WHO Ordinal Scale and Inflammation Risk Categories in COVID-19. Comparative Study of the Severity Scales.

BACKGROUND: The WHO ordinal severity scale has been used to predict mortality and guide trials in COVID-19. However, it has its limitations. OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to compare three classificatory and predictive models: the WHO ordinal severity scale, the model based on inflammation grades, and the hybrid model. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with patient data collected and followed up from March 1, 2020, to May 1, 2021, from the nationwide SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The primary study outcome was in-hospital mortality. As this was a hospital-based study, the patients included corresponded to categories 3 to 7 of the WHO ordinal scale. Categories 6 and 7 were grouped in the same category. KEY RESULTS: A total of 17,225 patients were included in the study. Patients classified as high risk in each of the WHO categories according to the degree of inflammation were as follows: 63.8% vs. 79.9% vs. 90.2% vs. 95.1% (p<0.001). In-hospital mortality for WHO ordinal scale categories 3 to 6/7 was as follows: 0.8% vs. 24.3% vs. 45.3% vs. 34% (p<0.001). In-hospital mortality for the combined categories of ordinal scale 3a to 5b was as follows: 0.4% vs. 1.1% vs. 11.2% vs. 27.5% vs. 35.5% vs. 41.1% (p<0.001). The predictive regression model for in-hospital mortality with our proposed combined ordinal scale reached an AUC=0.871, superior to the two models separately. CONCLUSIONS: The present study proposes a new severity grading scale for COVID-19 hospitalized patients. In our opinion, it is the most informative, representative, and predictive scale in COVID-19 patients to date.

Utility of lymphocyte phenotype profile to differentiate primary Sjögren's syndrome from sicca syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential diagnostic utility of advanced lymphocyte profiling to differentiate between primary Sjögren's Syndrome (pSS) and non-Sjögren Sicca syndrome. METHODS: Distribution of peripheral lymphocyte subpopulations was analysed by flow cytometry in 68 patients with pSS, 26 patients with sicca syndrome and 23 healthy controls. The ability to discriminate between pSS and sicca syndrome was analysed using the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve of the different lymphocyte subsets. RESULTS: The ratio between naïve/memory B cell proportions showed an AUC of 0.742 to differentiate pSS and sicca syndrome, with a sensitivity of 76.6% and a specificity of 72% for a cut-off value of 3.4. The ratio of non-switched memory B cells to activated CD4+ T cells percentage (BNSM/CD4ACT) presented the highest AUC (0.840) with a sensitivity of 83.3% and specificity of 81.7% for a cut-off value <4.1. To differentiate seronegative pSS patients from sicca patients, the BNSM/CD4ACT ratio exhibited an AUC of 0.742 (sensitivity 75%, specificity 66.7%, cut-off value <4.4), and the number of naïve CD4 T cells had an AUC of 0.821 (sensitivity 76.9%, specificity 88.9%, cut-off value <312/mm3). CONCLUSION: Patients with pSS show a profound imbalance in the distribution of circulating T and B lymphocyte subsets. The ratio BNSM/CD4ACT is useful to discriminate between pSS and sicca syndrome.

Clinical Characteristics and Risk Factors of Respiratory Failure in a Cohort of Young Patients Requiring Hospital Admission with SARS-CoV2 Infection in Spain: Results of the Multicenter SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

