The Costs of Anonymization: Case Study Using Clinical Data.

BACKGROUND: Sharing data from clinical studies can accelerate scientific progress, improve transparency, and increase the potential for innovation and collaboration. However, privacy concerns remain a barrier to data sharing. Certain concerns, such as reidentification risk, can be addressed through the application of anonymization algorithms, whereby data are altered so that it is no longer reasonably related to a person. Yet, such alterations have the potential to influence the data set's statistical properties, such that the privacy-utility trade-off must be considered. This has been studied in theory, but evidence based on real-world individual-level clinical data is rare, and anonymization has not broadly been adopted in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of anonymization in the real world by comprehensively evaluating the privacy-utility trade-off of differently anonymized data using data and scientific results from the German Chronic Kidney Disease (GCKD) study. METHODS: The GCKD data set extracted for this study consists of 5217 records and 70 variables. A 2-step procedure was followed to determine which variables constituted reidentification risks. To capture a large portion of the risk-utility space, we decided on risk thresholds ranging from 0.02 to 1. The data were then transformed via generalization and suppression, and the anonymization process was varied using a generic and a use case-specific configuration. To assess the utility of the anonymized GCKD data, general-purpose metrics (ie, data granularity and entropy), as well as use case-specific metrics (ie, reproducibility), were applied. Reproducibility was assessed by measuring the overlap of the 95% CI lengths between anonymized and original results. RESULTS: Reproducibility measured by 95% CI overlap was higher than utility obtained from general-purpose metrics. For example, granularity varied between 68.2% and 87.6%, and entropy varied between 25.5% and 46.2%, whereas the average 95% CI overlap was above 90% for all risk thresholds applied. A nonoverlapping 95% CI was detected in 6 estimates across all analyses, but the overwhelming majority of estimates exhibited an overlap over 50%. The use case-specific configuration outperformed the generic one in terms of actual utility (ie, reproducibility) at the same level of privacy. CONCLUSIONS: Our results illustrate the challenges that anonymization faces when aiming to support multiple likely and possibly competing uses, while use case-specific anonymization can provide greater utility. This aspect should be taken into account when evaluating the associated costs of anonymized data and attempting to maintain sufficiently high levels of privacy for anonymized data. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00003971; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00003971. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1093/ndt/gfr456.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in chronic kidney disease patients with pre-existing dialysis: description across different pandemic intervals and effect on disease course (mortality).

PURPOSE: Patients suffering from chronic kidney disease (CKD) are in general at high risk for severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) but dialysis-dependency (CKD5D) is poorly understood. We aimed to describe CKD5D patients in the different intervals of the pandemic and to evaluate pre-existing dialysis dependency as a potential risk factor for mortality. METHODS: In this multicentre cohort study, data from German study sites of the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-infected patients (LEOSS) were used. We multiply imputed missing data, performed subsequent analyses in each of the imputed data sets and pooled the results. Cases (CKD5D) and controls (CKD not requiring dialysis) were matched 1:1 by propensity-scoring. Effects on fatal outcome were calculated by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 207 patients suffering from CKD5D and 964 potential controls. Multivariable regression of the whole cohort identified age (> 85 years adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 7.34, 95% CI 2.45-21.99), chronic heart failure (aOR 1.67, 95% CI 1.25-2.23), coronary artery disease (aOR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05-1.89) and active oncological disease (aOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.07-2.80) as risk factors for fatal outcome. Dialysis-dependency was not associated with a fatal outcome-neither in this analysis (aOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75-1.54) nor in the conditional multivariable regression after matching (aOR 1.34, 95% CI 0.70-2.59). CONCLUSIONS: In the present multicentre German cohort, dialysis dependency is not linked to fatal outcome in SARS-CoV-2-infected CKD patients. However, the mortality rate of 26% demonstrates that CKD patients are an extreme vulnerable population, irrespective of pre-existing dialysis-dependency.

