Safety and immunogenicity of Ad26.COV2.S in adults: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2a dose-finding study.

BACKGROUND: A single dose of Ad26.COV2.S is well-tolerated and effective in preventing moderate-to-severe disease outcomes due to COVID-19. We evaluated the impact of dose level, number of doses, and dose interval on immunogenicity, reactogenicity, and safety of Ad26.COV2.S in adults. Anamnestic responses were also explored. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 2a study was conducted in adults aged 18-55 years and ≥ 65 years (NCT04535453). Four dose levels (1.25 × 1010, 2.5 × 1010, 5 × 1010, and 1 × 1011 viral particles [vp], single and 2-dose schedules, and dose intervals of 56 and 84 days, were assessed. Four or 6 months post-primary vaccination, Ad26.COV2.S 1.25 × 1010 vp was given to evaluate anamnestic responses. Humoral and cell-mediated immune responses were measured. Reactogenicity and safety were assessed in all participants. RESULTS: All Ad26.COV2.S schedules induced humoral responses with evidence of a dose response relationship. A single dose of Ad26.COV2.S (5 × 1010 vp) induced antibody and cellular immune responses that persisted for up to at least 6 months. In the 2-dose regimens, antibody responses were higher than 1-dose regimens at comparable dose levels, and the magnitude of the immune response increased when the interval between doses was increased (84 days vs 56 days). Rapid, marked immune responses were observed in all groups after vaccine antigen exposure indicating immune memory. Durable immune responses were observed in all groups for up to at least 6 months post-antigen exposure. Strong and consistent correlations between neutralising and binding antibodies were observed CD4 + and CD8 + T cell responses were similar after all regimens. Reactogenicity within 7 days post-vaccination tended to be dose-related. CONCLUSION: The study supports the primary, single dose schedule with Ad26.COV2.S at 5 × 1010 vp and homologous booster vaccination after a 6 month interval. Rapid and marked responses to vaccine antigen exposure indicate induction of immune memory by 1- and 2-dose primary vaccination.

ALDRESS: A Retrospective Pilot Study to Develop a Pharmacological Causality Algorithm for Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS).

Background: The drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome represents a severe form of drug hypersensitivity reaction characterized by significant morbidity, mortality, and long-term sequelae, coupled with limited therapeutic avenues. Accurate identification of the causative drug(s) is paramount for acute management, exploration of safe therapeutic alternatives, and prevention of future occurrences. However, the absence of a standardized diagnostic test and a specific causality algorithm tailored to DRESS poses a significant challenge in its clinical management. Methods: We conducted a retrospective case-control study involving 37 DRESS patients to validate a novel causality algorithm, the ALDRESS, designed explicitly for this syndrome, comparing it against the current standard algorithm, SEFV. Results: The ALDRESS algorithm showcased superior performance, exhibiting an 85.7% sensitivity and 93% specificity with comparable negative predictive values (80.6% vs. 97%). Notably, the ALDRESS algorithm yielded a substantially higher positive predictive value (75%) compared to SEFV (51.40%), achieving an overall accuracy rate of 92%. Conclusions: Our findings underscore the efficacy of the ALDRESS algorithm in accurately attributing causality to drugs implicated in DRESS syndrome. However, further validation studies involving larger, diverse cohorts are warranted to consolidate its clinical utility and broaden its applicability. This study lays the groundwork for a refined causality assessment tool, promising advancements in the diagnosis and management of DRESS syndrome.

Developments in pharmacogenetics, pharmacogenomics, and personalized medicine.

The development of Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics in Western Europe is highly relevant in the worldwide scenario. Despite the usually low institutional support, many research groups, composed of basic and clinical researchers, have been actively working for decades in this field. Their contributions made an international impact and paved the way for further studies and pharmacogenomics implementation in clinical practice. In this manuscript, that makes part of the Special Issue entitled Spanish Pharmacology, we present an analysis of the state of the art of Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics research in Europe, we compare it with the developments in Spain, and we summarize the most salient contributions since 1988 to the present, as well as recent developments in the clinical application of pharmacogenomics knowledge. Finally, we present some considerations on how we could improve translation to clinical practice in this specific scenario.

