Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 66
Filtrar
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 7(4): e244954, 2024 Apr 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38573635

RESUMEN

Importance: On June 21, 2023, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended the first respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccines for adults aged 60 years and older using shared clinical decision-making. Understanding the severity of RSV disease in adults can help guide this clinical decision-making. Objective: To describe disease severity among adults hospitalized with RSV and compare it with the severity of COVID-19 and influenza disease by vaccination status. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, adults aged 18 years and older admitted to the hospital with acute respiratory illness and laboratory-confirmed RSV, SARS-CoV-2, or influenza infection were prospectively enrolled from 25 hospitals in 20 US states from February 1, 2022, to May 31, 2023. Clinical data during each patient's hospitalization were collected using standardized forms. Data were analyzed from August to October 2023. Exposures: RSV, SARS-CoV-2, or influenza infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Using multivariable logistic regression, severity of RSV disease was compared with COVID-19 and influenza severity, by COVID-19 and influenza vaccination status, for a range of clinical outcomes, including the composite of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and in-hospital death. Results: Of 7998 adults (median [IQR] age, 67 [54-78] years; 4047 [50.6%] female) included, 484 (6.1%) were hospitalized with RSV, 6422 (80.3%) were hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1092 (13.7%) were hospitalized with influenza. Among patients with RSV, 58 (12.0%) experienced IMV or death, compared with 201 of 1422 unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 (14.1%) and 458 of 5000 vaccinated patients with COVID-19 (9.2%), as well as 72 of 699 unvaccinated patients with influenza (10.3%) and 20 of 393 vaccinated patients with influenza (5.1%). In adjusted analyses, the odds of IMV or in-hospital death were not significantly different among patients hospitalized with RSV and unvaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.59-1.13; P = .22) or influenza (aOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.82-1.76; P = .35); however, the odds of IMV or death were significantly higher among patients hospitalized with RSV compared with vaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (aOR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.02-1.86; P = .03) or influenza disease (aOR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.62-4.86; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults hospitalized in this US cohort during the 16 months before the first RSV vaccine recommendations, RSV disease was less common but similar in severity compared with COVID-19 or influenza disease among unvaccinated patients and more severe than COVID-19 or influenza disease among vaccinated patients for the most serious outcomes of IMV or death.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Masculino , Virus Sincitiales Respiratorios , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , COVID-19/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas contra la Influenza/uso terapéutico , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/epidemiología , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/terapia
2.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 73(8): 180-188, 2024 Feb 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421945

RESUMEN

In September 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended updated 2023-2024 (monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccination for all persons aged ≥6 months to prevent COVID-19, including severe disease. However, few estimates of updated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended illness are available. This analysis evaluated VE of an updated COVID-19 vaccine dose against COVID-19-associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) encounters and hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during September 2023-January 2024 using a test-negative, case-control design with data from two CDC VE networks. VE against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 51% (95% CI = 47%-54%) during the first 7-59 days after an updated dose and 39% (95% CI = 33%-45%) during the 60-119 days after an updated dose. VE estimates against COVID-19-associated hospitalization from two CDC VE networks were 52% (95% CI = 47%-57%) and 43% (95% CI = 27%-56%), with a median interval from updated dose of 42 and 47 days, respectively. Updated COVID-19 vaccine provided increased protection against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters and hospitalization among immunocompetent adults. These results support CDC recommendations for updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination. All persons aged ≥6 months should receive updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Adolescente , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Comités Consultivos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Hospitalización
3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2023 Dec 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38051664

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Influenza circulation during the 2022-2023 season in the United States largely returned to pre-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-pandemic patterns and levels. Influenza A(H3N2) viruses were detected most frequently this season, predominately clade 3C.2a1b.2a, a close antigenic match to the vaccine strain. METHODS: To understand effectiveness of the 2022-2023 influenza vaccine against influenza-associated hospitalization, organ failure, and death, a multicenter sentinel surveillance network in the United States prospectively enrolled adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness between 1 October 2022, and 28 February 2023. Using the test-negative design, vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates against influenza-associated hospitalization, organ failures, and death were measured by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in influenza-positive case-patients and influenza-negative, SARS-CoV-2-negative control-patients. RESULTS: A total of 3707 patients, including 714 influenza cases (33% vaccinated) and 2993 influenza- and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-negative controls (49% vaccinated) were analyzed. VE against influenza-associated hospitalization was 37% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 27%-46%) and varied by age (18-64 years: 47% [30%-60%]; ≥65 years: 28% [10%-43%]), and virus (A[H3N2]: 29% [6%-46%], A[H1N1]: 47% [23%-64%]). VE against more severe influenza-associated outcomes included: 41% (29%-50%) against influenza with hypoxemia treated with supplemental oxygen; 65% (56%-72%) against influenza with respiratory, cardiovascular, or renal failure treated with organ support; and 66% (40%-81%) against influenza with respiratory failure treated with invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: During an early 2022-2023 influenza season with a well-matched influenza vaccine, vaccination was associated with reduced risk of influenza-associated hospitalization and organ failure.

