Pharmacotherapy and pulmonary fibrosis risk after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a prospective nationwide cohort study in the United States.

Background: Pulmonary fibrosis is characterized by lung parenchymal destruction and can increase morbidity and mortality. Pulmonary fibrosis commonly occurs following hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 infection. As there are medications that modify pulmonary fibrosis risk, we investigated whether distinct pharmacotherapies (amiodarone, cancer chemotherapy, corticosteroids, and rituximab) are associated with differences in post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis incidence. Methods: We used the National COVID-19 Cohort Collaboration (N3C) Data Enclave, which aggregates and harmonizes COVID-19 data across the United States, to assess pulmonary fibrosis incidence documented at least 60 days after COVID-19 diagnosis among adults hospitalized between January 1st, 2020 and July 6th, 2022 without pre-existing pulmonary fibrosis. We used propensity scores to match pre-COVID-19 drug-exposed and unexposed cohorts (1:1) based on covariates with known influence on pulmonary fibrosis incidence, and estimated the association of drug exposure with risk for post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis. Sensitivity analyses considered pulmonary fibrosis incidence documented at least 30- or 90-days post-hospitalization and pulmonary fibrosis incidence in the COVID-19-negative N3C population. Findings: Among 5,923,394 patients with COVID-19, we analyzed 452,951 hospitalized adults, among whom pulmonary fibrosis incidence was 1.1 per 100-person-years. 277,984 hospitalized adults with COVID-19 were included in our primary analysis, among whom all drug exposed cohorts were well-matched to unexposed cohorts (standardized mean differences <0.1). The post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis incidence rate ratio (IRR) was 2.5 (95% CI 1.2-5.1, P = 0.01) for rituximab, 1.6 (95% CI 1.3-2.0, P < 0.0001) for chemotherapy, and 1.2 (95% CI 1.0-1.3, P = 0.02) for corticosteroids. Amiodarone exposure had no significant association with post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis (IRR = 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-1.1, P = 0.24). In sensitivity analyses, pre-COVID-19 corticosteroid use was not consistently associated with post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis. In the COVID-19 negative hospitalized population (n = 1,240,461), pulmonary fibrosis incidence was lower overall (0.6 per 100-person-years) and for patients exposed to all four drugs. Interpretation: Recent rituximab or cancer chemotherapy before COVID-19 infection in hospitalized patients is associated with increased risk for post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis. Funding: The analyses described in this publication were conducted with data or tools accessed through the NCATS N3C Data Enclave https://covid.cd2h.org and N3C Attribution & Publication Policy v1.2-2020-08-25b supported by NIHK23HL146942, NIHK08HL150291, NIHK23HL148387, NIHUL1TR002389, NCATSU24 TR002306, and a SECURED grant from the Walder Foundation/Center for Healthcare Delivery Science and Innovation, University of Chicago. WFP received a grant from the Greenwall Foundation. This research was possible because of the patients whose information is included within the data and the organizations (https://ncats.nih.gov/n3c/resources/data-contribution/data-transfer-agreement-signatories) and scientists who have contributed to the on-going development of this community resource (https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaa196).

Cannabidiol inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication through induction of the host ER stress and innate immune responses.

The spread of SARS-CoV-2 and ongoing COVID-19 pandemic underscores the need for new treatments. Here we report that cannabidiol (CBD) inhibits infection of SARS-CoV-2 in cells and mice. CBD and its metabolite 7-OH-CBD, but not THC or other congeneric cannabinoids tested, potently block SARS-CoV-2 replication in lung epithelial cells. CBD acts after viral entry, inhibiting viral gene expression and reversing many effects of SARS-CoV-2 on host gene transcription. CBD inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication in part by up-regulating the host IRE1α RNase endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress response and interferon signaling pathways. In matched groups of human patients from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative, CBD (100 mg/ml oral solution per medical records) had a significant negative association with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests. This study highlights CBD as a potential preventative agent for early-stage SARS-CoV-2 infection and merits future clinical trials. We caution against use of non-medical formulations including edibles, inhalants or topicals as a preventative or treatment therapy at the present time.

Association of Vitamin D Levels, Race/Ethnicity, and Clinical Characteristics With COVID-19 Test Results.

