RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Synthetic serine protease inhibitors block the cellular enzyme transmembrane protease serine 2, thus preventing SARS-CoV-2 cell entry. There are two relevant drugs in this class, namely, nafamostat (intravenous formulation) and camostat (oral formulation). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether transmembrane protease serine 2 inhibition with nafamostat or camostat is associated with a reduced risk of 30-day all-cause mortality in adults with COVID-19. DATA SOURCES: Scientific databases and clinical trial registry platforms. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, INTERVENTIONS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Preprints or published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of nafamostat or camostat vs. usual care or placebo in adults requiring treatment for COVID-19. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS AND RISK-OF-BIAS ASSESSMENT: The primary outcome of the meta-analysis was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included time to recovery, adverse events, and serious adverse events. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the revised Cochrane RoB 2 tool for individually randomized trials. Meta-analysis was conducted in the R package meta (v7.0-0) using inverse variance and random effects. Protocol registration number was INPLASY202320120. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs were included. Overall, the number of available patients was small (nafamostat = 387; camostat = 1061), the number of enrolled patients meeting the primary outcome was low (nafamostat = 12; camostat = 13), and heterogeneity was high. In hospitalized adults, we did not identify differences in 30-day all-cause mortality (risk ratio [95% CI]: 0.58 [0.19, 1.80], p 0.34; I2 = 0%; n = 6) and time to recovery (mean difference [95% CI]: 0.08 days [-0.74, 0.89], p 0.86; n = 2) between nafamostat vs. usual care; and for 30-day all-cause mortality (risk ratio [95% CI]: 0.99 [0.31, 3.18], p 0.99; n = 2) between camostat vs. placebo. CONCLUSION: The RCT evidence is inconclusive to determine whether there is a mortality reduction and safety with either nafamostat or camostat for the treatment of adults with COVID-19. There were high RoB, small sample size, and high heterogeneity between RCTs.
Asunto(s)
Benzamidinas , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Guanidinas , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , SARS-CoV-2 , Serina Endopeptidasas , Inhibidores de Serina Proteinasa , Adulto , Humanos , Benzamidinas/uso terapéutico , COVID-19/mortalidad , Ésteres , Gabexato/uso terapéutico , Gabexato/análogos & derivados , Guanidinas/uso terapéutico , SARS-CoV-2/efectos de los fármacos , Inhibidores de Serina Proteinasa/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Serina Proteinasa/efectos adversos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
The changing phenotype of coronarvirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may quickly render guideline-recommended interventions obsolete. We developed a 40-question clinician survey in consultation with the Australasian COVID-19 Trial site investigators. The survey was designed to assess clinician perceptions of the current treatment strategies and future research priorities in the management of non-critically ill patients admitted to hospital with SARS-CoV-2 infection. There were 84 complete responses from predominantly Australian and New Zealand clinicians. The perceived prevalence of patients with incidental COVID-19, nosocomial infection, underlying illness exacerbated by COVID-19, and/or immunocompromised status suggests new populations to target. The results highlighted clinician interest in antiviral therapies for future research in both immunocompetent and immunocompromised cohorts. These survey results underscore the need for ongoing surveillance of COVID-19 disease phenotypes and clinician and patient priorities for future research.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Australia/epidemiología , Hospitales , InvestigaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection (bacteraemia) is traditionally treated with at least two weeks of IV antibiotics in adults, 3-7 days in children, and often longer for those with complicated disease. The current practice of treating S. aureus bacteraemia (SAB) with prolonged IV antibiotics (rather than oral antibiotics) is based on historical observational research and expert opinion. Prolonged IV antibiotic therapy has significant disadvantages for patients and healthcare systems, and there is growing interest in whether a switch to oral antibiotics following an initial period of IV therapy is a safe alternative for clinically stable patients. PROTOCOL: The early oral switch (EOS) domain of the S. aureus Network Adaptive Platform (SNAP) trial will assess early switch to oral antibiotics compared with continued IV treatment in clinically stable patients with SAB. The primary endpoint is 90-day all-cause mortality. Hospitalised SAB patients are assessed at platform day 7 +/- 2 (uncomplicated SAB) and day 14 +/-2 (complicated SAB) to determine their eligibility for randomisation to EOS (intervention) or continued IV treatment (current standard of care). DISCUSSION: Recruitment is occurring to the EOS domain of the SNAP trial. As of August 2023, 21% of all SNAP participants had been randomised to the EOS domain, a total of 264 participants across 77 centres, with an aim to recruit at least 1000 participants. We describe challenges and facilitators to enrolment in this domain to aid those planning similar trials.