4.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 72(40): 1083-1088, 2023 Oct 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37796753

RESUMEN

On June 21, 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccination for adults aged ≥60 years, offered to individual adults using shared clinical decision-making. Informed use of these vaccines requires an understanding of RSV disease severity. To characterize RSV-associated severity, 5,784 adults aged ≥60 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness and laboratory-confirmed RSV, SARS-CoV-2, or influenza infection were prospectively enrolled from 25 hospitals in 20 U.S. states during February 1, 2022-May 31, 2023. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare RSV disease severity with COVID-19 and influenza severity on the basis of the following outcomes: 1) standard flow (<30 L/minute) oxygen therapy, 2) high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV), 3) intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and 4) invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death. Overall, 304 (5.3%) enrolled adults were hospitalized with RSV, 4,734 (81.8%) with COVID-19 and 746 (12.9%) with influenza. Patients hospitalized with RSV were more likely to receive standard flow oxygen, HFNC or NIV, and ICU admission than were those hospitalized with COVID-19 or influenza. Patients hospitalized with RSV were more likely to receive IMV or die compared with patients hospitalized with influenza (adjusted odds ratio = 2.08; 95% CI = 1.33-3.26). Among hospitalized older adults, RSV was less common, but was associated with more severe disease than COVID-19 or influenza. High disease severity in older adults hospitalized with RSV is important to consider in shared clinical decision-making regarding RSV vaccination.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Gripe Humana , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio , Virus Sincitial Respiratorio Humano , Humanos , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/terapia , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/terapia , SARS-CoV-2 , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/epidemiología , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/terapia , Hospitalización , Gravedad del Paciente , Oxígeno
5.
Crit Care Med ; 51(12): e269-e274, 2023 12 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37695136

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Interleukin-18 (IL-18) plasma level and latent class analysis (LCA) have separately been shown to predict prognosis and treatment response in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). IL-18 is a measure of inflammasome activation, a pathway potentially distinct from inflammation captured by biomarkers defining previously published LCA classes. We hypothesized that elevated IL-18 would identify distinct "high-risk" patients not captured by prior LCA classifications. DESIGN: Statins for acutely injured lungs from sepsis (SAILS) and hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibition with simvastatin in acute lung injury to reduce pulmonary dysfunction trial (HARP-2) are two large randomized, controlled trials in ARDS in which both LCA assignments and IL-18 levels were shown to predict mortality. We first evaluated the overlap between high IL-18 levels (≥ 800 pg/mL) with prior LCA class assignments using McNemar's test and then tested the correlation between IL-18 and LCA biomarkers using Pearson's exact test on log-2 transformed values. Our primary analysis was the association of IL-18 level with 60-day mortality in the hypoinflammatory LCA class, which was assessed using the Fisher exact test and Cox proportional hazards modeling adjusting for age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score, and gender. Secondary analyses included the association of IL-18 and LCA with mortality within each IL-18/LCA subgroup. SETTING: Secondary analysis of two multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trials of ARDS patients. SUBJECTS: Six hundred eighty-three patients in SAILS and 511 patients in HARP-2. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We found that 33% of patients in SAILS and HARP-2 were discordant by IL-18 level and LCA class. We further found that IL-18 level was only modestly correlated (0.17-0.47) with cytokines used in the LCA assignment. A substantial subset of individuals classified as hypoinflammatory by LCA (14% of SAILS and 43% of HARP-2) were classified as high risk by elevated IL-18. These individuals were at high risk for mortality in both SAILS (42% 60-d mortality, odds ratio [OR] 3.3; 95% CI, 1.8-6.1; p < 0.001) and HARP-2 (27% 60-d mortality, OR 2.1; 95% CI, 1.2-3.8; p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Plasma IL-18 level provides important additional prognostic information to LCA subphenotypes defined largely by traditional inflammatory biomarkers in two large ARDS cohorts.


