Plasma steroid concentrations reflect acute disease severity and normalise during recovery in people hospitalised with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Endocrine systems are disrupted in acute illness, and symptoms reported following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are similar to those found with clinical hormone deficiencies. We hypothesised that people with severe acute COVID-19 and with post-COVID symptoms have glucocorticoid and sex hormone deficiencies. DESIGN/PATIENTS: Samples were obtained for analysis from two UK multicentre cohorts during hospitalisation with COVID-19 (International Severe Acute Respiratory Infection Consortium/World Health Organisation [WHO] Clinical Characterization Protocol for Severe Emerging Infections in the UK study), and at follow-up 5 months after hospitalisation (Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study). MEASUREMENTS: Plasma steroids were quantified by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Steroid concentrations were compared against disease severity (WHO ordinal scale) and validated symptom scores. Data are presented as geometric mean (SD). RESULTS: In the acute cohort (n = 239, 66.5% male), plasma cortisol concentration increased with disease severity (cortisol 753.3 [1.6] vs. 429.2 [1.7] nmol/L in fatal vs. least severe, p < .001). In males, testosterone concentrations decreased with severity (testosterone 1.2 [2.2] vs. 6.9 [1.9] nmol/L in fatal vs. least severe, p < .001). In the follow-up cohort (n = 198, 62.1% male, 68.9% ongoing symptoms, 165 [121-192] days postdischarge), plasma cortisol concentrations (275.6 [1.5] nmol/L) did not differ with in-hospital severity, perception of recovery, or patient-reported symptoms. Male testosterone concentrations (12.6 [1.5] nmol/L) were not related to in-hospital severity, perception of recovery or symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: Circulating glucocorticoids in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 reflect acute illness, with a marked rise in cortisol and fall in male testosterone. These findings are not observed 5 months from discharge. The lack of association between hormone concentrations and common post-COVID symptoms suggests steroid insufficiency does not play a causal role in this condition.

Expression of mesenchyme-specific gene signatures by follicular dendritic cells: insights from the meta-analysis of microarray data from multiple mouse cell populations.

Follicular dendritic cells (FDC) are an important subset of stromal cells within the germinal centres of lymphoid tissues. They are specialized to trap and retain antigen-containing immune complexes on their surfaces to promote B-cell maturation and immunoglobulin isotype class-switching. However, little is known of the cell types from which FDC originate. To address fundamental questions associated with the relationships between FDC and other cell populations, we took advantage of the growing body of publicly available data for transcriptome analysis. We obtained a large number of gene expression data files from a range of different primary mouse cells and cell lines and subjected these data to network-based cluster analysis using BiolayoutExpress(3D) . Genes with related function clustered together in distinct regions of the graph and enabled the identification of transcriptional networks that underpin the functional activity of distinct cell populations. Several gene clusters were identified that were selectively expressed by cells of mesenchymal lineage and contained classic mesenchymal cell markers and extracellular matrix genes including various collagens, Acta2, Bgn, Fbn1 and Twist1. Our analysis showed that FDC also express highly many of these mesenchyme-associated genes. Promoter analysis of the genes comprising the mesenchymal clusters identified several regulatory motifs that are binding sites for candidate transcription factors previously known to be candidate regulators of mesenchyme-specific genes. Together, these data suggest FDC are a specialized mesenchymal cell population within the germinal centres of lymphoid tissues.

An updated systematic review of the role of host genetics in susceptibility to influenza.

The World Health Organization has identified studies of the role of host genetics on susceptibility to severe influenza as a priority. A systematic review was conducted in June 2011 to summarise the evidence on the role of host genetics in susceptibility to influenza, and this report updates that previously published review. Animal studies suggest that genetic control of susceptibility to severe influenza in mice is complex and not controlled by a single locus, but there is encouraging evidence that some of the host genetic determinants of susceptibility to severe disease may be common across influenza subtypes. Although a number of studies on genetic susceptibility to influenza in humans have been published recently, all are underpowered and unreplicated, so do not provide robust statistical evidence of an association between the identified genetic loci and susceptibility. One study does however present convincing functional evidence for an important role for IFITM3 in susceptibility to severe influenza in mice, and some evidence that this may also be important in human A/H1N1/pdm2009 infection.

Meta-analysis of lineage-specific gene expression signatures in mouse leukocyte populations.

