-
1.
REsCue trial: Randomized controlled clinical trial with extended-release calcifediol in symptomatic COVID-19 outpatients.
Bishop, CW, Ashfaq, A, Melnick, JZ, Vazquez-Escarpanter, E, Fialkow, JA, Strugnell, SA, Choe, J, Kalantar-Zadeh, K, Federman, NC, Ng, D, et al
Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.). 2023;107:111899
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Literature shows that vitamin D repletion may reduce the risk for infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), mitigate severity of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and accelerate recovery. Sufficient serum level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25D) is postulated to potentiate COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness, boost innate and control adaptive immunity, and reduce post-infection cytokine storm and lung injury. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of extended-release calcifediol capsules to treat symptomatic patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. This study is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 clinical trial titled REsCue. One hundred seventy-one symptomatic COVID-19 outpatients participants were enrolled. Patients were randomised (1:1) to 4 weeks of treatment with extended-release calcifediol (30 mcg/capsule) or matching placebo and a 2-week follow-up. Results show that extended-release calcifediol treatment was effective in increasing serum 25D levels to ≥50 ng/mL, which may have yielded significantly shorter resolution times for three aggregated respiratory symptoms (trouble breathing, chest congestion, and dry or hacking cough) commonly observed in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Authors conclude that the positive findings from this study warrant confirmation in additional larger studies.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This double-blind randomized controlled trial investigated raising serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25D) with extended-release calcifediol (ERC) on time to symptom resolution in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. METHODS COVID-19 outpatients received oral ERC (300 mcg on days 1-3 and 60 mcg on days 4-27) or placebo (NCT04551911). Symptoms were self-reported daily. Primary end points were raising 25D to ≥50 ng/mL and decreasing resolution time for five aggregated symptoms (three respiratory). RESULTS In all, 171 patients were randomized, 160 treated and 134 (65 ERC, 69 placebo) retained. The average age was 43 y (range 18-71), 59% were women. The mean baseline 25D was 37 ± 1 (SE) ng/mL. In the full analysis set (FAS), 81% of patients in the ERC group achieved 25D levels of ≥50 ng/mL versus 15% in the placebo group (P < 0.0001). In the per-protocol (PP) population, mean 25D increased with ERC to 82 ± 4 (SE) ng/mL (P < 0.0001) by day 7; the placebo group trended lower. Symptom resolution time was unchanged in the FAS by ERC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.983; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.695-1.390; P = 0.922). In the PP population, respiratory symptoms resolved 4 d faster when 25D was elevated above baseline level at both days 7 and 14 (median 6.5 versus 10.5 d; HR, 1.372; 95% CI, 0.945-1.991; P = 0.0962; Wilcoxon P = 0.0386). Symptoms resolved in both treatment groups to a similar extent by study end. Safety concerns including hypercalcemia were absent with ERC treatment. CONCLUSION ERC safely raised serum 25D to ≥50 ng/mL in outpatients with COVID-19, possibly accelerating resolution of respiratory symptoms and mitigating the risk for pneumonia. These findings warrant further study.
-
2.
High-dose versus standard-dose vitamin D supplementation in older adults with COVID-19 (COVIT-TRIAL): A multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled superiority trial.