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: There is clinical uncertainty over the optimal treatment for penicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (PSSA) infections. Furthermore, there is concern that phenotypic penicillin susceptibility testing methods are not reliably able to detect some blaZ-positive S. aureus. METHODS: Nine S. aureus isolates, including six genetically diverse strains harbouring blaZ, were sent in triplicate to 34 participating laboratories from Australia (nâ=â14), New Zealand (nâ=â6), Canada (nâ=â12), Singapore (nâ=â1) and Israel (nâ=â1). We used blaZ PCR as the gold standard to assess susceptibility testing performance of CLSI (P10 disc) and EUCAST (P1 disc) methods. Very major errors (VMEs), major error (MEs) and categorical agreement were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-two laboratories reported 593 results according to CLSI methodology (P10 disc). Nineteen laboratories reported 513 results according to the EUCAST (P1 disc) method. For CLSI laboratories, the categorical agreement and calculated VME and ME rates were 85% (508/593), 21% (84/396) and 1.5% (3/198), respectively. For EUCAST laboratories, the categorical agreement and calculated VME and ME rates were 93% (475/513), 11% (84/396) and 1% (3/198), respectively. Seven laboratories reported results for both methods, with VME rates of 24% for CLSI and 12% for EUCAST. CONCLUSIONS: The EUCAST method with a P1 disc resulted in a lower VME rate compared with the CLSI methods with a P10 disc. These results should be considered in the context that among collections of PSSA isolates, as determined by automated MIC testing, less than 10% harbour blaZ. Furthermore, the clinical relevance of phenotypically susceptible, but blaZ-positive S. aureus, remains unclear.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Infecciones Estafilocócicas , Humanos , Antibacterianos/farmacología , Staphylococcus aureus/genética , Penicilinas/farmacología , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , IncertidumbreRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Optimal thromboprophylaxis for hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is uncertain. METHODS: In an open-label, adaptive platform trial, we randomly assigned hospitalized adults with Covid-19 to low-dose low-molecular-weight heparin thromboprophylaxis or intermediate-dose or low-dose plus aspirin. In response to external evidence, the aspirin intervention was discontinued and a therapeutic-dose arm added. The primary end point was death or the requirement for new organ support by day 28, analyzed with a Bayesian logistic model. Enrolment was closed as a result of operational constraints. RESULTS: Between February 2021 and March 2022, 1574 patients were randomly assigned. Among 1526 participants included in the analysis (India, n=1273; Australia and New Zealand, n=138; and Nepal, n=115), the primary outcome occurred in 35 (5.9%) of 596 in low-dose, 25 (4.2%) of 601 in intermediate-dose, 20 (7.2%) of 279 in low-dose plus aspirin, and 7 (14%) of 50 in therapeutic-dose anticoagulation. Compared with low-dose thromboprophylaxis, the median adjusted odds ratio for the primary outcome for intermediate-dose was 0.74 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.43 to 1.27; posterior probability of effectiveness [adjusted odds ratio<1; Pr], 86%), for low-dose plus aspirin 0.88 (95% CrI, 0.47 to 1.64; Pr, 65%), and for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation 2.22 (95% CrI, 0.77 to 6.20; Pr, 7%). Overall thrombotic and bleeding rates were 0.8% and 0.4%, respectively. There were 10 serious adverse reactions related to anticoagulation strategy, of which nine were grade 1 or 2 across study interventions and one grade 4 episode of retroperitoneal hematoma in a patient receiving intermediate-dose anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized noncritically ill adults with Covid-19, compared with low-dose, there was an 86% posterior probability that intermediate-dose, 65% posterior probability that low-dose plus aspirin, and a 7% posterior probability that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation reduced the odds of death or requirement for organ support. No treatment strategy met prespecified stopping criteria before trial closure, precluding definitive conclusions. (Funded by Australian National Health and Medical Research Council or Medical Research Future Fund Investigator and Practitioner Grants and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04483960.)
