Plasma concentration of orally administered amoxicillin and clindamycin in patients receiving haemodialysis.

OBJECTIVES: In the randomized controlled trial PANTHEM, the prophylactic effect of oral amoxicillin or clindamycin is investigated in patients receiving chronic haemodialysis (HD). However, data on plasma concentrations of these antibiotics during HD are sparse. This study aims to determine if the plasma concentration of amoxicillin and clindamycin is sufficient during HD after oral administration of amoxicillin and clindamycin at three different time intervals prior to the HD procedure. METHODS: Adult patients receiving chronic HD were investigated twice with an interval of at least 7 days starting with either a tablet of 500/125 mg amoxicillin/clavulanic acid or a tablet of 600 mg clindamycin. Patients were randomized to take the antibiotics either 30, 60 or 120 min prior to the HD procedure. Plasma antibiotic concentrations were measured at start, midway and at the end of HD. A lower threshold was set at 2.0 mg/L for amoxicillin and at 1.0 mg/L for clindamycin. In addition, a population pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed, assessing PTA. RESULTS: In the amoxicillin cohort (n = 37), 84% of patients and 95% of all plasma amoxicillin concentrations were above or at the threshold throughout the dialysis procedure. In the clindamycin cohort (n = 33), all concentrations were above the threshold throughout the dialysis procedure. Further, in all patients, the mean plasma concentration of both amoxicillin and clindamycin across the HD period was well above the threshold. Finally, the PK model predicted a high PTA in the majority of patients. DISCUSSION: In patients on chronic HD, oral administration of amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (500/125 mg) or clindamycin (600 mg) within 30-120 min prior to HD leads to a sufficient prophylactic plasma concentration across the HD period.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in social housing areas in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is thought to be more prevalent among ethnic minorities and individuals with low socioeconomic status. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies during the COVID-19 pandemic among citizens 15 years or older in Denmark living in social housing (SH) areas. METHODS: We conducted a study between January 8th and January 31st, 2021 with recruitment in 13 selected SH areas. Participants were offered a point-of-care rapid SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibody test and a questionnaire concerning risk factors associated with COVID-19. As a proxy for the general Danish population we accessed data on seroprevalence from Danish blood donors (total Ig ELISA assay) in same time period. RESULTS: Of the 13,279 included participants, 2296 (17.3%) were seropositive (mean age 46.6 (SD 16.4) years, 54.2% female), which was 3 times higher than in the general Danish population (mean age 41.7 (SD 14.1) years, 48.5% female) in the same period (5.8%, risk ratios (RR) 2.96, 95% CI 2.78-3.16, p > 0.001). Seropositivity was higher among males (RR 1.1, 95% CI 1.05-1.22%, p = 0.001) and increased with age, with an OR seropositivity of 1.03 for each 10-year increase in age (95% CI 1.00-1.06, p = 0.031). Close contact with COVID-19-infected individuals was associated with a higher risk of infection, especially among household members (OR 5.0, 95% CI 4.1-6.2 p < 0,001). Living at least four people in a household significantly increased the OR of seropositivity (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6, p = 0.02) as did living in a multi-generational household (OR 1.3 per generation, 95% CI 1.1-1.6, p = 0.003). Only 1.6% of participants reported not following any of the national COVID-19 recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Danish citizens living in SH areas of low socioeconomic status had a three times higher SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence compared to the general Danish population. The seroprevalence was significantly higher in males and increased slightly with age. Living in multiple generations households or in households of more than four persons was a strong risk factor for being seropositive. Results of this study can be used for future consideration of the need for preventive measures in the populations living in SH areas.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence among homeless people and shelter workers in Denmark: a nationwide cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) and associated shelter workers may be at higher risk of infection with "Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2" (SARS-CoV-2). The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among PEH and shelter workers in Denmark. DESIGN AND METHODS: In November 2020, we conducted a nationwide cross-sectional seroprevalence study among PEH and shelter workers at 21 recruitment sites in Denmark. The assessment included a point-of-care test for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, followed by a questionnaire. The seroprevalence was compared to that of geographically matched blood donors considered as a proxy for the background population, tested using a total Ig ELISA assay. RESULTS: We included 827 participants in the study, of whom 819 provided their SARS-CoV-2 antibody results. Of those, 628 were PEH (median age 50.8 (IQR 40.9-59.1) years, 35.5% female) and 191 were shelter workers (median age 46.6 (IQR 36.1-55.0) years and 74.5% female). The overall seroprevalence was 6.7% and was similar among PEH and shelter workers (6.8% vs 6.3%, p = 0.87); and 12.2% among all participants who engaged in sex work. The overall participant seroprevalence was significantly higher than that of the background population (2.9%, p < 0.001). When combining all participants who reported sex work or were recruited at designated safe havens, we found a significantly increased risk of seropositivity compared to other participants (OR 2.23, 95%CI 1.06-4.43, p = 0.02). Seropositive and seronegative participants reported a similar presence of at least one SARS-CoV-2 associated symptom (49% and 54%, respectively). INTERPRETATIONS: The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was more than twice as high among PEH and associated shelter workers, compared to the background population. These results could be taken into consideration when deciding in which phase PEH are eligible for a vaccine, as part of the Danish national SARS-CoV-2 vaccination program rollout. FUNDING: TrygFonden and HelseFonden.

Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether recommending surgical mask use outside the home reduces wearers' risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection in a setting where masks were uncommon and not among recommended public health measures. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial (DANMASK-19 [Danish Study to Assess Face Masks for the Protection Against COVID-19 Infection]). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04337541). SETTING: Denmark, April and May 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Adults spending more than 3 hours per day outside the home without occupational mask use. INTERVENTION: Encouragement to follow social distancing measures for coronavirus disease 2019, plus either no mask recommendation or a recommendation to wear a mask when outside the home among other persons together with a supply of 50 surgical masks and instructions for proper use. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection in the mask wearer at 1 month by antibody testing, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), or hospital diagnosis. The secondary outcome was PCR positivity for other respiratory viruses. RESULTS: A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was -0.3 percentage point (95% CI, -1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results. Although the difference observed was not statistically significant, the 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection. LIMITATION: Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others. CONCLUSION: The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Salling Foundations.

Predictive and prognostic value of different cardiac troponin assays: a nationwide register-based cohort study.

AIMS: Guidelines do not differentiate between the available assays of cardiac troponin (cTn). We compared the prognostic and predictive ability of cTn assays. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a nationwide cohort study of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and ≥ 2 cTn measurements of one of four assays: Roche high-sensitivity cTnT (hs-cTnT), Abbott high sensitivity cTnI (hs-cTnI), Siemens Vista cTnI, and Siemens cTnI Ultra. Data were collected from Danish registries from 2009-18. Peak cTn concentration normalized to the 99th percentile was used. Outcomes were myocardial infarction (MI) during admission, one-year all-cause-, cardiovascular-, and non-cardiovascular mortality. Receiver operating characteristics and logistic regression calculating odds ratios (OR) were used. A total of 90 705 patients were included, of which 20 550 (23%) had MI. Siemens Vista cTnI was the strongest predictor of MI, Area under the curve (auc) 0.93 (95% CI 0.93-0.93). In 1 year 9012 (9.9%) of patients had died. An inverted U-shape relationship was observed between concentration of cTn and all-cause mortality. Hs-cTnT OR 21.3 (95% CI 18.4-24.8) at 2-5 times the 99th percentile and 12.1 (95% CI 10.3-14.1) for concentrations >100 times the 99th percentile. The inverted U-shape relationship was only present for non-cardiovascular mortality. The strongest predictor of cardiovascular mortality was hs-cTnT, OR 11.3 (95% CI 6.4-21.8) at 1-2 times the 99th percentile and 88.8 (95% CI 53.2-163.0) for concentrations >100 times the 99th percentile. CONCLUSION: Siemens Vista cTnI was the strongest predictor of MI and hs-cTnT was the strongest predictor of mortality. An inverted U-shape relationship was observed between cTn concentration and non-cardiovascular mortality.

Testing Denmark: a Danish Nationwide Surveillance Study of COVID-19.

"Testing Denmark" is a national, large-scale, epidemiological surveillance study of SARS-CoV-2 in the Danish population. Between September and October 2020, approximately 1.3 million people (age >15 years) were randomly invited to fill in an electronic questionnaire covering COVID-19 exposures and symptoms. The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was determined by point-of care rapid test (POCT) distributed to participants' home addresses. In total, 318,552 participants (24.5% invitees) completed the study and 2,519 (0.79%) were seropositive. Of the participants with a prior positive PCR test (n = 1,828), 29.1% were seropositive in the POCT. Although seropositivity increased with age, participants 61 years and over reported fewer symptoms and were tested less frequently. Seropositivity was associated with physical contact with SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals (risk ratio [RR] 7.43, 95% CI: 6.57-8.41), particular in household members (RR 17.70, 95% CI: 15.60-20.10). A greater risk of seropositivity was seen in home care workers (RR 2.09, 95% CI: 1.58-2.78) compared to office workers. A high degree of adherence with national preventive recommendations was reported (e.g., >80% use of face masks), but no difference were found between seropositive and seronegative participants. The seroprevalence result was somewhat hampered by a lower-than-expected performance of the POCT. This is likely due to a low sensitivity of the POCT or problems reading the test results, and the main findings therefore relate to risk associations. More emphasis should be placed on age, occupation, and exposure in local communities. IMPORTANCE To date, including 318,522 participants, this is the largest population-based study with broad national participation where tests and questionnaires have been sent to participants' homes. We found that more emphasis from national and local authorities toward the risk of infection should be placed on age of tested individuals, type of occupation, as well as exposure in local communities and households. To meet the challenge that broad nationwide information can be difficult to gather. This study design sets the stage for a novel way of conducting studies. Additionally, this study design can be used as a supplementary model in future general test strategy for ongoing monitoring of COVID-19 immunity in the population, both from past infection and from vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, however, with attention to the complexity of performing and reading the POCT at home.