Annweiler, C, Beaudenon, M, Gautier, J, Gonsard, J, Boucher, S, Chapelet, G, Darsonval, A, Fougère, B, Guérin, O, Houvet, M, et al
PLoS medicine. 2022;19(5):e1003999
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused hundreds of thousands of deaths, mostly in older adults. The aim of this study was to test whether a single oral high-dose of cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) administered within 72 hours after the diagnosis of COVID-19 improves, compared to standard-dose cholecalciferol, the 14-day overall survival among at-risk older adults who are positive to COVID-19. This study is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label, parallel group, intent-to-treat, randomised controlled superiority clinical trial which involves the collaboration of 9 medical centres. Eligible participants (n=260) were randomly assigned to receive a single oral dose of either 400,000 IU (n=130) or 50,000 IU (n=130) cholecalciferol on the day of inclusion. Results show: - reduced overall mortality at day 14. - that high-dose cholecalciferol was safe and did not result in more frequent adverse effects compared to the standard dose. - that some benefits were also found on the 14-day mortality due to COVID-19 as well as on the overall mortality between day 6 and day 14. - that there was no evidence that the single high-dose vitamin D3 administered early in COVID-19 provided any benefit on overall mortality for up to 28 days. Authors conclude that high-dose oral cholecalciferol supplementation is a simple, safe, and inexpensive treatment which may be of interest as an adjuvant to provide a bridge to recovery for at-risk older adults facing the emergence of immune escape variants.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Vitamin D supplementation has been proposed as a treatment for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) based on experimental data and data from small and uncontrolled observational studies. The COvid19 and VITamin d TRIAL (COVIT-TRIAL) study was conducted to test whether a single oral high dose of cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) administered within 72 hours after the diagnosis of COVID-19 improves, compared to standard-dose cholecalciferol, the 14-day overall survival among at-risk older adults infected with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS AND FINDINGS This multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label, superiority trial involved collaboration of 9 medical centers in France. Patients admitted to the hospital units or living in nursing homes adjacent to the investigator centers were eligible if they were ≥65 years, had SARS-CoV-2 infection of less than 3 days, and at least 1 COVID-19 worsening risk factor (among age ≥75 years, SpO2 ≤94%, or PaO2/FiO2 ≤300 mm Hg). Main noninclusion criteria were organ failure requiring ICU, SpO2 ≤92% despite 5 L/min oxygen, life expectancy <3 months, vitamin D supplementation >800 IU/day during the preceding month, and contraindications to vitamin D supplements. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly allocated to either a single oral high-dose (400,000 IU) or standard-dose (50,000 IU) cholecalciferol administered under medical supervision within 72 hours after the diagnosis of COVID-19. Participants and local study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but the Steering Committee and the Data and Safety Monitoring Board were masked to the randomization group and outcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 14-day overall mortality. Between April 15 and December 17, 2020, of 1,207 patients who were assessed for eligibility in the COVIT-TRIAL study, 254 met eligibility criteria and formed the intention-to-treat population. The median age was 88 (IQR, 82 to 92) years, and 148 patients (58%) were women. Overall, 8 (6%) of 127 patients allocated to high-dose cholecalciferol, and 14 (11%) of 127 patients allocated to standard-dose cholecalciferol died within 14 days (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.39 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16 to 0.99], P = 0.049, after controlling for randomization strata [i.e., age, oxygen requirement, hospitalization, use of antibiotics, anti-infective drugs, and/or corticosteroids] and baseline imbalances in important prognostic factors [i.e., sex, ongoing cancers, profuse diarrhea, and delirium at baseline]). The number needed to treat for one person to benefit (NNTB) was 21 [NNTB 9 to ∞ to number needed to treat for one person to harm (NNTH) 46]. Apparent benefits were also found on 14-day mortality due to COVID-19 (7 (6%) deaths in high-dose group and 14 (11%) deaths in standard-dose group; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.33 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.86], P = 0.02). The protective effect of the single oral high-dose administration was not sustained at 28 days (19 (15%) deaths in high-dose group and 21 (17%) deaths in standard-dose group; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.70 [95% CI, 0.36 to 1.36], P = 0.29). High-dose cholecalciferol did not result in more frequent adverse effects compared to the standard dose. The open-label design and limited study power are the main limitations of the study. CONCLUSIONS In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), we observed that the early administration of high-dose versus standard-dose vitamin D3 to at-risk older patients with COVID-19 improved overall mortality at day 14. The effect was no longer observed after 28 days. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04344041.
-
3.
