RESUMO
BackgroundThere are currently no effective pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for Long-COVID. To identify potential therapeutic targets, we focussed on previously described four recovery clusters five months after hospital discharge, their underlying inflammatory profiles and relationship with clinical outcomes at one year. MethodsPHOSP-COVID is a prospective longitudinal cohort study, recruiting adults hospitalised with COVID-19 across the UK. Recovery was assessed using patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs), physical performance, and organ function at five-months and one-year after hospital discharge. Hierarchical logistic regression modelling was performed for patient-perceived recovery at one-year. Cluster analysis was performed using clustering large applications (CLARA) k-medoids approach using clinical outcomes at five-months. Inflammatory protein profiling from plasma at the five-month visit was performed. Findings2320 participants have been assessed at five months after discharge and 807 participants have completed both five-month and one-year visits. Of these, 35{middle dot}6% were female, mean age 58{middle dot}7 (SD 12{middle dot}5) years, and 27{middle dot}8% received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The proportion of patients reporting full recovery was unchanged between five months 501/1965 (25{middle dot}5%) and one year 232/804 (28{middle dot}9%). Factors associated with being less likely to report full recovery at one year were: female sex OR 0{middle dot}68 (95% CI 0{middle dot}46-0{middle dot}99), obesity OR 0{middle dot}50 (95%CI 0{middle dot}34-0{middle dot}74) and IMV OR 0{middle dot}42 (95%CI 0{middle dot}23-0{middle dot}76). Cluster analysis (n=1636) corroborated the previously reported four clusters: very severe, severe, moderate/cognitive, mild relating to the severity of physical, mental health and cognitive impairments at five months in a larger sample. There was elevation of inflammatory mediators of tissue damage and repair in both the very severe and the moderate/cognitive clusters compared to the mild cluster including interleukin-6 which was elevated in both comparisons. Overall, there was a substantial deficit in median (IQR) EQ5D-5L utility index from pre-COVID (retrospective assessment) 0{middle dot}88 (0{middle dot}74-1{middle dot}00), five months 0{middle dot}74 (0{middle dot}60-0{middle dot}88) to one year: 0{middle dot}74 (0{middle dot}59-0{middle dot}88), with minimal improvements across all outcome measures at one-year after discharge in the whole cohort and within each of the four clusters. InterpretationThe sequelae of a hospital admission with COVID-19 remain substantial one year after discharge across a range of health domains with the minority in our cohort feeling fully recovered. Patient perceived health-related quality of life remains reduced at one year compared to pre-hospital admission. Systematic inflammation and obesity are potential treatable traits that warrant further investigation in clinical trials. FundingUKRI & NIHR Research in ContextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe systematically searched PubMed and Embase databases for large studies reporting one-year follow-up data for hospitalised COVID-19 patients published between January 1, 2021 and November 7, 2021, without language restrictions. Search terms related to COVID-19, hospitalisation and long-term follow-up were used. A large prospective cohort study from Wuhan, China (n = 1276) showed that 49% of patients reported at least one persistent symptom during a follow-up clinic visit at 12 months post COVID-19; no significant improvement in exercise capacity was observed between six- and 12-month visits. Another two large cohort studies in China (n = 2433) and Spain (n = 1950) with one-year follow-up data from telephone interviews showed that 45% and 81% of patients reported at least one residual COVID-19 symptom, respectively. However, no previous studies have compared the trajectories of COVID-19 recovery in patients classified by different clinical phenotypes, and there are no large studies investigating the relationship between systemic inflammation and ongoing health impairments post COVID-19. Added value of this studyIn a diverse population of adults post-hospital admission with COVID-19, our large UK prospective multi-centre study reports several novel findings: the minority felt fully recovered at one year with minimal recovery from five months across any health domain; female sex and obesity are associated with being less likely to feel fully recovered at one year; several inflammatory mediators were increased in individuals with the most severe physical, mental health, and cognitive impairments compared to individuals with milder ongoing impairments. Implications of all the available evidenceBoth pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions are urgently needed to improve the ongoing burden following hospitalisation for COVID-19 both for individuals and healthcare systems; our findings support the use of a precision medicine approach with potential treatable traits of systemic inflammation and obesity.