BACKGROUND: Age is a risk factor for COVID severity. Most studies performed in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV2 infection have shown an over-representation of older patients and consequently few have properly defined COVID-19 in younger patients who require hospital admission. The aim of the present study was to analyze the clinical characteristics and risk factors for the development of respiratory failure among young (18 to 50 years) hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This retrospective nationwide cohort study included hospitalized patients from 18 to 50 years old with confirmed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and July 2, 2020. All patient data were obtained from the SEMI-COVID Registry. Respiratory failure was defined as the ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2 ratio) ≤200 mmHg or the need for mechanical ventilation and/or high-flow nasal cannula or the presence of acute respiratory distress syndrome. RESULTS: During the recruitment period, 15,034 patients were included in the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, of whom 2327 (15.4%) were younger than 50 years. Respiratory failure developed in 343 (14.7%), while mortality occurred in 2.3%. Patients with respiratory failure showed a higher incidence of major adverse cardiac events (44 (13%) vs 14 (0.8%), p<0.001), venous thrombosis (23 (6.7%) vs 14 (0.8%), p<0.001), mortality (43 (12.5%) vs 7 (0.4%), p<0.001), and longer hospital stay (15 (9-24) vs 6 (4-9), p<0.001), than the remaining patients. In multivariate analysis, variables associated with the development of respiratory failure were obesity (odds ratio (OR), 2.42; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.71 to 3.43; p<0.0001), alcohol abuse (OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.26 to 4.58; p=0.0076), sleep apnea syndrome (SAHS) (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.07 to 3.43; p=0.032), Charlson index ≥1 (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.52; p=0.0013), fever (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.22; p=0.0075), lymphocytes ≤1100 cells/µL (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.37; p=0.0033), LDH >320 U/I (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.42; p=0.0039), AST >35 mg/dL (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.52; p=0.003), sodium <135 mmol/L (OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.24 to 4.33; p=0.0079), and C-reactive protein >8 mg/dL (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.72 to 3.41; p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Young patients with COVID-19 requiring hospital admission showed a notable incidence of respiratory failure. Obesity, SAHS, alcohol abuse, and certain laboratory parameters were independently associated with the development of this complication. Patients who suffered respiratory failure had a higher mortality and a higher incidence of major cardiac events, venous thrombosis, and hospital stay.

Severity Scores in COVID-19 Pneumonia: a Multicenter, Retrospective, Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Identification of patients on admission to hospital with coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia who can develop poor outcomes has not yet been comprehensively assessed. OBJECTIVE: To compare severity scores used for community-acquired pneumonia to identify high-risk patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. DESIGN: PSI, CURB-65, qSOFA, and MuLBSTA, a new score for viral pneumonia, were calculated on admission to hospital to identify high-risk patients for in-hospital mortality, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), or use of mechanical ventilation. Area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC), sensitivity, and specificity for each score were determined and AUROC was compared among them. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia included in the SEMI-COVID-19 Network. KEY RESULTS: We examined 10,238 patients with COVID-19. Mean age of patients was 66.6 years and 57.9% were males. The most common comorbidities were as follows: hypertension (49.2%), diabetes (18.8%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (12.8%). Acute respiratory distress syndrome (34.7%) and acute kidney injury (13.9%) were the most common complications. In-hospital mortality was 20.9%. PSI and CURB-65 showed the highest AUROC (0.835 and 0.825, respectively). qSOFA and MuLBSTA had a lower AUROC (0.728 and 0.715, respectively). qSOFA was the most specific score (specificity 95.7%) albeit its sensitivity was only 26.2%. PSI had the highest sensitivity (84.1%) and a specificity of 72.2%. CONCLUSIONS: PSI and CURB-65, specific severity scores for pneumonia, were better than qSOFA and MuLBSTA at predicting mortality in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Additionally, qSOFA, the simplest score to perform, was the most specific albeit the least sensitive.

Serum CXCL13, BAFF, IL-21 and IL-22 levels are related to disease activity and lymphocyte profile in primary Sjögren's syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the utility of serum BAFF, IL-17, IL-18, IL-21, IL-22, CXCL13, TNF-R2 and PD-L2 as biomarkers of disease activity in primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS), their relationship with lymphocyte subpopulations and their accuracy to discriminate pSS from Sicca syndrome. METHODS: We conducted an observational study on 66 pSS patients and 48 controls (25 with Sicca syndrome and 23 healthy volunteers). Serum levels of BAFF, IL-17 A/F, IL-18, IL-21, IL-22, CXCL13, TNF-R2 and PD-L2 were measured using a multiplex immunoassay. Lymphocyte subpopulations were analysed by flow cytometry. Disease activity of pSS was assessed with ESSDAI at study inclusion. RESULTS: Patients with pSS presented higher serum CXCL13 (364.7 vs. 205.2 pg/mL), IL-21 (43.2 vs. 0 pg/mL) and BAFF (1646 vs. 1369 pg/mL), and lower PD-L2 levels (1950.8 vs. 2792.3 pg/mL) than controls. ESSDAI was associated with BAFF, IL-18 and IL-22. Patients with ESSDAI >0 exhibited higher CXCL13, IL-21, IL-22 and TNFR2 concentrations. IL-21 levels correlated with lower memory B-cell and higher naïve B-cell percentages and IL-22 levels correlated with increased circulating activated CD4+ T-cells. The combination of serum CXCL13, BAFF and PDL2 levels using the formula [ln(CXCL13)+ln(BAFF)]/ln(PDL2) exhibit an AUC of 0.854 (95% CI: 0.750-0.919) to discriminate between pSS and Sicca syndrome (sensitivity 77.2% and specificity 86.4% using a cut-off of 1.7). CONCLUSIONS: CXCL13, BAFF, IL-21, and IL-22 are potential biomarkers of pSS activity and IL-21 and IL-22 are associated with disturbances of lymphocyte subpopulations in pSS. The combination of serum CXCL13, BAFF, and PD-L2 levels allows discrimination between pSS and Sicca syndrome.