Efficacy of telemedicine for the management of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Kuan, PX, Chan, WK, Fern Ying, DK, Rahman, MAA, Peariasamy, KM, Lai, NM, Mills, NL, Anand, A
The Lancet. Digital health. 2022;4(9):e676-e691
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Digital health interventions (DHIs) have the potential to transform the diagnosis, monitoring, and management of chronic cardiovascular conditions. Many DHIs are widely deployed in health systems across the world, with adoption rapidly increasing in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The aim of this study was to provide an updated synthesis of evidence on the effectiveness of telemedicine in the management of cardiovascular diseases. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of seventy-two studies with a total of 127,869 participants, of whom 82,818 (65%) were males and 45051 (35%) were females. Results showed reduced cardiovascular-related mortality and hospitalisation for patients with heart failure who received combined remote telemedicine monitoring and consultation compared with usual care. Authors conclude that the findings of their study suggest a definite role for telemedicine in the management of heart failure, particularly in early treatment optimisation, but the value is less clear for long-term management strategy and other cardiovascular diseases. Thus, future research should focus to address the application of these technologies to unselected populations and longer-term effectiveness.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Telemedicine has been increasingly integrated into chronic disease management through remote patient monitoring and consultation, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting effectiveness of telemedicine interventions for the management of patients with cardiovascular conditions. METHODS In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library from database inception to Jan 18, 2021. We included randomised controlled trials and observational or cohort studies that evaluated the effects of a telemedicine intervention on cardiovascular outcomes for people either at risk (primary prevention) of cardiovascular disease or with established (secondary prevention) cardiovascular disease, and, for the meta-analysis, we included studies that evaluated the effects of a telemedicine intervention on cardiovascular outcomes and risk factors. We excluded studies if there was no clear telemedicine intervention described or if cardiovascular or risk factor outcomes were not clearly reported in relation to the intervention. Two reviewers independently assessed and extracted data from trials and observational and cohort studies using a standardised template. Our primary outcome was cardiovascular-related mortality. We evaluated study quality using Cochrane risk-of-bias and Newcastle-Ottawa scales. The systematic review and the meta-analysis protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021221010) and the Malaysian National Medical Research Register (NMRR-20-2471-57236). FINDINGS 72 studies, including 127 869 participants, met eligibility criteria, with 34 studies included in meta-analysis (n=13 269 with 6620 [50%] receiving telemedicine). Combined remote monitoring and consultation for patients with heart failure was associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular-related mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0·83 [95% CI 0·70 to 0·99]; p=0·036) and hospitalisation for a cardiovascular cause (0·71 [0·58 to 0·87]; p=0·0002), mostly in studies with short-term follow-up. There was no effect of telemedicine on all-cause hospitalisation (1·02 [0·94 to 1·10]; p=0·71) or mortality (0·90 [0·77 to 1·06]; p=0·23) in these groups, and no benefits were observed with remote consultation in isolation. Small reductions were observed for systolic blood pressure (mean difference -3·59 [95% CI -5·35 to -1·83] mm Hg; p<0·0001) by remote monitoring and consultation in secondary prevention populations. Small reductions were also observed in body-mass index (mean difference -0·38 [-0·66 to -0·11] kg/m2; p=0·0064) by remote consultation in primary prevention settings. INTERPRETATION Telemedicine including both remote disease monitoring and consultation might reduce short-term cardiovascular-related hospitalisation and mortality risk among patients with heart failure. Future research should evaluate the sustained effects of telemedicine interventions. FUNDING The British Heart Foundation.
-
4.
Vitamin D supplementation for the treatment of COVID-19: a living systematic review.