Use and effectiveness of remdesivir for the treatment of patients with covid-19 using data from the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (LEOSS): a multicentre cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The use of remdesivir (RDV) as the first drug approved for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains controversial. Based on the Lean European Open Survey on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected patients (LEOSS), we aim to contribute timing-focused complementary real-world insights to its evaluation. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 infected patients between January 2020 and December 2021 treated with RDV were matched 1:1 to controls considering sociodemographics, comorbidities and clinical status. Multiple imputations were used to account for missing data. Effects on fatal outcome were estimated using uni- and multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: We included 9,687 patients. For those starting RDV administration in the complicated phase, Cox regression for fatal outcome showed an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 0.59 (95%CI 0.41-0.83). Positive trends could be obtained for further scenarios: an aHR of 0.51 (95%CI 0.16-1.68) when RDV was initiated in uncomplicated and of 0.76 (95% CI 0.55-1.04) in a critical phase of disease. Patients receiving RDV with concomitant steroids exhibited a further reduction in aHR in both, the complicated (aHR 0.50, 95%CI 0.29-0.88) and critical phase (aHR 0.63, 95%CI 0.39-1.02). CONCLUSION: Our study results elucidate that RDV use, in particular when initiated in the complicated phase and accompanied by steroids is associated with improved mortality. However, given the limitations of non-randomized trials in estimating the magnitude of the benefit of an intervention, further randomized trials focusing on the timing of therapy initiation seem warranted.

Disease severity in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: comparing routine surveillance with cohort data from the LEOSS study in 2020 in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: Studies investigating risk factors for severe COVID-19 often lack information on the representativeness of the study population. Here, we investigate factors associated with severe COVID-19 and compare the representativeness of the dataset to the general population. METHODS: We used data from the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (LEOSS) of hospitalized COVID-19 patients diagnosed in 2020 in Germany to identify associated factors for severe COVID-19, defined as progressing to a critical disease stage or death. To assess the representativeness, we compared the LEOSS cohort to cases of hospitalized patients in the German statutory notification data of the same time period. Descriptive methods and Poisson regression models were used. RESULTS: Overall, 6672 hospitalized patients from LEOSS and 132,943 hospitalized cases from the German statutory notification data were included. In LEOSS, patients above 76 years were less likely represented (34.3% vs. 44.1%). Moreover, mortality was lower (14.3% vs. 21.5%) especially among age groups above 66 years. Factors associated with a severe COVID-19 disease course in LEOSS included increasing age, male sex (adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 1.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.53-1.86), prior stem cell transplantation (aRR 2.27, 95% CI 1.53-3.38), and an elevated C-reactive protein at day of diagnosis (aRR 2.30, 95% CI 2.03-2.62). CONCLUSION: We identified a broad range of factors associated with severe COVID-19 progression. However, the results may be less applicable for persons above 66 years since they experienced lower mortality in the LEOSS dataset compared to the statutory notification data.

Ethical and coordinative challenges in setting up a national cohort study during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.

With the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), global researchers were confronted with major challenges. The German National Pandemic Cohort Network (NAPKON) was launched in fall 2020 to effectively leverage resources and bundle research activities in the fight against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We analyzed the setup phase of NAPKON as an example for multicenter studies in Germany, highlighting challenges and optimization potential in connecting 59 university and nonuniversity study sites. We examined the ethics application process of 121 ethics submissions considering durations, annotations, and outcomes. Study site activation and recruitment processes were investigated and related to the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections. For all initial ethics applications, the median time to a positive ethics vote was less than two weeks and 30 of these study sites (65%) joined NAPKON within less than three weeks each. Electronic instead of postal ethics submission (9.5 days (Q1: 5.75, Q3: 17) vs. 14 days (Q1: 11, Q3: 26), p value = 0.01) and adoption of the primary ethics vote significantly accelerated the ethics application process. Each study center enrolled a median of 37 patients during the 14-month observation period, with large differences depending on the health sector. We found a positive correlation between recruitment performance and COVID-19 incidence as well as hospitalization incidence. Our analysis highlighted the challenges and opportunities of the federated system in Germany. Digital ethics application tools, adoption of a primary ethics vote and standardized formal requirements lead to harmonized and thus faster study initiation processes during a pandemic.