Risk of ischaemic events at giant cell arteritis diagnosis according to PET/CT findings.

PURPOSE: To analyse the risk of ischaemic events in patients with newly diagnosed giant cell arteritis (GCA) according to PET/CT findings. METHODS: PET/CT was performed during the first 10 days of steroid therapy. Clinical manifestations at diagnosis, and physical examination and PET/CT findings were recorded and compared according to the presence or absence of ischaemic symptoms at disease onset. Analysed territories included the ascending aorta, aortic arch, descending aorta, abdominal aorta, carotid arteries, brachiocephalic trunk, vertebral arteries, subclavian arteries and axillary arteries. RESULTS: The study group comprised 30 patients with a median age of 80.8 years. Of these patients, 21 (70%) reported ischaemic symptoms at diagnosis, and 13 (43.3%) had permanent visual loss. Of the 30 patients, 77.8% showed large vessel vasculitis (including aortic and vertebral artery involvement) on PET/CT, and 60% had isolated involvement of the vertebral territory. Vertebral arteries were more frequently involved in patients with ischaemic symptoms (OR 5.0, 95% CI 0.99-24.86, p = 0.051). The presence of vertebral artery involvement in the absence of aortic involvement was associated with the presence of ischaemic manifestations (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.001). The presence of aortitis was found to protect against the development of permanent visual loss (OR 19.0, 95% CI 2.79-127.97, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest an association between the vascular pattern on PET/CT at the time of GCA diagnosis and the risk of ischaemic events.

[Infective endocarditis in adult patients with congenital heart disease. Experience from a reference centre]. / Endocarditis infecciosa en adultos con cardiopatía congénita. Experiencia en un centro de referencia.

INTRODUCTION: A growing number of patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) will reach adulthood. Infective endocarditis (IE) is a major complication in this population. The aim of this study was to describe the features of IE in adults with CHD treated in a reference centre. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on a cohort of patients over 16 years of age with CHD who presented with IE (defined by the modified Duke criteria) between 1996 and 2014. Only the first episode from each patient was considered for the descriptive analysis. RESULTS: IE was observed in 27 patients. The median age at diagnosis of IE was 27.7 years, and 63% were male. Comorbidity was low (median Charlson index was 0). IE was mostly community-acquired (78%). The most frequent CHD were ventricular septal defect (33%). A repair was performed in 48% of patients, and 19% received palliative treatment. Forty-one percent of patients had some type of prosthesis. A residual defect was observed in 81%. The IE was detected in the right side of 44% of the patients. The most frequent aetiological agents were viridans group streptococci (41%) and Staphylococcus epidermidis (30%). Surgery was required to treat IE in 37% of patients. There were five re-infections and three relapses. Two patients died, both as a result of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: IE in adults with CHD occurred in young patients, and almost all of them carried some prosthetic material or a residual defect. The IE is frequently right-sided. Although surgical treatment was required in many cases, mortality was low, except in the case of relapses.

Changing Trends in the Global Consumption of Treatments Used in Hospitalized Patients for COVID-19: A Time Series Multicentre Study.