Asunto(s)
Interleucina-18 , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Humanos , Análisis de Clases Latentes , Estudios Retrospectivos , Citocinas , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapia , Biomarcadores , Interleucina-8
7.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 20(10): 1465-1474, 2023 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37478340

RESUMEN

Rationale: Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction is common among patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease (COVID-19); however, its epidemiology may depend on the echocardiographic parameters used to define it. Objectives: To evaluate the prevalence of abnormalities in three common echocardiographic parameters of RV function among patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), as well as the effect of RV dilatation on differential parameter abnormality and the association of RV dysfunction with 60-day mortality. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ICU patients with COVID-19 between March 4, 2020, and March 4, 2021, who received a transthoracic echocardiogram within 48 hours before to at most 7 days after ICU admission. RV dysfunction and dilatation, respectively, were defined by guideline thresholds for tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), RV fractional area change, RV free wall longitudinal strain (RVFWS), and RV basal dimension or RV end-diastolic area. Association of RV dysfunction with 60-day mortality was assessed through logistic regression adjusting for age, prior history of congestive heart failure, invasive ventilation at the time of transthoracic echocardiogram, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score. Results: A total of 116 patients were included, of whom 69% had RV dysfunction by one or more parameters, and 36.3% of these had RV dilatation. The three most common patterns of RV dysfunction were the presence of three abnormalities, the combination of abnormal RVFWS and TAPSE, and isolated TAPSE abnormality. Patients with RV dilatation had worse RV fractional area change (24% vs. 36%; P = 0.001), worse RVFWS (16.3% vs. 19.1%; P = 0.005), higher RV systolic pressure (45 mm Hg vs. 31 mm Hg; P = 0.001) but similar TAPSE (13 mm vs. 13 mm; P = 0.30) compared with those with normal RV size. After multivariable adjustment, 60-day mortality was significantly associated with RV dysfunction (odds ratio, 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-9.44), as was the presence of at least two parameter abnormalities. Conclusions: ICU patients with COVID-19 had significant heterogeneity in RV function abnormalities present with different patterns associated with RV dilatation. RV dysfunction by any parameter was associated with increased mortality. Therefore, a multiparameter evaluation may be critical in recognizing RV dysfunction in COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Disfunción Ventricular Derecha , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Disfunción Ventricular Derecha/diagnóstico por imagen , Disfunción Ventricular Derecha/epidemiología , COVID-19/complicaciones , Ecocardiografía/métodos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Función Ventricular Derecha
8.
Lancet Respir Med ; 11(9): 791-803, 2023 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37348524

