Increased Risk of Hospitalisation and Intensive Care Admission Associated With Infection With SARS-CoV-2 Variants B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 in Norway, December 2020 – May 2021

IntroductionSince their emergence, SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC) B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 have spread worldwide. We estimated the risk of hospitalisation and admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for infections with B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 in Norway, compared to infections with non-VOC.Materials and methodsUsing linked individual-level data from national registries, we conducted a cohort study on laboratory-confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 in Norway diagnosed between 28 December 2020 and 2 May 2021. Variants were identified based on whole genome sequencing, partial sequencing by Sanger sequencing or PCR screening for selected targets. The outcome was hospitalisation or ICU admission. We calculated adjusted risk ratios (aRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using multivariable binomial regression to examine the association between SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 with i) hospital admission and ii) ICU admission compared to non-VOC.ResultsWe included 23,169 cases of B.1.1.7, 548 B.1.351 and 4,584 non-VOC. Overall, 1,017 cases were hospitalised (3.6%) and 206 admitted to ICU (0.7%). B.1.1.7 was associated with a 1.9-fold increased risk of hospitalisation (aRR 95%CI 1.6–2.3) and a 1.8-fold increased risk of ICU admission (aRR 95%CI 1.2–2.8) compared to non-VOC. Among hospitalised cases, no difference was found in the risk of ICU admission between B.1.1.7 and non-VOC. B.1.351 was associated with a 2.4-fold increased risk of hospitalisation (aRR 95%CI 1.7–3.3) and a 2.7-fold increased risk of ICU admission (aRR 95%CI 1.2–6.5) compared to non-VOC.DiscussionOur findings add to the growing evidence of a higher risk of severe disease among persons infected with B.1.1.7 or B.1.351. This highlights the importance of prevention and control measures to reduce transmission of these VOC in society, particularly ongoing vaccination programmes, and preparedness plans for hospital surge capacity.

Since their emergence, SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC) B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 have spread worldwide. We estimated the risk of hospitalisation and admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for infections with B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 in Norway, compared to infections with non-VOC. Using linked individual-level data from national registries, we conducted a cohort study on laboratory-confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 in Norway diagnosed between 28 December 2020 and 2 May 2021. Variants were identified based on whole genome sequencing, partial sequencing by Sanger sequencing or PCR screening for selected targets. The outcome was hospitalisation or ICU admission. We calculated adjusted risk ratios (aRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using multivariable binomial regression to examine the association between SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 with i) hospital admission and ii) ICU admission compared to non-VOC. We included 23,169 cases of B.1.1.7, 548 B.1.351 and 4,584 non-VOC. Overall, 1,017 cases were hospitalised (3.6%) and 206 admitted to ICU (0.7%). B.1.1.7 was associated with a 1.9-fold increased risk of hospitalisation (aRR 95%CI 1.6-2.3) and a 1.8-fold increased risk of ICU admission (aRR 95%CI 1.2-2.8) compared to non-VOC. Among hospitalised cases, no difference was found in the risk of ICU admission between B.1.1.7 and non-VOC. B.1.351 was associated with a 2.4-fold increased risk of hospitalisation (aRR 95%CI 1.7-3.3) and a 2.7-fold increased risk of ICU admission (aRR 95%CI 1.2-6.5) compared to non-VOC. Our findings add to the growing evidence of a higher risk of severe disease among persons infected with B.1.1.7 or B.1.351. This highlights the importance of prevention and control measures to reduce transmission of these VOC in society, particularly ongoing vaccination programmes, and preparedness plans for hospital surge capacity.

Venous thromboembolism has been reported in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It remains unclear if premorbid use of prophylactic oral anticoagulation, for reasons other than COVID-19, protects against death in patients with COVID-19. The aim of this study was to estimate if the risk of all-cause mortality, hospital admission or intensive care unit (ICU) admission for individuals with verified SARS-CoV-2 was lower if patients used oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy prior to a positive COVID-19 status. Data were obtained using national health registries. Cohort entry was the day of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and individuals were followed for 14 days or until death or hospital admission. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard regressions and competing risk analyses were used to estimate the risk of all-cause mortality, hospital admission and ICU admission in OAC users compared with patients with no use of OAC. In this nationwide cohort study a total of 244 522 individuals were included (median age 35 years (interquartile range 21-52); 124 095 (51%) female), among whom 3710 (1.5%) were OAC users. In the adjusted Cox regression cohort, there was no difference in risk of all-cause mortality in OAC versus non-OAC users. (hazard ratio (HR) 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.30). Hospital admission risk (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20) was slightly increased in OAC users, and there was no difference between the groups regarding the risk of ICU admission (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74-1.24). In individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2, pre-existing treatment with OAC was not associated with prophylactic benefits in the prevention of hospital admission, ICU admissions or death. Prescription patterns should remain unchanged.