All-cause mortality and disease progression in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with or without antibiotic therapy: an analysis of the LEOSS cohort.

PURPOSE: Reported antibiotic use in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is far higher than the actual rate of reported bacterial co- and superinfection. A better understanding of antibiotic therapy in COVID-19 is necessary. METHODS: 6457 SARS-CoV-2-infected cases, documented from March 18, 2020, until February 16, 2021, in the LEOSS cohort were analyzed. As primary endpoint, the correlation between any antibiotic treatment and all-cause mortality/progression to the next more advanced phase of disease was calculated for adult patients in the complicated phase of disease and procalcitonin (PCT) ≤ 0.5 ng/ml. The analysis took the confounders gender, age, and comorbidities into account. RESULTS: Three thousand, six hundred twenty-seven cases matched all inclusion criteria for analyses. For the primary endpoint, antibiotic treatment was not correlated with lower all-cause mortality or progression to the next more advanced (critical) phase (n = 996) (both p > 0.05). For the secondary endpoints, patients in the uncomplicated phase (n = 1195), regardless of PCT level, had no lower all-cause mortality and did not progress less to the next more advanced (complicated) phase when treated with antibiotics (p > 0.05). Patients in the complicated phase with PCT > 0.5 ng/ml and antibiotic treatment (n = 286) had a significantly increased all-cause mortality (p = 0.029) but no significantly different probability of progression to the critical phase (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this cohort, antibiotics in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients were not associated with positive effects on all-cause mortality or disease progression. Additional studies are needed. Advice of local antibiotic stewardship- (ABS-) teams and local educational campaigns should be sought to improve rational antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients.

Prediction of COVID-19 deterioration in high-risk patients at diagnosis: an early warning score for advanced COVID-19 developed by machine learning.

PURPOSE: While more advanced COVID-19 necessitates medical interventions and hospitalization, patients with mild COVID-19 do not require this. Identifying patients at risk of progressing to advanced COVID-19 might guide treatment decisions, particularly for better prioritizing patients in need for hospitalization. METHODS: We developed a machine learning-based predictor for deriving a clinical score identifying patients with asymptomatic/mild COVID-19 at risk of progressing to advanced COVID-19. Clinical data from SARS-CoV-2 positive patients from the multicenter Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients (LEOSS) were used for discovery (2020-03-16 to 2020-07-14) and validation (data from 2020-07-15 to 2021-02-16). RESULTS: The LEOSS dataset contains 473 baseline patient parameters measured at the first patient contact. After training the predictor model on a training dataset comprising 1233 patients, 20 of the 473 parameters were selected for the predictor model. From the predictor model, we delineated a composite predictive score (SACOV-19, Score for the prediction of an Advanced stage of COVID-19) with eleven variables. In the validation cohort (n = 2264 patients), we observed good prediction performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.73 ± 0.01. Besides temperature, age, body mass index and smoking habit, variables indicating pulmonary involvement (respiration rate, oxygen saturation, dyspnea), inflammation (CRP, LDH, lymphocyte counts), and acute kidney injury at diagnosis were identified. For better interpretability, the predictor was translated into a web interface. CONCLUSION: We present a machine learning-based predictor model and a clinical score for identifying patients at risk of developing advanced COVID-19.

The German National Pandemic Cohort Network (NAPKON): rationale, study design and baseline characteristics.

