Treatment effect modifiers in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 receiving remdesivir and dexamethasone.

BACKGROUND: The combined effectiveness of remdesivir and dexamethasone in subgroups of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 is poorly investigated. METHODS: In this nationwide retrospective cohort study, we included 3826 patients with COVID-19 hospitalised between February 2020 and April 2021. The primary outcomes were use of invasive mechanical ventilation and 30-day mortality, comparing a cohort treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone with a previous cohort treated without remdesivir and dexamethasone. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting logistic regression to assess associations with progression to invasive mechanical ventilation and 30-day mortality between the two cohorts. The analyses were conducted overall and by subgroups based on patient characteristics. RESULTS: Odds ratio for progression to invasive mechanical ventilation and 30-day mortality in individuals treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone compared to treatment with standard of care alone was 0.46 (95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.57) and 0.47 (95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.56), respectively. The reduced risk of mortality was observed in elderly patients, overweight patients and in patients requiring supplemental oxygen at admission, regardless of sex, comorbidities and symptom duration. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone had significantly improved outcomes compared to patients treated with standard of care alone. These effects were observed in most patient subgroups.

Hospitalization for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and pneumonia: association with the dose of inhaled corticosteroids. A nation-wide cohort study of 52 100 outpatients.

OBJECTIVES: International guidelines only advocate the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) experiencing recurring exacerbations and eosinophilic inflammation. However, ICSs are commonly used in patients with COPD and without exacerbations and signs of eosinophilic inflammation, thus possibly increasing the risk of hospitalization for pneumonia. Thus, we aimed to determine the risk of hospitalization for pneumonia associated with increasing cumulated ICS doses among patients with COPD to establish whether there is dose dependency. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study included all patients with COPD treated at a respiratory outpatient clinic in Denmark. The patients were divided into four groups based on their average daily ICS exposure. The dose-response relationship was investigated using a multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis. RESULTS: In total, 52 100 patients were included, who were divided into the no-use (n = 15 755), low-dose (n = 12 050), moderate-dose (n = 12 488), and high-dose (n = 11 807) groups. ICS use was strongly associated with hospitalization for pneumonia (hazard ratio [HR], 1.3; CI, 1.2-1.3) (ICS vs. no ICS). The risk of hospitalization for pneumonia increased with every dosing group step: low dose: HR, 1.1 (CI, 1.0-1.2); moderate dose: HR, 1.2 (CI, 1.1-1.3), and high dose: HR, 1.5 (CI, 1.4-1.6); "no use" was the reference. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings. CONCLUSIONS: In the dose-response relationship analysis, ICS dose were associated with a substantially increased risk of hospitalization for pneumonia of up to 50%. Our data support that ICSs should be administered at the lowest possible dose and only to patients with COPD who have a documented need.