Implementing pharmacogenetics in clinical trials: considerations about current methodological, ethical, and regulatory challenges.

INTRODUCTION: The implementation of pharmacogenetic analysis within clinical trials faces methodological, ethical, and regulatory challenges, as well as tackling the difficulty in obtaining actionable information with a sufficient level of evidence to enable its integration into routine clinical practice. AREAS COVERED: We discuss the current status of pharmacogenetics integration in clinical trials, underscore the associated challenges, and make some suggestions on the aspects to address in any clinical trial including a pharmacogenetic evaluation. We conducted a literature review, thoroughly reviewed the applicable regulations and available guidelines, and assessed the application dossiers submitted for evaluation to the Ethics committee of Hospital La Paz (Madrid, Spain) to extract information related to inclusion of pharmacogenetics evaluations. EXPERT OPINION: The integration of pharmacogenetics into clinical trials is becoming increasingly common. However, several regulatory, methodological and ethical aspects involved are insufficiently addressed. There is a need for specific and transparent guidelines that establish unified and compliant criteria for methodology, proper handling of samples in compliance with regulations, and the protection of data privacy and confidentiality. Participants should receive complete and appropriate information regarding the purpose, handling, storage, and transfer of their samples and data, and should have the right to decide about their processing.

Results of phase 2 randomized multi-center study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of infusion of memory T cells as adoptive therapy in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia and/or lymphopenia (RELEASE NCT04578210).

BACKGROUND AIMS: There are currently no effective anti-viral treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-hospitalized patients with hypoxemia. Lymphopenia is a biomarker of disease severity usually present in patients who are hospitalized. Approaches to increasing lymphocytes exerting an anti-viral effect must be considered to treat these patients. Following our phase 1 study, we performed a phase 2 randomized multicenter clinical trial in which we evaluated the efficacy of the infusion of allogeneic off-the-shelf CD45RA- memory T cells containing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific T cells from convalescent donors plus the standard of care (SoC) versus just the SoC treatment. METHODS: Eighty-four patients were enrolled in three Spanish centers. The patients were randomized into the infusion of 1 × 106/kg CD45RA- memory T cells or the SoC. We selected four unvaccinated donors based on the expression of interferon gamma SARS-CoV-2-specific response within the CD45RA- memory T cells and the most frequent human leukocyte antigen typing in the Spanish population. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 81 patients. The primary outcome for recovery, defined as the proportion of participants in each group with normalization of fever, oxygen saturation sustained for at least 24 hours and lymphopenia recovery through day 14 or at discharge, was met for the experimental arm. We also observed faster lymphocyte recovery in the experimental group. We did not observe any treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Adoptive cell therapy with off-the-shelf CD45RA- memory T cells containing SAR-CoV-2-specific T cells is safe, effective and accelerates lymphocyte recovery of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and/or lymphopenia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04578210.

The Current Mismatch Between COVID-19 Clinical Trial Design and the Evolving Profile of Hospitalized Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

Evaluating 100 adult coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients at a Madrid hospital, we identified a mismatch between current clinical trial designs and the evolving profile of hospitalized patients. Most patients were ineligible due to design constraints, suggesting a need to rethink trial criteria for a more accurate representation of the hospitalized COVID-19 cohort.

Advancing pharmacogenetic testing in a tertiary hospital: a retrospective analysis after 10 years of activity.

