Outpatient remdesivir treatment program for hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019: Patient perceptions, process and economic impact.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is FDA-approved for the treatment of hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. Many patients improve clinically to allow for hospital dismissal before completing the 5-day course. In a prior work, patients who continued remdesivir in an outpatient setting experienced better 28-day clinical outcomes. Here, we assessed patients' perspectives and the economic impact of this outpatient practice. METHODS: Hospitalized patients who received remdesivir for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, from 11/6/2020 to 11/5/2021 and were dismissed to continue remdesivir in the outpatient setting were surveyed. The cost of care was compared between those who remained hospitalized versus those who were dismissed. RESULTS: 93 (19.8 %) among 470 eligible patients responded to the electronic survey. Responders were older than non-responders. The majority (70.5 %) had symptoms resolved by the time of the survey. Ten (11.4 %) patients had persistent symptoms attributed to long COVID-19. The majority were satisfied with the quality of care (82.3 %) and overall experience (76.0 %) in the infusion clinic. After adjusting for gender, comorbidity score, and WHO severity scale, the predicted costs for the groups were $16,544 (inpatient) and $9,097 (outpatient) per patient (difference of $7,447; p < .01). An estimate of 1,077 hospital bed-days were made available to other patients as a result of this transition to outpatient. CONCLUSION: An outpatient remdesivir program that allowed for early dismissal was perceived favorably by patients. The program resulted in significant cost and resource savings, the latter in terms of the availability of hospital beds for other patients needing critical services.

Pro Inflammatory Cytokines Profiles of Patients With Long COVID Differ Between Variant Epochs.

BACKGROUND: Over 30% of patients with COVID-19 have persistent symptoms that last beyond 30 days and referred to as Long COVID. Long COVID has been associated with a persistent elevation in peripheral cytokines including interleukin-6, interleukin-1ß, and tumor necrosis factor-α. This study reports cytokine profiles of patients in our clinic across SARS-COV-2 variant epochs. METHODS: The clinical cytokine panel was analyzed in patients with Long COVID during periods that were stratified according to variant epoch. The 4 variant epochs were defined as: (1) wild-type through alpha, (2) alpha/beta/gamma, (3) delta, and (4) omicron variants. RESULTS: A total of 390 patients had the clinical cytokine panel performed; the median age was 48 years (IQR 38-59) and 62% were female. Distribution by variant was wild-type and alpha, 50% (n = 196); alpha/beta/gamma, 7.9% (n = 31); delta, 18% (n = 72); and omicron, 23% (n = 91). Time to cytokine panel testing was significantly longer for the earlier epochs. Tumor necrosis factor-α (P < .001) and interleukin 1ß (P < .001) were significantly more elevated in the earlier epochs (median of 558 days in wild-type through Alpha epoch vs 263 days in omicron epoch, P < .001)). Nucleocapsid antibodies were consistently detected across epochs. DISCUSSION: When stratified by variant epoch, patients with early epoch Long COVID had persistently elevated peripheral pro-inflammatory cytokine levels when compared to later epoch Long COVID. Patients with Long COVID have similar clusters of symptoms across epochs, suggesting that the underlying pathology is independent of the peripheral cytokine signature.

Longitudinal Progression of Patients with Long COVID Treated in a Post-COVID Clinic: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: In addition to the morbidity and mortality associated with acute infection, COVID-19 has been associated with persistent symptoms (>30 days), often referred to as Long COVID (LC). LC symptoms often cluster into phenotypes, resembling conditions such as fibromyalgia, postural orthostatic tachycardiac syndrome (POTS), and myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). LC clinics have been established to best address the needs of LC patients and continuity of care. We developed a cross-sectional survey to assess treatment response through our LC Clinic (LCC). METHODS: A 25-question survey (1-10 Likert scale) was expert- and content-validated by LCC clinicians, patients, and patient advocates. The survey assessed LC symptoms and the helpfulness of different interventions, including medications and supplements. A total of 852 LCC patients were asked to complete the survey, with 536 (62.9%) responding. RESULTS: The mean time from associated COVID-19 infection to survey completion was 23.2 ± 6.4 months. The mean age of responders was 52.3 ± 14.1 (63% females). Self-reported symptoms were all significantly improved (P < .001) from the initial visit to the LCC (baseline) to the time of the follow-up survey. However, only 4.5% (24/536) of patients rated all symptoms low (1-2) at the time of the survey, indicating low levels of full recovery in our cohort. The patients rated numerous interventions as being helpful, including low-dose naltrexone (45/77; 58%), vagal nerve stimulation (18/34; 53%), and fisetin (28/44; 64%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients report general improvements in symptoms following the initial LCC visit, but complete recovery rates remain low at 23.2 ± 6.4 months.

