COVID-19 severity appears to be reduced in spring/summer.

BACKGROUND: because of different human behaviours, SARS-CoV-2 spread may be lower in spring/summer. On the contrary, it is not clearly known whether the clinical course/severity of hospitalized patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 can be different in the various seasons.. OBJECTIVES: to understand whether there were differences in severity of COVID-19 in patients who had contracted the infection in winter versus those infected in spring/summer. DESIGN: observational retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: from the administrative database of the SARS-CoV-2 surveillance system and that of hospital discharge, a cohort of patients (8,221, 653 of which were hospitalized) who tested positive to the RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 between 01.12.2020 and 31.07.2021 in the Grosseto province (Tuscany Region, Central Italy) was selected and analysed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: hospitalization rate and length, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) use, Intensive Care Unite (ICU) admissions, intra-hospital mortality and PaO2/FiO2 values were measured and compared between subjects infected in winter and those who developed COVID-19 in spring/summer. Viral load (cycle threshold, Ct), vitamin D, serum ferritin, IL-6, procalcitonin, D-dimer, and C-reactive protein measured in the two periods were also compared. RESULTS: in the considered months, the hospitalization rate among 8,221 patients with COVID-19 was 8%: 370 (8.5%) individuals were hospitalized in winter and 283 (7,3%; p=0.31) in spring/summer; 62 (16.8%), 88 (23.8%), and 63 (17%) in winter and 28 (9.9%), 40 (14.1%), and 36 (12.7%) in spring/summer were admitted in ICU (p=0.01), used CPAP/NIV (p=0.002) and died (p=0.13), respectively. Hospitalization days were 14.5±11.6 in winter and 10.3±8.84 in spring/summer (p=0.001), while minimum PaO2/FiO2, measured during hospital stays was 123.2±38.6 in spring/summer and 112.6±40.8 in winter (p=0.054). Multivariate analysis (adjusted for all confounding factors) also confirmed reduced risks of having ICU admissions (0.53; 95%CI 0.32;0.88; p=0.01) and of using CPAP/NIV (0.48; 95%CI 0.32;0.75; p=0.001) in spring/summer when compared to winter. Hospitalization days and minimum PaO2/FiO2 were also lower in spring/summer (ß= -3.9; 95%CI -5.5;-2.2; p=0.001) and winter (ß= -17; 95%CI -0.93;35; p=0.06), respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio of mortality in winter, obtained with a Cox model, was higher of about 38% compared to spring/summer. No Ct values (viral load) differences were found either in winter (19.45±6.18) or spring/summer (20.3±6.7; p=0.343). IL-6, ferritin, procalcitonin, D-dimer were similar. Conversely, CRP was lower whereas vitamin D was higher in the warmer seasons. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 may be less severe during spring/summer in hospitalized patients. This does not seem to be influenced by different SARS-CoV-2 viral load in the different periods considered. C-reactive protein was found to be lower whereas vitamin D higher in the warmer months. It can be hypothesized that higher levels of vitamin D in spring/summer, compared to winter, may be associated to a positive modulation of COVID-19 induced inflammation with a possible disease severity reduction during spring/summer.

Should a prescription database be used to search uncontrolled severe asthmatics?

INTRODUCTION: Many uncontrolled severe asthmatics are not on biologic therapy. We hypothesized that using a prescription database could help us identify them. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 3,309 patients who received at least one Montelukast prescription in 2019 were extracted from our prescription database. Number of packages/year, types and dosages of ICS, LABA, ICS/LABA, LAMA and monoclonal antibodies were considered for each patient. In our analysis, for subjects that took > 7 packages of ICS/LABA + LTRA +/- LAMA (high adherent) the number of oral corticosteroids (OC) packets prescribed for each of them was also looked upon. RESULTS: Patients that took ICS/LABA or ICS/LABA + LAMA continuously with high ICS doses were 188 (25.6%) and 117 (39.3%) respectively (total: 305 - 29.5%). Among them, 58 (30.9%) and 53 (45.3%) (total: 111 - 36.4%) were prescribed more than 2 OC packages. Whereas, 21 (11.2%) and 24 (20.5%) patients (total: 45 - 14.75%) received at least 4 OC package prescriptions. CONCLUSION: Approximately 36% of patients in continuous step-4/5 of GINA guidelines treatment may have severe uncontrolled asthma (overusing OC) which needed biologic treatment. In our opinion, a prescription archiving database may be a tool that can help us identify such uncontrolled asthma patients.