Stroehlein, JK, Wallqvist, J, Iannizzi, C, Mikolajewska, A, Metzendorf, MI, Benstoem, C, Meybohm, P, Becker, M, Skoetz, N, Stegemann, M, et al
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2021;5:CD015043
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
This study is part of a series of Cochrane Reviews investigating treatments and therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-19 is a rapidly spreading infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Therapeutic interventions to treat COVID-19 are being investigated with immense emphasis. Recently, vitamin D supplementation for treatment of COVID-19 gained attention, since studies suggested an association between vitamin D deficiency and risk or prognosis of the disease. The aim of this study was to assess whether vitamin D supplementation is effective and safe for the treatment of COVID-19 This study is a living systematic review of seven records (three randomised controlled studies – 356 adult participants). Results for the effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation for participants with COVID-19 are inconclusive. Moreover, inconsistency in the reporting of adverse and serious adverse events impeded evaluation of safety of vitamin D supplementation. Authors conclude that to elucidate the effectiveness and safety of vitamin D supplementation for individuals with COVID-19, more randomised controlled trials are needed.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The role of vitamin D supplementation as a treatment for COVID-19 has been a subject of considerable discussion. A thorough understanding of the current evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of vitamin D supplementation for COVID-19 based on randomised controlled trials is required. OBJECTIVES To assess whether vitamin D supplementation is effective and safe for the treatment of COVID-19 in comparison to an active comparator, placebo, or standard of care alone, and to maintain the currency of the evidence, using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Web of Science and the WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions to 11 March 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. We excluded studies investigating preventive effects, or studies including populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB 2) for RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following prioritised outcome categories: individuals with moderate or severe COVID-19: all-cause mortality, clinical status, quality of life, adverse events, serious adverse events, and for individuals with asymptomatic or mild disease: all-cause mortality, development of severe clinical COVID-19 symptoms, quality of life, adverse events, serious adverse events. MAIN RESULTS We identified three RCTs with 356 participants, of whom 183 received vitamin D. In accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) clinical progression scale, two studies investigated participants with moderate or severe disease, and one study individuals with mild or asymptomatic disease. The control groups consisted of placebo treatment or standard of care alone. Effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease We included two studies with 313 participants. Due to substantial clinical and methodological diversity of both studies, we were not able to pool data. Vitamin D status was unknown in one study, whereas the other study reported data for vitamin D deficient participants. One study administered multiple doses of oral calcifediol at days 1, 3 and 7, whereas the other study gave a single high dose of oral cholecalciferol at baseline. We assessed one study with low risk of bias for effectiveness outcomes, and the other with some concerns about randomisation and selective reporting. All-cause mortality at hospital discharge (313 participants) We found two studies reporting data for this outcome. One study reported no deaths when treated with vitamin D out of 50 participants, compared to two deaths out of 26 participants in the control group (Risk ratio (RR) 0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 2.13). The other study reported nine deaths out of 119 individuals in the vitamin D group, whereas six participants out of 118 died in the placebo group (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.04]. We are very uncertain whether vitamin D has an effect on all-cause mortality at hospital discharge (very low-certainty evidence). Clinical status assessed by the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (237 participants) We found one study reporting data for this outcome. Nine out of 119 participants needed invasive mechanical ventilation when treated with vitamin D, compared to 17 out of 118 participants in the placebo group (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.13). Vitamin D supplementation may decrease need for invasive mechanical ventilation, but the evidence is uncertain (low-certainty evidence). Quality of life We did not find data for quality of life. Safety of vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease We did not include data from one study, because assessment of serious adverse events was not described and we are concerned that data might have been inconsistently measured. This study reported vomiting in one out of 119 participants immediately after vitamin D intake (RR 2.98, 95% CI 0.12 to 72.30). We are very uncertain whether vitamin D supplementation is associated with higher risk for adverse events (very low-certainty). Effectiveness and safety of vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19 and asymptomatic or mild disease We found one study including 40 individuals, which did not report our prioritised outcomes, but instead data for viral clearance, inflammatory markers, and vitamin D serum levels. The authors reported no events of hypercalcaemia, but recording and assessment of further adverse events remains unclear. Authors administered oral cholecalciferol in daily doses for at least 14 days, and continued with weekly doses if vitamin D blood levels were > 50 ng/mL. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is currently insufficient evidence to determine the benefits and harms of vitamin D supplementation as a treatment of COVID-19. The evidence for the effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation for the treatment of COVID-19 is very uncertain. Moreover, we found only limited safety information, and were concerned about consistency in measurement and recording of these outcomes. There was substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity of included studies, mainly because of different supplementation strategies, formulations, vitamin D status of participants, and reported outcomes. There is an urgent need for well-designed and adequately powered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with an appropriate randomisation procedure, comparability of study arms and preferably double-blinding. We identified 21 ongoing and three completed studies without published results, which indicates that these needs will be addressed and that our findings are subject to change in the future. Due to the living approach of this work, we will update the review periodically.