Importance: Deficient (ie, <20 ng/mL) or insufficient (ie, 20 to <30 ng/mL) 25-hydroxyvitamin D (also known as calcifediol) levels are more common in Black individuals than White individuals and are associated with increased coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk. Whether COVID-19 risk is associated with differences in vitamin D levels of 30 ng/mL or greater is not known. Objective: To examine whether COVID-19 test results are associated with differences in vitamin D levels of 30 ng/mL or greater, including for White individuals and for Black individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at an academic medical center in Chicago, Illinois. Participants included individuals with data on vitamin D level within 365 days before COVID-19 testing, which was conducted from March 3 to December 30, 2020. Data were analyzed from September 11, 2020, to February 5, 2021. Exposures: The last vitamin D level before COVID-19 testing was categorized as less than 20 ng/mL (ie, deficient), 20 to less than 30 ng/mL (ie, insufficient), 30 to less than 40 ng/mL, or 40 ng/mL or greater. Treatment was defined by vitamin D type and dose 14 days before COVID-19 testing and treatment changes after last vitamin D level. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was a positive result for COVID-19 in polymerase chain reaction testing. Multivariable analyses tested whether previously measured vitamin D level was associated with having test results positive for COVID-19 in White individuals and in Black individuals, controlling for months and treatment changes since the vitamin D level was measured, as well as demographic characteristics and comorbidity indicators. Results: A total of 4638 individuals (mean [SD] age 52.8 [19.5] years; 3205 [69%] women) had data for a vitamin D level within 1 year before COVID-19 testing, including 2288 (49%) Black individuals, 1999 (43%) White individuals, and 351 individuals (8%) who were another race/ethnicity (eg, Asian, Mideast Indian, >1 race). Stratified by vitamin D level, 1251 individuals (27%) had less than 20 ng/mL, 1267 individuals (27%) had 20 to less than 30 ng/mL, 1023 individuals (22%) had 30 to less than 40 ng/mL, and 1097 individuals (24%) had 40 ng/mL or greater. Lower vitamin D levels were more common in Black individuals (<20 ng/mL: 829 of 2288 Black individuals [36%]) than White individuals (<20 ng/mL: 315 of 1999 White individuals [16%]). A total of 333 individuals (7%) had test results positive for COVID-19, including 102 White individuals (5%) and 211 Black individuals (9%). Multivariate analysis controlling for time since last vitamin D level measurement was used to estimate the outcomes associated with levels 14 days before COVID-19 testing. A positive test result for COVID-19 was not significantly associated with vitamin D levels in White individuals but was associated with vitamin D levels in Black individuals (compared with ≥40 ng/mL: <20 ng/mL incidence rate ratio [IRR], 2.55 [95% CI, 1.26-5.15]; P = .009; 20 to <30 ng/mL IRR, 1.69 [95% CI, 0.75-3.84]; P = .21; 30 to <40 ng/mL IRR, 2.64 [95% CI, 1.24-5.66]; P = .01). Stratified by vitamin D level, estimated COVID-19 positivity rates in Black individuals were 9.72% (95% CI, 6.74%-13.41%) for individuals with a vitamin D level less than 20 ng/mL, 6.47% (95% CI, 3.33%-10.28%) for individuals with a vitamin D level of 20 to less than 30 ng/mL, 10.10% (95% CI, 6.00%-15.47%) for individuals with a vitamin D level of 30 to less than 40 ng/mL, and 3.82% (95% CI, 1.78%-6.68%) for individuals with a vitamin D level of 40 ng/mL or higher. Multivariate analysis in individuals with a vitamin D level of 30 ng/mL or greater found that the IRR of a positive COVID-19 test result was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.94-0.99; P = .008) per 1-ng/mL increase in vitamin D overall and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91-0.98; P = .003) per 1-ng/mL increase in vitamin D in Black individuals. Conclusions and Relevance: In this single-center retrospective cohort study, COVID-19 risk increased among Black individuals with vitamin D level less than 40 ng/mL compared with those with 40 ng/mL or greater and decreased with increasing levels among individuals with levels greater than 30 ng/mL. No significant associations were noted for White individuals. Randomized clinical trials should examine whether increasing vitamin D level to greater than 40 ng/mL affects COVID-19 risk.

Cannabidiol Inhibits SARS-CoV-2 Replication and Promotes the Host Innate Immune Response.