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There is a clinical need for therapeutics for COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure whose 60-day mortality remains at 30-50%. Aviptadil, a lung-protective neuropeptide, and remdesivir, a nucleotide prodrug of an adenosine analog, were compared with placebo among patients with COVID-19 acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. METHODS: TESICO was a randomised trial of aviptadil and remdesivir versus placebo at 28 sites in the USA. Hospitalised adult patients were eligible for the study if they had acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and were within 4 days of the onset of respiratory failure. Participants could be randomly assigned to both study treatments in a 2 × 2 factorial design or to just one of the agents. Participants were randomly assigned with a web-based application. For each site, randomisation was stratified by disease severity (high-flow nasal oxygen or non-invasive ventilation vs invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO]), and four strata were defined by remdesivir and aviptadil eligibility, as follows: (1) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil and remdesivir in the 2 × 2 factorial design; participants were equally randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to intravenous aviptadil plus remdesivir, aviptadil plus remdesivir matched placebo, aviptadil matched placebo plus remdesvir, or aviptadil placebo plus remdesivir placebo; (2) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil only because remdesivir was started before randomisation; (3) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil only because remdesivir was contraindicated; and (4) eligible for randomisation to remdesivir only because aviptadil was contraindicated. For participants in strata 2-4, randomisation was 1:1 to the active agent or matched placebo. Aviptadil was administered as a daily 12-h infusion for 3 days, targeting 600 pmol/kg on infusion day 1, 1200 pmol/kg on day 2, and 1800 pmol/kg on day 3. Remdesivir was administered as a 200 mg loading dose, followed by 100 mg daily maintenance doses for up to a 10-day total course. For participants assigned to placebo for either agent, matched saline placebo was administered in identical volumes. For both treatment comparisons, the primary outcome, assessed at day 90, was a six-category ordinal outcome: (1) at home (defined as the type of residence before hospitalisation) and off oxygen (recovered) for at least 77 days, (2) at home and off oxygen for 49-76 days, (3) at home and off oxygen for 1-48 days, (4) not hospitalised but either on supplemental oxygen or not at home, (5) hospitalised or in hospice care, or (6) dead. Mortality up to day 90 was a key secondary outcome. The independent data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping the aviptadil trial on May 25, 2022, for futility. On June 9, 2022, the sponsor stopped the trial of remdesivir due to slow enrolment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04843761. FINDINGS: Between April 21, 2021, and May 24, 2022, we enrolled 473 participants in the study. For the aviptadil comparison, 471 participants were randomly assigned to aviptadil or matched placebo. The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 461 participants who received at least a partial infusion of aviptadil (231 participants) or aviptadil matched placebo (230 participants). For the remdesivir comparison, 87 participants were randomly assigned to remdesivir or matched placebo and all received some infusion of remdesivir (44 participants) or remdesivir matched placebo (43 participants). 85 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analyses for both agents (ie, those enrolled in the 2 x 2 factorial). For the aviptadil versus placebo comparison, the median age was 57 years (IQR 46-66), 178 (39%) of 461 participants were female, and 246 (53%) were Black, Hispanic, Asian or other (vs 215 [47%] White participants). 431 (94%) of 461 participants were in an intensive care unit at baseline, with 271 (59%) receiving high-flow nasal oxygen or non-invasive ventiliation, 185 (40%) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, and five (1%) receiving ECMO. The odds ratio (OR) for being in a better category of the primary efficacy endpoint for aviptadil versus placebo at day 90, from a model stratified by baseline disease severity, was 1·11 (95% CI 0·80-1·55; p=0·54). Up to day 90, 86 participants in the aviptadil group and 83 in the placebo group died. The cumulative percentage who died up to day 90 was 38% in the aviptadil group and 36% in the placebo group (hazard ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·77-1·41; p=0·78). The primary safety outcome of death, serious adverse events, organ failure, serious infection, or grade 3 or 4 adverse events up to day 5 occurred in 146 (63%) of 231 patients in the aviptadil group compared with 129 (56%) of 230 participants in the placebo group (OR 1·40, 95% CI 0·94-2·08; p=0·10). INTERPRETATION: Among patients with COVID-19-associated acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, aviptadil did not significantly improve clinical outcomes up to day 90 when compared with placebo. The smaller than planned sample size for the remdesivir trial did not permit definitive conclusions regarding safety or efficacy. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Adulto , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , COVID-19/complicaciones , SARS-CoV-2 , Resultado del Tratamiento , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/tratamiento farmacológico , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/etiología , Oxígeno
9.
Vaccine ; 41(29): 4249-4256, 2023 06 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37301704

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Accurate determination of COVID-19 vaccination status is necessary to produce reliable COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates. Data comparing differences in COVID-19 VE by vaccination sources (i.e., immunization information systems [IIS], electronic medical records [EMR], and self-report) are limited. We compared the number of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses identified by each of these sources to assess agreement as well as differences in VE estimates using vaccination data from each individual source and vaccination data adjudicated from all sources combined. METHODS: Adults aged ≥18 years who were hospitalized with COVID-like illness at 21 hospitals in 18 U.S. states participating in the IVY Network during February 1-August 31, 2022, were enrolled. Numbers of COVID-19 vaccine doses identified by IIS, EMR, and self-report were compared in kappa agreement analyses. Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was estimated using multivariable logistic regression models to compare the odds of COVID-19 vaccination between SARS-CoV-2-positive case-patients and SARS-CoV-2-negative control-patients. VE was estimated using each source of vaccination data separately and all sources combined. RESULTS: A total of 4499 patients were included. Patients with ≥1 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose were identified most frequently by self-report (n = 3570, 79 %), followed by IIS (n = 3272, 73 %) and EMR (n = 3057, 68 %). Agreement was highest between IIS and self-report for 4 doses with a kappa of 0.77 (95 % CI = 0.73-0.81). VE point estimates of 3 doses against COVID-19 hospitalization were substantially lower when using vaccination data from EMR only (VE = 31 %, 95 % CI = 16 %-43 %) than when using all sources combined (VE = 53 %, 95 % CI = 41 %-62%). CONCLUSION: Vaccination data from EMR only may substantially underestimate COVID-19 VE.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Adolescente , Autoinforme , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Eficacia de las Vacunas , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Inmunización , Vacunación , Hospitalización , ARN Mensajero
10.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(5): e2314428, 2023 05 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37227729