-
5.
Western Dietary Pattern Antioxidant Intakes and Oxidative Stress: Importance During the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 Pandemic.
Trujillo-Mayol, I, Guerra-Valle, M, Casas-Forero, N, Sobral, MMC, Viegas, O, Alarcón-Enos, J, Ferreira, IM, Pinho, O
Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.). 2021;12(3):670-681
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
The Atlantic diet (AD), Mediterranean diet (MD) and diets which follow the American dietary guidelines (AmD) all supply enough nutrients for the body to stay healthy. However, during periods of viral pandemics, such as the Covid-19 pandemic, these diets may be inadequate for optimal resistance to infection. Furthermore, nutrient requirements may alter with age, stress, and health. This review paper aimed to discuss the three different diets and their suitability depending on age and physical and mental state. Supplementation during a pandemic was also discussed. When the body contracts viruses such as Covid-19, reactive oxygen species can accumulate resulting in oxidative stress which can damage the cells. Nutrients in the diet, which act as antioxidants may be of benefit, in this instance, however traditional balanced diets such as the AD, MD and AmD may be inadequate. In tandem with a balanced diet, supplementation may improve health. Zinc, vitamin A, selenium, vitamin D, vitamin C, and iron have been shown in research to improve the body’s response to viruses. It was concluded that the Covid-19 pandemic has caused severe infections, which can result in oxidative stress, increasing vulnerability to viral infections. Supplementing certain nutrients may be of benefit especially in vulnerable individuals. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to understand that a balanced diet is essential during viral pandemics, and it may be necessary to consider supplementation for high-risk individuals.
Abstract
The importance of balanced dietary habits, which include appropriate amounts of antioxidants to maintain the immune system, has become increasingly relevant during the current SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic, because viral infections are characterized by high oxidative stress. Furthermore, the measures taken by governments to control the pandemic have led to increased anxiety, stress, and depression, which affect physical and mental health, all of which are influenced by nutritional status, diet, and lifestyle. The Mediterranean diet (MD), Atlantic diet (AD), and the Dietary Guidelines for Americans all provide the essential vitamins, minerals, and phenolic compounds needed to activate enzymatic and nonenzymatic antioxidant responses. However, viral pandemics such as the current COVID-19 crisis entail high oxidative damage caused by both the infection and the resultant social stresses within populations, which increases the probability and severity of infection. Balanced dietary patterns such as the MD and the AD are characterized by the consumption of fruit, vegetables, legumes, olive oil, and whole grains with low intakes of processed foods and red meat. For a healthy lifestyle in young adults, the MD in particular provides the required amount of antioxidants per day for vitamins D (0.3-3.8 μg), E (17.0 mg), C (137.2-269.8 mg), A (1273.3 μg), B-12 (1.5-2.0 μg), and folate (455.1-561.3 μg), the minerals Se (120.0 μg), Zn (11.0 mg), Fe (15.0-18.8 mg), and Mn (5.2-12.5 mg), and polyphenols (1171.00 mg) needed to maintain an active immune response. However, all of these diets are deficient in the recommended amount of vitamin D (20 μg/d). Therefore, vulnerable populations such as elders and obese individuals could benefit from antioxidant supplementation to improve their antioxidant response. Although evidence remains scarce, there is some indication that a healthy diet, along with supplemental antioxidant intake, is beneficial to COVID-19 patients.
-
6.
Association of Blood Glucose Control and Outcomes in Patients with COVID-19 and Pre-existing Type 2 Diabetes.