In order to address fundamental questions associated with the relationships between mononuclear phagocytes and other myeloid and lymphoid cell populations, we have taken advantage of the growing body of expression data available in the public domain. We collated a large number of published expression studies on mouse haemopoietic cell lineages comprising 304 cell samples from 29 independent experiments performed on a single microarray platform (Affymetrix MOE430-2). The data were subjected to network-based cluster analysis using Biolayout Express(3D). Genes with related function clustered together in distinct regions of the graph reaffirming many known associations between gene expression and role in specific pathways and defining most major cell types of the immune system. Promoters of genes within individual clusters were distinguished by over-representation of regulatory motifs recognised by specific transcription factors. However, these data indicate that commonly used myeloid subpopulation markers, such as CD11c (Itgax), do not correlate with expression of other genes, and further bring into question their use in defining myeloid cell lineage, activation (M1 vs. M2) and antigen-presenting cell function. In particular, there were few mRNA markers that clearly distinguished classical dendritic cells (DC) from macrophages, other than low expression of genes required for phagocytic activity. Bone marrow-derived DC, grown in GM-CSF, were clearly identified as phagocytes and distinguished from isolated lymphoid tissue DC. Thus, through pooling datasets from public data and examining the gene expression clusters within, we can learn a great deal about the transcriptional networks that underpin the differences in functional activities between cell populations of the immune system.

GWAS and meta-analysis identifies multiple new genetic mechanisms underlying severe Covid-19.

Pulmonary inflammation drives critical illness in Covid-19, 1;2 creating a clinically homogeneous extreme phenotype, which we have previously shown to be highly efficient for discovery of genetic associations. 3;4 Despite the advanced stage of illness, we have found that immunomodulatory therapies have strong beneficial effects in this group. 1;5 Further genetic discoveries may identify additional therapeutic targets to modulate severe disease. 6 In this new data release from the GenOMICC (Genetics Of Mortality in Critical Care) study we include new microarray genotyping data from additional critically-ill cases in the UK and Brazil, together with cohorts of severe Covid-19 from the ISARIC4C 7 and SCOURGE 8 studies, and meta-analysis with previously-reported data. We find an additional 14 new genetic associations. Many are in potentially druggable targets, in inflammatory signalling (JAK1, PDE4A), monocyte-macrophage differentiation (CSF2), immunometabolism (SLC2A5, AK5), and host factors required for viral entry and replication (TMPRSS2, RAB2A). As with our previous work, these results provide tractable therapeutic targets for modulation of harmful host-mediated inflammation in Covid-19.

Systematic review and meta-analysis identifies potential host therapeutic targets in COVID-19.

The increasing body of literature describing the role of host factors in COVID-19 pathogenesis demonstrates the need to combine diverse, multi-omic data to evaluate and substantiate the most robust evidence and inform development of therapies. Here we present a dynamic ranking of host genes implicated in human betacoronavirus infection (SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, seasonal coronaviruses). Researchers can search and review the ranked genes and the contribution of different experimental methods to gene rank at https://baillielab.net/maic/covid19. We conducted an extensive systematic review of experiments identifying potential host factors. Gene lists from diverse sources were integrated using Meta-Analysis by Information Content (MAIC). This previously described algorithm uses data-driven gene list weightings to produce a comprehensive ranked list of implicated host genes. From 32 datasets, the top ranked gene was PPIA, encoding cyclophilin A, a drug-gable target using cyclosporine.Other highly-ranked genes included proposed prognostic factors (CXCL10, CD4, CD3E) and investigational therapeutic targets (IL1A) for COVID-19. Gene rankings also inform the interpretation of COVID-19 GWAS results, implicating FYCO1 over other nearby genes in a disease-associated locus on chromosome 3. As new data are published we will regularly update list of genes as a resource to inform and prioritise future studies.