RESUMEN

Importance: Platelet activation is a potential therapeutic target in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the effect of P2Y12 inhibition among critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international, open-label, adaptive platform, 1:1 randomized clinical trial included critically ill (requiring intensive care-level support) patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Patients were enrolled between February 26, 2021, through June 22, 2022. Enrollment was discontinued on June 22, 2022, by the trial leadership in coordination with the study sponsor given a marked slowing of the enrollment rate of critically ill patients. Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to receive a P2Y12 inhibitor or no P2Y12 inhibitor (usual care) for 14 days or until hospital discharge, whichever was sooner. Ticagrelor was the preferred P2Y12 inhibitor. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death and, for participants who survived to hospital discharge, the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 of the index hospitalization. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Results: At the time of trial termination, 949 participants (median [IQR] age, 56 [46-65] years; 603 male [63.5%]) had been randomly assigned, 479 to the P2Y12 inhibitor group and 470 to usual care. In the P2Y12 inhibitor group, ticagrelor was used in 372 participants (78.8%) and clopidogrel in 100 participants (21.2%). The estimated adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for the effect of P2Y12 inhibitor on organ support-free days was 1.07 (95% credible interval, 0.85-1.33). The posterior probability of superiority (defined as an OR > 1.0) was 72.9%. Overall, 354 participants (74.5%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and 339 participants (72.4%) in the usual care group survived to hospital discharge (median AOR, 1.15; 95% credible interval, 0.84-1.55; posterior probability of superiority, 80.8%). Major bleeding occurred in 13 participants (2.7%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and 13 (2.8%) in the usual care group. The estimated mortality rate at 90 days for the P2Y12 inhibitor group was 25.5% and for the usual care group was 27.0% (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.76-1.23; P = .77). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of critically ill participants hospitalized for COVID-19, treatment with a P2Y12 inhibitor did not improve the number of days alive and free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support. The use of the P2Y12 inhibitor did not increase major bleeding compared with usual care. These data do not support routine use of a P2Y12 inhibitor in critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04505774.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Agonistas del Receptor Purinérgico P2Y , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Hemorragia , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Ticagrelor/uso terapéutico , Agonistas del Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/uso terapéutico
11.
Clin Infect Dis ; 77(4): 547-557, 2023 08 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37255285

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the changing epidemiology of adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) informs research priorities and public health policies. METHODS: Among adults (≥18 years) hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed, acute COVID-19 between 11 March 2021, and 31 August 2022 at 21 hospitals in 18 states, those hospitalized during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron-predominant period (BA.1, BA.2, BA.4/BA.5) were compared to those from earlier Alpha- and Delta-predominant periods. Demographic characteristics, biomarkers within 24 hours of admission, and outcomes, including oxygen support and death, were assessed. RESULTS: Among 9825 patients, median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 60 years (47-72), 47% were women, and 21% non-Hispanic Black. From the Alpha-predominant period (Mar-Jul 2021; N = 1312) to the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineage-predominant period (Jun-Aug 2022; N = 1307): the percentage of patients who had ≥4 categories of underlying medical conditions increased from 11% to 21%; those vaccinated with at least a primary COVID-19 vaccine series increased from 7% to 67%; those ≥75 years old increased from 11% to 33%; those who did not receive any supplemental oxygen increased from 18% to 42%. Median (IQR) highest C-reactive protein and D-dimer concentration decreased from 42.0 mg/L (9.9-122.0) to 11.5 mg/L (2.7-42.8) and 3.1 mcg/mL (0.8-640.0) to 1.0 mcg/mL (0.5-2.2), respectively. In-hospital death peaked at 12% in the Delta-predominant period and declined to 4% during the BA.4/BA.5-predominant period. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to adults hospitalized during early COVID-19 variant periods, those hospitalized during Omicron-variant COVID-19 were older, had multiple co-morbidities, were more likely to be vaccinated, and less likely to experience severe respiratory disease, systemic inflammation, coagulopathy, and death.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Adulto , Femenino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Masculino , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Oxígeno
12.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 72(17): 463-468, 2023 Apr 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37104244