RESUMO
BackgroundThe impact of COVID-19 on physical and mental health, and employment following hospitalisation is poorly understood. MethodsPHOSP-COVID is a multi-centre, UK, observational study of adults discharged from hospital with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 involving an assessment between two- and seven-months later including detailed symptom, physiological and biochemical testing. Multivariable logistic regression was performed for patient-perceived recovery with age, sex, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), co-morbidities, and severity of acute illness as co-variates. Cluster analysis was performed using outcomes for breathlessness, fatigue, mental health, cognition and physical function. FindingsWe report findings of 1077 patients discharged in 2020, from the assessment undertaken a median 5 [IQR4 to 6] months later: 36% female, mean age 58 [SD 13] years, 69% white ethnicity, 27% mechanical ventilation, and 50% had at least two co-morbidities. At follow-up only 29% felt fully recovered, 20% had a new disability, and 19% experienced a health-related change in occupation. Factors associated with failure to recover were female, middle-age, white ethnicity, two or more co-morbidities, and more severe acute illness. The magnitude of the persistent health burden was substantial and weakly related to acute severity. Four clusters were identified with different severities of mental and physical health impairment: 1) Very severe (17%), 2) Severe (21%), 3) Moderate with cognitive impairment (17%), 4) Mild (46%), with 3%, 7%, 36% and 43% feeling fully recovered, respectively. Persistent systemic inflammation determined by C-reactive protein was related to cluster severity, but not acute illness severity. InterpretationWe identified factors related to recovery from a hospital admission with COVID-19 and four different phenotypes relating to the severity of physical, mental, and cognitive health five months later. The implications for clinical care include the potential to stratify care and the need for a pro-active approach with wide-access to COVID-19 holistic clinical services. Funding: UKRI and NIHR
RESUMO
BackgroundThe safety of COVID-19 vaccines has been demonstrated in selected populations in recent studies, but more data in specific groups is needed to inform vaccine choice and health policy. ObjectivesAn international, online survey was conducted to compare the safety, tolerability and reactogenicity of available COVID-19 vaccines in different recipient groups. MethodsThis survey was launched in February 2021, for 11 days. Recipients of a first COVID-19 vaccine dose [≥]7 days prior to survey completion were eligible. The incidence and severity of vaccination side effects were assessed. ResultsSurvey was completed by 2,002 respondents, of whom 26.6% had prior COVID-19 infection (68.8% laboratory confirmed). Prior COVID-19 infection was associated with increased risk of any side effect (risk ratio 1.08, 95% confidence intervals [1.05-1.11]), fever (2.24 [1.86-2.70]), breathlessness (2.05 [1.28-3.29]), flu-like illness (1.78 [1.51-2.10]), fatigue (1.34 [1.20-1.49]) and local reactions (1.10 [1.06-1.15]). It was also associated with increased risk of severe side effects, leading to hospital care (1.56 [1.14-2.12]). While mRNA vaccines were associated with a higher incidence of any side effect (1.06 [1.01-1.11]) compared to viral vector-based vaccines, these were generally milder (p<0.001), mostly local reactions. Importantly, mRNA vaccine-recipients reported considerably lower incidence of systemic reactions (RR<0.6) including anaphylaxis, swelling, flu-like illness, breathlessness and fatigue, and of side effects requiring hospital care (0.42 [0.31-0.58]). ConclusionFor the first time, our study links prior COVID-19 illness with increased incidence of vaccination side effects and demonstrates that mRNA vaccines cause milder, less frequent systemic side effects, but more local reactions. Key messages- People with prior COVID-19 illness appear to experience significantly increased incidence and severity of side effects after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. - In this first head-to-head comparison of the safety and reactogenicity of different types of vaccines, it was demonstrated that mRNA vaccines cause milder, less frequent systemic side effects, compared to viral vector vaccines, but more local reactions. Tweetable SummaryA survey of >2000 COVID-19 vaccine-recipients links prior COVID-19 illness with increased incidence of vaccination side effects; mRNA vaccines cause milder, less frequent systemic side effects, but more local reactions.
RESUMO
It is crucial that randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) evaluate the outcomes that are critical to patients and clinicians, to facilitate relevance, interpretability, and comparability. This methodological systematic review describes the outcomes evaluated in 415 RCTs on the management of COVID-19, that were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, by 5/5/2020. Significant heterogeneity was observed in the selection of outcomes and the instruments used to measure them. Mortality, adverse events and treatment success or failure are only evaluated in 64.4%, 48.4% and 43% of the included studies, respectively, while other outcomes are selected less often. Studies focusing on more severe presentations (hospitalized patients or requiring intensive care) most frequently evaluate mortality and adverse events, while hospital admission and viral detection/load are most frequently assessed in the community setting. Outcome measurement instruments are poorly reported and heterogeneous. In general, simple instruments that can control for important sources of bias are favoured. Follow-up does not exceed one month in 64.3% of these earlier trials, and long-term COVID-19 burden is rarely assessed. The methodological issues identified could delay the introduction of potentially life-saving treatments in clinical practice. Our findings demonstrate the need for consensus in the design of RCTs. Take home message@ERSpublications: This systematic review describes the heterogeneity in outcomes evaluated in 415 RCTs on COVID-19 management and the instruments used to measure them. Our findings reveal a need for consensus in the design of future RCTs.