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Anticoagulantes/farmacología , Coagulación Sanguínea , Aspirina/farmacologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Nafamostat mesylate is a potent in vitro antiviral agent that inhibits the host transmembrane protease serine 2 enzyme used by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 for cell entry. METHODS: This open-label, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial in Australia, New Zealand, and Nepal included noncritically ill hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Participants were randomly assigned to usual care or usual care plus nafamostat. The primary end point was death (any cause) or receipt of new invasive or noninvasive ventilation or vasopressor support within 28 days after randomization. Analysis was with a Bayesian logistic model in which an adjusted odds ratio <1.0 indicates improved outcomes with nafamostat. Enrollment was closed due to falling numbers of eligible patients. RESULTS: We screened 647 patients in 21 hospitals (15 in Australia, 4 in New Zealand, and 2 in Nepal) and enrolled 160 participants from May 2021 to August 2022. In the intention-to-treat population, the primary end point occurred in 8 (11%) of 73 patients with usual care and 4 (5%) of 82 with nafamostat. The median adjusted odds ratio for the primary end point for nafamostat was 0.40 (95% credible interval, 0.12 to 1.34) with a posterior probability of effectiveness (adjusted odds ratio <1.0) of 93%. For usual care compared with nafamostat, hyperkalemia occurred in 1 (1%) of 67 and 7 (9%) of 78 participants, respectively, and clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 1 (1%) of 73 and 7 (8%) of 82 participants. CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalized patients with Covid-19, there was a 93% posterior probability that nafamostat reduced the odds of death or organ support. Prespecified stopping criteria were not met, precluding definitive conclusions. Hyperkalemia and bleeding were more common with nafamostat. (Funded by ASCOT and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04483960.)
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Guanidinas/farmacología , BenzamidinasRESUMEN
The search for clinically effective antivirals against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is ongoing. Repurposing of drugs licensed for non-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) indications has been extensively investigated in laboratory models and in clinical studies with mixed results. Nafamostat mesylate (nafamostat) is a drug licensed in Japan and Korea for indications including acute pancreatitis and disseminated intravascular coagulation. It is available only for continuous intravenous infusion. In vitro human lung cell line studies with nafamostat demonstrate high antiviral potency against SARS-CoV-2 (half maximal inhibitory concentration [IC50] of 0.0022 µM [compared to remdesivir 1.3 µM]), ostensibly via inhibition of the cellular enzyme transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2) preventing viral entry into human cells. In addition, the established antithrombotic activity is hypothesised to be advantageous given thrombosis-associated sequelae of COVID-19. Clinical reports to date are limited, but indicate a potential benefit of nafamostat in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. In this review, we will explore the pre-clinical, pharmacokinetic and clinical outcome data presently available for nafamostat as a treatment for COVID-19. The recruitment to ongoing clinical trials is a priority to provide more robust data on the safety and efficacy of nafamostat as a treatment for COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Pancreatitis , Enfermedad Aguda , Antivirales/farmacología , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Benzamidinas , Fibrinolíticos/uso terapéutico , Guanidinas , Humanos , Pancreatitis/tratamiento farmacológico , SARS-CoV-2 , Serina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream (SAB) infection is a common and severe infectious disease, with a 90-day mortality of 15%-30%. Despite this, <3000 people have been randomized into clinical trials of treatments for SAB infection. The limited evidence base partly results from clinical trials for SAB infections being difficult to complete at scale using traditional clinical trial methods. Here we provide the rationale and framework for an adaptive platform trial applied to SAB infections. We detail the design features of the Staphylococcus aureus Network Adaptive Platform (SNAP) trial that will enable multiple questions to be answered as efficiently as possible. The SNAP trial commenced enrolling patients across multiple countries in 2022 with an estimated target sample size of 7000 participants. This approach may serve as an exemplar to increase efficiency of clinical trials for other infectious disease syndromes.