Effects of statins on clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND: Obesity, common condition among patients with COVID-19, contributes to illness severity during hospitalization. To date, knowledge on the prevalence, risk of hospital and intensive care units (ICU) admissions and mortality is limited. Therefore, systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using a PRISMA guideline. PURPOSE: The study aimed to address the prevalence, risk of hospital and ICU admissions and mortality among patients with COVID-19 and obesity. METHODS: The Newcastle–Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of a study. Primary outcomes were the prevalence and risk of hospitalization, and secondary outcomes were the risk of ICU admissions and mortality risk. Mantel–Haenszel with random effects was applied, and the effect measure was odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Nine studies were included in the systematic review, and only four studies for meta-analysis. Among 29,776 patients with COVID-19, obesity was identified as the second-highest comorbidity. The prevalence rates of obesity and severe obesity among patients with COVID-19 were 26.1% and 15.5%, respectively. Obesity resulted in significantly increased risk of hospital admission (OR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.12–3.53, p = 0.02) and ICU admission (OR = 1.77, 95% = CI 1.52–2.06, p < 0.00001). Severe obesity had a significantly increased risk of ICU admission (OR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.42–2.25, p < 0.00001). The mortality rate of patients with COVID-19 and obesity was about 30.5% (438/1,434), and 19.7% (2,777/14,095) of them recovered from COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Obesity poses as nearly twice the risk of hospital and ICU admissions, and severe obesity contributes to almost twice the risk of ICU admissions.

<abstract><p>As COVID-19 vaccines become available, different model-based approaches have been developed to evaluate strategic priorities for vaccine allocation to reduce severe illness. One strategy is to directly prioritize groups that are likely to experience medical complications due to COVID-19, such as older adults. A second strategy is to limit community spread by reducing importations, for example by vaccinating members of the mobile labour force, such as rotational workers. This second strategy may be appropriate for regions with low disease prevalence, where importations are a substantial fraction of all cases and reducing the importation rate reduces the risk of community outbreaks, which can provide significant indirect protection for vulnerable individuals. Current studies have focused on comparing vaccination strategies in the absence of importations, and have not considered allocating vaccines to reduce the importation rate. Here, we provide an analytical criteria to compare the reduction in the risk of hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) admission over four months when either older adults or rotational workers are prioritized for vaccination. Vaccinating rotational workers (assumed to be 6,000 individuals and about 1% of the Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) population) could reduce the average risk of hospitalization and ICU admission by 42%, if no community spread is observed at the time of vaccination, because epidemic spread is reduced and vulnerable individuals are indirectly protected. In contrast, vaccinating all individuals aged 75 and older (about 43,300 individuals, or 8% of the NL population) would lead to a 24% reduction in the average risk of hospitalization, and to a 45% reduction in the average risk of ICU admission, because a large number of individuals at high risk from COVID-19 are now vaccinated. Therefore, reducing the risk of hospitalization and ICU admission of the susceptible population by reducing case importations would require a significantly lower number of vaccines. Benefits of vaccinating rotational workers decrease with increasing infection prevalence in the community. Prioritizing members of the mobile labour force should be considered as an efficient strategy to indirectly protect vulnerable groups from COVID-19 exposure in regions with low disease prevalence.</p></abstract>

<b>Background:</b> Venous thromboembolia have been reported in patients with COVID-19. However, it remains unclear if COVID-19 patients who, for other indications, take anti-coagulant medication on a regular basis, are protected against thrombosis-mediated death. The aim of this study was to estimate the risk of all-cause mortality, hospital admission, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission for verified COVID-19 patients who did vs. did not use oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC). <b>Methods:</b> Data was obtained by using national registries. Patients were followed for 90 days or until death or hospital admission. An adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate the risk of all-cause mortality, hospital admission and ICU admission. <b>Results:</b> A total of 243,039 confirmed COVID-19 patients were included in the study (mean age 35 years; 123,448 [50.79%] male), among whom 4,482 were OAC users. We observed an increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.011-1.24, p=0.015) and hospital admission (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.13-1.31, p&lt;0.0001) in OAC users. Among admitted patients, however, we observed a decreased risk of ICU admission (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.63-0.96, p=0.02) in OAC users. <b>Conclusion:</b> OAC was not associated with a lower risk of death or hospital admission, but our data support that hospitalized patients without anticoagulant treatment, may be at increased risk of respiratory deterioration and need for intensive care admission.