Risk of COVID-19 in health-care workers in Denmark: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Health-care workers are thought to be highly exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in health-care workers and the proportion of seroconverted health-care workers with previous symptoms of COVID-19. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, screening was offered to health-care workers in the Capital Region of Denmark, including medical, nursing, and other students who were associated with hospitals in the region. Screening included point-of-care tests for IgM and IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Test results and participant characteristics were recorded. Results were compared with findings in blood donors in the Capital Region in the study period. FINDINGS: Between April 15 and April 23, 2020, we screened 29 295 health-care workers, of whom 28 792 (98·28%) provided their test results. We identified 1163 (4·04% [95% CI 3·82-4·27]) seropositive health-care workers. Seroprevalence was higher in health-care workers than in blood donors (142 [3·04%] of 4672; risk ratio [RR] 1·33 [95% CI 1·12-1·58]; p<0·001). Seroprevalence was higher in male health-care workers (331 [5·45%] of 6077) than in female health-care workers (832 [3·66%] of 22 715; RR 1·49 [1·31-1·68]; p<0·001). Frontline health-care workers working in hospitals had a significantly higher seroprevalence (779 [4·55%] of 16 356) than health-care workers in other settings (384 [3·29%] of 11 657; RR 1·38 [1·22-1·56]; p<0·001). Health-care workers working on dedicated COVID-19 wards (95 [7·19%] of 1321) had a significantly higher seroprevalence than other frontline health-care workers working in hospitals (696 [4·35%] of 15 983; RR 1·65 [1·34-2·03]; p<0·001). 622 [53·5%] of 1163 seropositive participants reported symptoms attributable to SARS-CoV-2. Loss of taste or smell was the symptom that was most strongly associated with seropositivity (377 [32·39%] of 1164 participants with this symptom were seropositive vs 786 [2·84%] of 27 628 without this symptom; RR 11·38 [10·22-12·68]). The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04346186. INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of health-care workers with antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was low but higher than in blood donors. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in health-care workers was related to exposure to infected patients. More than half of seropositive health-care workers reported symptoms attributable to COVID-19. FUNDING: Lundbeck Foundation.

Pre-eclampsia and risk of later kidney disease: nationwide cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate associations between pre-eclampsia and later risk of kidney disease. DESIGN: Nationwide register based cohort study. SETTING: Denmark. POPULATION: All women with at least one pregnancy lasting at least 20 weeks between 1978 and 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Hazard ratios comparing rates of kidney disease between women with and without a history of pre-eclampsia, stratified by gestational age at delivery and estimated using Cox regression. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 1 072 330 women followed for 19 994 470 person years (average 18.6 years/woman). Compared with women with no previous pre-eclampsia, those with a history of pre-eclampsia were more likely to develop chronic renal conditions: hazard ratio 3.93 (95% confidence interval 2.90 to 5.33, for early preterm pre-eclampsia (delivery <34 weeks); 2.81 (2.13 to 3.71) for late preterm pre-eclampsia (delivery 34-36 weeks); 2.27 (2.02 to 2.55) for term pre-eclampsia (delivery ≥37 weeks). In particular, strong associations were observed for chronic kidney disease, hypertensive kidney disease, and glomerular/proteinuric disease. Adjustment for cardiovascular disease and hypertension only partially attenuated the observed associations. Stratifying the analyses on time since pregnancy showed that associations between pre-eclampsia and chronic kidney disease and glomerular/proteinuric disease were much stronger within five years of the latest pregnancy (hazard ratio 6.11 (3.84 to 9.72) and 4.77 (3.88 to 5.86), respectively) than five years or longer after the latest pregnancy (2.06 (1.69 to 2.50) and 1.50 (1.19 to 1.88). By contrast, associations between pre-eclampsia and acute renal conditions were modest. CONCLUSION: s Pre-eclampsia, particularly early preterm pre-eclampsia, was strongly associated with several chronic renal disorders later in life. More research is needed to determine which women are most likely to develop kidney disease after pre-eclampsia, what mechanisms underlie the association, and what clinical follow-up and interventions (and in what timeframe post-pregnancy) would be most appropriate and effective.