Outpatient treatment with concomitant vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma for patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19.

Although severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and hospitalization associated with COVID-19 are generally preventable among healthy vaccine recipients, patients with immunosuppression have poor immunogenic responses to COVID-19 vaccines and remain at high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and hospitalization. In addition, monoclonal antibody therapy is limited by the emergence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants that have serially escaped neutralization. In this context, there is interest in understanding the clinical benefit associated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma collected from persons who have been both naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2 and vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 ("vax-plasma"). Thus, we report the clinical outcome of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and who received contemporary COVID-19-specific therapeutics (standard-of-care group) and a subgroup who also received concomitant treatment with very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma (vax-plasma group) with a specific focus on hospitalization rates. The overall hospitalization rate was 2.2% (5 of 225 patients) in the vax-plasma group and 6.2% (10 of 161 patients) in the standard-of-care group, which corresponded to a relative risk reduction of 65% (P = 0.046). Evidence of efficacy in nonvaccinated patients cannot be inferred from these data because 94% (361 of 386 patients) of patients were vaccinated. In vaccinated patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19, the addition of vax-plasma or very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma to COVID-19-specific therapies reduced the risk of disease progression leading to hospitalization.IMPORTANCEAs SARS-CoV-2 evolves, new variants of concern (VOCs) have emerged that evade available anti-spike monoclonal antibodies, particularly among immunosuppressed patients. However, high-titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma continues to be effective against VOCs because of its broad-spectrum immunomodulatory properties. Thus, we report clinical outcomes of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were treated with COVID-19-specific therapeutics and a subgroup also treated with vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma. We found that the administration of vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma was associated with a significantly decreased incidence of hospitalization among immunocompromised COVID-19 outpatients. Our data add to the contemporary data providing evidence to support the clinical utility of high-titer convalescent plasma as antibody replacement therapy in immunocompromised patients.

Comparable outcomes of outpatient remdesivir and sotrovimab among high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 during the omicron BA.1 surge.

Studies conducted prior to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron demonstrated that sotrovimab and remdesivir reduced hospitalization among high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. However, their effectiveness has not been directly compared. This study examined all high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 who received either remdesivir or sotrovimab at Mayo Clinic during the Omicron BA.1 surge from January to March 2022. COVID-19-related hospitalization or death within 28 days were compared between the two treatment groups. Among 3257 patients, 2158 received sotrovimab and 1099 received remdesivir. Patients treated with sotrovimab were younger and had lower comorbidity but were more likely to be immunocompromised than remdesivir-treated patients. The majority (89%) had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19-related hospitalization (1.5% and 1.0% in remdesivir and sotrovimab, respectively, p = .15) and mortality within 28 days (0.4% in both groups, p = .82) were similarly low. A propensity score weighted analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the outcomes between the two groups. We demonstrated favorable outcomes that were not significantly different between patients treated with remdesivir or sotrovimab.

