Real-life Assessment of BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel in Adults Hospitalized With Respiratory Illness.

BACKGROUND: Inability to identify the microbial etiology of lower respiratory tract infection leads to unnecessary antibiotic use. We evaluated the utility of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (BioFire PN) to inform microbiologic diagnosis. METHODS: Hospitalized adults with respiratory illness were recruited; sputa and clinical/laboratory data were collected. Sputa were cultured for bacteria and tested with BioFire PN. Microbial etiology was adjudicated by 4 physicians. Bacterial polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was compared with culture and clinical adjudication. RESULTS: Of 298 sputa tested, BioFire PN detected significantly more pathogens (350 bacteria, 16 atypicals, and 164 viruses) than sputum culture plus any standard-of-care testing (91% vs 60%, P < .0001). When compared with culture, the sensitivity of BioFire PN for individual bacteria was 46% to 100%; specificity, 61% to 100%; and negative predictive value, 92% to 100%. Cases were adjudicated as viral (n = 58) and bacterial (n = 100). PCR detected bacteria in 55% of viral cases and 95% of bacterial (P < .0001). High serum procalcitonin and bacterial adjudication were more often associated with sputa with 106 or 107 copies detected. CONCLUSIONS: Multiplex PCR testing of sputa for bacteria is useful to rule out bacterial infection with added value to detect viruses and atypical bacteria.

Immunogenicity of a 2-Dose Regimen of Moderna mRNA Beta/Omicron BA.1 Bivalent Variant Vaccine Boost in a Randomized Clinical Trial.

We compared the serologic responses of 1 dose versus 2 doses of a variant vaccine (Moderna mRNA-1273 Beta/Omicron BA.1 bivalent vaccine) in adults. A 2-dose boosting regimen with a variant vaccine did not increase the magnitude or the durability of the serological responses compared to a single variant vaccine boost.

Comparison of bivalent and monovalent SARS-CoV-2 variant vaccines: the phase 2 randomized open-label COVAIL trial.

Vaccine protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection wanes over time, requiring updated boosters. In a phase 2, open-label, randomized clinical trial with sequentially enrolled stages at 22 US sites, we assessed safety and immunogenicity of a second boost with monovalent or bivalent variant vaccines from mRNA and protein-based platforms targeting wild-type, Beta, Delta and Omicron BA.1 spike antigens. The primary outcome was pseudovirus neutralization titers at 50% inhibitory dilution (ID50 titers) with 95% confidence intervals against different SARS-CoV-2 strains. The secondary outcome assessed safety by solicited local and systemic adverse events (AEs), unsolicited AEs, serious AEs and AEs of special interest. Boosting with prototype/wild-type vaccines produced numerically lower ID50 titers than any variant-containing vaccine against all variants. Conversely, boosting with a variant vaccine excluding prototype was not associated with decreased neutralization against D614G. Omicron BA.1 or Beta monovalent vaccines were nearly equivalent to Omicron BA.1 + prototype or Beta + prototype bivalent vaccines for neutralization of Beta, Omicron BA.1 and Omicron BA.4/5, although they were lower for contemporaneous Omicron subvariants. Safety was similar across arms and stages and comparable to previous reports. Our study shows that updated vaccines targeting Beta or Omicron BA.1 provide broadly crossprotective neutralizing antibody responses against diverse SARS-CoV-2 variants without sacrificing immunity to the ancestral strain. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05289037 .