RESUMEN

As of April 2023, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in 1.1 million deaths in the United States, with approximately 75% of deaths occurring among adults aged ≥65 years (1). Data on the durability of protection provided by monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination against critical outcomes of COVID-19 are limited beyond the Omicron BA.1 lineage period (December 26, 2021-March 26, 2022). In this case-control analysis, the effectiveness of 2-4 monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses was evaluated against COVID-19-associated invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and in-hospital death among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during February 1, 2022-January 31, 2023. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against IMV and in-hospital death was 62% among adults aged ≥18 years and 69% among those aged ≥65 years. When stratified by time since last dose, VE was 76% at 7-179 days, 54% at 180-364 days, and 56% at ≥365 days. Monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination provided substantial, durable protection against IMV and in-hospital death among adults during the Omicron variant period. All adults should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccination to prevent critical COVID-19-associated outcomes.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Adulto , Adolescente , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Pandemias , Respiración Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , ARN Mensajero
13.
Crit Care Med ; 51(6): 731-741, 2023 06 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37010317

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether implementation of an Emergency Critical Care Program (ECCP) is associated with improved survival and early downgrade of critically ill medical patients in the emergency department (ED). DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective cohort study using ED-visit data between 2015 and 2019. SETTING: Tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adult medical patients presenting to the ED with a critical care admission order within 12 hours of arrival. INTERVENTIONS: Dedicated bedside critical care for medical ICU patients by an ED-based intensivist following initial resuscitation by the ED team. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary outcomes were inhospital mortality and the proportion of patients downgraded to non-ICU status while in the ED within 6 hours of the critical care admission order (ED downgrade <6 hr). A difference-in-differences (DiD) analysis compared the change in outcomes for patients arriving during ECCP hours (2 pm to midnight, weekdays) between the preintervention period (2015-2017) and the intervention period (2017-2019) to the change in outcomes for patients arriving during non-ECCP hours (all other hours). Adjustment for severity of illness was performed using the emergency critical care Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (eccSOFA) score. The primary cohort included 2,250 patients. The DiDs for the eccSOFA-adjusted inhospital mortality decreased by 6.0% (95% CI, -11.9 to -0.1) with largest difference in the intermediate illness severity group (DiD, -12.2%; 95% CI, -23.1 to -1.3). The increase in ED downgrade less than 6 hours was not statistically significant (DiD, 4.8%; 95% CI, -0.7 to 10.3%) except in the intermediate group (DiD, 8.8%; 95% CI, 0.2-17.4). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a novel ECCP was associated with a significant decrease in inhospital mortality among critically ill medical ED patients, with the greatest decrease observed in patients with intermediate severity of illness. Early ED downgrades also increased, but the difference was statistically significant only in the intermediate illness severity group.


Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos , Enfermedad Crítica , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Hospitalización , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos
14.
J Infect Dis ; 228(3): 235-244, 2023 08 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36883903

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) genomic and subgenomic RNA levels are frequently used as a correlate of infectiousness. The impact of host factors and SARS-CoV-2 lineage on RNA viral load is unclear. METHODS: Total nucleocapsid (N) and subgenomic N (sgN) RNA levels were measured by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) in specimens from 3204 individuals hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at 21 hospitals. RT-qPCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were used to estimate RNA viral load. The impact of time of sampling, SARS-CoV-2 variant, age, comorbidities, vaccination, and immune status on N and sgN Ct values were evaluated using multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Mean Ct values at presentation for N were 24.14 (SD 4.53) for non-variants of concern, 25.15 (SD 4.33) for Alpha, 25.31 (SD 4.50) for Delta, and 26.26 (SD 4.42) for Omicron. N and sgN RNA levels varied with time since symptom onset and infecting variant but not with age, comorbidity, immune status, or vaccination. When normalized to total N RNA, sgN levels were similar across all variants. CONCLUSIONS: RNA viral loads were similar among hospitalized adults, irrespective of infecting variant and known risk factors for severe COVID-19. Total N and subgenomic RNA N viral loads were highly correlated, suggesting that subgenomic RNA measurements add little information for the purposes of estimating infectivity.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , ARN Subgenómico , Carga Viral , ARN , ARN Viral/genética
15.
JCI Insight ; 8(3)2023 02 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36752204

RESUMEN

The widespread presence of autoantibodies in acute infection with SARS-CoV-2 is increasingly recognized, but the prevalence of autoantibodies in non-SARS-CoV-2 infections and critical illness has not yet been reported. We profiled IgG autoantibodies in 267 patients from 5 independent cohorts with non-SARS-CoV-2 viral, bacterial, and noninfectious critical illness. Serum samples were screened using Luminex arrays that included 58 cytokines and 55 autoantigens, many of which are associated with connective tissue diseases (CTDs). Samples positive for anti-cytokine antibodies were tested for receptor blocking activity using cell-based functional assays. Anti-cytokine antibodies were identified in > 50% of patients across all 5 acutely ill cohorts. In critically ill patients, anti-cytokine antibodies were far more common in infected versus uninfected patients. In cell-based functional assays, 11 of 39 samples positive for select anti-cytokine antibodies displayed receptor blocking activity against surface receptors for Type I IFN, GM-CSF, and IL-6. Autoantibodies against CTD-associated autoantigens were also commonly observed, including newly detected antibodies that emerged in longitudinal samples. These findings demonstrate that anti-cytokine and autoantibodies are common across different viral and nonviral infections and range in severity of illness.