Systematic comparison of ranking aggregation methods for gene lists in experimental results

A common experimental output in biomedical science is a list of genes implicated in a given biological process or disease. The results of a group of studies answering the same, or similar, questions can be combined by meta-analysis to find a consensus or a more reliable answer. Ranking aggregation methods can be used to combine gene lists from various sources in meta-analyses. Evaluating a ranking aggregation method on a specific type of dataset before using it is required to support the reliability of the result since the property of a dataset can influence the performance of an algorithm. Evaluation of aggregation methods is usually based on a simulated database especially for the algorithms designed for gene lists because of the lack of a known truth for real data. However, simulated datasets tend to be too small compared to experimental data and neglect key features, including heterogeneity of quality, relevance and the inclusion of unranked lists. In this study, a group of existing methods and their variations which are suitable for meta-analysis of gene lists are compared using simulated and real data. Simulated data was used to explore the performance of the aggregation methods as a function of emulating the common scenarios of real genomics data, with various heterogeneity of quality, noise level, and a mix of unranked and ranked data using 20000 possible entities. In addition to the evaluation with simulated data, a comparison using real genomic data on the SARS-CoV-2 virus, cancer (NSCLC), and bacteria (macrophage apoptosis) was performed. We summarise our evaluation results in terms of a simple flowchart to select a ranking aggregation method for genomics data.

Shared genetic etiology between idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and COVID-19 severity

BackgroundIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a complex lung disease, characterized by progressive lung scarring. Severe COVID-19 is associated with substantial pneumonitis and has a number of shared major risk factors with IPF. This study aimed to determine the genetic correlation between IPF and severe COVID-19 and assess a potential causal role of genetically increased risk of IPF on COVID-19 severity. MethodsWe performed a Mendelian randomisation (MR) study for IPF causality in COVID-19. Genetic variants associated with IPF susceptibility (P<5x10-8) in previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) were used as instrumental variables (IVs). Effect estimates of those IVs on COVID-19 severity were gathered from the GWAS meta-analysis by the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative. The genetic correlation between IPF and COVID-19 severity was estimated with linkage disequilibrium (LD) score regression. FindingsWe detected a positive genetic correlation of IPF with COVID-19 severity (rg=0.31 [95% CI 0.04-0.57], P = 0.023). The MR estimates for severe COVID-19 did not reveal any genetic association (OR 1.05, [95% CI 0.92-1.20], P = 0.43). However, outlier analysis revealed that the IPF risk allele rs35705950 at MUC5B had a different effect compared with the other variants. When rs35705950 was excluded, MR results provided evidence that genetically increased risk of IPF has a causal effect on COVID-19 severity (OR 1.21, [95% CI 1.06-1.38], P = 4.24x10-3). Furthermore, the IPF risk-allele at MUC5B showed an apparent protective effect against COVID-19 hospitalization only in older adults (OR 0.86, [95% CI 0.73-1.00], P = 2.99x10-2). InterpretationThe strongest genetic determinant of IPF, rs35705950 at MUC5B, seems to confer protection against COVID-19, whereas the combined effect of all other IPF risk loci seem to confer risk of COVID-19 severity. The observed effect of rs35705950 could either be due to protective effects of mucin over-production on the airways or a consequence of selection bias due to a patient group that is heavily enriched for the rs35705950 T undertaking strict self-isolation. Due to the diverse impact of IPF causal variants on SARS-CoV-2 infection, further investigation is needed to address this apparent paradox between variance at MUC5B and other IPF genetic risk factors. FundingNovo Nordisk Foundation and Oak Foundation.

Outcomes of COVID-19 related hospitalisation among people with HIV in the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK Protocol: prospective observational study