Clinical and Demographic Factors Associated With COVID-19, Severe COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Adults: A Secondary Cross-Protocol Analysis of 4 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Current data identifying COVID-19 risk factors lack standardized outcomes and insufficiently control for confounders. Objective: To identify risk factors associated with COVID-19, severe COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary cross-protocol analysis included 4 multicenter, international, randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled, COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials with harmonized protocols established by the COVID-19 Prevention Network. Individual-level data from participants randomized to receive placebo within each trial were combined and analyzed. Enrollment began July 2020 and the last data cutoff was in July 2021. Participants included adults in stable health, at risk for SARS-CoV-2, and assigned to the placebo group within each vaccine trial. Data were analyzed from April 2022 to February 2023. Exposures: Comorbid conditions, demographic factors, and SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk at the time of enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary outcomes were COVID-19 and severe COVID-19. Multivariate Cox proportional regression models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs for baseline covariates, accounting for trial, region, and calendar time. Secondary outcomes included severe COVID-19 among people with COVID-19, subclinical SARS-CoV-2 infection, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: A total of 57 692 participants (median [range] age, 51 [18-95] years; 11 720 participants [20.3%] aged ≥65 years; 31 058 participants [53.8%] assigned male at birth) were included. The analysis population included 3270 American Indian or Alaska Native participants (5.7%), 7849 Black or African American participants (13.6%), 17 678 Hispanic or Latino participants (30.6%), and 40 745 White participants (70.6%). Annualized incidence was 13.9% (95% CI, 13.3%-14.4%) for COVID-19 and 2.0% (95% CI, 1.8%-2.2%) for severe COVID-19. Factors associated with increased rates of COVID-19 included workplace exposure (high vs low: aHR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.16-1.58]; medium vs low: aHR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.21-1.65]; P < .001) and living condition risk (very high vs low risk: aHR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.21-1.66]; medium vs low risk: aHR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.08-1.32]; P < .001). Factors associated with decreased rates of COVID-19 included previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.09-0.19]; P < .001), age 65 years or older (aHR vs age <65 years, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.50-0.64]; P < .001) and Black or African American race (aHR vs White race, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.67-0.91]; P = .002). Factors associated with increased rates of severe COVID-19 included race (American Indian or Alaska Native vs White: aHR, 2.61 [95% CI, 1.85-3.69]; multiracial vs White: aHR, 2.19 [95% CI, 1.50-3.20]; P < .001), diabetes (aHR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.14-2.08]; P = .005) and at least 2 comorbidities (aHR vs none, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.09-1.76]; P = .008). In analyses restricted to participants who contracted COVID-19, increased severe COVID-19 rates were associated with age 65 years or older (aHR vs <65 years, 1.75 [95% CI, 1.32-2.31]; P < .001), race (American Indian or Alaska Native vs White: aHR, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.38-2.83]; Black or African American vs White: aHR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.03-2.14]; multiracial: aHR, 1.81 [95% CI, 1.21-2.69]; overall P = .001), body mass index (aHR per 1-unit increase, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01-1.04]; P = .001), and diabetes (aHR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.37-2.49]; P < .001). Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with decreased severe COVID-19 rates (aHR, 0.04 [95% CI, 0.01-0.14]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary cross-protocol analysis of 4 randomized clinical trials, exposure and demographic factors had the strongest associations with outcomes; results could inform mitigation strategies for SARS-CoV-2 and viruses with comparable epidemiological characteristics.

Immunogenicity of NVX-CoV2373 heterologous boost against SARS-CoV-2 variants.

As part of a multicenter study evaluating homologous and heterologous COVID-19 booster vaccines, we assessed the magnitude, breadth, and short-term durability of binding and pseudovirus-neutralizing antibody (PsVNA) responses following a single booster dose of NVX-CoV2373 in adults primed with either Ad26.COV2.S, mRNA-1273, or BNT162b2 vaccines. NVX-CoV2373 as a heterologous booster was immunogenic and associated with no safety concerns through Day 91. Fold-rises in PsVNA titers from baseline (Day 1) to Day 29 were highest for prototypic D614G variant and lowest for more recent Omicron sub-lineages BQ.1.1 and XBB.1. Peak humoral responses against all SARS-CoV-2 variants were lower in those primed with Ad26.COV2.S than with mRNA vaccines. Prior SARS CoV-2 infection was associated with substantially higher baseline PsVNA titers, which remained elevated relative to previously uninfected participants through Day 91. These data support the use of heterologous protein-based booster vaccines as an acceptable alternative to mRNA or adenoviral-based COVID-19 booster vaccines. This trial was conducted under ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04889209.

Immunogenicity of a Two Dose Regimen of Moderna mRNA Beta/Omicron BA.1 Bivalent Variant Vaccine Boost in a Randomized Clinical Trial.

