Tocilizumab vs. baricitinib in hospitalized severe COVID-19 patients: results from a real-world cohort.

BACKGROUND: Tocilizumab and baricitinib are recommended treatment options for hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen support. Literature about its efficacy and safety in a head-to-head comparison is scarce. METHODS: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen were treated with tocilizumab or baricitinib additionally to dexamethasone. Tocilizumab was available from February till the 19th of September 2021 and baricitinib from 21st of September. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome parameters were progression to mechanical ventilation (MV), length-of-stay (LOS) and potential side effects. RESULTS: 159 patients (tocilizumab 68, baricitinib 91) with a mean age of 60.5 years, 64% male were included in the study. Tocilizumab patients were admitted 1 day earlier, were in a higher WHO category at the time of inclusion and had a higher CRP level on admission and treatment initiation. Patients receiving Tocilizumab were treated with remdesivir more often and only patients in the baricitinib group were treated with monoclonal antibodies. Other characteristics did not differ significantly. In-hospital mortality (18% vs. 11%, p = 0.229), progression to MV (19% vs. 11%, p = 0.173) and LOS (13 vs. 12 days, p = 0.114) did not differ between groups. Side effects were equally distributed between groups, except ALAT elevation which was significantly more often observed in the tocilizumab group (43% vs. 25%, p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital mortality, progression to MV and LOS were not significantly different in patients treated with tocilizumab or baricitinib additionally to standard of care. Both drugs seem equally effective but further head-to-head trials are needed.

Evaluation of Five Commercial SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Tests in a Clinical Setting.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care antigen tests (AgTs) for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) enable the rapid testing of infected individuals and are easy-to-use. However, there are few studies evaluating their clinical use. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical performance characteristics of various commercial SARS-CoV-2 AgTs. DESIGN: The sensitivity of five AgTs, comprising four rapid antigen tests (RAT; AMP Rapid Test SARS-CoV-2 Ag, NADAL COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test, CLINITEST Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test, and Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test) and one sandwich chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA; LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 Assay), were evaluated in 300 nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs. Reverse transcriptase (RT) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used as a reference method. PARTICIPANTS: NP swabs were collected from patients admitted to hospital due to COVID-19. KEY RESULTS: Sensitivities of the AgTs ranged from 64.9 to 91.7% for samples with RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values lower than 30 and were 100% for cycle threshold (Ct) values lower than 20. The highest sensitivity was observed for CLINITEST Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test, and Roche SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test. Multivariate analysis using time from symptom onset and the Ct value for AgT sensitivity showed an inverse correlation. Further, the female sex was an independent factor of lower RAT sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Antigen tests from NP swab samples show high sensitivity in patients with a Ct value < 20. The best clinical sensitivity can be obtained using AgTs within the first 6 days after symptom onset.

Assessment of S1-, S2-, and NCP-Specific IgM, IgA, and IgG Antibody Kinetics in Acute SARS-CoV-2 Infection by a Microarray and Twelve Other Immunoassays.

In this study, we comprehensively analyzed multispecific antibody kinetics of different immunoglobulins in hospitalized patients with acute severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Three hundred fifty-four blood samples longitudinally obtained from 81 IgG-seroconverting progressed coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19) patients were quantified for spike 1 (S1), S2, and nucleocapsid protein (NCP)-specific IgM, IgA, IgG, and total Ig antibodies using a microarray, 11 different enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs)/chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLIAs), and 1 rapid test by seven manufacturers. The assays' specificity was assessed in 130 non-CoVID-19 pneumonia patients. Using the microarray, NCP-specific IgA and IgG antibodies continuously displayed higher detection rates during acute CoVID-19 than S1- and S2-specific ones. S1-specific IgG antibodies, however, reached higher peak values. Until the 26th day post-symptom onset, all patients developed IgG responses against S1, S2, and NCP. Although detection rates by ELISAs/CLIAs generally resembled those of the microarray, corresponding to the target antigen, sensitivities and specificities varied among all tests. Notably, patients with more severe CoVID-19 displayed higher IgG and IgA levels, but this difference was mainly observed with S1-specific immunoassays. In patients with high SARS-CoV-2 levels in the lower respiratory tract, we observed high detection rates of IgG and total Ig immunoassays with a particular rise of S1-specific IgG antibodies when viral concentrations in the tracheal aspirate subsequently declined over time. In summary, our study demonstrates that differences in sensitivity among commercial immunoassays during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection are only partly related to the target antigen. Importantly, our data indicate that NCP-specific IgA and IgG antibodies are detected earlier, while higher S1-specific IgA antibody levels occur in severely ill patients.

COVID-19 fatality prediction in people with diabetes and prediabetes using a simple score upon hospital admission.

AIM: To assess predictors of in-hospital mortality in people with prediabetes and diabetes hospitalized for COVID-19 infection and to develop a risk score for identifying those at the greatest risk of a fatal outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A combined prospective and retrospective, multicentre, cohort study was conducted at 10 sites in Austria in 247 people with diabetes or newly diagnosed prediabetes who were hospitalized with COVID-19. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the predictor variables upon admission included clinical data, co-morbidities of diabetes or laboratory data. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify significant predictors and to develop a risk score for in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: The mean age of people hospitalized (n = 238) for COVID-19 was 71.1 ± 12.9 years, 63.6% were males, 75.6% had type 2 diabetes, 4.6% had type 1 diabetes and 19.8% had prediabetes. The mean duration of hospital stay was 18 ± 16 days, 23.9% required ventilation therapy and 24.4% died in the hospital. The mortality rate in people with diabetes was numerically higher (26.7%) compared with those with prediabetes (14.9%) but without statistical significance (P = .128). A score including age, arterial occlusive disease, C-reactive protein, estimated glomerular filtration rate and aspartate aminotransferase levels at admission predicted in-hospital mortality with a C-statistic of 0.889 (95% CI: 0.837-0.941) and calibration of 1.000 (P = .909). CONCLUSIONS: The in-hospital mortality for COVID-19 was high in people with diabetes but not significantly different to the risk in people with prediabetes. A risk score using five routinely available patient variables showed excellent predictive performance for assessing in-hospital mortality.