Asunto(s)
Bacteriemia , Infecciones Estafilocócicas , Humanos , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Bacteriemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Staphylococcus aureusRESUMEN
Importance: The efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19 is uncertain. Objective: To determine whether antiplatelet therapy improves outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: In an ongoing adaptive platform trial (REMAP-CAP) testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, 1557 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 were enrolled between October 30, 2020, and June 23, 2021, from 105 sites in 8 countries and followed up for 90 days (final follow-up date: July 26, 2021). Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive either open-label aspirin (n = 565), a P2Y12 inhibitor (n = 455), or no antiplatelet therapy (control; n = 529). Interventions were continued in the hospital for a maximum of 14 days and were in addition to anticoagulation thromboprophylaxis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based respiratory or cardiovascular organ support) within 21 days, ranging from -1 for any death in hospital (censored at 90 days) to 22 for survivors with no organ support. There were 13 secondary outcomes, including survival to discharge and major bleeding to 14 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. An odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. Efficacy was defined as greater than 99% posterior probability of an OR greater than 1. Futility was defined as greater than 95% posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 vs control. Intervention equivalence was defined as greater than 90% probability that the OR (compared with each other) was between 1/1.2 and 1.2 for 2 noncontrol interventions. Results: The aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitor groups met the predefined criteria for equivalence at an adaptive analysis and were statistically pooled for further analysis. Enrollment was discontinued after the prespecified criterion for futility was met for the pooled antiplatelet group compared with control. Among the 1557 critically ill patients randomized, 8 patients withdrew consent and 1549 completed the trial (median age, 57 years; 521 [33.6%] female). The median for organ support-free days was 7 (IQR, -1 to 16) in both the antiplatelet and control groups (median-adjusted OR, 1.02 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.86-1.23]; 95.7% posterior probability of futility). The proportions of patients surviving to hospital discharge were 71.5% (723/1011) and 67.9% (354/521) in the antiplatelet and control groups, respectively (median-adjusted OR, 1.27 [95% CrI, 0.99-1.62]; adjusted absolute difference, 5% [95% CrI, -0.2% to 9.5%]; 97% posterior probability of efficacy). Among survivors, the median for organ support-free days was 14 in both groups. Major bleeding occurred in 2.1% and 0.4% of patients in the antiplatelet and control groups (adjusted OR, 2.97 [95% CrI, 1.23-8.28]; adjusted absolute risk increase, 0.8% [95% CrI, 0.1%-2.7%]; 99.4% probability of harm). Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill patients with COVID-19, treatment with an antiplatelet agent, compared with no antiplatelet agent, had a low likelihood of providing improvement in the number of organ support-free days within 21 days. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.
Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Enfermedad Crítica , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria , Tromboembolia Venosa , Adulto , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Aspirina/efectos adversos , Aspirina/uso terapéutico , Teorema de Bayes , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/terapia , Enfermedad Crítica/mortalidad , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Femenino , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/uso terapéutico , Antagonistas del Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/efectos adversos , Antagonistas del Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/uso terapéutico , Respiración Artificial , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To study the efficacy of lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Critically ill adults with COVID-19 were randomized to receive lopinavir-ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, combination therapy of lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine or no antiviral therapy (control). The primary endpoint was an ordinal scale of organ support-free days. Analyses used a Bayesian cumulative logistic model and expressed treatment effects as an adjusted odds ratio (OR) where an OR > 1 is favorable. RESULTS: We randomized 694 patients to receive lopinavir-ritonavir (n = 255), hydroxychloroquine (n = 50), combination therapy (n = 27) or control (n = 362). The median organ support-free days among patients in lopinavir-ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, and combination therapy groups was 4 (- 1 to 15), 0 (- 1 to 9) and-1 (- 1 to 7), respectively, compared to 6 (- 1 to 16) in the control group with in-hospital mortality of 88/249 (35%), 17/49 (35%), 13/26 (50%), respectively, compared to 106/353 (30%) in the control group. The three interventions decreased organ support-free days compared to control (OR [95% credible interval]: 0.73 [0.55, 0.99], 0.57 [0.35, 0.83] 0.41 [0.24, 0.72]), yielding posterior probabilities that reached the threshold futility (≥ 99.0%), and high probabilities of harm (98.0%, 99.9% and > 99.9%, respectively). The three interventions reduced hospital survival compared with control (OR [95% CrI]: 0.65 [0.45, 0.95], 0.56 [0.30, 0.89], and 0.36 [0.17, 0.73]), yielding high probabilities of harm (98.5% and 99.4% and 99.8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Among critically ill patients with COVID-19, lopinavir-ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, or combination therapy worsened outcomes compared to no antiviral therapy.
Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Ritonavir , Adulto , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Teorema de Bayes , Enfermedad Crítica , Combinación de Medicamentos , Humanos , Hidroxicloroquina/uso terapéutico , Lopinavir/uso terapéutico , Ritonavir/uso terapéutico , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
Rhinovirus (RV) is commonly detected in asymptomatic children; hence, its pathogenicity during childhood pneumonia remains controversial. We evaluated RV epidemiology in HIV-uninfected children hospitalized with clinical pneumonia and among community controls. PERCH was a case-control study that enrolled children (1-59 months) hospitalized with severe and very severe pneumonia per World Health Organization clinical criteria and age-frequency-matched community controls in seven countries. Nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs were collected for all participants, combined, and tested for RV and 18 other respiratory viruses using the Fast Track multiplex real-time PCR assay. RV detection was more common among cases (24%) than controls (21%) (aOR = 1.5, 95%CI:1.3-1.6). This association was driven by the children aged 12-59 months, where 28% of cases vs. 18% of controls were RV-positive (aOR = 2.1, 95%CI:1.8-2.5). Wheezing was 1.8-fold (aOR 95%CI:1.4-2.2) more prevalent among pneumonia cases who were RV-positive vs. RV-negative. Of the RV-positive cases, 13% had a higher probability (>75%) that RV was the cause of their pneumonia based on the PERCH integrated etiology analysis; 99% of these cases occurred in children over 12 months in Bangladesh. RV was commonly identified in both cases and controls and was significantly associated with severe pneumonia status among children over 12 months of age, particularly those in Bangladesh. RV-positive pneumonia was associated with wheezing.