In this brief report, we compare the magnitude and durability of the serologic response of one versus two doses (separated by 56 days) of a variant vaccine (Moderna mRNA-1273 Beta/Omicron BA.1 bivalent vaccine) in adults.

Evaluating Demographic Representation in Clinical Trials: Use of the Adaptive Coronavirus Disease 2019 Treatment Trial (ACTT) as a Test Case.

Background: Clinical trials initiated during emerging infectious disease outbreaks must quickly enroll participants to identify treatments to reduce morbidity and mortality. This may be at odds with enrolling a representative study population, especially when the population affected is undefined. Methods: We evaluated the utility of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET), the COVID-19 Case Surveillance System (CCSS), and 2020 United States (US) Census data to determine demographic representation in the 4 stages of the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT). We compared the cumulative proportion of participants by sex, race, ethnicity, and age enrolled at US ACTT sites, with respective 95% confidence intervals, to the reference data in forest plots. Results: US ACTT sites enrolled 3509 adults hospitalized with COVID-19. When compared with COVID-NET, ACTT enrolled a similar or higher proportion of Hispanic/Latino and White participants depending on the stage, and a similar proportion of African American participants in all stages. In contrast, ACTT enrolled a higher proportion of these groups when compared with US Census and CCSS. The proportion of participants aged ≥65 years was either similar or lower than COVID-NET and higher than CCSS and the US Census. The proportion of females enrolled in ACTT was lower than the proportion of females in the reference datasets. Conclusions: Although surveillance data of hospitalized cases may not be available early in an outbreak, they are a better comparator than US Census data and surveillance of all cases, which may not reflect the population affected and at higher risk of severe disease.

Immunogenicity of the BA.1 and BA.4/BA.5 SARS-CoV-2 Bivalent Boosts: Preliminary Results from the COVAIL Randomized Clinical Trial.

In a randomized clinical trial, we compare early neutralizing antibody responses after boosting with bivalent SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines based on either BA.1 or BA.4/BA.5 Omicron spike protein combined with wildtype spike. Responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants exhibited the greatest reduction in titers against currently circulating Omicron subvariants for both bivalent vaccines.

Immunogenicity of the BA.1 and BA.4/BA.5 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Bivalent Boosts: Preliminary Results From the COVAIL Randomized Clinical Trial.

In a randomized clinical trial, we compare early neutralizing antibody responses after boosting with bivalent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines based on either BA.1 or BA.4/BA.5 Omicron spike protein combined with wild-type spike. Responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants exhibited the greatest reduction in titers against currently circulating Omicron subvariants for both bivalent vaccines.

Clinical impact of healthcare-associated respiratory syncytial virus in hospitalized adults.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical impact of healthcare-associated (HA) respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in hospitalized adults. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study within a prospective, population-based, surveillance study of RSV-infected hospitalized adults during 3 respiratory seasons: October 2017-April 2018, October 2018-April 2019, and October 2019-March 2020. SETTING: The study was conducted in 2 academically affiliated medical centers. PATIENTS: Each HA-RSV patient (in whom RSV was detected by PCR test ≥4 days after hospital admission) was matched (age, sex, season) with 2 community-onset (CO) RSV patients (in whom RSV was detected ≤3 days of admission). METHODS: Risk factors and outcomes were compared among HA-RSV versus CO-RSV patients using conditional logistic regression. Escalation of respiratory support associated with RSV detection (day 0) from day -2 to day +4 was explored among HA-RSV patients. RESULTS: In total, 84 HA-RSV patients were matched to 160 CO-RSV patients. In HA-RSV patients, chronic kidney disease was more common, while chronic respiratory conditions and obesity were less common. HA-RSV patients were not more likely to be admitted to an ICU or require mechanical ventilation, but they more often required a higher level of care at discharge compared with CO-RSV patients (44% vs 14%, respectively). Also, 29% of evaluable HA-RSV patients required respiratory support escalation; these patients were older and more likely to have respiratory comorbidities, to have been admitted to intensive care, and to die during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: HA-RSV in adults may be associated with escalation in respiratory support and an increased level of support in living situation at discharge. Infection prevention and control strategies and RSV vaccination of high-risk adults could mitigate the risk of HA-RSV.