The field of pharmacogenetics (PGx) holds great promise in advancing personalized medicine by adapting treatments based on individual genetic profiles. Despite its benefits, there are still economic, ethical and institutional barriers that hinder its implementation in our healthcare environment. A retrospective analysis approach of anonymized data sourced from electronic health records was performed, encompassing a diverse patient population and evaluating key parameters such as prescribing patterns and test results, to assess the impact of pharmacogenetic testing. A head-to-head comparison with previously published activity results within the same pharmacogenetic laboratory was also conducted to contrast the progress made after 10 years. The analysis revealed significant utilization of pharmacogenetic testing in daily clinical practice, with 1,145 pharmacogenetic tests performed over a 1-year period and showing a 35% growth rate increase over time. Of the 17 different medical departments that sought PGx tests, the Oncology department accounted for the highest number, representing 58.47% of all genotyped patients. A total of 1,000 PGx tests were requested for individuals susceptible to receive a dose modification based on genotype, and 76 individuals received a genotype-guided dose adjustment. This study presents a comprehensive descriptive analysis of real-world data obtained from a public tertiary hospital laboratory specialized in pharmacogenetic testing, and presents data that strongly endorse the integration of pharmacogenetic testing into everyday clinical practice.

Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) Levels in Post-COVID Follow-Up: Differences According to the Severity of COVID-19.

To evaluate KL-6 levels in medium-term post-COVID and to compare them in three groups categorised by the severity of COVID-19, we conducted a real-world, retrospective, cohort study. Data from the COVID-19 episode and follow-up during the post-COVID phase were extracted from the COVID@HULP and POSTCOVID@HULP databases, respectively. For the post-COVID period we included demographics, medical history, symptoms, quality of life, physical activity, anxiety and depression status and laboratory results. Patients were categorised into three groups based on the severity of COVID-19: Group 1 (inpatient critical), Group 2 (inpatient non-critical) and Group 3 (hospitalised at home). KL-6 was measured during the follow-up of the three groups. In all, 802 patients were included (Group 1 = 59; Group 2 = 296; Group 3 = 447 patients). The median age was 59 years (48-70), and 362 (45.2%) were males. At admission, fibrinogen and ferritin levels were lower in Group 3 than in the other groups (p < 0.001). Follow-up data were obtained 124 days (97-149) after the diagnosis of COVID-19. The median levels of fibrinogen, ferritin and KL-6 at follow-up were 336 mg/dL (276-413), 80.5 ng/mL (36-174.3) and 326 U/mL (240.3-440.3), respectively. KL-6 levels were lower in Group 3 than in the other groups (298 U/mL (231.5-398) vs. 381.5 U/mL (304-511.8) (Group 1) and 372 U/mL (249-483) (Group 2) (p < 0.001)). KL-6 was associated with ferritin (p < 0.001), fibrinogen (p < 0.001), D-dimer (p < 0.001) and gamma-glutamyl transferase (p < 0.001). KL-6 levels are less elevated at medium-term post-COVID follow-up in patients with mild COVID-19 than in those with moderate or severe disease. KL-6 is associated with systemic inflammatory, hepatic enzyme and thrombosis biomarkers.

Evaluation of factors associated with recruitment rates in early phase clinical trials based on the European Clinical Trials Register data.

Effective participant recruitment is a critical challenge in clinical trials. Inadequate enrollment of participants can precipitate delays, escalated costs, and compromise scientific integrity. Despite its relevance, particularly during the early phases, it persists as an obstacle in the field of clinical research. The primary aim of this study was to analyze the recruitment rates of early-phase clinical trials and evaluate their potential associations with key trial characteristics. Using a descriptive and statistical analysis, a research study was conducted based on the early-phase trials registered at the European Clinical Trials Register (EU-CTR), spanning the timeframe from January 2017 to December 2021. Among the 194 trials examined, we found median recruitment rates of 68%. A more detailed exploration revealed a greater level of success in terms of recruitment achievement in pediatric trials when compared to trials involving adults, non-oncologic trials, or those also developed in non-European countries. It is important to underscore that only 69 trials out of the total managed to conclude recruitment, with the most prevalent reason for premature cessation being the presence of efficacy and safety issues or sponsor's strategy. This number can be greatly improved. Despite certain disparities observed in the information within EU-CTR, we have successfully determined the recruitment rates of the studies and established associations with some of the clinical trial characteristics analyzed. Owing to the inherent constraints of this study, further research is warranted to gain a comprehensive understanding of the intricate interplay between trial characteristics and their impact on recruitment rates in early-phase studies.