Background.There is conflicting evidence about how HIV infection influences COVID-19. We compared the presentation characteristics and outcomes of people with and without HIV hospitalised with COVID-19 at 207 centres across the United Kingdom. Methods.We analysed data from people with laboratory confirmed or highly likely COVID-19 enrolled into the ISARIC CCP-UK study. The primary endpoint was day-28 mortality after presentation. We used Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression to describe the association with HIV status after adjustment for sex, ethnicity, age, indeterminate/probable hospital acquisition of COVID-19 (definite hospital acquisition excluded), presentation date, and presence/absence of ten comorbidities. We additionally adjusted for disease severity at presentation as defined by hypoxia/oxygen therapy. Findings.Among 47,539 patients, 115 (0{middle dot}24%) had confirmed HIV-positive status and 103/115 (89{middle dot}6%) had a record of antiretroviral therapy. At presentation, relative to the HIV-negative group, HIV-positive people were younger (median 55 versus 74 years; p<0{middle dot}001), had a higher prevalence of obesity and moderate/severe liver disease, higher lymphocyte counts and C-reactive protein, and more systemic symptoms. The cumulative incidence of day-28 mortality was 25{middle dot}2% in the HIV-positive group versus 32{middle dot}1% in the HIV-negative group (p=0{middle dot}12); however, stratification for age revealed a higher mortality among HIV-positive people aged below 60 years. The effect of HIV-positive status was confirmed in adjusted analyses (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1{middle dot}49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0{middle dot}99-2{middle dot}25; p=0{middle dot}06). Following additional adjustment for disease severity at presentation, mortality was higher in HIV-positive people (adjusted HR 1{middle dot}63; 95% CI 1{middle dot}07-2{middle dot}48; p=0{middle dot}02). In the HIV-positive group, mortality was more common among those who were slightly older and among people with obesity and diabetes with complications. Interpretation.HIV-positive status may be associated with an increased risk of day-28 mortality following a COVID-19 related hospitalisation. Funding.NIHR, MRC, Wellcome Trust, Department for International Development, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Study registrationISRCTN66726260 RESEARCH IN CONTEXTO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed for articles in all languages containing the words "COVID*", "coronavirus", "SARS CoV-2" AND "HIV". After screening on 23rd July 2020, we found 51 articles reporting outcomes of COVID-19 in HIV-positive people. Of these, 2 were systematic reviews, 24 were single case reports or case series of under 10 participants, and 12 were larger case series or retrospective cohorts without matched controls. There were two cohort studies that matched HIV-positive people diagnosed with COVID-19 to the general population attending for HIV care in the same area, and three studies that matched HIV-positive people diagnosed with COVID-19 to HIV-negative controls. Some of the evidence from the United States and Europe to date suggests that people with HIV experience a similar disease course and outcomes of COVID-19 compared to the general population. However, many of the studies are limited by small sample size, lack of comparator group and lack of adjustment for potential confounding. In contrast, preliminary results from a cohort study of over 20,000 participants in South Africa indicate that HIV-positive status more than doubles the risk of COVID-19 related mortality. Currently, the evidence from the United Kingdom is limited to two case series comprising a total of 21 patients. Added value of this studyThis study analysed data collected from 207 sites across the United Kingdom as part of ISARIC CCP, the largest prospective cohort of patients hospitalised with COVID-19, to evaluate the association between HIV-positive status and day-28 mortality. The study has the benefit of a relatively large number of participants with HIV (n=115, almost all receiving antiretroviral therapy) and importantly, the ability to direct compare their presenting characteristics and outcomes to those of 47,424 HIV-negative controls within the same dataset. This includes the ability to assess the influence of gender, ethnicity and age, as well as the effect of key comorbidities including chronic cardiac, pulmonary, renal and haematological disease, diabetes, obesity, chronic neurological disorder, dementia, liver disease, and malignancy. Unlike some of the other evidence to date, but in line with the data from South Africa, this study indicates that HIV-positive status may increase the risk of mortality with COVID-19 compared to the general population, with an effect that was especially evident among people with HIV aged below 60 years and was independent of gender or ethnicity. Although we detected an association between mortality among people with HIV and occurrence of obesity and diabetes with complication, the effect of HIV-positive status persisted after adjusting for comorbidities. Implications of all the available evidencePeople with HIV may be at increased risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19 compared to the general population. Ongoing data collection is needed to confirm this association. Linkage of hospital outcome data to the HIV history will be paramount to establishing the determinants of the increased risk. COVID-19 related hospitalisation should pursue systematic recording of HIV status to ensure optimal management and gathering of evidence.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of remdesivir in treating severe COVID-19 using data from the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK: a prospective, national cohort study.

BackgroundRemdesivir has been evaluated in clinical trial populations, but there is a sparsity of evidence evaluating effectiveness in general populations. MethodsAdults eligible to be treated with remdesivir, requiring oxygen but not ventilated, were identified from UK patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Patients treated with remdesivir within 24h of hospitalisation were compared with propensity-score matched controls; estimates of effectiveness were calculated for short-term outcomes (14-day mortality, 28-day mortality, time-to-recovery among others) using multivariable modelling. Results9,278 out of 39,330 patients satisfied eligibility criteria. 1,549 patients were identified as treated and matched with 4,964 controls. Patients were 62% male, mean (SD) age 63.1 (15.6) years, 80% White ethnicity, and symptomatic for a median of 6 days prior to baseline. There was no statistically significant benefit of remdesivir at 14 days in terms of mortality or clinical status; there were signals of effectiveness in time-to-recovery after day 9, and a reduction in 28-day mortality. ConclusionIn a real-world setting, initiation of remdesivir within 24h of hospitalisation in conjunction with standard of care was not associated with a benefit at 14 days but supports clinical trial evidence of a potential reduction in 28-day mortality.

