Comparison of safety and efficacy between Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir in the treatment of COVID-19 infection in patients with advanced kidney disease: a retrospective observational study.

Background: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is used in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with normal or mild renal impairment (eGFR ≥30 ml/min per 1.73 m2). There is limited data regarding its use in advanced kidney disease (eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m2). We performed a retrospective territory-wide observational study evaluating the safety and efficacy of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir when compared with molnupiravir in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 with advanced kidney disease. Methods: We adopted target trial emulation using data from a territory-wide electronic health record database on eligible patients aged ≥18 years with advanced kidney disease (history of eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m2) who were infected with COVID-19 and were prescribed with either molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within five days of infection during the period from 16 March 2022 to 31 December 2022. A sequence trial approach and 1:4 propensity score matching was applied based on the baseline covariates including age, sex, number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), hospitalisation, eGFR, renal replacement therapy, comorbidities (cancer, respiratory disease, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, diabetes, hypertension), and drug use (renin-angiotensin-system agents, beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, nitrates, lipid lowering agents, insulins, oral antidiabetic drugs, antiplatelets, immuno-suppressants, corticosteroids, proton pump inhibitors, histamine H2 receptor antagonists, monoclonal antibody infusion) within past 90 days. Individuals were followed up from the index date until the earliest outcome occurrence, death, 90 days from index date or the end of data availability. Stratified Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted with baseline covariates was used to compare the risk of outcomes between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir recipients and molnupiravir recipients which include (i) all-cause mortality, (ii) intensive care unit (ICU) admission, (iii) ventilatory support, (iv) hospitalisation, (v) hepatic impairment, (vi) ischaemic stroke, and (vii) myocardial infarction. Subgroup analyses included age (<70; ≥70 years); sex, Charlson comorbidity index (≤5; >5), and number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received (0-1; ≥2 doses). Findings: A total of 4886 patients were included (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 1462; molnupiravir: 3424). There were 347 events of all-cause mortality (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 74, 5.06%; molnupiravir: 273, 7.97%), 10 events of ICU admission (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 4, 0.27%; molnupiravir: 6, 0.18%), 48 events of ventilatory support (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 13, 0.89%; molnupiravir: 35, 1.02%), 836 events of hospitalisation (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 218, 23.98%; molnupiravir: 618, 28.14%), 1 event of hepatic impairment (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 0, 0%; molnupiravir: 1, 0.03%), 8 events of ischaemic stroke (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 3, 0.22%; molnupiravir: 5, 0.16%) and 9 events of myocardial infarction (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 2, 0.15%; molnupiravir: 7, 0.22%). Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users had lower rates of all-cause mortality (absolute risk reduction (ARR) at 90 days 2.91%, 95% CI: 1.47-4.36%) and hospitalisation (ARR at 90 days 4.16%, 95% CI: 0.81-7.51%) as compared with molnupiravir users. Similar rates of ICU admission (ARR at 90 days -0.09%, 95% CI: -0.4 to 0.2%), ventilatory support (ARR at 90 days 0.13%, 95% CI: -0.45 to 0.72%), hepatic impairment (ARR at 90 days 0.03%, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.09%), ischaemic stroke (ARR at 90 days -0.06%, 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.22%), and myocardial infarction (ARR at 90 days 0.07%, 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.33%) were found between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir users. Consistent results were observed in relative risk adjusted with baseline characteristics. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was associated with significantly reduced risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 0.624, 95% CI: 0.455-0.857) and hospitalisation (HR: 0.782, 95% CI: 0.64-0.954). Interpretation: Patients with COVID-19 with advanced kidney disease receiving nirmatrelvir-ritonavir had a lower rate of all-cause mortality and hospital admission when compared with molnupiravir. Other adverse clinical outcomes were similar in both treatment groups. Funding: Health and Medical Research Fund (COVID1903010), Health Bureau, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.

Insights from a Prospective Follow-up of Thyroid Function and Autoimmunity among COVID-19 Survivors.

BACKGROUND: The occurrence of Graves' disease and Hashimoto thyroiditis after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) raised concerns that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may trigger thyroid autoimmunity. We aimed to address the current uncertainties regarding incident thyroid dysfunction and autoimmunity among COVID-19 survivors. METHODS: We included consecutive adult COVID-19 patients without known thyroid disorders, who were admitted to Queen Mary Hospital from July 21 to September 21, 2020 and had serum levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone, free thyroxine, free triiodothyronine (fT3), and anti-thyroid antibodies measured both on admission and at 3 months. RESULTS: In total, 122 patients were included. Among 20 patients with abnormal thyroid function tests (TFTs) on admission (mostly low fT3), 15 recovered. Among 102 patients with initial normal TFTs, two had new-onset abnormalities that could represent different phases of thyroiditis. Among 104 patients whose anti-thyroid antibody titers were reassessed, we observed increases in anti-thyroid peroxidase (TPO) (P<0.001) and anti-thyroglobulin (P<0.001), but not anti-thyroid stimulating hormone receptor titers (P=0.486). Of 82 patients with negative anti-TPO findings at baseline, 16 had a significant interval increase in anti-TPO titer by >12 U, and four became anti-TPO-positive. Worse baseline clinical severity (P=0.018), elevated C-reactive protein during hospitalization (P=0.033), and higher baseline anti-TPO titer (P=0.005) were associated with a significant increase in anti-TPO titer. CONCLUSION: Most patients with thyroid dysfunction on admission recovered during convalescence. Abnormal TFTs suggestive of thyroiditis occurred during convalescence, but infrequently. Importantly, our novel observation of an increase in anti-thyroid antibody titers post-COVID-19 warrants further follow-up for incident thyroid dysfunction among COVID-19 survivors.