Gene Expression Risk Scores for COVID-19 Illness Severity.

BACKGROUND: The correlates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness severity following infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are incompletely understood. METHODS: We assessed peripheral blood gene expression in 53 adults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection clinically adjudicated as having mild, moderate, or severe disease. Supervised principal components analysis was used to build a weighted gene expression risk score (WGERS) to discriminate between severe and nonsevere COVID-19. RESULTS: Gene expression patterns in participants with mild and moderate illness were similar, but significantly different from severe illness. When comparing severe versus nonsevere illness, we identified >4000 genes differentially expressed (false discovery rate < 0.05). Biological pathways increased in severe COVID-19 were associated with platelet activation and coagulation, and those significantly decreased with T-cell signaling and differentiation. A WGERS based on 18 genes distinguished severe illness in our training cohort (cross-validated receiver operating characteristic-area under the curve [ROC-AUC] = 0.98), and need for intensive care in an independent cohort (ROC-AUC = 0.85). Dichotomizing the WGERS yielded 100% sensitivity and 85% specificity for classifying severe illness in our training cohort, and 84% sensitivity and 74% specificity for defining the need for intensive care in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that gene expression classifiers may provide clinical utility as predictors of COVID-19 illness severity.

Perturbations in Respiratory Syncytial Virus Activity During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a common cause of respiratory disease in all age groups, with young children and older adults experiencing the most severe illness. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in striking changes in the activity of seasonal respiratory viruses, including RSV. After a period of suppression early in the pandemic, an interseasonal surge of RSV occurred in 2021. Viral activity was detected primarily in children and young adults after relaxation of public health measures, but without the usual proportional increases in infections and hospitalizations in older adults who were likely still adhering to stricter public health measures.

Change in functional status associated with respiratory syncytial virus infection in hospitalized older adults.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes severe respiratory illnesses in infants and older adults. Older adults are frequently hospitalized with RSV illness and may experience loss of function. This study evaluated longitudinal changes in function associated with RSV hospitalization in older adults. METHODS: Adults ≥60 years hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed RSV were enrolled (N = 302). Demographics and comorbidities were collected. Functional status was assessed 2 weeks pre-hospitalization by recall, at enrollment, hospital discharge and 2, 4, and 6 months post-discharge using the Lawton-Brody Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) (scale 0-8) and Barthel ADL Index (scale 0-100). RESULTS: RSV-associated hospitalization resulted in acute functional loss. Median IADL (5 vs. 3, p < 0.0001) and ADL (90 vs. 70, p < 0.0001) scores decreased significantly from pre-hospitalization to admission and remained decreased at discharge. There were no statistically significant differences between pre-hospitalization and 2-, 4-, or 6-month scores. However, 33% and 32% of subjects experienced decreased 6-month IADL and ADL scores, respectively. Additionally, 14% required a higher level of care at discharge. When stratified by pre-hospitalization living situation, 6-month IADL scores declined significantly for those admitted from a skilled nursing facility (3 vs. 1, p = 0.001). In multivariate analysis, male sex and diabetes were associated with a 6-month decline in ADL score of ≥10. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults hospitalized with RSV demonstrate acute functional decline that may become prolonged. Pre-hospitalization living situation may predict patient outcomes. Further study is needed with hospitalized age-matched controls and refined measurement tools to better define the specific impact of RSV on function.

SARS-CoV-2 Variant Vaccine Boosters Trial: Preliminary Analyses.