Recovery from Covid-19 critical illness: a secondary analysis of the ISARIC4C CCP-UK cohort study and the RECOVER trial

BackgroundWe aimed to compare the prevalence and severity of fatigue in survivors of Covid-19 versus non-Covid-19 critical illness, and to explore potential associations between baseline characteristics and worse recovery. MethodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of two prospectively collected datasets. The population included was 92 patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with Covid-19, and 240 patients who received IMV with non-Covid-19 illness before the pandemic. Follow-up data was collected post-hospital discharge using self-reported questionnaires. The main outcome measures were self-reported fatigue severity and the prevalence of severe fatigue (severity >7/10) 3 and 12-months post-hospital discharge. ResultsCovid-19 IMV-patients were significantly younger with less prior comorbidity, and more males, than pre-pandemic IMV-patients. At 3-months, the prevalence (38.9% [7/18] vs. 27.1% [51/188]) and severity (median 5.5/10 vs. 5.0/10) of fatigue was similar between the Covid-19 and pre-pandemic populations respectively. At 6-months, the prevalence (10.3% [3/29] vs. 32.5% [54/166]) and severity (median 2.0/10 vs. 5.7/10) of fatigue was less in the Covid-19 cohort. In the Covid-19 population, women under 50 experienced more severe fatigue, breathlessness, and worse overall health state compared to other Covid-19 IMV-patients. There were no significant sex differences in long-term outcomes in the pre-pandemic population. In the total sample of IMV-patients included (i.e. all Covid-19 and pre-pandemic patients), having Covid-19 was significantly associated with less severe fatigue (severity <7/10) after adjusting for age, sex, and prior comorbidity (adjusted OR 0.35 (95%CI 0.15-0.76, p=0.01). ConclusionFatigue may be less severe after Covid-19 than after other critical illness.

Pandemic, epidemic, endemic: B cell repertoire analysis reveals unique anti-viral responses to SARS-CoV-2, Ebola and Respiratory Syncytial Virus

Immunoglobulin gene heterogeneity reflects the diversity and focus of the humoral immune response towards different infections, enabling inference of B cell development processes. Detailed compositional and lineage analysis of long read IGH repertoire sequencing, combining examples of pandemic, epidemic and endemic viral infections with control and vaccination samples, demonstrates general responses including increased use of IGHV4-39 in both EBOV and COVID-19 infection cohorts. We also show unique characteristics absent in RSV infection or yellow fever vaccine samples: EBOV survivors show unprecedented high levels of class switching events while COVID-19 repertoires from acute disease appear underdeveloped. Despite the high levels of clonal expansion in COVID-19 IgG1 repertoires there is a striking lack of evidence of germinal centre mutation and selection. Given the differences in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality with age, it is also pertinent that we find significant differences in repertoire characteristics between young and old patients. Our data supports the hypothesis that a primary viral challenge can result in a strong but immature humoral response where failures in selection of the repertoire risks off-target effects.

Secreted SARS-CoV-2 ORF8 modulates the cytokine expression profile of human macrophages

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is still adapting to its new human host. Attention has focussed on the viral spike protein, but substantial variation has been seen in the ORF8 gene. Here, we show that SARS-CoV-2 ORF8 protein undergoes signal peptide-mediated processing through the endoplasmic reticulum and is secreted as a glycosylated, disulphide-linked dimer. The secreted protein from the prototype SARS-CoV-2 virus had no major effect on viability of a variety of cell types, or on IFN or NF-{kappa}B signalling. However, it modulated cytokine expression from primary CSF1-derived human macrophages, most notably by decreasing IL-6 and IL-8 secretion. Furthermore, a sequence polymorphism L84S that appeared early in the pandemic associated with the Clade S lineage of virus, showed a markedly different effect, of increasing IL-6 production. We conclude that ORF8 sequence polymorphisms can potentially affect SARS-CoV-2 virulence and should therefore be monitored in sequencing-based surveillance.