Academia and industry agreement on a feasibility tool for first-time-in-human clinical trial units.

First-time-in-human (FTIH) trials are designed to generate information on the safety, tolerability, as well as the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics profile of new drugs. To ensure the safety of participants, these trials need to be conducted at specifically equipped phase I clinical trial units (CTUs). In accordance with the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) Guideline for Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and the European Union (EU) regulatory guidelines, one of the aims of the European Regime Accelerator for Tuberculosis (ERA4TB) project is to collaboratively create a feasibility tool, through a partnership between public and private entities, for the validation of CTUs selected to conduct FTIH trials. A feasibility form, encompassing nine sections, was created to gather information on the unit in relation to key attributes of FTIH trials. Collaboratively, industry and academic partners defined the minimal criteria to ensure the adherence of CTUs to the principles of ICH GCP and regulations outlined by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for the execution of FTIH trials. Subsequently, all CTUs available for the project were assessed for FTIH trial eligibility. The introduction of the certification procedure through the feasibility tool within ERA4TB resulted in the accreditation of the five academic CTUs, which are now prepared to carry out FTIH trials as part of the Consortium. The developed feasibility tool aims to establish open and widely used minimum requirements for the validation of academic CTUs as FTIH units, marking it as the inaugural tool for CTU validation resulting from the collaboration between industry and academia within the ERA4TB project. The established partnership has enabled an innovative and novel way of working.

Rationale for combined therapies in severe-to-critical COVID-19 patients.

An unprecedented global social and economic impact as well as a significant number of fatalities have been brought on by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), produced by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Acute SARS-CoV-2 infection can, in certain situations, cause immunological abnormalities, leading to an anomalous innate and adaptive immune response. While most patients only experience mild symptoms and recover without the need for mechanical ventilation, a substantial percentage of those who are affected develop severe respiratory illness, which can be fatal. The absence of effective therapies when disease progresses to a very severe condition coupled with the incomplete understanding of COVID-19's pathogenesis triggers the need to develop innovative therapeutic approaches for patients at high risk of mortality. As a result, we investigate the potential contribution of promising combinatorial cell therapy to prevent death in critical patients.

Identifying biomarkers of treatment response to ciclosporin in atopic dermatitis through multiomic predictive modelling: DERMATOMICS study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: There is a need to optimise the management of atopic dermatitis (AD), improving the efficacy of treatments and reducing the toxicity associated with them. Although the efficacy of ciclosporine (CsA) in the treatment of AD has been thoroughly documented in the literature, the optimal dose has not been yet established. The use of multiomic predictive models of treatment response could optimise CsA therapy in AD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is a low-intervention phase 4 trial to optimise the treatment of patients with moderate-severe AD requiring systemic treatment. The primary objectives are to identify biomarkers that could allow for the selection of responders and non-responders to first-line treatment with CsA and to develop a response prediction model to optimise the CsA dose and treatment regimen in responding patients based on these biomarkers. The study is divided into two cohorts: the first comprised of patients starting treatment with CsA (cohort 1), and the second, of patients already receiving or who have received CsA therapy (cohort 2). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study activities began following authorisation by the Spanish Regulatory Agency (AEMPS) and the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of La Paz University Hospital approval. Trial results will be submitted for publication in an open access peer-reviewed medical speciality-specific publication.Trial registration of this study can be located at the EU Clinical Trials Register, available from https://euclinicaltrials.eu/search-for-clinical-trials/?lang=en. Our clinical trial was registered in the website before the enrolment of the first patient complying with European regulations. EU Clinical Trials Register is a primary registry according the WHO. Once our trial was included in a primary and official registry, in order to extend the accessibility to our research, we also registered it retrospectively in clinicaltrials.gov; however, this is not mandatory as per our regulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05692843.