AIM: To analyze trends in the prescription of COVID-19 treatments for hospitalized patients during the pandemic. METHODS: Multicenter, ecological, time-series study of aggregate data for all adult patients with COVID-19 treated in five acute-care hospitals in Barcelona, Spain, between March 2020 and May 2021. Trends in the monthly prevalence of drugs used against COVID-19 were analyzed by the Mantel-Haenszel test. RESULTS: The participating hospitals admitted 22,277 patients with COVID-19 during the study period, reporting an overall mortality of 10.8%. In the first months of the pandemic, lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine were the most frequently used antivirals, but these fell into disuse and were replaced by remdesivir in July 2020. By contrast, the trend in tocilizumab use varied, first peaking in April and May 2020, declining until January 2021, and showing a discrete upward trend thereafter. Regarding corticosteroid use, we observed a notable upward trend in the use of dexamethasone 6 mg per day from July 2020. Finally, there was a high prevalence of antibiotics use, especially azithromycin, in the first three months, but this decreased thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 evolved with the changing scientific evidence during the pandemic. Initially, multiple drugs were empirically used that subsequently could not demonstrate clinical benefit. In future pandemics, stakeholders should strive to promote the early implementation of adaptive randomized clinical trials.

Improving prediction of COVID-19 mortality using machine learning in the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 registry.

COVID-19 is responsible for high mortality, but robust machine learning-based predictors of mortality are lacking. To generate a model for predicting mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using Gradient Boosting Decision Trees (GBDT). The Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 registry includes 24,514 pseudo-anonymized cases of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from 1 February 2020 to 5 December 2021. This registry was used as a GBDT machine learning model, employing the CatBoost and BorutaShap classifier to select the most relevant indicators and generate a mortality prediction model by risk level, ranging from 0 to 1. The model was validated by separating patients according to admission date, using the period 1 February to 31 December 2020 (first and second waves, pre-vaccination period) for training, and 1 January to 30 November 2021 (vaccination period) for the test group. An ensemble of ten models with different random seeds was constructed, separating 80% of the patients for training and 20% from the end of the training period for cross-validation. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) was used as a performance metric. Clinical and laboratory data from 23,983 patients were analyzed. CatBoost mortality prediction models achieved an AUC performance of 84.76 (standard deviation 0.45) for patients in the test group (potentially vaccinated patients not included in model training) using 16 features. The performance of the 16-parameter GBDT model for predicting COVID-19 hospital mortality, although requiring a relatively large number of predictors, shows a high predictive capacity.

Persistent COVID-19 symptoms 1 year after hospital discharge: A prospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the health status and exercise capacity of COVID-19 survivors one year after hospital discharge. METHODS: This multicenter prospective study included COVID-19 survivors 12 months after hospital discharge. Participants were randomly selected from a large cohort of COVID-19 patients who had been hospitalized until 15th April 2020. They were interviewed about persistent symptoms, underwent a physical examination, chest X-ray, and a 6-minute walk test (6MWT). A multivariate analysis was performed to determine the risk factors for persistent dyspnea. RESULTS: Of the 150 patients included, 58% were male and the median age was 63 (IQR 54-72) years. About 82% reported ≥1 symptoms and 45% had not recovered their physical health. The multivariate regression analysis revealed that the female sex, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and smoking were independent risk factors for persistent dyspnea. Approximately 50% completed less than 80% of the theoretical distance on the 6MWT. Only 14% had an abnormal X-ray, showing mainly interstitial infiltrates. A third of them had been followed up in outpatient clinics and 6% had undergone physical rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: Despite the high rate of survivors of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic with persistent symptomatology at 12 months, the follow-up and rehabilitation of these patients has been really poor. Studies focusing on the role of smoking in the persistence of COVID-19 symptoms are lacking.

Methylprednisolone Pulses in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients Without Respiratory Failure: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Corticosteroids are the cornerstone of the treatment of patients with COVID-19 admitted to hospital. However, whether corticosteroids can prevent respiratory worsening in hospitalized COVID-19 patients without oxygen requirements is currently unknown. Aims: To assess the efficacy of methylprednisolone pulses (MPP) in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with increased levels of inflammatory markers not requiring oxygen at baseline. Methods: Multicenter, parallel, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in Spain. Patients admitted for confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia with raised inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein >60 mg/L, interleukin-6 >40 pg/ml, or ferritin >1,000 µg/L) but without respiratory failure after the first week of symptom onset were randomized to receive a 3-day course of intravenous MPP (120 mg/day) or placebo. The primary outcome was treatment failure at 14 days, a composite variable including mortality, the need for ICU admission or mechanical ventilation, and clinical worsening, this last parameter defined as a PaO2/FiO2 ratio below 300; or a 15% decrease in the PaO2 from baseline, together with an increase in inflammatory markers or radiological progression. If clinical worsening occurred, patients received tocilizumab and unmasked corticosteroids. The secondary outcomes were 28-day mortality, adverse events, need for ICU admission or high-flow oxygen, length of hospital stay, SARS-CoV-2 clearance, and changes in laboratory parameters. Results: A total of 72 patients were randomized and 71 patients were analyzed (34 in the MPP group and 37 in the placebo group). Twenty patients presented with treatment failure (29.4 in the MPP group vs. 27.0% in the placebo group, p = 0.82), with no differences regarding the time to treatment failure between groups. There were no cases of death or mechanical ventilation requirements at 14 days post-randomization. The secondary outcomes were similar in MPP and placebo groups. Conclusions: A 3-day course of MPP after the first week of disease onset did not prevent respiratory deterioration in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with an inflammatory phenotype who did not require oxygen.