A common TMPRSS2 variant protects against severe COVID-19

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 has a wide range of clinical presentations, from asymptomatic to life-threatening. Old age is the strongest factor associated with increased COVID19-related mortality, followed by sex and pre-existing conditions. The importance of genetic and immunological factors on COVID19 outcome is also starting to emerge, as demonstrated by population studies and the discovery of damaging variants in genes controlling type I IFN immunity and of autoantibodies that neutralize type I IFNs. The human protein transmembrane protease serine type 2 (TMPRSS2) plays a key role in SARS-CoV-2 infection, as it is required to activate the virus spike protein, facilitating entry into target cells. We focused on the only common TMPRSS2 non-synonymous variant predicted to be damaging (rs12329760), which has a minor allele frequency of [~]25% in the population. In a large population of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, we show that this variant is associated with a reduced likelihood of developing severe COVID19 (OR 0.87, 95%CI:0.79-0.97, p=0.01). This association was stronger in homozygous individuals when compared to the general population (OR 0.65, 95%CI:0.50-0.84, p=1.3x10-3). We demonstrate in vitro that this variant, which causes the amino acid substitution valine to methionine, impacts the catalytic activity of TMPRSS2 and is less able to support SARS-CoV-2 spike-mediated entry into cells. TMPRSS2 rs12329760 is a common variant associated with a significantly decreased risk of severe COVID19. Further studies are needed to assess the expression of the TMPRSS2 across different age groups. Moreover, our results identify TMPRSS2 as a promising drug target, with a potential role for camostat mesilate, a drug approved for the treatment of chronic pancreatitis and postoperative reflux esophagitis, in the treatment of COVID19. Clinical trials are needed to confirm this.

Outcome of COVID-19 in hospitalised immunocompromised patients: an analysis of the WHO ISARIC CCP-UK prospective cohort study.

BackgroundImmunocompromised patients may be at higher risk of mortality if hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with immunocompetent patients. However, previous studies have been contradictory. We aimed to determine whether immunocompromised patients were at greater risk of in-hospital death, and how this risk changed over the pandemic. MethodsWe included patients >=19yrs with symptomatic community-acquired COVID-19 recruited to the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK. We defined immunocompromise as: immunosuppressant medication preadmission, cancer treatment, organ transplant, HIV, or congenital immunodeficiency. We used logistic regression to compare the risk of death in both groups, adjusting for age, sex, deprivation, ethnicity, vaccination and co-morbidities. We used Bayesian logistic regression to explore mortality over time. FindingsBetween 17/01/2020 and 28/02/2022 we recruited 156,552 eligible patients, of whom 21,954 (14%) were immunocompromised. 29% (n=6,499) of immunocompromised and 21% (n=28,608) of immunocompetent patients died in hospital. The odds of in-hospital mortality were elevated for immunocompromised patients (adjOR 1.44, 95% CI 1.39-1.50, p<0.001). As the pandemic progressed, in-hospital mortality reduced more slowly for immunocompromised patients than for immunocompetent patients. This was particularly evident with increasing age: the probability of the reduction in hospital mortality being less for immunocompromised patients aged 50-69yrs was 88% for men and 83% for women, and for those >80yrs was 99% for men, and 98% for women. ConclusionsImmunocompromised patients remain at elevated risk of death from COVID-19. Targeted measures such as additional vaccine doses and monoclonal antibodies should be considered for this group. FundingNational Institute for Health Research; Medical Research Council; Chief Scientist Office, Scotland.

Apixaban following discharge in hospitalised adults with COVID-19: Preliminary results from a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled platform clinical trial.