Clinical research with targeted drugs in paediatric oncology.

The development of targeted drugs in paediatric oncology has been notoriously slow, in part due to the peculiarities of this rare and highly heterogeneous population. To provide therapeutic breakthroughs for the highest risk subgroups of childhood cancer, innovative research solutions have been implemented in the last several years by different international collaborative groups and regulators. Here, we discuss and summarise some of these approaches, as well as challenges and unmet needs that are still being addressed. A wide range of topics were covered in this review including molecular diagnosis optimisation, innovative research methodologies, big data approaches, trial enrolment strategies, and improvements in regulation and preclinical research platforms.

Prognostic Impact of Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Germline Variants in Unresectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Platin-Based Chemotherapy.

Platin-based chemotherapy is the standard treatment for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, resistance to this therapy is a major obstacle in successful treatment. In this study, we aimed to investigate the impact of several pharmacogenetic variants in patients with unresectable NSCLC treated with platin-based chemotherapy. Our results showed that DPYD variant carriers had significantly shorter progression-free survival and overall survival compared to DPYD wild-type patients, whereas DPD deficiency was not associated with a higher incidence of high-grade toxicity. For the first time, our study provides evidence that DPYD gene variants are associated with resistance to platin-based chemotherapy in NSCLC patients. Although further studies are needed to confirm these findings and explore the underlying mechanisms of this association, our results suggest that genetic testing of DPYD variants may be useful for identifying patients at a higher risk of platin-based chemotherapy resistance and might be helpful in guiding future personalized treatment strategies in NSCLC patients.

Safety and immunogenicity of the protein-based PHH-1V compared to BNT162b2 as a heterologous SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccine in adults vaccinated against COVID-19: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority phase IIb trial.

Background: A SARS-CoV-2 protein-based heterodimer vaccine, PHH-1V, has been shown to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy young adults in a first-in-human, Phase I/IIa study dose-escalation trial. Here, we report the interim results of the Phase IIb HH-2, where the immunogenicity and safety of a heterologous booster with PHH-1V is assessed versus a homologous booster with BNT162b2 at 14, 28 and 98 days after vaccine administration. Methods: The HH-2 study is an ongoing multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority Phase IIb trial, where participants 18 years or older who had received two doses of BNT162b2 were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive a booster dose of vaccine-either heterologous (PHH-1V group) or homologous (BNT162b2 group)-in 10 centres in Spain. Eligible subjects were allocated to treatment stratified by age group (18-64 versus ≥65 years) with approximately 10% of the sample enrolled in the older age group. The primary endpoints were humoral immunogenicity measured by changes in levels of neutralizing antibodies (PBNA) against the ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 strain after the PHH-1V or the BNT162b2 boost, and the safety and tolerability of PHH-1V as a boost. The secondary endpoints were to compare changes in levels of neutralizing antibodies against different variants of SARS-CoV-2 and the T-cell responses towards the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein peptides. The exploratory endpoint was to assess the number of subjects with SARS-CoV-2 infections ≥14 days after PHH-1V booster. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05142553. Findings: From 15 November 2021, 782 adults were randomly assigned to PHH-1V (n = 522) or BNT162b2 (n = 260) boost vaccine groups. The geometric mean titre (GMT) ratio of neutralizing antibodies on days 14, 28 and 98, shown as BNT162b2 active control versus PHH-1V, was, respectively, 1.68 (p < 0.0001), 1.31 (p = 0.0007) and 0.86 (p = 0.40) for the ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 strain; 0.62 (p < 0.0001), 0.65 (p < 0.0001) and 0.56 (p = 0.003) for the Beta variant; 1.01 (p = 0.92), 0.88 (p = 0.11) and 0.52 (p = 0.0003) for the Delta variant; and 0.59 (p ≤ 0.0001), 0.66 (p < 0.0001) and 0.57 (p = 0.0028) for the Omicron BA.1 variant. Additionally, PHH-1V as a booster dose induced a significant increase of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells expressing IFN-γ on day 14. There were 458 participants who experienced at least one adverse event (89.3%) in the PHH-1V and 238 (94.4%) in the BNT162b2 group. The most frequent adverse events were injection site pain (79.7% and 89.3%), fatigue (27.5% and 42.1%) and headache (31.2 and 40.1%) for the PHH-1V and the BNT162b2 groups, respectively. A total of 52 COVID-19 cases occurred from day 14 post-vaccination (10.14%) for the PHH-1V group and 30 (11.90%) for the BNT162b2 group (p = 0.45), and none of the subjects developed severe COVID-19. Interpretation: Our interim results from the Phase IIb HH-2 trial show that PHH-1V as a heterologous booster vaccine, when compared to BNT162b2, although it does not reach a non-inferior neutralizing antibody response against the Wuhan-Hu-1 strain at days 14 and 28 after vaccination, it does so at day 98. PHH-1V as a heterologous booster elicits a superior neutralizing antibody response against the previous circulating Beta and the currently circulating Omicron BA.1 SARS-CoV-2 variants in all time points assessed, and for the Delta variant on day 98 as well. Moreover, the PHH-1V boost also induces a strong and balanced T-cell response. Concerning the safety profile, subjects in the PHH-1V group report significantly fewer adverse events than those in the BNT162b2 group, most of mild intensity, and both vaccine groups present comparable COVID-19 breakthrough cases, none of them severe. Funding: HIPRA SCIENTIFIC, S.L.U.