Ethnicity and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 in Spain: Results from the Multicenter SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: This work aims to analyze clinical outcomes according to ethnic groups in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in Spain. (2) Methods: This nationwide, retrospective, multicenter, observational study analyzed hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry) from 1 March 2020 to 31 December 2021. Clinical outcomes were assessed according to ethnicity (Latin Americans, Sub-Saharan Africans, Asians, North Africans, Europeans). The outcomes were in-hospital mortality (IHM), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and the use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Associations between ethnic groups and clinical outcomes adjusted for patient characteristics and baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index values and wave were evaluated using logistic regression. (3) Results: Of 23,953 patients (median age 69.5 years, 42.9% women), 7.0% were Latin American, 1.2% were North African, 0.5% were Asian, 0.5% were Sub-Saharan African, and 89.7% were European. Ethnic minority patients were significantly younger than European patients (median (IQR) age 49.1 (40.5−58.9) to 57.1 (44.1−67.1) vs. 71.5 (59.5−81.4) years, p < 0.001). The unadjusted IHM was higher in European (21.6%) versus North African (11.4%), Asian (10.9%), Latin American (7.1%), and Sub-Saharan African (3.2%) patients. After further adjustment, the IHM was lower in Sub-Saharan African (OR 0.28 (0.10−0.79), p = 0.017) versus European patients, while ICU admission rates were higher in Latin American and North African versus European patients (OR (95%CI) 1.37 (1.17−1.60), p < 0.001) and (OR (95%CI) 1.74 (1.26−2.41), p < 0.001). Moreover, Latin American patients were 39% more likely than European patients to use IMV (OR (95%CI) 1.43 (1.21−1.71), p < 0.001). (4) Conclusion: The adjusted IHM was similar in all groups except for Sub-Saharan Africans, who had lower IHM. Latin American patients were admitted to the ICU and required IMV more often.

Use of glucocorticoids megadoses in SARS-CoV-2 infection in a spanish registry: SEMI-COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of different doses of corticosteroids on the evolution of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, based on the potential benefit of the non-genomic mechanism of these drugs at higher doses. METHODS: Observational study using data collected from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. We evaluated the epidemiological, radiological and analytical scenario between patients treated with megadoses therapy of corticosteroids vs low-dose of corticosteroids and the development of complications. The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality according to use of corticosteroids megadoses. RESULTS: Of a total of 14,921 patients, corticosteroids were used in 5,262 (35.3%). Of them, 2,216 (46%) specifically received megadoses. Age was a factor that differed between those who received megadoses therapy versus those who did not in a significant manner (69 years [IQR 59-79] vs 73 years [IQR 61-83]; p < .001). Radiological and analytical findings showed a higher use of megadoses therapy among patients with an interstitial infiltrate and elevated inflammatory markers associated with COVID-19. In the univariate study it appears that steroid use is associated with increased mortality (OR 2.07 95% CI 1.91-2.24 p < .001) and megadose use with increased survival (OR 0.84 95% CI 0.75-0.96, p 0.011), but when adjusting for possible confounding factors, it is observed that the use of megadoses is also associated with higher mortality (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.32-1.80; p < .001). There is no difference between megadoses and low-dose (p .298). Although, there are differences in the use of megadoses versus low-dose in terms of complications, mainly infectious, with fewer pneumonias and sepsis in the megadoses group (OR 0.82 95% CI 0.71-0.95; p < .001 and OR 0.80 95% CI 0.65-0.97; p < .001) respectively. CONCLUSION: There is no difference in mortality with megadoses versus low-dose, but there is a lower incidence of infectious complications with glucocorticoid megadoses.