The rapid spread of COVID-19 underscores the need for new treatments. Here we report that cannabidiol (CBD), a compound produced by the cannabis plant, inhibits SARS-CoV-2 infection. CBD and its metabolite, 7-OH-CBD, but not congeneric cannabinoids, potently block SARS-CoV-2 replication in lung epithelial cells. CBD acts after cellular infection, inhibiting viral gene expression and reversing many effects of SARS-CoV-2 on host gene transcription. CBD induces interferon expression and up-regulates its antiviral signaling pathway. A cohort of human patients previously taking CBD had significantly lower SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence of up to an order of magnitude relative to matched pairs or the general population. This study highlights CBD, and its active metabolite, 7-OH-CBD, as potential preventative agents and therapeutic treatments for SARS-CoV-2 at early stages of infection.

Advancing oral health policy through persuasive messaging and effective research measures.

Oral health is often excluded from broad health policy discussions, addressed only in a policy silo. There is a paucity of research to guide policymaking as it relates to oral health. In response, AcademyHealth's Oral Health Interest Group organized a meeting during the 2019 AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting to promote transdisciplinary dialog on the current state of oral health policy and the steps necessary to improve the oral health of Americans. This article summarizes the two main themes that emerged from the proceedings of the Oral Health Interest Group meeting: a) recommendations for advocating the inclusion of oral health in policy discussions and b) critical research topics and measures needed for effective oral health policies in the future.

Association of Vitamin D Status and Other Clinical Characteristics With COVID-19 Test Results.

Importance: Vitamin D treatment has been found to decrease the incidence of viral respiratory tract infection, especially in patients with vitamin D deficiency. Whether vitamin D is associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence is unknown. Objective: To examine whether the last vitamin D status before COVID-19 testing is associated with COVID-19 test results. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study at an urban academic medical center included patients with a 25-hydroxycholecalciferol or 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol level measured within 1 year before being tested for COVID-19 from March 3 to April 10, 2020. Exposures: Vitamin D deficiency was defined by the last measurement of 25-hydroxycholecalciferol less than 20 ng/mL or 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol less than 18 pg/mL before COVID-19 testing. Treatment changes were defined by changes in vitamin D type and dose between the date of the last vitamin D level measurement and the date of COVID-19 testing. Vitamin D deficiency and treatment changes were combined to categorize the most recent vitamin D status before COVID-19 testing as likely deficient (last level deficient and treatment not increased), likely sufficient (last level not deficient and treatment not decreased), and 2 groups with uncertain deficiency (last level deficient and treatment increased, and last level not deficient and treatment decreased). Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome was a positive COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test result. Multivariable analysis tested whether vitamin D status before COVID-19 testing was associated with testing positive for COVID-19, controlling for demographic and comorbidity indicators. Results: A total of 489 patients (mean [SD] age, 49.2 [18.4] years; 366 [75%] women; and 331 [68%] race other than White) had a vitamin D level measured in the year before COVID-19 testing. Vitamin D status before COVID-19 testing was categorized as likely deficient for 124 participants (25%), likely sufficient for 287 (59%), and uncertain for 78 (16%). Overall, 71 participants (15%) tested positive for COVID-19. In multivariate analysis, testing positive for COVID-19 was associated with increasing age up to age 50 years (relative risk, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09; P = .02); non-White race (relative risk, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.26-5.12; P = .009), and likely deficient vitamin D status (relative risk, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.12-2.81; P = .02) compared with likely sufficient vitamin D status. Predicted COVID-19 rates in the deficient group were 21.6% (95% CI, 14.0%-29.2%) vs 12.2%(95% CI, 8.9%-15.4%) in the sufficient group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, likely deficient vitamin D status was associated with increased COVID-19 risk, a finding that suggests that randomized trials may be needed to determine whether vitamin D affects COVID-19 risk.

Association of Vitamin D Deficiency and Treatment with COVID-19 Incidence.