BackgroundThe role of thromboprophylaxis in the post-acute phase of COVID-19 is uncertain due to conflicting results from randomised controlled trials and observational studies. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of post-hospital apixaban in reducing the rate of death and hospital readmission of hospitalised adults with COVID-19. MethodsHEAL COVID is an adaptive randomised open label multicentre platform trial recruiting participants from National Health Service Hospitals in the United Kingdom. Here we report the preliminary results of apixaban comparison of HEAL-COVID. Participants with a hospital admission related to confirmed COVID-19 and an expected date of discharge in the subsequent five days were randomised to either apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily or standard care (no anticoagulation) for 14 days. The primary outcome was hospital free survival at 12 months obtained through routine data sources. The trial was prospectively registered with ISRCTN (15851697) and Clincialtrials.gov (NCT04801940). FindingsBetween 19 May 2021 and 21 November 2022, 402 participants from 109 sites were randomised to apixaban and 399 to standard care. Seven participants withdrew from the apixaban group and one from the standard care group. Analysis was undertaken on an intention-to-treat basis. The apixaban arm was stopped on the recommendation of the oversight committees following an interim analysis due to no indication of benefit. Of the 402 participants randomised to apixaban, 117 experienced death or rehospitalisation during a median follow-up of 344{middle dot}5 days (IQR 125 to 365), and 123 participants receiving standard care experienced death or rehospitalisation during a median follow-up of 349 days (IQR 124 to 365). There was no statistical difference in the rate of death and rehospitalisation (HR: 0{middle dot}96 99%CI 0{middle dot}69-1{middle dot}34; p=0{middle dot}75). Three participants in the apixaban arm experienced clinically significant bleeding during treatment. InterpretationFourteen days of post-hospital anticoagulation with the direct oral anticoagulant apixaban did not reduce the rate of death or rehospitalisation of adults hospitalised with COVID-19. These data do not support the use of prophylactic post-hospital anticoagulation in adults with COVID-19. FundingHEAL-COVID is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research [NIHR133788] and the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre [BRC-1215-20014*].

Elevated antiviral, myeloid and endothelial inflammatory markers in severe COVID-19

Introductory paragraphThe mechanisms that underpin COVID-19 disease severity, and determine the outcome of infection, are only beginning to be unraveled. The host inflammatory response contributes to lung injury, but circulating mediators levels fall below those in classical cytokine storms. We analyzed serial plasma samples from 619 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 recruited through the prospective multicenter ISARIC clinical characterization protocol U.K. study and 39 milder community cases not requiring hospitalization. Elevated levels of numerous mediators including angiopoietin-2, CXCL10, and GM-CSF were seen at recruitment in patients who later died. Markers of endothelial injury (angiopoietin-2 and von-Willebrand factor A2) were detected early in some patients, while inflammatory cytokines and markers of lung injury persisted for several weeks in fatal COVID-19 despite decreasing antiviral cytokine levels. Overall, markers of myeloid or endothelial cell activation were associated with severe, progressive, and fatal disease indicating a central role for innate immune activation and vascular inflammation in COVID-19.

Therapeutic potential of IL6R blockade for the treatment of sepsis and sepsis-related death: Findings from a Mendelian randomisation study

IntroductionSepsis is characterised by dysregulated, life-threatening immune responses, which are thought to be driven by cytokines such as interleukin-6 (IL-6). Genetic variants in IL6R known to downregulate IL-6 signalling are associated with improved COVID-19 outcomes, a finding later confirmed in randomised trials of IL-6 receptor antagonists (IL6RA). We hypothesised that blockade of IL6R could also improve outcomes in sepsis. MethodsWe performed a Mendelian randomisation analysis using single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in and near IL6R to evaluate the likely causal effects of IL6R blockade on sepsis, sepsis severity, other infections, and COVID-19. We weighted SNPs by their effect on CRP and combined results across them in inverse variance weighted meta-analysis, proxying the effect of IL6RA. Our outcomes were measured in UK Biobank, FinnGen, the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative (HGI), and the GenOSept and GainS consortium. We performed several sensitivity analyses to test assumptions of our methods, including utilising variants around CRP in a similar analysis. ResultsIn the UK Biobank cohort (N=485,825, including 11,643 with sepsis), IL6R blockade was associated with a decreased risk of sepsis (OR=0.80; 95% CI 0.66-0.96, per unit of natural log transformed CRP decrease). The size of this effect increased with severity, with larger effects on 28-day sepsis mortality (OR=0.74; 95% CI 0.38-0.70); critical care admission with sepsis (OR=0.48, 95% CI 0.30-0.78) and critical care death with sepsis (OR=0.37, 95% CI 0.14 - 0.98) Similar associations were seen with severe respiratory infection: OR for pneumonia in critical care 0.69 (95% CI 0.49 - 0.97) and for sepsis survival in critical care (OR=0.22; 95% CI 0.04- 1.31) in the GainS and GenOSept consortium. We also confirm the previously reported protective effect of IL6R blockade on severe COVID-19 (OR=0.69, 95% 0.57 - 0.84) in the COVID-19 HGI, which was of similar magnitude to that seen in sepsis. Sensitivity analyses did not alter our primary results. ConclusionsIL6R blockade is causally associated with reduced incidence of sepsis, sepsis related critical care admission, and sepsis related mortality. These effects are comparable in size to the effect seen in severe COVID-19, where IL-6 receptor antagonists were shown to improve survival. This data suggests a randomised trial of IL-6 receptor antagonists in sepsis should be considered.