Asunto(s)
Autoanticuerpos , COVID-19 , Humanos , Autoantígenos , Enfermedad Crítica , Citocinas , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 10(1): ofac698, 2023 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36695662

RESUMEN

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are increasingly reporting relative VE (rVE) comparing a primary series plus booster doses with a primary series only. Interpretation of rVE differs from traditional studies measuring absolute VE (aVE) of a vaccine regimen against an unvaccinated referent group. We estimated aVE and rVE against COVID-19 hospitalization in primary-series plus first-booster recipients of COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: Booster-eligible immunocompetent adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in the United States during December 25, 2021-April 4, 2022 were included. In a test-negative design, logistic regression with case status as the outcome and completion of primary vaccine series or primary series plus 1 booster dose as the predictors, adjusted for potential confounders, were used to estimate aVE and rVE. Results: A total of 2060 patients were analyzed, including 1104 COVID-19 cases and 956 controls. Relative VE against COVID-19 hospitalization in boosted mRNA vaccine recipients versus primary series only was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55%-74%); aVE was 81% (95% CI, 75%-86%) for boosted versus 46% (95% CI, 30%-58%) for primary. For boosted Janssen vaccine recipients versus primary series, rVE was 49% (95% CI, -9% to 76%); aVE was 62% (95% CI, 33%-79%) for boosted versus 36% (95% CI, -4% to 60%) for primary. Conclusions: Vaccine booster doses increased protection against COVID-19 hospitalization compared with a primary series. Comparing rVE measures across studies can lead to flawed interpretations of the added value of a new vaccination regimen, whereas difference in aVE, when available, may be a more useful metric.

17.
Clin Infect Dis ; 76(3): e460-e468, 2023 02 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35580849

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines were authorized in the United States in December 2020. Although vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mild infection declines markedly after several months, limited understanding exists on the long-term durability of protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization. METHODS: Case-control analysis of adults (≥18 years) hospitalized at 21 hospitals in 18 states 11 March-15 December 2021, including COVID-19 case patients and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-negative controls. We included adults who were unvaccinated or vaccinated with 2 doses of a mRNA vaccine before the date of illness onset. VE over time was assessed using logistic regression comparing odds of vaccination in cases versus controls, adjusting for confounders. Models included dichotomous time (<180 vs ≥180 days since dose 2) and continuous time modeled using restricted cubic splines. RESULTS: A total of 10 078 patients were included, 4906 cases (23% vaccinated) and 5172 controls (62% vaccinated). Median age was 60 years (interquartile range, 46-70), 56% were non-Hispanic White, and 81% had ≥1 medical condition. Among immunocompetent adults, VE <180 days was 90% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88-91) versus 82% (95% CI, 79-85) at ≥180 days (P < .001). VE declined for Pfizer-BioNTech (88% to 79%, P < .001) and Moderna (93% to 87%, P < .001) products, for younger adults (18-64 years) (91% to 87%, P = .005), and for adults ≥65 years of age (87% to 78%, P < .001). In models using restricted cubic splines, similar changes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In a period largely predating Omicron variant circulation, effectiveness of 2 mRNA doses against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was largely sustained through 9 months.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Hospitalización , Vacunas de ARNm , ARN Mensajero , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Anciano
18.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(5152): 1625-1630, 2022 Dec 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36580424