The German government initiated the Network University Medicine (NUM) in early 2020 to improve national research activities on the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. To this end, 36 German Academic Medical Centers started to collaborate on 13 projects, with the largest being the National Pandemic Cohort Network (NAPKON). The NAPKON's goal is creating the most comprehensive Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cohort in Germany. Within NAPKON, adult and pediatric patients are observed in three complementary cohort platforms (Cross-Sectoral, High-Resolution and Population-Based) from the initial infection until up to three years of follow-up. Study procedures comprise comprehensive clinical and imaging diagnostics, quality-of-life assessment, patient-reported outcomes and biosampling. The three cohort platforms build on four infrastructure core units (Interaction, Biosampling, Epidemiology, and Integration) and collaborations with NUM projects. Key components of the data capture, regulatory, and data privacy are based on the German Centre for Cardiovascular Research. By April 01, 2022, 34 university and 40 non-university hospitals have enrolled 5298 patients with local data quality reviews performed on 4727 (89%). 47% were female, the median age was 52 (IQR 36-62-) and 50 pediatric cases were included. 44% of patients were hospitalized, 15% admitted to an intensive care unit, and 12% of patients deceased while enrolled. 8845 visits with biosampling in 4349 patients were conducted by April 03, 2022. In this overview article, we summarize NAPKON's design, relevant milestones including first study population characteristics, and outline the potential of NAPKON for German and international research activities.Trial registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04768998 . https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04747366 . https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04679584.

[Supra-regional public health actors in Germany-an overview and categorization]. / Überregionale Public-Health-Akteure in Deutschland ­ eine Bestandsaufnahme und Kategorisierung.

BACKGROUND: Public health actors contribute significantly to health protection, promotion, and prevention at the population level. An overview of the public health landscape can facilitate collaboration among the stakeholders and increase transparency of career paths for young professionals. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to develop an overview and category system of supra-regional public health actors in Germany. METHODS: Based on a list of institutional actors that participated in the national conference Future Forum Public Health ("Zukunftsforum Public Health") and a targeted online search by the authors, supra-regional institutions and organizations with a public health focus were identified. All actors were screened independently by ≥ 2 authors. Community-level actors as well as those without a direct public health focus were excluded. Additional actors were identified via a snowballing process. In order to cluster the actors thematically, a category system was formed inductively. RESULTS: Out of a total of 645 screened actors, 307 (47.6%) were included and subsequently assigned to 12 main and 30 subcategories. Professional associations (n = 60) made up the largest category, followed by civil society (n = 49) and state actors (n = 40). In addition to a tabular and graphical overview, an interactive visualization of the actors was created ( www.noeg.org ). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive overview of supra-regional institutional public health actors in Germany and highlights the breadth of the German public health landscape. The results of this work offer new opportunities for collaboration and can support young professionals in their career paths. Building on this work, further research on public health actors is recommended.

Clinical course and predictive risk factors for fatal outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with chronic kidney disease.

PURPOSE: The ongoing pandemic caused by the novel severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has stressed health systems worldwide. Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) seem to be more prone to a severe course of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) due to comorbidities and an altered immune system. The study's aim was to identify factors predicting mortality among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with CKD. METHODS: We analyzed 2817 SARS-CoV-2-infected patients enrolled in the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-infected patients and identified 426 patients with pre-existing CKD. Group comparisons were performed via Chi-squared test. Using univariate and multivariable logistic regression, predictive factors for mortality were identified. RESULTS: Comparative analyses to patients without CKD revealed a higher mortality (140/426, 32.9% versus 354/2391, 14.8%). Higher age could be confirmed as a demographic predictor for mortality in CKD patients (> 85 years compared to 15-65 years, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 6.49, 95% CI 1.27-33.20, p = 0.025). We further identified markedly elevated lactate dehydrogenase (> 2 × upper limit of normal, aOR 23.21, 95% CI 3.66-147.11, p < 0.001), thrombocytopenia (< 120,000/µl, aOR 11.66, 95% CI 2.49-54.70, p = 0.002), anemia (Hb < 10 g/dl, aOR 3.21, 95% CI 1.17-8.82, p = 0.024), and C-reactive protein (≥ 30 mg/l, aOR 3.44, 95% CI 1.13-10.45, p = 0.029) as predictors, while renal replacement therapy was not related to mortality (aOR 1.15, 95% CI 0.68-1.93, p = 0.611). CONCLUSION: The identified predictors include routinely measured and universally available parameters. Their assessment might facilitate risk stratification in this highly vulnerable cohort as early as at initial medical evaluation for SARS-CoV-2.

First results of the "Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients (LEOSS)".