Experience in the use of remdesivir in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the effectiveness and safety of remdesivir in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in real-world clinical practice  conditions. METHOD: Retrospective observational study that included all adults with  SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted at the Moisès Broggi Hospital and  treated with remdesivir between July 1st and November 7th, 2020.  Efficacy outcomes were time to recovery, 28-day mortality, length of  hospital stay, and the need of mechanical ventilation after treatment. The  main safetyrelated endpoint was elevation of transaminases after  treatment. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients were included of whom 97 (87.4%) were receiving low-flow oxygen therapy. Median time to recovery was 9  days [6-14]. Seven patients (6.3%) died at 28 days' follow-up. Median  length of hospital stay was 12 days [9-22] and 15 patients (13.5%)  needed mechanical ventilation after treatment with remdesivir. Severe  hypertransaminasemia was observed in 4 patients (4%). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes of patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia on low-flow oxygen therapy treated with remdesivir were  similar to those published in clinical trials, both in terms of time to  recovery and 28-day mortality.

Objetivo: Describir la efectividad y seguridad de remdesivir en pacientes con neumonía por SARS-CoV-2 en condiciones de práctica clínica real.Método: Estudio observacional retrospectivo que incluyó a todos los pacientes tratados con remdesivir en el Hospital Moisès Broggi entre el 1 de julio y el 7 de noviembre de 2020. Como variables de efectividad se registraron el tiempo hasta la recuperación, la mortalidad a  los 28 días, la estancia hospitalaria y la proporción de pacientes que  requirió ventilación mecánica invasiva tras el tratamiento. Como variable  de seguridad se registró la alteración en las transaminasas tras el  tratamiento.Resultados: Se incluyeron 111 pacientes, 97 (87,4%) con oxigenoterapia de bajo flujo. El tiempo hasta la recuperación fue de 9 días [6-14] de  mediana y 7 pacientes (6,3%) habían fallecido a los 28 días de seguimiento. La estancia hospitalaria fue de 12 días [9-22] de mediana. Un total de 15 pacientes (13,5%) requirió ventilación mecánica  invasiva tras el tratamiento y 4 pacientes (4%) presentaron una alteración grave de las transaminasas.Conclusiones: El tratamiento con remdesivir en la práctica clínica habitual presenta resultados similares a los publicados en los ensayos  clínicos en el subgrupo de pacientes con oxigenoterapia de bajo flujo,  tanto en el tiempo hasta la recuperación como en la mortalidad a los 28  días.

Treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia with glucocorticoids (CORTIVID): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness and safety of glucocorticoid infusion pulse therapy to improve the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with elevated inflammatory biomarkers. TRIAL DESIGN: A parallel-group quadruple-blind (participant, intervention provider, outcome assessor and data manager), randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: All patients admitted to hospital due to COVID-19 pneumonia will be considered eligible. Potential candidates will be identified and consecutively included in the emergency room or in the COVID-19 admission wards of two hospitals in Spain: Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra (Pamplona) and Hospital Moisès Broggi (Sant Joan Despí, Barcelona). Inclusion criteria are: 1) age ≥18 years old; 2) diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia confirmed by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) of nasopharyngeal swabs or sputum in accordance with the recommendations of the Spanish Ministry of Health; 3) history of symptoms compatible with COVID-19 ≥7 days; 4) hospital admission; 5) at least one of the following: C-reactive protein (CRP) >60 mg/dL, interleukin-6 (IL-6) >40 pg/mL, and/or ferritin >1000 µg/L; and 6) provision of informed consent. Exclusion criteria are: 1) allergy or contraindication to any of the drugs under study; 2) oxygen saturation (SpO2) <90% (in air ambient) or partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood (PaO2) <60 mmHg (in ambient air) or PaO2/FiO2 <300 mmHg; 3) ongoing treatment with glucocorticoids, or other immunosuppressants, including biologics for another indication; 4) decompensated diabetes mellitus; 5) uncontrolled hypertension; 6) psychotic or manic disorder; 7) active cancer; 8) pregnancy or breastfeeding; 9) clinical or biochemical suspicion (procalcitonin >0.5 ng/mL) of active infection other than with SARS-CoV-2; 10) management as an outpatient; 11) conservative or palliative management; 12) participation in another clinical trial; or 13) any major uncontrolled medical, psychological, psychiatric, geographic or social problem that contraindicates the patient's participation in the trial or hinders proper follow-up and adherence to the protocol and evaluation of study outcomes. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Eligible patients will be randomised to receive standard of care plus methylprednisolone (intervention group) or standard of care plus placebo (control group). Intervention group: standard of care at the discretion of the researcher, including lopinavir/ritonavir (200/50 mg, 2 tablets twice daily, per os, for 7 to 14 days) ± remdesivir (a single intravenous loading dose of 200 mg on day 1 followed by once-daily intravenous maintenance doses of 100 mg from day 2 to 5), or no drug treatment, + methylprednisolone (once-daily intravenous infusion of 120 mg on days 1, 2 and 3). CONTROL GROUP: standard of care at the discretion of the researcher, including lopinavir/ritonavir (200/50 mg, 2 tablets every 12 hours, per os, for 7 to 14 days) ± remdesivir (a single intravenous loading dose of 200 mg on day 1 followed by once-daily intravenous maintenance doses of 100 mg from day 2 to 5), or no drug treatment, + placebo (once-daily intravenous infusion of 100 mL of 0.9% saline on days 1, 2 and 3). MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with treatment failure at 14 days after randomisation, defined as: 1) death, 2) need for admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), 3) initiation of mechanical ventilation, 4) SpO2 falling to <90% (in ambient air) or PaO2 <60 mmHg (in ambient air) or PaO2FiO2 <300 mmHg, not explained by a cause other than COVID-19, and/or 5) decrease in PaO2 ≥15% from baseline, together with laboratory and radiological deterioration. RANDOMISATION: Treatment will be allocated by block randomisation stratified by patient age (< or ≥ 75 years of age). For this purpose, we will use the R randomizeR package using two block sizes (4 and 6) with random permutation. The randomisation sequence will be generated by a unit (the Navarrabiomed Clinical Trials Platform) independent from the researchers who will recruit patients and implement the protocol. BLINDING (MASKING): The study will be quadruple-blinded, specifically, with blinding of patients, intervention providers, outcome assessors and data managers. The pharmacy at each participating hospital will prepare indistinguishable bags of methylprednisolone or placebo (0.9% saline) for patients of the experimental and placebo groups, respectively. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The percentage of patients with treatment failure (primary endpoint) is currently unknown. Assuming an absolute difference of 25% in the primary outcome between the two groups (35% in the control group and 10% in the intervention group), we estimate that 60 patients (30 per group) are required to detect this difference with a two-tailed type I error of 0.05 and a type II error of 0.2. Estimating a loss to follow-up of 20%, we should recruit a total sample size of 72 patients (36 per group). TRIAL STATUS: The Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS) and the Ethics Committee of the University Hospital La Princesa approved version 7.0 of the protocol on 30 April 2020 as a low intervention clinical trial. Subsequently, the protocol has been amended by researchers and re-approved by AEMPS and the same ethics committee on 1 July 2020 (version 8.0) and on 28 August 2020 (version 9.0). Currently, the trial is in the recruitment phase. Recruitment began on 28 May 2020 and is expected to be completed by February 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study protocol was registered on the eudract.ema.europa.eu on 5 May 2020 (title "Early treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia with glucocorticoids. Randomized controlled clinical trial"; EudraCT Number: 2020-001827-15 ) and on clinicaltrials.gov on 19 June 2020 (title: "Glucocorticoids in COVID-19 (CORTIVID)"; identifier: NCT04438980 ). FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol (version 9.0) is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Predicting critical illness on initial diagnosis of COVID-19 based on easily obtained clinical variables: development and validation of the PRIORITY model.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to develop and validate a prediction model, based on clinical history and examination findings on initial diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), to identify patients at risk of critical outcomes. METHODS: We used data from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, a cohort of consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from 132 centres in Spain (23rd March to 21st May 2020). For the development cohort, tertiary referral hospitals were selected, while the validation cohort included smaller hospitals. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or admission to intensive care unit. Clinical signs and symptoms, demographics, and medical history ascertained at presentation were screened using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, and logistic regression was used to construct the predictive model. RESULTS: There were 10 433 patients, 7850 in the development cohort (primary outcome 25.1%, 1967/7850) and 2583 in the validation cohort (outcome 27.0%, 698/2583). The PRIORITY model included: age, dependency, cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, dyspnoea, tachypnoea, confusion, systolic blood pressure, and SpO2 ≤93% or oxygen requirement. The model showed high discrimination for critical illness in both the development (C-statistic 0.823; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.813, 0.834) and validation (C-statistic 0.794; 95%CI 0.775, 0.813) cohorts. A freely available web-based calculator was developed based on this model (https://www.evidencio.com/models/show/2344). CONCLUSIONS: The PRIORITY model, based on easily obtained clinical information, had good discrimination and generalizability for identifying COVID-19 patients at risk of critical outcomes.