Zhu, L, She, ZG, Cheng, X, Qin, JJ, Zhang, XJ, Cai, J, Lei, F, Wang, H, Xie, J, Wang, W, et al
Cell metabolism. 2020;31(6):1068-1077.e3
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by infection from the newly emerged, highly contagious coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this study was to analyse the association between plasma glucose levels and clinic outcomes in COVID-19 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The study is a retrospective longitudinal, multi-centre study from a cohort of 7,337 COVID-19 cases enrolled among 19 hospitals. Results show that patients with pre-existing T2D received significantly more intensive integrated treatments to manage their symptoms of COVID-19 than the non-diabetic subjects. Furthermore, findings indicate that well-controlled blood glucose was associated with a markedly improved outcome of patients with COVID-19 and pre-existing T2D. Authors conclude that T2D is an important risk factor for COVID-19 progression and adverse endpoints, and well-controlled blood glucose is associated with a significant reduction in the composite adverse outcomes and death.
Abstract
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a major comorbidity of COVID-19. However, the impact of blood glucose (BG) control on the degree of required medical interventions and on mortality in patients with COVID-19 and T2D remains uncertain. Thus, we performed a retrospective, multi-centered study of 7,337 cases of COVID-19 in Hubei Province, China, among which 952 had pre-existing T2D. We found that subjects with T2D required more medical interventions and had a significantly higher mortality (7.8% versus 2.7%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.49) and multiple organ injury than the non-diabetic individuals. Further, we found that well-controlled BG (glycemic variability within 3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L) was associated with markedly lower mortality compared to individuals with poorly controlled BG (upper limit of glycemic variability exceeding 10.0 mmol/L) (adjusted HR, 0.14) during hospitalization. These findings provide clinical evidence correlating improved glycemic control with better outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and pre-existing T2D.
-
7.
COVID-19 infection: the perspectives on immune responses.
Shi, Y, Wang, Y, Shao, C, Huang, J, Gan, J, Huang, X, Bucci, E, Piacentini, M, Ippolito, G, Melino, G
Cell death and differentiation. 2020;27(5):1451-1454
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
The SARS-CoV-2 infection triggers an immune response which varies greatly from one person to another. It can be roughly divided into three stages: stage I, an asymptomatic incubation period with or without detectable virus; stage II, non-severe symptomatic period with the presence of virus; stage III, severe respiratory symptomatic stage with high viral load. Currently around 15% of people infected end up in severe stage III. There appears to be a two-phase immune response; an early protective phase and a second inflammation-driven damaging phase. In phase one the adaptive immune system responds to the virus. Being in good general health is important in this phase to limiting the progression of the disease to a more severe stage. In phase two the innate immune system response to tissue damage caused by the virus could lead to widespread inflammation of the lungs and acute respiratory distress syndrome or respiratory failure. Therapeutically this raises the question of whether the immune response should be boosted in phase one and suppressed in phase two. There also appears to be an element of viral relapse in some patients discharged from hospital indicating that a virus-eliminating immune response may be difficult to achieve naturally. These same patients may also not respond to vaccines. Overall, it is still unclear why some people develop severe disease, whilst others do not. Overall immunity alone does not explain the differences in disease presentation.
-
8.
Using psychoneuroimmunity against COVID-19.
Kim, SW, Su, KP
Brain, behavior, and immunity. 2020;87:4-5
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
This viewpoint article raises awareness of the threat of COVID-19 poses to psychiatric patients who are in mental health hospitals. Those patients appear to have a much elevated mortality rate and are potentially more vulnerable to the effects of panic/anxiety due to the pandemic. Their lifestyle choices, influenced by fears about the virus, may also have a negative effect on their immunity. The article also raises the issue of the effects the pandemic and associated changes to day-to-day life can have on the mental and general health of the rest of the population, and in particular to mental health professionals, whose ability to care for their psychiatric patients may be impaired. The authors also briefly discuss the psychological and immunological mechanisms that connect our mental state to the ability of our immune system to fight infections, and the impact of our lifestyles and environments. To summarise they state that infected patients, uninfected quarantined individuals and medical professionals all require mental health supporting strategies, and that epidemiological studies of potential long-term psychiatric consequences are essential.