PURPOSE: Knowledge regarding patients' clinical condition at severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection is sparse. Data in the international, multicenter Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients (LEOSS) cohort study may enhance the understanding of COVID-19. METHODS: Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, enrolled in the LEOSS cohort study between March 16, 2020, and May 14, 2020, were analyzed. Associations between baseline characteristics and clinical stages at diagnosis (uncomplicated vs. complicated) were assessed using logistic regression models. RESULTS: We included 2155 patients, 59.7% (1,287/2,155) were male; the most common age category was 66-85 years (39.6%; 500/2,155). The primary COVID-19 diagnosis was made in 35.0% (755/2,155) during complicated clinical stages. A significant univariate association between age; sex; body mass index; smoking; diabetes; cardiovascular, pulmonary, neurological, and kidney diseases; ACE inhibitor therapy; statin intake and an increased risk for complicated clinical stages of COVID-19 at diagnosis was found. Multivariable analysis revealed that advanced age [46-65 years: adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.73, 95% CI 1.25-2.42, p = 0.001; 66-85 years: aOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.36-2.74, p < 0.001; > 85 years: aOR 2.38, 95% CI 1.49-3.81, p < 0.001 vs. individuals aged 26-45 years], male sex (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01-1.50, p = 0.040), cardiovascular disease (aOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.09-1.72, p = 0.007), and diabetes (aOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.04-1.69, p = 0.023) were associated with complicated stages of COVID-19 at diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The LEOSS cohort identified age, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and male sex as risk factors for complicated disease stages at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, thus confirming previous data. Further data regarding outcomes of the natural course of COVID-19 and the influence of treatment are required.

[The COVID-19 Pandemic as an Opportunity and Challenge for Registries in Health Services Research: Lessons Learned from the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients (LEOSS)]. / Die COVID-19 Pandemie als Herausforderung und Chance für Register in der Versorgungsforschung: Erfahrungen aus Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients (LEOSS).

OBJECTIVE: The Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought opportunities and challenges, especially for health services research based on routine data. In this article we will demonstrate this by presenting lessons learned from establishing the currently largest registry in Germany providing a detailed clinical dataset on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected patients: the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients (LEOSS). METHODS: LEOSS is based on a collaborative and integrative research approach with anonymous recruitment and collection of routine data and the early provision of data in an open science context. The only requirement for inclusion was a SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by virological diagnosis. Crucial strategies to successfully realize the project included the dynamic reallocation of available staff and technical resources, an early and direct involvement of data protection experts and the ethics committee as well as the decision for an iterative and dynamic process of improvement and further development. RESULTS: Thanks to the commitment of numerous institutions, a transsectoral and transnational network of currently 133 actively recruiting sites with 7,227 documented cases could be established (status: 18.03.2021). Tools for data exploration on the project website, as well as the partially automated provision of datasets according to use cases with varying requirements, enabled us to utilize the data collected within a short period of time. Data use and access processes were carried out for 97 proposals assigned to 27 different research areas. So far, nine articles have been published in peer-reviewed international journals. CONCLUSION: As a collaborative effort of the whole network, LEOSS developed into a large collection of clinical data on COVID-19 in Germany. Even though in other international projects, much larger data sets could be analysed to investigate specific research questions through direct access to source systems, the uniformly maintained and technically verified documentation standard with many discipline-specific details resulted in a large valuable data set with unique characteristics. The lessons learned while establishing LEOSS during the current pandemic have already created important implications for the design of future registries and for pandemic preparedness and response.

Utility-Preserving Anonymization in a Real-World Scenario: Evidence from the German Chronic Kidney Disease (GCKD) Study.

Data sharing provides benefits in terms of transparency and innovation. Privacy concerns in this context can be addressed by anonymization techniques. In our study, we evaluated anonymization approaches which transform structured data in a real-world scenario of a chronic kidney disease cohort study and checked for replicability of research results via 95% CI overlap in two differently anonymized datasets with different protection degrees. Calculated 95% CI overlapped in both applied anonymization approaches and visual comparison presented similar results. Thus, in our use case scenario, research results were not relevantly impacted by anonymization, which adds to the growing evidence of utility-preserving anonymization techniques.