IMPORTANCE: Vitamin D treatment has been found to decrease incidence of viral respiratory tract infection, especially in vitamin D deficiency. It is unknown whether COVID-19 incidence is associated with vitamin D deficiency and treatment. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether vitamin D deficiency and treatment are associated with testing positive for COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study Setting: University of Chicago Medicine Participants: Patients tested for COVID-19 from 3/3/2020-4/10/2020. Vitamin D deficiency was defined by the most recent 25-hydroxycholecalciferol <20ng/ml or 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol <18pg/ml within 1 year before COVID-19 testing. Treatment was defined by the most recent vitamin D type and dose, and treatment changes between the time of the most recent vitamin D level and time of COVID-19 testing. Vitamin D deficiency and treatment changes were combined to categorize vitamin D status at the time of COVID-19 testing as likely deficient(last-level-deficient/treatment-not-increased), likely sufficient(last-level-not-deficient/treatment-not-decreased), or uncertain deficiency(last-level-deficient/treatment-increased or last-level-not-deficient/treatment-decreased). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcome was testing positive for COVID-19. Multivariable analysis tested whether the most recent vitamin D level and treatment changes after that level were associated with testing positive for COVID-19 controlling for demographic and comorbidity indicators. Bivariate analyses of associations of treatment with vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 were performed. RESULTS: Among 4,314 patients tested for COVID-19, 499 had a vitamin D level in the year before testing. Vitamin D status at the time of COVID-19 testing was categorized as likely deficient for 127(25%) patients, likely sufficient for 291(58%) patients, and uncertain for 81(16%) patients. In multivariate analysis, testing positive for COVID-19 was associated with increasing age(RR(age<50)=1.05,p<0.021;RR(age≥50)=1.02,p<0.064)), non-white race(RR=2.54,p<0.01) and being likely vitamin D deficient (deficient/treatment-not-increased:RR=1.77,p<0.02) as compared to likely vitamin D sufficient(not-deficient/treatment-not-decreased), with predicted COVID-19 rates in the vitamin D deficient group of 21.6%(95%CI[14.0%-29.2%] ) versus 12.2%(95%CI[8.9%-15.4%]) in the vitamin D sufficient group. Vitamin D deficiency declined with increasing vitamin D dose, especially of vitamin D3. Vitamin D dose was not significantly associated with testing positive for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Vitamin D deficiency that is not sufficiently treated is associated with COVID-19 risk. Testing and treatment for vitamin D deficiency to address COVID-19 warrant aggressive pursuit and study.

Simulation-based optimization to improve hospital patient assignment to physicians and clinical units.

A fundamental activity in hospital operations is patient assignment, which we define as the process of assigning hospital patients to specific physician services and clinical units based on their diagnosis. When the preferred assignment is not possible, typically due to capacity limits, hospitals often allow for overflow, which is the assignment of patients to other services and/or units. Overflow accelerates assignment, but can also reduce care quality and increase length of stay. This paper develops a discrete-event simulation model to evaluate different assignment strategies. Using a simulation-based optimization approach, we evaluate and heuristically optimize these strategies accounting for expected hospital and physician profit, care quality and patient waiting time. We apply the model using data from the University of Chicago Medical Center. We find that the strategies that use heuristically optimized designation of overflow services and units increase expected profit relative to the capacity-based strategy in which overflow patients are assigned to a service and unit with the most available capacity. We also find further improvement in the strategy that uses heuristically optimized overflow services and units as well as a holding unit that holds patients until a bed in their primary or secondary unit becomes available. Additionally, we demonstrate the effects of these strategies on other performance measures such as patient concentration, waiting time, and outcomes.

A protocol of dual prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism prevention in gynecologic cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a quality improvement protocol for venous thromboembolism prevention in postoperative gynecologic cancer patients. METHODS: On January 1, 2006, we initiated a universal protocol of dual prophylaxis with sequential compression devices and three times daily heparin (or daily low molecular weight heparin) until discharge in gynecologic cancer patients having major surgery. Patients with both malignancy and age over 60 years (or history of prior clot) were discharged on 2 weeks of anticoagulant. Before January 2006, all patients were given sequential compression devices starting before the induction of anesthesia, continuing until discharge from the hospital. Records of gynecologic cancer service patients admitted in 2005 and 2006 were reviewed, excluding patients with a history of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia or those admitted on an anticoagulant. Any pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis diagnosed within 6 weeks of surgery was identified. We performed chi2 and Wilcoxon rank sum tests as well as multivariable regression analysis for confounders. RESULTS: Six of the 311 women meeting inclusion criteria in 2006 (1.9%) and 19 of 294 (6.5%) in 2005 had venous thromboembolism (odds ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.88, multivariable analysis adjusting for baseline differences between the groups). Heparin was given to 98.1% of patients in the hospital in 2006, and 91.1% of those meeting high-risk criteria were discharged on an anticoagulant. No differences in major bleeding complications were seen between years. CONCLUSION: A protocol of dual prophylaxis with prolonged prophylaxis in high-risk patients was successfully implemented and was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of venous thromboembolism without increasing bleeding complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.