Background: Protection from SARS-CoV-2 vaccines wanes over time and is compounded by emerging variants including Omicron subvariants. This study evaluated safety and immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 variant vaccines. Methods: This phase 2 open-label, randomized trial enrolled healthy adults previously vaccinated with a SARS-CoV-2 primary series and a single boost. Eligible participants were randomized to one of six Moderna COVID19 mRNA vaccine arms (50µg dose): Prototype (mRNA-1273), Omicron BA.1+Beta (1 or 2 doses), Omicron BA.1+Delta, Omicron BA.1 monovalent, and Omicron BA.1+Prototype. Neutralization antibody titers (ID 50 ) were assessed for D614G, Delta, Beta and Omicron BA.1 variants and Omicron BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 subvariants 15 days after vaccination. Results: From March 30 to May 6, 2022, 597 participants were randomized and vaccinated. Median age was 53 years, and 20% had a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. All vaccines were safe and well-tolerated. Day 15 geometric mean titers (GMT) against D614G were similar across arms and ages, and higher with prior infection. For uninfected participants, Day 15 Omicron BA.1 GMTs were similar across Omicron-containing vaccine arms (3724-4561) and higher than Prototype (1,997 [95%CI:1,482-2,692]). The Omicron BA.1 monovalent and Omicron BA.1+Prototype vaccines induced a geometric mean ratio (GMR) to Prototype for Omicron BA.1 of 2.03 (97.5%CI:1.37-3.00) and 1.56 (97.5%CI:1.06-2.31), respectively. A subset of samples from uninfected participants in four arms were also tested in a different laboratory at Day 15 for neutralizing antibody titers to D614G and Omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.2.12.2 and BA.4/BA.5. Omicron BA.4/BA.5 GMTs were approximately one third BA.1 GMTs (Prototype 517 [95%CI:324-826] vs. 1503 [95%CI:949-2381]; Omicron BA.1+Beta 628 [95%CI:367-1,074] vs. 2125 [95%CI:1139-3965]; Omicron BA.1+Delta 765 [95%CI:443-1,322] vs. 2242 [95%CI:1218-4128] and Omicron BA.1+Prototype 635 [95%CI:447-903] vs. 1972 [95%CI:1337-2907). Conclusions: Higher Omicron BA.1 titers were observed with Omicron-containing vaccines compared to Prototype vaccine and titers against Omicron BA.4/BA.5 were lower than against BA.1 for all candidate vaccines. Clinicaltrialsgov: NCT05289037.

Rapid decline in vaccine-boosted neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant.

The Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exhibits reduced susceptibility to vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, requiring a boost to generate protective immunity. We assess the magnitude and short-term durability of neutralizing antibodies after homologous and heterologous boosting with mRNA and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines. All prime-boost combinations substantially increase the neutralization titers to Omicron, although the boosted titers decline rapidly within 2 months from the peak response compared with boosted titers against the prototypic D614G variant. Boosted Omicron neutralization titers are substantially higher for homologous mRNA vaccine boosting, and for heterologous mRNA and Ad26.COV2.S vaccine boosting, compared with homologous Ad26.COV2.S boosting. Homologous mRNA vaccine boosting generates nearly equivalent neutralizing activity against Omicron sublineages BA.1, BA.2, and BA.3 but modestly reduced neutralizing activity against BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 compared with BA.1. These results have implications for boosting requirements to protect against Omicron and future variants of SARS-CoV-2. This trial was conducted under ClincalTrials.gov: NCT04889209.