Abstract
The worldwide outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) raises concerns of widespread panic and anxiety in individuals subjected to the real or perceived threat of the virus. Compared to general populations, patients who are institutionalized in a closed unit are also very vulnerable to COVID-19 infection and complications. This crisis touched on difficult issues of not only psychiatric care and ethics, but also psychological impacts to psychiatric care givers. In this Viewpoint, we address both physical and biopsychosocial aspects of this infection, as well as the psychoneuroimmunity of preventive strategies of healthy lifestyle, regular exercise, balanced nutrition, quality sleep and a strong connection with people. Social distancing and wearing masks might help us from pathogen exposure, yet such these measures also prevent us from expressing compassion and friendliness. Therefore, all forms of psychological support should be routinely implemented not only to consider psychological resilience but also to enhance psychoneuroimmunity against COVID-19.
-
9.
Fasting blood glucose at admission is an independent predictor for 28-day mortality in patients with COVID-19 without previous diagnosis of diabetes: a multi-centre retrospective study.
Wang, S, Ma, P, Zhang, S, Song, S, Wang, Z, Ma, Y, Xu, J, Wu, F, Duan, L, Yin, Z, et al
Diabetologia. 2020;63(10):2102-2111
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Hyperglycaemia was a risk factor for mortality from severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and is an independent risk factor for lower respiratory tract infection and poor prognosis. The aim of this retrospective study of 605 patients without previously diagnosed diabetes was to examine the association between fasting blood glucose (FBG) on admission and the 28-day in hospital mortality of COVID-19 patients. Patients with a FBG level of 7.0mmol/l or over had more than double the risk of dying than those with a level of 6.0mmol/l or less. Other risk factors for mortality included age, being male, and severity of pneumonia at admission. Compared with patients whose FBG was 6.0mmol/l or lower at admission, patients with FBG of 7.0 mmol/l and above had a 3.99 times higher risk of in-hospital complications, whilst those with FBG of 6.1–6.9 mmol/l had a 2.61 times higher risk of complications. The authors conclude that glycaemic testing and control are important to all COVID-19 patients even where they have no pre-existing diabetes.
Abstract
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS Hyperglycaemia is associated with an elevated risk of mortality in community-acquired pneumonia, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, trauma and surgery, among other conditions. In this study, we examined the relationship between fasting blood glucose (FBG) and 28-day mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients not previously diagnosed as having diabetes. METHODS We conducted a retrospective study involving all consecutive COVID-19 patients with a definitive 28-day outcome and FBG measurement at admission from 24 January 2020 to 10 February 2020 in two hospitals based in Wuhan, China. Demographic and clinical data, 28-day outcomes, in-hospital complications and CRB-65 scores of COVID-19 patients in the two hospitals were analysed. CRB-65 is an effective measure for assessing the severity of pneumonia and is based on four indicators, i.e. confusion, respiratory rate (>30/min), systolic blood pressure (≤90 mmHg) or diastolic blood pressure (≤60 mmHg), and age (≥65 years). RESULTS Six hundred and five COVID-19 patients were enrolled, including 114 who died in hospital. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that age (HR 1.02 [95% CI 1.00, 1.04]), male sex (HR 1.75 [95% CI 1.17, 2.60]), CRB-65 score 1-2 (HR 2.68 [95% CI 1.56, 4.59]), CRB-65 score 3-4 (HR 5.25 [95% CI 2.05, 13.43]) and FBG ≥7.0 mmol/l (HR 2.30 [95% CI 1.49, 3.55]) were independent predictors for 28-day mortality. The OR for 28-day in-hospital complications in those with FBG ≥7.0 mmol/l and 6.1-6.9 mmol/l vs <6.1 mmol/l was 3.99 (95% CI 2.71, 5.88) or 2.61 (95% CI 1.64, 4.41), respectively. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION FBG ≥7.0 mmol/l at admission is an independent predictor for 28-day mortality in patients with COVID-19 without previous diagnosis of diabetes. Glycaemic testing and control are important to all COVID-19 patients even where they have no pre-existing diabetes, as most COVID-19 patients are prone to glucose metabolic disorders. Graphical abstract.