RESUMEN

Monovalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, designed against the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2, successfully reduced COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in the United States and globally (1,2). However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization has declined over time, likely related to a combination of factors, including waning immunity and, with the emergence of the Omicron variant and its sublineages, immune evasion (3). To address these factors, on September 1, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended a bivalent COVID-19 mRNA booster (bivalent booster) dose, developed against the spike protein from ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineages, for persons who had completed at least a primary COVID-19 vaccination series (with or without monovalent booster doses) ≥2 months earlier (4). Data on the effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose against COVID-19 hospitalization in the United States are lacking, including among older adults, who are at highest risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness. During September 8-November 30, 2022, the Investigating Respiratory Viruses in the Acutely Ill (IVY) Network§ assessed effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose received after ≥2 doses of monovalent mRNA vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥65 years. When compared with unvaccinated persons, VE of a bivalent booster dose received ≥7 days before illness onset (median = 29 days) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was 84%. Compared with persons who received ≥2 monovalent-only mRNA vaccine doses, relative VE of a bivalent booster dose was 73%. These early findings show that a bivalent booster dose provided strong protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization in older adults and additional protection among persons with previous monovalent-only mRNA vaccination. All eligible persons, especially adults aged ≥65 years, should receive a bivalent booster dose to maximize protection against COVID-19 hospitalization this winter season. Additional strategies to prevent respiratory illness, such as masking in indoor public spaces, should also be considered, especially in areas where COVID-19 community levels are high (4,5).


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Hospitalización , ARN Mensajero , Vacunas Combinadas
19.
Vaccine ; 40(48): 6979-6986, 2022 11 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36374708

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Test-negative design (TND) studies have produced validated estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) for influenza vaccine studies. However, syndrome-negative controls have been proposed for differentiating bias and true estimates in VE evaluations for COVID-19. To understand the use of alternative control groups, we compared characteristics and VE estimates of syndrome-negative and test-negative VE controls. METHODS: Adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in 18 states March 11-August 31, 2021 were eligible for analysis. Case patients had symptomatic acute respiratory infection (ARI) and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Control groups were test-negative patients with ARI but negative SARS-CoV-2 testing, and syndrome-negative controls were without ARI and negative SARS-CoV-2 testing. Chi square and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to detect differences in baseline characteristics. VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was calculated using logistic regression comparing adjusted odds of prior mRNA vaccination between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and each control group. RESULTS: 5811 adults (2726 cases, 1696 test-negative controls, and 1389 syndrome-negative controls) were included. Control groups differed across characteristics including age, race/ethnicity, employment, previous hospitalizations, medical conditions, and immunosuppression. However, control-group-specific VE estimates were very similar. Among immunocompetent patients aged 18-64 years, VE was 93 % (95 % CI: 90-94) using syndrome-negative controls and 91 % (95 % CI: 88-93) using test-negative controls. CONCLUSIONS: Despite demographic and clinical differences between control groups, the use of either control group produced similar VE estimates across age groups and immunosuppression status. These findings support the use of test-negative controls and increase confidence in COVID-19 VE estimates produced by test-negative design studies.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Humanos , Adulto , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/prevención & control , Prueba de COVID-19 , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Hospitalización , Síndrome
20.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(42): 1327-1334, 2022 Oct 21.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36264830

RESUMEN

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529 or BA.1) became predominant in the United States by late December 2021 (1). BA.1 has since been replaced by emerging lineages BA.2 (including BA.2.12.1) in March 2022, followed by BA.4 and BA.5, which have accounted for a majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections since late June 2022 (1). Data on the effectiveness of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against BA.4/BA.5-associated hospitalizations are limited, and their interpretation is complicated by waning of vaccine-induced immunity (2-5). Further, infections with earlier Omicron lineages, including BA.1 and BA.2, reduce vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates because certain persons in the referent unvaccinated group have protection from infection-induced immunity. The IVY Network† assessed effectiveness of 2, 3, and 4 doses of monovalent mRNA vaccines compared with no vaccination against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during December 26, 2021-August 31, 2022. During the BA.1/BA.2 period, VE 14-150 days after a second dose was 63% and decreased to 34% after 150 days. Similarly, VE 7-120 days after a third dose was 79% and decreased to 41% after 120 days. VE 7-120 days after a fourth dose was 61%. During the BA.4/BA.5 period, similar trends were observed, although CIs for VE estimates between categories of time since the last dose overlapped. VE 14-150 days and >150 days after a second dose was 83% and 37%, respectively. VE 7-120 days and >120 days after a third dose was 60%and 29%, respectively. VE 7-120 days after the fourth dose was 61%. Protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization waned even after a third dose. The newly authorized bivalent COVID-19 vaccines include mRNA from the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain and from shared mRNA components between BA.4 and BA.5 lineages and are expected to be more immunogenic against BA.4/BA.5 than monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (6-8). All eligible adults aged ≥18 years§ should receive a booster dose, which currently consists of a bivalent mRNA vaccine, to maximize protection against BA.4/BA.5 and prevent COVID-19-associated hospitalization.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Humanos , Adolescente , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Hospitalización , Vacunas Combinadas , ARN Mensajero , Vacunas de ARNm
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...