Asunto(s)
Nasofaringe/virología , Infecciones por Picornaviridae/epidemiología , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Rhinovirus/patogenicidad , África/epidemiología , Asia/epidemiología , Pueblo Asiatico/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Masculino , Infecciones por Picornaviridae/etnología , Neumonía Viral/etiología , Ruidos Respiratorios/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Severity of viral respiratory illnesses can be increased with bacterial coinfection and can vary by sex, but influence of coinfection and sex on human endemic coronavirus (CoV) species, which generally cause mild to moderate respiratory illness, is unknown. We evaluated CoV and pneumococcal co-detection by sex in childhood pneumonia. METHODS: In the 2011-2014 Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health study, nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal (NP/OP) swabs and other samples were collected from 3981 children <5 years hospitalized with severe or very severe pneumonia in 7 countries. Severity by NP/OP detection status of CoV (NL63, 229E, OC43 or HKU1) and high-density (≥6.9 log10 copies/mL) pneumococcus (HDSpn) by real-time polymerase chain reaction was assessed by sex using logistic regression adjusted for age and site. RESULTS: There were 43 (1.1%) CoV+/HDSpn+, 247 CoV+/HDSpn-, 449 CoV-/HDSpn+ and 3149 CoV-/HDSpn- cases with no significant difference in co-detection frequency by sex (range 51.2%-64.0% male, P = 0.06). More CoV+/HDSpn+ pneumonia was very severe compared with other groups for both males (13/22, 59.1% versus range 29.1%-34.7%, P = 0.04) and females (10/21, 47.6% versus 32.5%-43.5%, P = 0.009), but only male CoV+/HDSpn+ required supplemental oxygen more frequently (45.0% versus 20.6%-28.6%, P < 0.001) and had higher mortality (35.0% versus 5.3%-7.1%, P = 0.004) than other groups. For females with CoV+/HDSpn+, supplemental oxygen was 25.0% versus 24.8%-33.3% (P = 0.58) and mortality was 10.0% versus 9.2%-12.9% (P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Co-detection of endemic CoV and HDSpn was rare in children hospitalized with pneumonia, but associated with higher severity and mortality in males. Findings may warrant investigation of differences in severity by sex with co-detection of HDSpn and SARS-CoV-2.
Asunto(s)
Coinfección/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecciones Neumocócicas/diagnóstico , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/diagnóstico , Animales , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/virología , Preescolar , Coinfección/diagnóstico , Coinfección/virología , Coronavirus , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/virología , Femenino , Infecciones por VIH/epidemiología , Infecciones por VIH/virología , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Nasofaringe/virología , Infecciones Neumocócicas/epidemiología , Infecciones Neumocócicas/virología , Neumonía/diagnóstico , Neumonía/virología , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/epidemiología , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/virología , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Streptococcus pneumoniaeRESUMEN
We conducted a multicentre cross sectional observational study of laboratory, public health and hospitalisation data for PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases within the New Zealand Northern Region, between 12 February and 8 June 2020. The aim of this study was to describe population level SARS-CoV-2 upper respiratory tract (URT) viral load dynamics by stratifying positivity rates and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) cycle threshold (Ct) values of URT samples from COVID-19 cases by days since symptom onset, and to explore utility of Ct values in determining length of time post-infection and thus potential infectivity. Of 123,124 samples tested for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR, 579 samples (407 positive and 172 negative) from 368 symptomatic non-hospitalised individuals with PCR-confirmed infection were included. Sample positivity rate was 61.5% (8/13) for pre-symptomatic samples, rising to 93.2% (317/340) for samples collected during the purported symptomatic infectious period (days 0-10 post-symptom onset), and dropping to 36.3% (82/226) for post-infectious period samples (day 11 onwards). URT viral load peaked shortly after symptom onset, with median Ct values ranging 20.00-29.99 until 15 days post-symptom onset, and >30.00 after this time. Of samples with a Ct value of <20.00, 96.1% were collected during the symptomatic infectious period. However, of samples with a Ct value ≥30.00 and ≥35.00, 46.9% and 18.5%, respectively, were also collected during the symptomatic infectious period. The findings of this study indicate that at or soon after symptom onset represents the optimum time to test for SARS-CoV-2 in the URT, with median Ct values suggesting the useful testing window extends until around 15 days post-symptom onset. In asymptomatic individuals or those with unknown dates of symptom onset, Ct values <20.00 imply recent onset/potential infectivity, but Ct values ≥30.00 or ≥35.00 do not exclude recent onset/potential infectivity. Individual sample Ct values should not be used as an absolute marker of length of time post-infection or to exclude infectivity where date of symptom onset is unavailable.