Hydroxychloroquine as a primary prophylactic agent against SARS-CoV-2 infection: A cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Hydroxychloroquine has been proposed as a primary prophylactic agent against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aimed to investigate if patients treated with hydroxychloroquine for a non-COVID-19 indication had a lower risk of verified infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) compared with matched controls. METHODS: A cohort comprising all persons in Denmark collecting hydroxychloroquine prescriptions in 2020 and 2019 (i.e., both during and before SARS-CoV-2 was confirmed in Denmark), matched by age and sex with controls, was studied. Data were collected using the Danish national registries, which contain complete information on patient health data, prescriptions and microbiological test results. The main outcome was microbiologically verified SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: In total, 5488 hydroxychloroquine users were matched with 54,486 non-users. At baseline, the groups differed in terms of diagnoses of pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease, renal disease, gastrointestinal/metabolic disease and dementia, as well as treatment with antirheumatic drugs. The final model was adjusted for these potential confounders. Use of hydroxychloroquine for non-COVID-19 indications was not associated with any change in confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.76-1.07). This result was robust in the propensity-score-matched sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: This study, which is the largest to date to investigate the primary prophylactic effect of hydroxychloroquine against SARS-CoV-2, does not support any prophylactic benefit of hydroxychloroquine in the prevention of infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Improved Survival Among Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treated With Remdesivir and Dexamethasone. A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on outcomes of moderate to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among patients treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone in a real-world setting. We sought to compare the effectiveness of standard of care (SOC) alone versus SOC plus remdesivir and dexamethasone. METHODS: Two population-based nationwide cohorts of individuals hospitalized with COVID-19 during February through December 2020 were studied. Death within 30 days and need of mechanical ventilation (MV) were compared by inverse probability of treatment weighted (ITPW) logistic regression analysis and shown as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The 30-days mortality rate of 1694 individuals treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone in addition to SOC was 12.6% compared to 19.7% for 1053 individuals receiving SOC alone. This corresponded to a weighted OR of 30-day mortality of 0.47 (95% CI: .38-.57) for patients treated with remdesivir and dexamethasone compared to patients receiving SOC alone. Similarly, progression to MV was reduced (OR 0.36; 95% CI: .29-.46). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of moderate to severe COVID-19 during June through December that included remdesivir and dexamethasone was associated with reduced 30-day mortality and need of MV compared to treatment in February through May.

Diagnosis and staging of lung cancer with the use of one single echoendoscope in both the trachea and the esophagus: A practical guide.

Accurate staging of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is crucial for allocation to surgical, medical or multimodal treatment. EUS and endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) have gained ground in the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer in addition to radiological imaging (e.g., computed tomography, fluoroscopy, and magnetic resonance imaging), nuclear medicine techniques (e.g. positron emission tomography, PET), combined techniques (e.g., fluorodesoxyglucosepositron emission tomography scanning), and sonographic imaging including conventional transcutaneous mediastinal and lung ultrasound. By using one single echoendoscope in both the trachea and the esophagus, surgical staging procedures (e.g. mediastinoscopy and video assisted thoracoscopy) can be avoided in a considerable proportion of patients with NSCLC.

Proactive prophylaxis with azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (ProPAC-COVID): a statistical analysis plan.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for treatments that can shorten hospitalization and lower the risk of secondary infection and death in patients with corona disease. The ProPac-COVID trial evaluates whether combination therapy with macrolide azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine via anti-inflammation/immune modulation, antiviral efficacy, and pre-emptive treatment of supra-infections can shorten hospitalization duration and reduce the risk of non-invasive ventilation, treatment in the intensive care unit, and death in patients with acute hospital admission and a positive test for 2019-nCoV and symptoms of COVID-19 disease. METHODS: The ProPAC-COVID is a multi-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial. The primary outcome is number of days spent alive and out of hospital within 14 days from randomization. Randomization will be in blocks of unknown size, and the final allocation will be stratified for age, site of recruitment, and whether the patient has any chronic lung diseases. Data is analyzed using intention-to-treat (ITT) principles, and main analyses will also be subject to modified ITT analysis and per protocol analysis. DISCUSSION: This paper describes the detailed statistical analysis plan for the evaluation of primary and secondary endpoints of the ProPAC-COVID study. Enrolment of patients to the ProPAC-COVID study is still ongoing. The purpose of this paper is to provide primary publication of study results to prevent selective reporting of outcomes, data-driven analysis, and to increase transparency. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04322396 . Registered on 26 March 2020.

Pleural infection: a retrospective study of clinical outcome and the correlation to known etiology, co-morbidity and treatment factors.