Thyroid Dysfunction in Relation to Immune Profile, Disease Status, and Outcome in 191 Patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related thyroiditis is increasingly recognized. The role of thyroid autoimmunity and SARS-CoV-2 viral load in SARS-CoV-2-related thyroid dysfunction is unclear. We evaluated the thyroid function of a cohort of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, in relation to their clinical features, and biochemical, immunological, and inflammatory markers. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients, without known thyroid disorders, admitted to Queen Mary Hospital for COVID-19 from July 21 to August 21, 2020, were included. Serum levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), free thyroxine, free triiodothyronine (fT3), and antithyroid antibodies were measured on admission. RESULTS: Among 191 patients with COVID-19 (mean age 53.5 ±â€…17.2 years; 51.8% male), 84.3% were mild, 12.6% were moderate, and 3.1% were severe. Abnormal thyroid function was seen in 13.1%. Ten patients had isolated low TSH, suggestive of subclinical thyrotoxicosis due to thyroiditis, although the contribution of autoimmunity was likely in 2 of them. Autoimmune thyroiditis probably also contributed to subclinical hypothyroidism in another patient. Ten patients had isolated low fT3, likely representing nonthyroidal illness syndrome. Lower SARS-Cov-2 polymerase chain reaction cycle threshold values and elevated C-reactive protein were independently associated with occurrence of low TSH (P = .030) and low fT3 (P = .007), respectively. A decreasing trend of fT3 with increasing COVID-19 severity (P = .032) was found. Patients with low fT3 had more adverse COVID-19-related outcomes. CONCLUSION: Around 15% of patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 had thyroid dysfunction. There may be a direct effect of SARS-CoV-2 on thyroid function, potentially leading to exacerbation of pre-existing autoimmune thyroid disease. Low fT3, associated with systemic inflammation, may have a prognostic significance.

A Rapid, Simple, Inexpensive, and Mobile Colorimetric Assay COVID-19-LAMP for Mass On-Site Screening of COVID-19.

To control the COVID-19 pandemic and prevent its resurgence in areas preparing for a return of economic activities, a method for a rapid, simple, and inexpensive point-of-care diagnosis and mass screening is urgently needed. We developed and evaluated a one-step colorimetric reverse-transcriptional loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay (COVID-19-LAMP) for detection of SARS-CoV-2, using SARS-CoV-2 isolate and respiratory samples from patients with COVID-19 (n = 223) and other respiratory virus infections (n = 143). The assay involves simple equipment and techniques and low cost, without the need for expensive qPCR machines, and the result, indicated by color change, is easily interpreted by naked eyes. COVID-19-LAMP can detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA with detection limit of 42 copies/reaction. Of 223 respiratory samples positive for SARS-CoV-2 by qRT-PCR, 212 and 219 were positive by COVID-19-LAMP at 60 and 90 min (sensitivities of 95.07% and 98.21%) respectively, with the highest sensitivities among nasopharyngeal swabs (96.88% and 98.96%), compared to sputum/deep throat saliva samples (94.03% and 97.02%), and throat swab samples (93.33% and 98.33%). None of the 143 samples with other respiratory viruses were positive by COVID-19-LAMP, showing 100% specificity. Samples with higher viral load showed shorter detection time, some as early as 30 min. This inexpensive, highly sensitive and specific COVID-19-LAMP assay can be useful for rapid deployment as mobile diagnostic units to resource-limiting areas for point-of-care diagnosis, and for unlimited high-throughput mass screening at borders to reduce cross-regional transmission.

Gastrointestinal Manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Virus Load in Fecal Samples From a Hong Kong Cohort: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has been characterized by fever, respiratory, and gastrointestinal symptoms as well as shedding of virus RNA into feces. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published gastrointestinal symptoms and detection of virus in stool and also summarized data from a cohort of patients with COVID-19 in Hong Kong. METHODS: We collected data from the cohort of patients with COVID-19 in Hong Kong (N = 59; diagnosis from February 2 through February 29, 2020),and searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and 3 Chinese databases through March 11, 2020, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We analyzed pooled data on the prevalence of overall and individual gastrointestinal symptoms (loss of appetite, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain or discomfort) using a random effects model. RESULTS: Among the 59 patients with COVID-19 in Hong Kong, 15 patients (25.4%) had gastrointestinal symptoms, and 9 patients (15.3%) had stool that tested positive for virus RNA. Stool viral RNA was detected in 38.5% and 8.7% among those with and without diarrhea, respectively (P = .02). The median fecal viral load was 5.1 log10 copies per milliliter in patients with diarrhea vs 3.9 log10 copies per milliliter in patients without diarrhea (P = .06). In a meta-analysis of 60 studies comprising 4243 patients, the pooled prevalence of all gastrointestinal symptoms was 17.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.3-24.5); 11.8% of patients with nonsevere COVID-19 had gastrointestinal symptoms (95% CI, 4.1-29.1), and 17.1% of patients with severe COVID-19 had gastrointestinal symptoms (95% CI, 6.9-36.7). In the meta-analysis, the pooled prevalence of stool samples that were positive for virus RNA was 48.1% (95% CI, 38.3-57.9); of these samples, 70.3% of those collected after loss of virus from respiratory specimens tested positive for the virus (95% CI, 49.6-85.1). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from the Hong Kong cohort of patients with COVID-19 and a meta-analysis of findings from publications, we found that 17.6% of patients with COVID-19 had gastrointestinal symptoms. Virus RNA was detected in stool samples from 48.1% patients, even in stool collected after respiratory samples had negative test results. Health care workers should therefore exercise caution in collecting fecal samples or performing endoscopic procedures in patients with COVID-19, even during patient recovery.