Impacto de los corticoides sistémicos en el tiempo de hospitalización en pacientes con COVID-19 / Impact of systemic corticosteroids on length of hospitalization among patients with COVID-19

Objetivo: la COVID-19 supuso una amenaza para la capacidad hospitalaria por el elevado número de ingresos, lo que llevó al desarrollo de diversas estrategias para liberar y crear nuevas camas hospitalarias. Dada la importancia de los corticoides sistémicos en esta enfermedad, se evaluó la eficacia de estos en la reducción de la duración de la estancia hospitalaria (EH) y se comparó el efecto de 3 corticosteroides diferentes sobre este resultado.Métodose realizó un estudio de vida real de diseño tipo cohorte retrospectiva y controlado. Se analizó una base de datos hospitalaria de 3.934 pacientes hospitalizados con diagnóstico de COVID-19 en un hospital terciario entre abril y mayo de 2020. Se comparó un grupo de enfermos que recibieron corticosteroides sistémicos (grupo con corticoides [GC]) frente a un grupo control que no recibió corticosteroides sistémicos (grupo sin corticoides [GSC]) emparejado por edad, sexo y gravedad de la enfermedad mediante una puntuación de propensión. La decisión de prescribir glucocorticoides dependía principalmente del criterio del médico responsable.Resultadosse compararon un total de 199 pacientes hospitalizados en el GC con 199 en el GSC. La EH fue más corta para el GC que para el GSC (mediana=3 [rango intercuartílico=0-10] vs. 5 [2-8,5]; p=0,005, respectivamente), mostrando un 43% más de probabilidad de ser hospitalizado ≤4 días que >4 días cuando se usaron corticosteroides. Además, esta diferencia solo la mostraron aquellos tratados con dexametasona (76,3% hospitalizados ≤4 días vs. 23,7% hospitalizados >4 días [p<0,001]). Los niveles de ferritina sérica, glóbulos blancos y plaquetas fueron más elevados en el GC. No se observaron diferencias en la mortalidad ni en el ingreso a la unidad de cuidados intensivos. (AU)

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome.MéthodWe conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team.ResultsA total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median=3 [interquartile range=0–10] vs. 5 [2–8.5]; p=0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤4 days than >4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised >4 days [p<0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed.ConclusionsTreatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone. (AU)

Impact of systemic corticosteroids on length of hospitalization among patients with COVID-19. / [Artículo traducido] Impacto de los corticoides sistémicos en el tiempo de hospitalización en pacientes con COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome. MéTHOD: We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team. RESULTS: A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median=3 [interquartile range=0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p=0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤4 days than >4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised >4 days [p<0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

Immunogenicity and safety of the non-typable Haemophilus influenzae-Moraxella catarrhalis (NTHi-Mcat) vaccine administered following the recombinant zoster vaccine versus administration alone: Results from a randomized, phase 2a, non-inferiority trial.

