a cabo una revisión sistemática de la evidencia científica, en la que se incluyó artículos en inglés, castellano, portugués e italiano y se excluyeron estudios de baja evidencia, y en los que no se analizaba la relación entre mortalidad y nivel socioeconómico en un entorno urbano. La selección de artículos se llevó a cabo por dos revisores independientes y la extracción de datos se realizó con tablas de evidencia. Se obtuvieron 1.509 registros y se incluyeron 24. En todos los trabajos se observó mayor mortalidad en las áreas con peores indicadores de privación. Se observó asociación con patologías cardiovasculares en seis estudios, en cuatro con patologías pulmonares y en tres con SIDA, infecciones y parasitosis y cirrosis. Los estudios incluidos presentan resultados poco consistentes y limitaciones metodológicas importantes que impiden la comparación entre estudios y la extracción de conclusiones relevantes.

Socioeconomic inequalities cause more disease and death than most risk factors, especially in cities. This systematic review of the scientific evidence included articles in English, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian and excluded studies with low levels of evidence and those that did not analyze associations between mortality and socioeconomic status in urban settings. Articles were selected by two independent reviewers, and data extraction used evidence tables. A total of 1,509 records were obtained, and 24 were included. All the studies showed higher mortality rates in poorer areas. Six studies showed an association with cardiovascular diseases, four with lung diseases, and three with AIDS, infectious and parasitic diseases, and cirrhosis. The selected studies showed low consistency in the results and important methodological limitations that prevented comparisons between studies or the extraction of relevant conclusions.

As desigualdades socioeconômicas são uma causa de mortalidade e morbidade superior à maioria dos fatores de risco, especialmente no ambiente urbano. Foi realizada uma revisão sistemática da evidência científica, na qual foram incluídos artigos em inglês, espanhol, português e italiano, e da qual foram excluídos estudos de baixa evidência, onde não constava análise da relação entre mortalidade e nível socioeconômico no ambiente urbano. A seleção de artigos foi efetuada por dois revisores independentes e a extração de dados foi feita através de tabelas de evidência. Foram obtidos 1.509 registros e incluídos 24. Em todos os trabalhos, foi observada maior mortalidade nas áreas com os piores indicadores de privação. Observou-se uma associação com patologias cardiovasculares em seis estudos, com patologias pulmonares, em quatro deles, e com a AIDS, infecções, parasitoses e cirrose em três. Os estudos incluídos apresentam resultados pouco consistentes e importantes limitações metodológicas, impedindo a comparação entre estudos e a inferência de conclusões relevantes.