Baricitinib versus dexamethasone for adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (ACTT-4): a randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib and dexamethasone have randomised trials supporting their use for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. We assessed the combination of baricitinib plus remdesivir versus dexamethasone plus remdesivir in preventing progression to mechanical ventilation or death in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial, patients were enrolled at 67 trial sites in the USA (60 sites), South Korea (two sites), Mexico (two sites), Singapore (two sites), and Japan (one site). Hospitalised adults (≥18 years) with COVID-19 who required supplemental oxygen administered by low-flow (≤15 L/min), high-flow (>15 L/min), or non-invasive mechanical ventilation modalities who met the study eligibility criteria (male or non-pregnant female adults ≥18 years old with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection) were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either baricitinib, remdesivir, and placebo, or dexamethasone, remdesivir, and placebo using a permuted block design. Randomisation was stratified by study site and baseline ordinal score at enrolment. All patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (or matching oral placebo) for a maximum of 14 days or dexamethasone (or matching intravenous placebo) for a maximum of 10 days. The primary outcome was the difference in mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 between the two treatment groups in the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in the as-treated population, comprising all participants who received one dose of the study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04640168. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2020, and April 13, 2021, 1047 patients were assessed for eligibility. 1010 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 516 (51%) to baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo and 494 (49%) to dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo. The mean age of the patients was 58·3 years (SD 14·0) and 590 (58%) of 1010 patients were male. 588 (58%) of 1010 patients were White, 188 (19%) were Black, 70 (7%) were Asian, and 18 (2%) were American Indian or Alaska Native. 347 (34%) of 1010 patients were Hispanic or Latino. Mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 was similar between the study groups (Kaplan-Meier estimates of 87·0% [95% CI 83·7 to 89·6] in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 87·6% [84·2 to 90·3] in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group; risk difference 0·6 [95% CI -3·6 to 4·8]; p=0·91). The odds ratio for improved status in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group compared with the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group was 1·01 (95% CI 0·80 to 1·27). At least one adverse event occurred in 149 (30%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 179 (37%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·5% [1·6 to 13·3]; p=0·014). 21 (4%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group had at least one treatment-related adverse event versus 49 (10%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 6·0% [2·8 to 9·3]; p=0·00041). Severe or life-threatening grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 143 (28%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 174 (36%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·7% [1·8 to 13·4]; p=0·012). INTERPRETATION: In hospitalised patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen by low-flow, high-flow, or non-invasive ventilation, baricitinib plus remdesivir and dexamethasone plus remdesivir resulted in similar mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29, but dexamethasone was associated with significantly more adverse events, treatment-related adverse events, and severe or life-threatening adverse events. A more individually tailored choice of immunomodulation now appears possible, where side-effect profile, ease of administration, cost, and patient comorbidities can all be considered. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Formation and Expansion of Memory B Cells against Coronavirus in Acutely Infected COVID-19 Individuals.

Infection with the ß-coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 typically generates strong virus-specific antibody production. Antibody responses against novel features of SARS-CoV-2 proteins require naïve B cell activation, but there is a growing appreciation that conserved regions are recognized by pre-existing memory B cells (MBCs) generated by endemic coronaviruses. The current study investigated the role of pre-existing cross-reactive coronavirus memory in the antibody response to the viral spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N) proteins following SARS-CoV-2 infection. The breadth of reactivity of circulating antibodies, plasmablasts, and MBCs was analyzed. Acutely infected subjects generated strong IgG responses to the S protein, including the novel receptor binding domain, the conserved S2 region, and to the N protein. The response included reactivity to the S of endemic ß-coronaviruses and, interestingly, to the N of an endemic α-coronavirus. Both mild and severe infection expanded IgG MBC populations reactive to the S of SARS-CoV-2 and endemic ß-coronaviruses. Avidity of S-reactive IgG antibodies and MBCs increased after infection. Overall, findings indicate that the response to the S and N of SARS-CoV-2 involves pre-existing MBC activation and adaptation to novel features of the proteins, along with the potential of imprinting to shape the response to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Homologous and Heterologous Covid-19 Booster Vaccinations.

BACKGROUND: Although the three vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) that have received emergency use authorization in the United States are highly effective, breakthrough infections are occurring. Data are needed on the serial use of homologous boosters (same as the primary vaccine) and heterologous boosters (different from the primary vaccine) in fully vaccinated recipients. METHODS: In this phase 1-2, open-label clinical trial conducted at 10 sites in the United States, adults who had completed a Covid-19 vaccine regimen at least 12 weeks earlier and had no reported history of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection received a booster injection with one of three vaccines: mRNA-1273 (Moderna) at a dose of 100 µg, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson-Janssen) at a dose of 5×1010 virus particles, or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) at a dose of 30 µg. The primary end points were safety, reactogenicity, and humoral immunogenicity on trial days 15 and 29. RESULTS: Of the 458 participants who were enrolled in the trial, 154 received mRNA-1273, 150 received Ad26.COV2.S, and 153 received BNT162b2 as booster vaccines; 1 participant did not receive the assigned vaccine. Reactogenicity was similar to that reported for the primary series. More than half the recipients reported having injection-site pain, malaise, headache, or myalgia. For all combinations, antibody neutralizing titers against a SARS-CoV-2 D614G pseudovirus increased by a factor of 4 to 73, and binding titers increased by a factor of 5 to 55. Homologous boosters increased neutralizing antibody titers by a factor of 4 to 20, whereas heterologous boosters increased titers by a factor of 6 to 73. Spike-specific T-cell responses increased in all but the homologous Ad26.COV2.S-boosted subgroup. CD8+ T-cell levels were more durable in the Ad26.COV2.S-primed recipients, and heterologous boosting with the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine substantially increased spike-specific CD8+ T cells in the mRNA vaccine recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Homologous and heterologous booster vaccines had an acceptable safety profile and were immunogenic in adults who had completed a primary Covid-19 vaccine regimen at least 12 weeks earlier. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; DMID 21-0012 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04889209.).