Which LABA/LAMA should be chosen in COPD patients in real life?

BACKGROUND: Given COPD heterogeneity, we do not know if some LABA/LAMAs are more suitable for some COPD phenotypes. This real-life database study aimed to evaluate retrospectively the 4 LABA/LAMA effectiveness and highlight possible specificities that could better guide us in choosing the right LABA/LAMA to be used. METHODS: We searched for subjects (1,779) adherent to umeclidinium/vilanterol (UM/VI), indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY), aclidinium/formoterol (ACLI/FOR) and tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) treatments in our prescribing/dispensing database. Prescriptions for systemic corticosteroids (SC), antibiotics and salbutamol during one year of LABA/LAMA treatment were analyzed. RESULTS: A better adherence was found in individuals taking IND/GLY (10.42 ± 1.86 packages/year) compared with UM/VI (10.09 ± 1.9; p = 0.008), ACLI/FOR (9.8 ± 1.8; p = 0.001) and TIO/OLO (10.1 ± 2.1; p = 0.047). The number of patients that were prescribed at least one package of SC/year and their package numbers/year were similar in males/females, across age groups and in "non-frequent exacerbators" with the 4 LABA/LAMAs. More SC were taken by frequent exacerbators, whereas fewer SC/antibiotic packages were prescribed to subjects aged >80 years with all treatments. In patients treated with ACLI/FOR or TIO/OLO, lower risks to having antibiotic prescriptions were observed when UM/VI (0.698[0.516-0.945] and 0.696[0.491-0.985; p = 0.020 and p = 0.041) and IND/GLY (0.597[0.445-0.802] and 0.595[0.423-0.836]; p = 0.001 and p = 0.003) were considered as landmarks. Lower risks for salbutamol prescriptions were detected with UM/VI (0.678[0.480-0.958]; p = 0.027) and TIO/OLO (0.585[0.365-0.937]; p = 0.026) when ACLI/FOR was used as a reference. CONCLUSION: According to our retrospective database study, each LABA/LAMA could have a specific efficacy profile in COPD that might be considered for personalized therapy. However, head-to-head targeted trials aimed to assess the impact of different LABA/LAMAs on COPD are needed to confirm/disprove such results.

JAK inhibition reduces SARS-CoV-2 liver infectivity and modulates inflammatory responses to reduce morbidity and mortality.

Using AI, we identified baricitinib as having antiviral and anticytokine efficacy. We now show a 71% (95% CI 0.15 to 0.58) mortality benefit in 83 patients with moderate-severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia with few drug-induced adverse events, including a large elderly cohort (median age, 81 years). An additional 48 cases with mild-moderate pneumonia recovered uneventfully. Using organotypic 3D cultures of primary human liver cells, we demonstrate that interferon-α2 increases ACE2 expression and SARS-CoV-2 infectivity in parenchymal cells by greater than fivefold. RNA-seq reveals gene response signatures associated with platelet activation, fully inhibited by baricitinib. Using viral load quantifications and superresolution microscopy, we found that baricitinib exerts activity rapidly through the inhibition of host proteins (numb-associated kinases), uniquely among antivirals. This reveals mechanistic actions of a Janus kinase-1/2 inhibitor targeting viral entry, replication, and the cytokine storm and is associated with beneficial outcomes including in severely ill elderly patients, data that incentivize further randomized controlled trials.