RESUMO
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection resulting in the clinical syndrome COVID-19 is associated with an exaggerated immune response and monocyte infiltrates in the lungs and other peripheral tissues. It is now increasingly recognised that chronic morbidity persists in some patients. We recently demonstrated profound alterations of monocytes in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. It is currently unclear whether these abnormalities resolve or progress following patient discharge. We show here that blood monocytes in convalescent patients at their 12 week follow up, have a greater propensity to produce pro-inflammatory cytokines TNF and IL-6, which was consistently higher in patients with resolution of lung injury as indicated by a normal chest X-ray and no shortness of breath (a key symptom of lung injury). Furthermore, monocytes from convalescent patients also displayed enhanced levels of molecules involved in leucocyte migration, including chemokine receptor CXCR6, adhesion molecule CD31/PECAM and integrins VLA-4 and LFA-1. Expression of migration molecules on monocytes was also consistently higher in convalescent patients with a normal chest X-ray. These data suggest persistent changes in innate immune function following recovery from COVID-19 and indicate that immune modulating therapies targeting monocytes and leucocyte migration may be useful in recovering COVID-19 patients with persistent symptoms.
RESUMO
BackgroundThe pathogenesis of COVID-19, caused by a novel strain of coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), involves a complex host-virus interaction and is characterised by an exaggerated immune response, the specific components of which are poorly understood. Here we report the outcome of a longitudinal immune profiling study in hospitalised patients during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK and show the relationship between immune responses and severity of the clinical presentation. MethodsThe Coronavirus Immune Response and Clinical Outcomes (CIRCO) study was conducted at four hospitals in Greater Manchester. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, recruited as close to admission as possible, provided peripheral blood samples at enrolment and sequentially thereafter. Fresh samples were assessed for immune cells and proteins in whole blood and serum. Some samples were also stimulated for 3 hours with LPS and analysed for intracellular proteins. Results were stratified based on patient-level data including severity of symptoms and date of reported symptom onset. FindingsLongitudinal analysis showed a very high neutrophil to T cell ratio and abnormal activation of monocytes in the blood, which displayed high levels of the cell cycle marker, Ki67 and low COX-2. These properties all reverted in patient with good outcome. Unexpectedly, multiple aspects of inflammation were diminished as patients progressed in severity and time, even in ITU patients not recovering. InterpretationThis is the first detailed longitudinal analysis of COVID-19 patients of varying severity and outcome, revealing common features and aspects that track with severity. Patients destined for a severe outcome can be identified at admission when still displaying mild-moderate symptoms. We provide clues concerning pathogenesis that should influence clinical trials and therapeutics. Targeting pathways involved in neutrophil and monocyte release from the bone marrow should be tested in patients with COVID-19. FundingThe Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research, The Wellcome Trust, The Royal Society, The BBSRC, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centres (BRC). Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSAnalysis of the literature before the study via pubmed and bioRxiv searches using the terms COVID-19, SARS-CoV2, immune and inflammation (with the last search performed on 27th April 2020) showed evidence of an overactive immune response in a handful of studies in cross-sectional analyses all done at a single time point. Added value of this studyTo determine the role of the immune response in a disease process, it is necessary to correlate immune activity with clinical parameters dynamically. In this study patients presented to hospital at different stages of disease so we took samples at different time-points to provide an accurate picture of the relevant pathobiology. In order to avoid loss of large components of the immune system due to the processes of storage, longitudinal samples were interrogated in real time to reveal the full immune alterations in COVID-19. Implications of all the available evidenceRespiratory viruses continue to cause devastating global disease. The finding of altered myelopoiesis, with excess neutrophils and altered monocyte function, as dominant features in our study provides an incentive for clinical testing of therapeutics that specifically target this pathobiology. Given that inflammation is greatest prior to admission to intensive care, trials of specific immune-modulating therapies should be considered earlier in admission. Future studies of COVID-19 mechanisms should place more emphasis on longitudinal analyses since disease changes dramatically over time.