A Pragmatic Study of Cardiovascular Disease During Long-Term COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Many patients diagnosed with COVID-19 have persistent cardiovascular symptoms, but whether this represents a true cardiac process is unclear. This study assessed whether symptoms associated with long COVID among patients referred for cardiovascular evaluation are associated with objective abnormalities on cardiac testing to explain their clinical presentation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 40,462 unique patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at our tertiary referral was conducted and identified 363 patients with persistent cardiovascular symptoms a minimum of 4 weeks after polymerase chain reaction confirmed COVID-19 infection. Patients had no cardiovascular symptoms prior to COVID-19 infection. Each patient was referred for cardiovascular evaluation at a tertiary referral center. The incidence and etiology of abnormalities on cardiovascular testing among patients with long COVID symptoms are reported here. The cohort was subsequently divided into 3 categories based on the dominant circulating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant at the time of initial infection for further analysis. RESULTS: Among 40,462 unique patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at our tertiary referral center from April 2020 to March 2022, 363 (0.9%) patients with long COVID were evaluated by Cardiology for possible cardiac sequelae from COVID and formed the main study cohort. Of these, 229 (63%) were vaccinated and 47 (12.9%) had severe initial infection, receiving inpatient treatment for COVID prior to developing long COVID symptoms. Symptoms were associated with a cardiac cause in 85 (23.4%), of which 52 (14.3%) were attributed to COVID; 39 (10.7%) with new cardiac disease from COVID, and 13 (3.6%) to worsening of pre-existing cardiac disease after COVID infection. The median troponin change in 45 patients with troponin measurements within 4 weeks of acute infection was +4 ng/dL (9 to 13 ng/dL). Among the total cohort with long COVID, 83.7% were diagnosed during the pre-Delta phase, 13.2% during the Delta phase, and 3.1% during the Omicron phase of the pandemic. There were 6 cases of myocarditis, 11 rhythm disorders, 8 cases of pericarditis, 5 suspected cases of endothelial dysfunction, and 33 cases of autonomic dysfunction. CONCLUSION: This pragmatic retrospective cohort study suggests that patients with long COVID referred for cardiovascular evaluation infrequently have new, objective cardiovascular disease to explain their clinical presentation. A multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach is warranted for symptom management along with conservative use of diagnostic testing.

Symptom presentation by phenotype of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome.

Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) presents heterogeneously and is diagnosed when appropriate symptoms are present in conjunction with a heart rate increase of at least 30 beats-per-minute upon standing without orthostatic hypotension. Much of the current understanding of POTS is based on clinical expertise, particularly regarding POTS phenotypes and their potential role in targeting pharmacologic treatment. This study describes the symptom presentation of POTS by phenotypes at a subspecialty POTS clinic. Data was collected prospectively during clinical visits between April 17, 2014 and February 8, 2021. This data was abstracted retrospectively by chart review. Most of the 378 study participants were female (89.9%) with a mean age 23.0 ± 4.9 years. Lightheadedness was the most common (97.6%) symptom and the most disruptive of quality of life (29.9%). Patients reported substantial functional impairment across multiple life domains, with 3.0 ± 2.8 days lost and 4.7 ± 2.3 unproductive days per week. There were no differences in symptom presentation among POTS phenotypes. POTS phenotypes are not distinguishable based on symptoms alone; if phenotyping is sought, testing is necessary. Further research is needed in better classifying POTS phenotypes with the potential goal of tailoring treatment.

Biomarkers of thromboinflammation correlate to COVID-19 infection and admission status in emergency department patients.

Background: COVID-19-associated coagulopathy is incompletely understood. Objectives: To characterize thrombin generation, Von Willebrand Factor (VWF), neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs), and their role in COVID-19 risk stratification in the emergency department (ED). Patients/methods: Plasma samples from 67 ED COVID-19 patients were compared to 38 healthy volunteers (HVs). Thrombin generation (calibrated automated thrombogram, CAT) was expressed as lag time (LT, min), peak height (PH, min), and time to peak (ttPeak, min). Citrullinated nucleosomes and histones were quantified with ELISA, VWF antigen and activity (IU/dL) through latex immunoassay, Factor VIII (IU/dL) through one-stage optical clot detection, and VWF multimers with Western blot densitometry. Wilcoxon testing and multivariable logistic regression were performed. Results presented as median [Q1, Q3]; p < 0.05 significant. Results: COVID-19 patients had longer LT (4.00 [3.26, 4.67]; 2.95 [2.67, 3.10], p < 0.001) and ttPeak (7.33 [6.33, 8.04]; 6.45 [6.00, 7.50], p = 0.004), greater VWF antigen (212 [158, 275]; 110 [91, 128], p < 0.001) and Factor VIII levels (148 [106, 190]; 106 [86, 129], p < 0.001), with decreased high molecular weight multimers (Normalized multimer ratio 0.807 [0.759, 0.869]; 0.891 [0.858, 0.966], p < 0.001), than HVs. COVID-19 patients requiring admission from the ED had longer LT and ttPeak with greater VWF antigen and Factor VIII levels than those not admitted. Two and three variable models of CAT parameters and VWF correlated with COVID-19 and admission status (C-statistics 0.677 to 0.922). Conclusions: Thrombin generation kinetics and VWF levels, independent of NETs, may have a role in predicting admission need for COVID-19 patients.