A candidate AS01-adjuvanted vaccine containing four surface proteins from non-typable Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis (NTHi-Mcat) has been developed to help prevent exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Sequential administration of different vaccines containing the same AS01-adjuvant system could lead to immune interference. We compared administration of NTHi-Mcat following AS01-adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) versus NTHi-Mcat alone. This phase 2a, open-label trial (NCT03894969) randomized healthy current or former smokers (50-80 years) without COPD to administration of NTHi-Mcat at 1, 3 or 6 months after RZV or to NTHi-Mcat alone (2-dose for both vaccines). Primary outcome was non-inferiority of the humoral immune response to NTHi-Mcat administered 1 month after RZV versus NTHi-Mcat alone, evaluated by specific antibody geometric mean concentration (GMC) ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The per-protocol set included 411 participants. Primary objective was met; lower limit of the 95%CI for the GMC ratio above 0.667 for all four vaccine antigens, 1 month after the second NTHi-Mcat dose. NTHi-Mcat induced similar immune response regardless of whether administered alone or 1, 3 or 6 months following RZV. Safety and reactogenicity profiles were acceptable; adverse event frequency was similar among study groups. Injection site pain was the most common symptom. No new safety concerns were identified. The study demonstrated non-inferiority of the immune response elicited by NTHi-Mcat administered sequentially to RZV versus NTHi-Mcat alone, indicating no immune interference. Starting from 1 month, no specific interval is required between RZV and NTHi-Mcat containing the same AS01-adjuvant system components in different quantities.

Impact of systemic corticosteroids on hospital length of stay among patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome. METHODS: We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team. RESULTS: A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median = 3 [interquartile range = 0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p = 0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤ 4 days than > 4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤ 4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised > 4 days [p < 0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

No changes in hemostasis after COVID-19-heterologous vaccination schedule: A subanalysis of the phase 2 CombiVacS study.

Background: Several cases of unusual thrombotic events and thrombocytopenia were described after vaccination with recombinant adenoviral vectors encoding the spike protein antigen of SARS-CoV-2. Objectives: The objective of this study was to elucidate the impact of a COVID-19 heterologous vaccination schedule, including priming with adenovirus vaccine, on hemostasis profiles. Methods: The present study is a subanalysis of the CombiVacS clinical trial initiated in April 2021 that included adult participants previously vaccinated with a single dose of ChAdOx1-S. Between 8 and 12 weeks after vaccination, they were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either BNT162b2 vaccine (intervention group, n = 99) or continue observation (control group, n = 50). Samples drawn before and 28 days after a vaccination with BNT162b2 were analyzed for platelet count and markers of hemostasis (D-dimer, anti-PF4 antibodies, cfDNA, PAI-1, thrombin generation, and serum capacity to activate platelets). Results: Platelet count from all participants after receiving BNT162b2 was within the normal range. Anti-PF4 antibodies were present in 26% and 18% of the subjects from the control and intervention groups, respectively, at day 28. In most cases, the levels of anti-PF4 antibodies were high before receiving BNT162b2. Serum from these participants did not activate platelets from healthy controls. There were no differences between the groups in PAI-1 and cfDNA plasma levels. According to the D-dimer plasma concentration, the thrombin generation test showed that none of the participants had a procoagulant profile. Conclusion: Our data suggest that the heterologous vaccination against COVID-19 with ChAdOx1-S and a second dose with BNT162b2 might be safe in terms of haemostasis.