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/virología , SARS-CoV-2 , Carga Viral , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Prueba de COVID-19 , Niño , Preescolar , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nueva Zelanda , Reacción en Cadena en Tiempo Real de la Polimerasa , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa de Transcriptasa Inversa , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Circulating antibodies are important markers of previous infection and immunity. Questions remain with respect to the durability and functionality of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. This study explored antibody responses in recovered COVID-19 patients in a setting where the probability of re-exposure is effectively nil, owing to New Zealand's successful elimination strategy. METHODS: A triplex bead-based assay that detects antibody isotype (IgG, IgM and IgA) and subclass (IgG1, IgG2, IgG3 and IgG4) responses against Nucleocapsid (N) protein, the receptor binding domain (RBD) and Spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2 was developed. After establishing baseline levels with pre-pandemic control sera (n = 113), samples from PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients with mild-moderate disease (n = 189) collected up to 8 months post-infection were examined. The relationship between antigen-specific antibodies and neutralising antibodies (NAbs) was explored with a surrogate neutralisation assay that quantifies inhibition of the RBD/hACE-2 interaction. RESULTS: While most individuals had broad isotype and subclass responses to each antigen shortly after infection, only RBD and S protein IgG, as well as NAbs, were relatively stable over the study period, with 99%, 96% and 90% of samples, respectively, having responses over baseline 4-8 months post-infection. Anti-RBD antibodies were strongly correlated with NAbs at all time points (Pearson's r ≥ 0.87), and feasibility of using finger prick sampling to accurately measure anti-RBD IgG was demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 persist for up to 8 months following mild-to-moderate infection. This robust response can be attributed to the initial exposure without immune boosting given the lack of community transmission in our setting.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor antagonists in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear. METHODS: We evaluated tocilizumab and sarilumab in an ongoing international, multifactorial, adaptive platform trial. Adult patients with Covid-19, within 24 hours after starting organ support in the intensive care unit (ICU), were randomly assigned to receive tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight), sarilumab (400 mg), or standard care (control). The primary outcome was respiratory and cardiovascular organ support-free days, on an ordinal scale combining in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and days free of organ support to day 21. The trial uses a Bayesian statistical model with predefined criteria for superiority, efficacy, equivalence, or futility. An odds ratio greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. RESULTS: Both tocilizumab and sarilumab met the predefined criteria for efficacy. At that time, 353 patients had been assigned to tocilizumab, 48 to sarilumab, and 402 to control. The median number of organ support-free days was 10 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) in the tocilizumab group, 11 (interquartile range, 0 to 16) in the sarilumab group, and 0 (interquartile range, -1 to 15) in the control group. The median adjusted cumulative odds ratios were 1.64 (95% credible interval, 1.25 to 2.14) for tocilizumab and 1.76 (95% credible interval, 1.17 to 2.91) for sarilumab as compared with control, yielding posterior probabilities of superiority to control of more than 99.9% and of 99.5%, respectively. An analysis of 90-day survival showed improved survival in the pooled interleukin-6 receptor antagonist groups, yielding a hazard ratio for the comparison with the control group of 1.61 (95% credible interval, 1.25 to 2.08) and a posterior probability of superiority of more than 99.9%. All secondary analyses supported efficacy of these interleukin-6 receptor antagonists. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with Covid-19 receiving organ support in ICUs, treatment with the interleukin-6 receptor antagonists tocilizumab and sarilumab improved outcomes, including survival. (REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02735707.).