BACKGROUND: We explored the hypothesized importance of early knowledge of microbiological etiology in patients with pleural infection, including comorbidity and treatment factors in the outcome analyses. METHODS: Data from the medical records of a large cohort of 437 consecutive patients in 9 hospitals in East-Denmark were included retrospectively. RESULTS: Microbiology, co-morbidity, therapy and outcome are described in detail. Patient groups with microbiology negative and known bacterial etiology had a similar 30-day and 90-day mortality. There were no differences in initial antibiotic treatment regimens, antibiotic treatment duration, rate of intra-pleural fibrinolysis treatment, surgical referral rate, and ICU admittance rate. Patients with microbiology negative etiology were younger (60.8 vs 64.3 years) and fewer had predisposing risk factors (59% vs 71%), but pleural drainage was more often delayed (49% vs 36%). Mortality was similar in patients treated with either of the two nationally recommended initial antibiotic regimens. However, higher 90-day mortality (22.5% vs 9.7%), disease severity (31.5% vs 6.2%), and ICU admittance rate (21.3% vs 2.9%) was observed in a sub-group with initial broad-spectrum treatment compared to patients receiving the nationally recommended initial treatments, irrespective of knowledge of etiology. Several factors correlated independently to 90-day mortality, including age, predisposing risk factors, surgical referral (Odds-Ratios > 1), drainage delay and intra-pleural fibrinolysis (ORs < 1). CONCLUSIONS: No difference was found between patients with microbiology negative and known bacterial etiology regarding outcome or treatment parameters. Treatment factors and predisposing factors independently relating to mortality were found in the cohort. Broad-spectrum antibiotics were initially used for treatment of patients with more severe illness and poorer outcome.

[Tuberculous coxitis in the hips 55 years after primary tuberculosis]. / Tuberkuløs artritis i en hofte 55 år efter primær tuberkulose.

We describe a case concerning tuberculous coxitis 55 years after primary tuberculosis. A 76-year old man developed hip pain, weight loss and a gluteal tumor. After three months he was diagnosed with tuberculous coxitis by ultrasound assisted aspiration from the joint. Anti-tuberculous chemotherapy was commenced. After three months a Girdlestone operation was performed and seven months later a total hip replacement was performed. Anti-tuberculous chemotherapy was continued for a total of 12 months. Early ultrasound assisted aspiration from the joint is recommended to shorten diagnostic delay and optimise treatment of tuberculous coxitis.

[Sarcomatoid mesothelioma--a diagnostic challenge]. / Sarkomatoidt mesoteliom--en diagnostisk udfordring.

This is the case of a 62-year-old carpenter in whom a computed tomography showed a widespread "mesothelioma-like" tumour of the pleura. Needle biopsy and later autopsy showed malignant sarcomatoid tumour. The tumour stained negatively for calretinin and other "mesothelial markers". Diagnosis has important legal implications for the relatives, we therefore find it important to stress that sarcomatoid mesothelioma is usually calretinin-negative.

[Interferon-gamma release assay on suspicion of active tuberculosis?]. / Interferon-gamma release-assay ved mistanke om aktiv tuberkulose?

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this retrospective study was to outline the practical use and clinical value of the immunodiagnostic interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) on suspicion of active Mycobacterium tuberculosis (TB) infection. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study of all patients (n=91) tested with IGRA (Quantiferon-TB-Gold, Celletis International, Australia) for M. tuberculosis infection from 1 January 2005 to the 31 December 2006 at a Danish regional hospital. RESULTS: In 74 patients suspected of active TB, the sensitivity of IGRA was 80% (8/10), the specificity was 85% (50/59), PPV was 47% (8/17) and NPV was 96% (50/52). The positive likelihood ratio (LR) was 5.3 and the negative LR was 0.24. Due to a suboptimal diagnostic setup, the diagnosis of lung cancer in one patient was delayed significantly by a positive IGRA. CONCLUSION: In the current study, IGRA had a high false-positive rate for diagnosing active TB and had a rather low sensitivity which is in line with recent meta analyses. The physicians' use and judgement of this new test seemed suboptimal, as the overwhelming use of IGRA for suspected active TB was not in concordance with international guidelines. IGRA does not differentiate between active and latent M. tuberculosis infection, and IGRA may seldomly be used as a supplementary evaluative tool (with many false negative and "false positive" results).