Dataset Information

COVID-19 severity in asthma patients: a multi-center matched cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The evidence pertaining to the effects of asthma on Coronavirus disease 2019 outcomes has been unclear. To improve our understanding of the clinically important association of asthma and Coronavirus disease 2019.

Methods

A matched cohort study was performed using data from the Mass General Brigham Health Care System (Boston, MA). Adult (age ≥18 years) patients with confirmed Coronavirus disease 2019 and without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis, or interstitial lung disease between March 4, 2020 and July 2, 2020 were analyzed. Up to five non-asthma comparators were matched to each asthma patient based on age (within 5 years), sex, and date of positive test (within 7 days). The primary outcomes were hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, and death, using multivariable Cox-proportional hazards models accounting for competing risk of death, when appropriate. Patients were followed for these outcomes from diagnosis of Coronavirus disease 2019 until July 2, 2020.

Results

Among 562 asthma patients, 199 (21%) were hospitalized, 15 (3%) received mechanical ventilation, and 7 (1%) died. Among the 2686 matched comparators, 487 (18%) were hospitalized, 107 (4%) received mechanical ventilation, and 69 (3%) died. The adjusted Hazard Ratios among asthma patients were 0.99 (95% Confidence Internal 0.80, 1.22) for hospitalization, 0.69 (95% Confidence Internal 0.36, 1.29) for mechanical ventilation, and 0.30 (95% Confidence Internal 0.11, 0.80) for death.

Conclusions

In this matched cohort study from a large Boston-based healthcare system, asthma was associated with comparable risk of hospitalization and mechanical ventilation but a lower risk of mortality.

SUBMITTER: Robinson LB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7938653 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough frequently used in the early pandemic, data on the effectiveness of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) remain mixed. We investigated the effectiveness and safety of CCP in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in real-world practices during the first two waves of the pandemic in a multi-hospital healthcare system in Texas.Methods and findingsAmong 11,322 hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection from July 1, 2020 to April 15, 2021, we included patients who received CCP and matched them with those who did not receive CCP within ±2 days of the transfusion date across sites within strata of sex, age groups, days and use of dexamethasone from hospital admission to the match date, and oxygen requirements 4-12 hours prior to the match date. Cox proportional hazards model estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effectiveness outcomes in a propensity score 1:1 matched cohort. Pre-defined safety outcomes were described. We included 1,245 patients each in the CCP treated and untreated groups. Oxygen support was required by 93% of patients at the baseline. The pre-defined primary effectiveness outcome of 28-day in-hospital all-cause mortality (HR = 0.85; 95%CI: 0.66,1.10) were similar between treatment groups. Sensitivity and stratified analyses found similar null results. CCP-treated patients were less likely to be discharged alive (HR = 0.82; 95%CI: 0.74, 0.91), and more likely to receive mechanical ventilation (HR = 1.48; 95%CI: 1.12, 1.96). Safety outcomes were rare and similar between treatment groups.ConclusionThe findings in this large, matched cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and mostly requiring oxygen support at the time of treatment, do not support a clinical benefit in 28-day in-hospital all-cause mortality for CCP. Future studies should assess the potential benefits with specifically high-titer units in perhaps certain subgroups of patients (e.g. those with early disease or immunocompromised).

Project description:Using RNA-seq and high-resolution mass spectrometry we performed a comprehensive systems analysis on 128 plasma and leukocyte samples from hospitalized patients with or without COVID-19 (n=102 and 26 respectively) and with differing degrees of disease severity. We generated abundance measurements for over 17,000 transcripts, proteins, metabolites, and lipids and compiled them with clinical data into a curated relational database. This resource offers the unique opportunity to perform systems analysis and cross-ome correlations to both molecules and patient outcomes. In total 219 molecular features were mapped with high significance to COVID-19 status and severity, including those involved in processes such as complement system activation, dysregulated lipid transport, and B cell activation. In one example, we detected a trio of covarying molecules – citrate, plasmenyl-phosphatidylcholines, and gelsolin (GSN) – that offer both pathophysiological insight and potential novel therapeutic targets. Further, our data revealed in some cases, and supported in others, that several biological processes were dysregulated in COVID-19 patients including vessel damage, platelet activation and degranulation, blood coagulation, and acute phase response. For example, we observed that the coagulation-related protein, cellular fibronectin (cFN), was highly increased within COVID-19 patients and provide new evidence that the upregulated proteoform stems from endothelial cells, consistent with endothelial injury as a major activator of the coagulation cascade. The abundance of prothrombin, which is cleaved to form thrombin during clotting, was significantly reduced and correlated with severity and might help to explain the hyper coagulative environment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. From transcriptomic analysis of leukocytes, we concluded that COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) demonstrated a phenotype that overlapped with, but was distinct from, that found in patients with non-COVID-19-ARDS. To aid in the global efforts toward elucidation of disease pathophysiology and therapeutic development, we created a web-based tool with interactive visualizations allowing for easy navigation of this systems-level compendium of biomolecule abundance in relation to COVID-19 status and severity. Finally, we leveraged these multi-omic data to predict COVID-19 patient outcomes with machine learning, which highlighted the predictive power of these expansive molecular measurements beyond the standardized clinical estimate of 10-year survival Charlson score.