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Receptores de Interleucina-6/antagonistas & inhibidores , Adulto , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/efectos adversos , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/terapia , Enfermedad Crítica , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Respiración ArtificialRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: An improved understanding of childhood pneumonia etiology is required to inform prevention and treatment strategies. Lung aspiration is the gold standard specimen for pneumonia diagnostics. We report findings from analyses of lung and pleural aspirates collected in the Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health (PERCH) study. METHODS: The PERCH study enrolled children aged 1-59 months hospitalized with World Health Organization-defined severe or very severe pneumonia in 7 countries in Africa and Asia. Percutaneous transthoracic lung aspiration (LA) and pleural fluid (PF) aspiration was performed on a sample of pneumonia cases with radiological consolidation and/or PF in 4 countries. Venous blood and nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs were collected from all cases. Multiplex quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and routine microbiologic culture were applied to clinical specimens. RESULTS: Of 44 LAs performed within 3 days of admission on 622 eligible cases, 13 (30%) had a pathogen identified by either culture (5/44) or by PCR (11/29). A pathogen was identified in 12/14 (86%) PF specimens tested by either culture (9/14) or PCR (9/11). Bacterial pathogens were identified more frequently than viruses. All but 1 of the cases with a virus identified were coinfected with bacterial pathogens. Streptococcus pneumoniae (9/44 [20%]) and Staphylococcus aureus (7/14 [50%]) were the predominant pathogens identified in LA and PF, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial pathogens predominated in this selected subgroup of PERCH participants drawn from those with radiological consolidation or PF, with S. pneumoniae and S. aureus the leading pathogens identified.
Asunto(s)
Percas , Neumonía , Animales , Teorema de Bayes , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Niño , Salud Infantil , Preescolar , Países en Desarrollo , Humanos , Lactante , Pulmón , Gravedad del Paciente , Neumonía/diagnóstico , Neumonía/etiología , Neumonía/prevención & control , Factores de Riesgo , Staphylococcus aureusRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Serological assays that detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are critical for determining past infection and investigating immune responses in the COVID-19 pandemic. We established ELISA-based immunoassays using locally produced antigens when New Zealand went into a nationwide lockdown and the supply chain of diagnostic reagents was a widely held domestic concern. The relationship between serum antibody binding measured by ELISA and neutralising capacity was investigated using a surrogate viral neutralisation test (sVNT). METHODS: A pre-pandemic sera panel (n = 113), including respiratory infections with symptom overlap with COVID-19, was used to establish assay specificity. Sera from PCRconfirmed SARS-CoV-2 patients (n = 21), and PCR-negative patients with respiratory symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 (n = 82) that presented to the two largest hospitals in Auckland during the lockdown period were included. A two-step IgG ELISA based on the receptor binding domain (RBD) and spike protein was adapted to determine seropositivity, and neutralising antibodies that block the RBD/hACE2 interaction were quantified by sVNT. RESULTS: The calculated cut-off (>0.2) in the two-step ELISA maximised specificity by classifying all pre-pandemic samples as negative. Sera from all PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients were classified as seropositive by ELISA ≥7 days after symptom onset. There was 100% concordance between the two-step ELISA and the sVNT with all 7+ day sera from PCRconfirmed COVID-19 patients also classified as positive with respect to neutralising antibodies. Of the symptomatic PCR-negative cohort, one individual with notable travel history was classified as positive by two-step ELISA and sVNT, demonstrating the value of serology in detecting prior infection. CONCLUSIONS: These serological assays were established and assessed at a time when human activity was severely restricted in New Zealand. This was achieved by generous sharing of reagents and technical expertise by the international scientific community, and highly collaborative efforts of scientists and clinicians across the country. The assays have immediate utility in supporting clinical diagnostics, understanding transmission in high-risk cohorts and underpinning longerterm 'exit' strategies based on effective vaccines and therapeutics.
RESUMEN
Melioidosis is thought to be endemic, although underdiagnosed, in Africa. We identified 5 autochthonous cases of Burkholderia pseudomallei infection in a case series in Kenya. Incidence of B. pseudomallei bacteremia in Kenya's Kilifi County is low, at 1.5 cases per million person-years, but this result might be an underestimate.