-
10.
Phenotypic characteristics and prognosis of inpatients with COVID-19 and diabetes: the CORONADO study.
Cariou, B, Hadjadj, S, Wargny, M, Pichelin, M, Al-Salameh, A, Allix, I, Amadou, C, Arnault, G, Baudoux, F, Bauduceau, B, et al
Diabetologia. 2020;63(8):1500-1515
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
People with diabetes have an increased risk for infections, especially influenza and pneumonia, and also appear to be particularly vulnerable to develop severe disease or die from Covid-19. The aim of this multicentre observational study from France was to determine clinical and biological features in patients with diabetes and hospitalised for Covid-19. A total of 1317 patients were analysed, with the main outcomes being intubation for mechanical ventilation (reached by 267 patients, 29%) or death (140 patients, 10.6%) within 7 days of being admitted to hospital. HbA1C, as a marker of how well controlled the diabetes was, was not associated with either risk of death or need for mechanical ventilation. When other factors were taken into account, only body mass index was associated with risk of ventilation, whilst age, history of microvascular or macrovascular complications (injury to small or large blood vessels), and treated obstructive sleep apnoea were found to be independently associated with the risk of death. Of clinical and blood test parameters on admission, difficulty breathing, lymphopaenia (low levels of specific white blood cells), and increased AST (marker of liver function) and CRP (marker of inflammation) were independent factors for predicting severity of the course of COVID-19.
Abstract
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is a life-threatening infection caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Diabetes has rapidly emerged as a major comorbidity for COVID-19 severity. However, the phenotypic characteristics of diabetes in COVID-19 patients are unknown. METHODS We conducted a nationwide multicentre observational study in people with diabetes hospitalised for COVID-19 in 53 French centres in the period 10-31 March 2020. The primary outcome combined tracheal intubation for mechanical ventilation and/or death within 7 days of admission. Age- and sex-adjusted multivariable logistic regressions were performed to assess the prognostic value of clinical and biological features with the endpoint. ORs are reported for a 1 SD increase after standardisation. RESULTS The current analysis focused on 1317 participants: 64.9% men, mean age 69.8 ± 13.0 years, median BMI 28.4 (25th-75th percentile: 25.0-32.7) kg/m2; with a predominance of type 2 diabetes (88.5%). Microvascular and macrovascular diabetic complications were found in 46.8% and 40.8% of cases, respectively. The primary outcome was encountered in 29.0% (95% CI 26.6, 31.5) of participants, while 10.6% (9.0, 12.4) died and 18.0% (16.0, 20.2) were discharged on day 7. In univariate analysis, characteristics prior to admission significantly associated with the primary outcome were sex, BMI and previous treatment with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockers, but not age, type of diabetes, HbA1c, diabetic complications or glucose-lowering therapies. In multivariable analyses with covariates prior to admission, only BMI remained positively associated with the primary outcome (OR 1.28 [1.10, 1.47]). On admission, dyspnoea (OR 2.10 [1.31, 3.35]), as well as lymphocyte count (OR 0.67 [0.50, 0.88]), C-reactive protein (OR 1.93 [1.43, 2.59]) and AST (OR 2.23 [1.70, 2.93]) levels were independent predictors of the primary outcome. Finally, age (OR 2.48 [1.74, 3.53]), treated obstructive sleep apnoea (OR 2.80 [1.46, 5.38]), and microvascular (OR 2.14 [1.16, 3.94]) and macrovascular complications (OR 2.54 [1.44, 4.50]) were independently associated with the risk of death on day 7. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATIONS In people with diabetes hospitalised for COVID-19, BMI, but not long-term glucose control, was positively and independently associated with tracheal intubation and/or death within 7 days. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov NCT04324736.