Frequency, risk factors, and outcomes of hospital readmissions of COVID-19 patients.

To determine the proportion of patients with COVID-19 who were readmitted to the hospital and the most common causes and the factors associated with readmission. Multicenter nationwide cohort study in Spain. Patients included in the study were admitted to 147 hospitals from March 1 to April 30, 2020. Readmission was defined as a new hospital admission during the 30 days after discharge. Emergency department visits after discharge were not considered readmission. During the study period 8392 patients were admitted to hospitals participating in the SEMI-COVID-19 network. 298 patients (4.2%) out of 7137 patients were readmitted after being discharged. 1541 (17.7%) died during the index admission and 35 died during hospital readmission (11.7%, p = 0.007). The median time from discharge to readmission was 7 days (IQR 3-15 days). The most frequent causes of hospital readmission were worsening of previous pneumonia (54%), bacterial infection (13%), venous thromboembolism (5%), and heart failure (5%). Age [odds ratio (OR): 1.02; 95% confident interval (95% CI): 1.01-1.03], age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index score (OR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.06-1.21), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.26-2.69), asthma (OR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.04-2.22), hemoglobin level at admission (OR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.86-0.99), ground-glass opacification at admission (OR: 0.86; 95% CI:0.76-0.98) and glucocorticoid treatment (OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.00-1.66) were independently associated with hospital readmission. The rate of readmission after hospital discharge for COVID-19 was low. Advanced age and comorbidity were associated with increased risk of readmission.

Risk Categories in COVID-19 Based on Degrees of Inflammation: Data on More Than 17,000 Patients from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: The inflammation or cytokine storm that accompanies COVID-19 marks the prognosis. This study aimed to identify three risk categories based on inflammatory parameters on admission. (2) Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with COVID-19, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The three categories of low, intermediate, and high risk were determined by taking into consideration the terciles of the total lymphocyte count and the values of C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, and D-dimer taken at the time of admission. (3) Results: A total of 17,122 patients were included in the study. The high-risk group was older (57.9 vs. 64.2 vs. 70.4 years; p < 0.001) and predominantly male (37.5% vs. 46.9% vs. 60.1%; p < 0.001). They had a higher degree of dependence in daily tasks prior to admission (moderate-severe dependency in 10.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 17%; p < 0.001), arterial hypertension (36.9% vs. 45.2% vs. 52.8%; p < 0.001), dyslipidemia (28.4% vs. 37% vs. 40.6%; p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (11.9% vs. 17.1% vs. 20.5%; p < 0.001), ischemic heart disease (3.7% vs. 6.5% vs. 8.4%; p < 0.001), heart failure (3.4% vs. 5.2% vs. 7.6%; p < 0.001), liver disease (1.1% vs. 3% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.002), chronic renal failure (2.3% vs. 3.6% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001), cancer (6.5% vs. 7.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.7% vs. 5.4% vs. 7.1%; p < 0.001). They presented more frequently with fever, dyspnea, and vomiting. These patients more frequently required high flow nasal cannula (3.1% vs. 4.4% vs. 9.7%; p < 0.001), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs. 3% vs. 6.3%; p < 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (0.6% vs. 2.7% vs. 8.7%; p < 0.001), and ICU admission (0.9% vs. 3.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001), and had a higher percentage of in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 6.2% vs. 23.9%; p < 0.001). The three risk categories proved to be an independent risk factor in multivariate analyses. (4) Conclusion: The present study identifies three risk categories for the requirement of high flow nasal cannula, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality based on lymphopenia and inflammatory parameters.