Project description:BackgroundTo systematically evaluate the prevalence of post-sequelae and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test (CAT) scoring one year after hospital discharge among older COVID-19 patients, as well as potential risk factors.MethodsA multi-center prospective cohort study involving 1,233 eligible older COVID-19 patients was conducted. All patients were followed-up between Mar 1, 2021 and Mar 20, 2021. CAT scoring was adopted to measure symptom burden in COVID-19 patients.ResultsOf the 1233 eligible cases, 630 (51.1%) reported at least one sequelae. The top six post-sequelae included fatigue (32.4%), sweating (20.0%), chest tightness (15.8%), anxiety (11.4%), myalgia (9.0%), and cough (5.8%). Severe patients had significantly higher percentage of fatigue, sweating, chest tightness, myalgia, and cough (P<0.05), while anxiety was universal in all subjects. Sweating, anxiety, palpitation, edema of lower limbs, smell reduction, and taste change were emerging sequelae. Disease severity during hospitalization (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.15-1.84, P = 0.002), and follow-up time (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.50-0.99, P = 0.043) were independently associated with risk of post-sequelae, while disease severity during hospitalization was significantly associated with increased risk of emerging sequelae (OR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.03-1.71, P = 0.029). The median of CAT score was 2 (0-5) in all patients, and a total of 120 patients (9.7%) had CAT scores ≥10. Disease severity during hospitalization (OR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.23-2.67, P = 0.003) and age (OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.04-1.09, P<0.001) were significantly associated with increased risk of CAT scores ≥10.ConclusionsWhile the dramatic decline in the prevalence rate of persistent symptoms is reassuring, new sequelae among older COVID-19 patients cannot be ignored. Disease severity during hospitalization, age, and follow-up time contributed to the risk of post-sequelae and CAT scoring one year after hospital discharge among older COVID-19 patients. Our study provides valuable clues for long-term post-sequelae of the older COVID-19 patients, as well as their risk factors.

Project description:BackgroundIn patients with severe respiratory failure from COVID-19, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) treatment can facilitate lung-protective ventilation and may improve outcome and survival if conventional therapy fails to assure adequate oxygenation and ventilation. We aimed to perform a confirmatory propensity-matched cohort study comparing the impact of ECMO and maximum invasive mechanical ventilation alone (MVA) on mortality and complications in severe COVID-19 pneumonia.Materials and methodsAll 295 consecutive adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) from March 13th, 2020, to July 31st, 2021 were included. At admission, all patients were classified into 3 categories: (1) full code including the initiation of ECMO therapy (AAA code), (2) full code excluding ECMO (AA code), and (3) do-not-intubate (A code). For the 271 non-ECMO patients, match eligibility was determined for all patients with the AAA code treated with MVA. Propensity score matching was performed using a logistic regression model including the following variables: gender, P/F ratio, SOFA score at admission, and date of ICU admission. The primary endpoint was ICU mortality.ResultsA total of 24 ECMO patients were propensity matched to an equal number of MVA patients. ICU mortality was significantly higher in the ECMO arm (45.8%) compared with the MVA cohort (16.67%) (OR 4.23 (1.11, 16.17); p=0.02). Three-month mortality was 50% with ECMO compared to 16.67% after MVA (OR 5.91 (1.55, 22.58); p < 0.01). Applied peak inspiratory pressures (33.42 ± 8.52 vs. 24.74 ± 4.86 mmHg; p < 0.01) and maximal PEEP levels (14.47 ± 3.22 vs. 13.52 ± 3.86 mmHg; p=0.01) were higher with MVA. ICU length of stay (LOS) and hospital LOS were comparable in both groups.ConclusionECMO therapy may be associated with an up to a three-fold increase in ICU mortality and 3-month mortality compared to MVA despite the facilitation of lung-protective ventilation settings in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. We cannot confirm the positive results of the first propensity-matched cohort study on this topic. This trial is registered with NCT05158816.