Consistency as a Data Quality Measure for German Corona Consensus Items Mapped from National Pandemic Cohort Network Data Collections.

BACKGROUND: As a national effort to better understand the current pandemic, three cohorts collect sociodemographic and clinical data from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients from different target populations within the German National Pandemic Cohort Network (NAPKON). Furthermore, the German Corona Consensus Dataset (GECCO) was introduced as a harmonized basic information model for COVID-19 patients in clinical routine. To compare the cohort data with other GECCO-based studies, data items are mapped to GECCO. As mapping from one information model to another is complex, an additional consistency evaluation of the mapped items is recommended to detect possible mapping issues or source data inconsistencies. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this work is to assure high consistency of research data mapped to the GECCO data model. In particular, it aims at identifying contradictions within interdependent GECCO data items of the German national COVID-19 cohorts to allow investigation of possible reasons for identified contradictions. We furthermore aim at enabling other researchers to easily perform data quality evaluation on GECCO-based datasets and adapt to similar data models. METHODS: All suitable data items from each of the three NAPKON cohorts are mapped to the GECCO items. A consistency assessment tool (dqGecco) is implemented, following the design of an existing quality assessment framework, retaining their-defined consistency taxonomies, including logical and empirical contradictions. Results of the assessment are verified independently on the primary data source. RESULTS: Our consistency assessment tool helped in correcting the mapping procedure and reveals remaining contradictory value combinations within COVID-19 symptoms, vital signs, and COVID-19 severity. Consistency rates differ between the different indicators and cohorts ranging from 95.84% up to 100%. CONCLUSION: An efficient and portable tool capable of discovering inconsistencies in the COVID-19 domain has been developed and applied to three different cohorts. As the GECCO dataset is employed in different platforms and studies, the tool can be directly applied there or adapted to similar information models.

Convalescent plasma treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infected high-risk patients: a matched pair analysis to the LEOSS cohort.

Establishing the optimal treatment for COVID-19 patients remains challenging. Specifically, immunocompromised and pre-diseased patients are at high risk for severe disease course and face limited therapeutic options. Convalescent plasma (CP) has been considered as therapeutic approach, but reliable data are lacking, especially for high-risk patients. We performed a retrospective analysis of 55 hospitalized COVID-19 patients from University Hospital Duesseldorf (UKD) at high risk for disease progression, in a substantial proportion due to immunosuppression from cancer, solid organ transplantation, autoimmune disease, dialysis. A matched-pairs analysis (1:4) was performed with 220 patients from the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-infected Patients (LEOSS) who were treated or not treated with CP. Both cohorts had high mortality (UKD 41.8%, LEOSS 34.1%). A matched-pairs analysis showed no significant effect on mortality. CP administration before the formation of pulmonary infiltrates showed the lowest mortality in both cohorts (10%), whereas mortality in the complicated phase was 27.8%. CP administration during the critical phase revealed the highest mortality: UKD 60.9%, LEOSS 48.3%. In our cohort of COVID-19 patients with severe comorbidities CP did not significantly reduce mortality in a retrospective matched-pairs analysis. However, our data supports the concept that a reduction in mortality is achievable by early CP administration.