Muscle involvement in SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Since the outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, several reports indicated neurological involvement in COVID-19 disease. Muscle involvement has also been reported as evidenced by creatine kinase (CK) elevations and reports of myalgia. METHODS: Creatine kinase, markers of inflammation, pre-existing diseases and statin use were extracted from records of Austrian hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Disease severity was classified as severe in case of intensive care unit (ICU) admission or mortality. COVID-19 patients were additionally compared to an historical group of hospitalised influenza patients. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-one patients with SARS-CoV-2 and 258 with influenza were included in the final analysis. CK was elevated in 27% of COVID-19 and in 28% of influenza patients. CK was higher in severe COVID-19 as were markers of inflammation. CK correlated significantly with inflammation markers, which had an independent impact on CK when adjusted for demographic variables and disease severity. Compared to influenza patients, COVID-19 patients were older, more frequently male, had more comorbidities, and more frequently had a severe disease course. Nevertheless, influenza patients had higher baseline CK than COVID-19, and 35.7% of intensive care unit (ICU)-admitted patients had CK levels >1,000 U/L compared to only 4.7% of ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSIONS: HyperCKemia occurs in a similar frequency in COVID-19 and influenza infection. CK levels were lower in COVID-19 than in influenza in mild and severe disease. CK levels strongly correlate with disease severity and markers of inflammation. To date, it remains unclear whether hyperCKemia is due to a virus-triggered inflammatory response or direct muscle toxicity.

COVID-19 is not "just another flu": a real-life comparison of severe COVID-19 and influenza in hospitalized patients in Vienna, Austria.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is regularly compared to influenza. Mortality and case-fatality rates vary widely depending on incidence of COVID-19 and the testing policy in affected countries. To date, data comparing hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and influenza is scarce. METHODS: Data from patients with COVID-19 were compared to patients infected with influenza A (InfA) and B (InfB) virus during the 2017/18 and 2018/19 seasons. All patients were ≥ 18 years old, had PCR-confirmed infection and needed hospital treatment. Demographic data, medical history, length-of-stay (LOS), complications including in-hospital mortality were analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 142 patients with COVID-19 were compared to 266 patients with InfA and 300 with InfB. Differences in median age (COVID-19 70.5 years vs InfA 70 years and InfB 77 years, p < 0.001) and laboratory results were observed. COVID-19 patients had fewer comorbidities, but complications (respiratory insufficiency, pneumonia, acute kidney injury, acute heart failure and death) occurred more frequently. Median length-of-stay (LOS) was longer in COVID-19 patients (12 days vs InfA 7 days vs. InfB 7 days, p < 0.001). There was a fourfold higher in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients (23.2%) when compared with InfA (5.6%) or InfB (4.7%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In hospitalized patients, COVID-19 is associated with longer LOS, a higher number of complications and higher in-hospital mortality compared to influenza, even in a population with fewer co-morbidities. This data, a high reproduction number and limited treatment options, alongside excess mortality during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, support the containment strategies implemented by most authorities.

Diagnosis of COVID-19 using multiple antibody assays in two cases with negative PCR results from nasopharyngeal swabs.

We report of two cases of progressed COVID-19 with negative PCR tests from nasopharyngeal swabs, in whom diagnosis was made by different antibody assays, including a lateral flow rapid test and multiple commercial ELISAs, finally confirmed by comprehensive serological assays. These cases highlight that commercial ELISAs and even rapid tests might significantly aid the diagnosis of COVID-19, particularly, if a combination of serological assays is used with a specific clinical question, in severely ill patients after seroconversion and when comprehensive serological methods are used for confirmation.

Performance of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibody Assays in Different Stages of Infection: Comparison of Commercial Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays and Rapid Tests.

We comparatively assessed sensitivities and specificities of 4 commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and 2 rapid tests in 77 patients with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, grouped by interval since symptom onset. Although test sensitivities were low (<40%) within the first 5 days after disease onset, immunoglobulin (Ig) M, IgA, and total antibody ELISAs increased in sensitivity to >80% between days 6 and 10 after symptom onset. The evaluated tests (including IgG and rapid tests) provided positive results in all patients at or after the 11th day after onset of disease. The specificities of the ELISAs were 83% (IgA), 98% (IgG), and 97% (IgM and total antibody).

A High-Fat Diet Increases Influenza A Virus-Associated Cardiovascular Damage.

BACKGROUND: Influenza A virus (IAV) causes a wide range of extrarespiratory complications. However, the role of host factors in these complications of influenza virus infection remains to be defined. METHODS: Here, we sought to use transcriptional profiling, virology, histology, and echocardiograms to investigate the role of a high-fat diet in IAV-associated cardiac damage. RESULTS: Transcriptional profiling showed that, compared to their low-fat counterparts (LF mice), mice fed a high-fat diet (HF mice) had impairments in inflammatory signaling in the lung and heart after IAV infection. This was associated with increased viral titers in the heart, increased left ventricular mass, and thickening of the left ventricular wall in IAV-infected HF mice compared to both IAV-infected LF mice and uninfected HF mice. Retrospective analysis of clinical data revealed that cardiac complications were more common in patients with excess weight, an association which was significant in 2 out of 4 studies. CONCLUSIONS: Together, these data provide the first evidence that a high-fat diet may be a risk factor for the development of IAV-associated cardiovascular damage and emphasizes the need for further clinical research in this area.