Cost determinants among adults hospitalized with respiratory syncytial virus in the United States, 2017-2019.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections are common in adults, but data describing the cost of RSV-associated hospitalization are lacking due to inconsistency in diagnostic coding and incomplete case ascertainment. We evaluated costs of RSV-associated hospitalization in adult patients with laboratory-confirmed, community-onset RSV. METHODS: We included adults ≥ 18 years of age admitted to three hospital systems in New York during two RSV seasons who were RSV-positive by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and had more than or equal to two acute respiratory infection symptoms or exacerbation of underlying cardiopulmonary disease. We abstracted costs from hospital finance systems or converted hospital charges to cost using cost-charge ratios. We converted cost into 2020 US dollars and extrapolated to the United States. We used a generalized linear model to determine predictors of hospitalization cost, stratified by admission to intensive care units (ICU). RESULTS: Cost data were available for 79% (601/756) of eligible patients. The mean total cost of hospitalization was $8403 (CI95 $7240-$9741). The highest costs were those attributed to ICU services $7885 (CI95 $5877-$10,240), whereas the lowest were radiology $324 (CI95 $275-$376). Other than longer length of stay, predictors of higher cost included having chronic liver disease (odds ratio [OR] 1.38 [CI95 1.05-1.80]) for patients without ICU admission and antibiotic use (OR 1.49 [CI95 1.10-2.03]) for patients with ICU admission. The annual US cost was estimated to be $1.2 (CI95 0.9-1.4) billion. CONCLUSION: The economic burden of RSV hospitalization of adults ≥ 18 years of age in the United States is substantial. RSV vaccine programs may be useful in reducing this economic burden.

Incidence of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection Among Hospitalized Adults, 2017-2020.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes acute respiratory illness (ARI) and triggers exacerbations of cardiopulmonary disease. Estimates of incidence in hospitalized adults range widely, with few data on incidence in adults with comorbidities that increase the risk of severity. We conducted a prospective, population-based, surveillance study to estimate incidence of RSV hospitalization among adults overall and those with specific comorbidities. METHODS: Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years residing in the surveillance area with ≥2 ARI symptoms or exacerbation of underlying cardiopulmonary disease were screened during the 2017-2018, 2018-2019, and 2019-2020 RSV seasons in 3 hospitals in Rochester, New York and New York City. Respiratory specimens were tested for RSV using polymerase chain reaction assays. RSV incidence per 100 000 was adjusted by market share. RESULTS: Active and passive surveillance identified 1099 adults hospitalized with RSV. Annual incidence during 3 seasons ranged from 44.2 to 58.9/100 000. Age-group-specific incidence ranged from 7.7 to 11.9/100 000, 33.5 to 57.5/100 000, and 136.9 to 255.6/100 000 in patients ages 18-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years, respectively. Incidence rates in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, and congestive heart failure were 3-13, 4-7, and 4-33 times, respectively, the incidence in patients without these conditions. CONCLUSIONS: We found a high burden of RSV hospitalization in this large prospective study. Notable was the high incidence among older patients and those with cardiac conditions. These data confirm the need for effective vaccines to prevent RSV infection in older and vulnerable adults.