Hospitalized patients dying with SARS-CoV-2 infection-An analysis of patient characteristics and management in ICU and general ward of the LEOSS registry.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a severe disease with a high need for intensive care treatment and a high mortality rate in hospitalized patients. The objective of this study was to describe and compare the clinical characteristics and the management of patients dying with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the acute medical and intensive care setting. METHODS: Descriptive analysis of dying patients enrolled in the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients (LEOSS), a non-interventional cohort study, between March 18 and November 18, 2020. Symptoms, comorbidities and management of patients, including palliative care involvement, were compared between general ward and intensive care unit (ICU) by univariate analysis. RESULTS: 580/4310 (13%) SARS-CoV-2 infected patients died. Among 580 patients 67% were treated on ICU and 33% on a general ward. The spectrum of comorbidities and symptoms was broad with more comorbidities (≥ four comorbidities: 52% versus 25%) and a higher age distribution (>65 years: 98% versus 70%) in patients on the general ward. 69% of patients were in an at least complicated phase at diagnosis of the SARS-CoV-2 infection with a higher proportion of patients in a critical phase or dying the day of diagnosis treated on ICU (36% versus 11%). While most patients admitted to ICU came from home (71%), patients treated on the general ward came likewise from home and nursing home (44% respectively) and were more frequently on palliative care before admission (29% versus 7%). A palliative care team was involved in dying patients in 15%. Personal contacts were limited but more often documented in patients treated on ICU (68% versus 47%). CONCLUSION: Patients dying with SARS-CoV-2 infection suffer from high symptom burden and often deteriorate early with a demand for ICU treatment. Therefor a demand for palliative care expertise with early involvement seems to exist.

Specific Risk Factors for Fatal Outcome in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: Results from a European Multicenter Study.

(1) Background: The aim of our study was to identify specific risk factors for fatal outcome in critically ill COVID-19 patients. (2) Methods: Our data set consisted of 840 patients enclosed in the LEOSS registry. Using lasso regression for variable selection, a multifactorial logistic regression model was fitted to the response variable survival. Specific risk factors and their odds ratios were derived. A nomogram was developed as a graphical representation of the model. (3) Results: 14 variables were identified as independent factors contributing to the risk of death for critically ill COVID-19 patients: age (OR 1.08, CI 1.06-1.10), cardiovascular disease (OR 1.64, CI 1.06-2.55), pulmonary disease (OR 1.87, CI 1.16-3.03), baseline Statin treatment (0.54, CI 0.33-0.87), oxygen saturation (unit = 1%, OR 0.94, CI 0.92-0.96), leukocytes (unit 1000/µL, OR 1.04, CI 1.01-1.07), lymphocytes (unit 100/µL, OR 0.96, CI 0.94-0.99), platelets (unit 100,000/µL, OR 0.70, CI 0.62-0.80), procalcitonin (unit ng/mL, OR 1.11, CI 1.05-1.18), kidney failure (OR 1.68, CI 1.05-2.70), congestive heart failure (OR 2.62, CI 1.11-6.21), severe liver failure (OR 4.93, CI 1.94-12.52), and a quick SOFA score of 3 (OR 1.78, CI 1.14-2.78). The nomogram graphically displays the importance of these 14 factors for mortality. (4) Conclusions: There are risk factors that are specific to the subpopulation of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Elevated markers of thrombo-inflammatory activation predict outcome in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities and COVID-19 disease: insights from the LEOSS registry.

AIMS: SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with adverse outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. Here, we analyzed whether specific biomarkers predict the clinical course of COVID-19 in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 2147 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection which were included in the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV­2 (LEOSS)-registry from March to June 2020. Clinical data and laboratory values were collected and compared between patients with and without cardiovascular comorbidities in different clinical stages of the disease. Predictors for mortality were calculated using multivariate regression analysis. We show that patients with cardiovascular comorbidities display significantly higher markers of myocardial injury and thrombo-inflammatory activation already in the uncomplicated phase of COVID-19. In multivariate analysis, elevated levels of troponin [OR 1.54; (95% CI 1.22-1.96), p < 0.001)], IL-6 [OR 1.69 (95% CI 1.26-2.27), p < 0.013)], and CRP [OR 1.32; (95% CI 1.1-1.58), p < 0.003)] were predictors of mortality in patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Patients with cardiovascular comorbidities show elevated markers of thrombo-inflammatory activation and myocardial injury, which predict mortality, already in the uncomplicated phase of COVID-19. Starting targeted anti-inflammatory therapy and aggressive anticoagulation already in the uncomplicated phase of the disease might improve outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities. Elevated markers of thrombo-inflammatory activation predict outcome in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities and COVID-19 disease: insights from the LEOSS registry.