Robust, reproducible clinical patterns in hospitalised patients with COVID-19

BackgroundSevere COVID-19 is characterised by fever, cough, and dyspnoea. Symptoms affecting other organ systems have been reported. However, it is the clinical associations of different patterns of symptoms which influence diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making. In this study, we applied simple machine learning techniques to a large prospective cohort of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 identify clinically meaningful sub-groups. MethodsWe obtained structured clinical data on 59 011 patients in the UK (the ISARIC Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium, 4C) and used a principled, unsupervised clustering approach to partition the first 25 477 cases according to symptoms reported at recruitment. We validated our findings in a second group of 33 534 cases recruited to ISARIC-4C, and in 4 445 cases recruited to a separate study of community cases. FindingsUnsupervised clustering identified distinct sub-groups. First, a core symptom set of fever, cough, and dyspnoea, which co-occurred with additional symptoms in three further patterns: fatigue and confusion, diarrhoea and vomiting, or productive cough. Presentations with a single reported symptom of dyspnoea or confusion were common, and a subgroup of patients reported few or no symptoms. Patients presenting with gastrointestinal symptoms were more commonly female, had a longer duration of symptoms before presentation, and had lower 30-day mortality. Patients presenting with confusion, with or without core symptoms, were older and had a higher unadjusted mortality. Symptom clusters were highly consistent in replication analysis using a further 35446 individuals subsequently recruited to ISARIC-4C. Similar patterns were externally verified in 4445 patients from a study of self-reported symptoms of mild disease. InterpretationThe large scale of the ISARIC-4C study enabled robust, granular discovery and replication of patient clusters. Clinical interpretation is necessary to determine which of these observations have practical utility. We propose that four patterns are usefully distinct from the core symptom groups: gastro-intestinal disease, productive cough, confusion, and pauci-symptomatic presentations. Importantly, each is associated with an in-hospital mortality which differs from that of patients with core symptoms. These observations deepen our understanding of COVID-19 and will influence clinical diagnosis, risk prediction, and future mechanistic and clinical studies. FundingMedical Research Council; National Institute Health Research; Well-come Trust; Department for International Development; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Liverpool Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre.

Effect of Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Preliminary Report

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Corticosteroids may modulate immune-mediated lung injury and reducing progression to respiratory failure and death. MethodsThe Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 therapy (RECOVERY) trial is a randomized, controlled, open-label, adaptive, platform trial comparing a range of possible treatments with usual care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We report the preliminary results for the comparison of dexamethasone 6 mg given once daily for up to ten days vs. usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Results2104 patients randomly allocated to receive dexamethasone were compared with 4321 patients concurrently allocated to usual care. Overall, 454 (21.6%) patients allocated dexamethasone and 1065 (24.6%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (age-adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74 to 0.92; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute mortality rate reductions varied significantly depending on level of respiratory support at randomization (test for trend p<0.001): Dexamethasone reduced deaths by one-third in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.0% vs. 40.7%, RR 0.65 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.82]; p<0.001), by one-fifth in patients receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (21.5% vs. 25.0%, RR 0.80 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.92]; p=0.002), but did not reduce mortality in patients not receiving respiratory support at randomization (17.0% vs. 13.2%, RR 1.22 [95% CI 0.93 to 1.61]; p=0.14). ConclusionsIn patients hospitalized with COVID-19, dexamethasone reduced 28-day mortality among those receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen at randomization, but not among patients not receiving respiratory support. Trial registrationsThe RECOVERY trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04381936). FundingMedical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research (Grant ref: MC_PC_19056).