Objective Sepsis patients are at risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), but few data are available on the occurrence of GIB and MACEs and their impact on sepsis outcomes. Methods The medical claims records of 220,082 patients admitted for sepsis between 1999 and 2013 were retrieved from the nationwide database. The adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of composite outcomes including the hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mechanical ventilation (MV) in patients with a MACE or GIB were estimated by multivariate logistic regression and joint effect analyses. Results The enrollees were 70.15 ± 15.17 years of age with a hospital mortality rate of 38.91%. GIB developed in 3.80% of the patients; MACEs included ischemic stroke in 1.54%, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in 0.92%, and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 1.59%. Both ICH and AMI significantly increased the risk of (1) ICU admission (aOR = 8.02, 95% confidence interval (CI): 6.84–9.42 for ICH and aOR = 4.78, 95% CI: 4.21–5.42 for AMI, respectively), (2) receiving MV (aOR = 3.92, 95% CI: 3.52–4.40 and aOR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.84–2.16, respectively), and (3) the hospital mortality (aOR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.98–1.19 and aOR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.03–1.19, respectively). However, sepsis with GIB or ischemic stroke increased only the risk of ICU admission and MV but not the hospital mortality (aOR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.93–1.03 for GIB and aOR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.78–0.91 for ischemic stroke, respectively). Conclusions GIB and MACEs significantly increased the risk of ICU admission and receiving MV but not the hospital mortality, which was independently associated with both AMI and ICH. Early prevention can at least reduce the complexity of clinical course and even the hospital mortality.

Pre-Existing Pancreatitis and Elevated Risks of COVID-19 Severity and Mortality

Factors Associated with Risk and Prognosis of Intensive Care Unit Admission in Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Danish Nationwide Cohort Study

IntroductionTo identify risk factors for early (< three days) intensive care unit (ICU) admission of patients hospitalised with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and not requiring immediate ICU admission, and to stratify the risk of ICU admission on days 1 to 3.MethodsUsing the original data from four North American and European prospective multicentre cohort studies of patients with CAP, we derived and validated a prediction rule for ICU admission on days 1 to 3 of emergency department (ED) presentation, for patients presenting with no obvious reason for immediate ICU admission (not requiring immediate respiratory or circulatory support).ResultsA total of 6560 patients were included (4593 and 1967 in the derivation and validation cohort, respectively), 303 (4.6%) of whom were admitted to an ICU on days 1 to 3. The Risk of Early Admission to ICU index (REA-ICU index) comprised 11 criteria independently associated with ICU admission: male gender, age younger than 80 years, comorbid conditions, respiratory rate of 30 breaths/minute or higher, heart rate of 125 beats/minute or higher, multilobar infiltrate or pleural effusion, white blood cell count less than 3 or 20 G/L or above, hypoxaemia (oxygen saturation < 90% or arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) < 60 mmHg), blood urea nitrogen of 11 mmol/L or higher, pH less than 7.35 and sodium less than 130 mEq/L. The REA-ICU index stratified patients into four risk classes with a risk of ICU admission on days 1 to 3 ranging from 0.7 to 31%. The area under the curve was 0.81 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.78 to 0.83) in the overall population.ConclusionsThe REA-ICU index accurately stratifies the risk of ICU admission on days 1 to 3 for patients presenting to the ED with CAP and no obvious indication for immediate ICU admission and therefore may assist orientation decisions.

Risk factors for hospitalization, intensive care, and mortality among patients with asthma and COVID-19

Background: Sepsis is associated with detrimental clinical outcomes. It requires early diagnosis and urgent therapeutic intervention. Because staffing during after-hours is limited, we explored whether after-hour admissions are associated with worse clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis. Methods: In this cohort study, we analysed nationwide acute care admissions for a main diagnosis of sepsis in Switzerland between 2006 and 2016 using prospective administrative data. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality using multivariate logistic regression models. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation, and 30-day readmission. Findings: We included 86`597 hospitalisations for sepsis, 60·1% admitted during routine-hours, 16·8% on weekends and 23·1% at night. Compared to routine-hour admissions, we found a higher risk for in-hospital mortality in patients admitted on weekends (20·0% vs. 19·2%, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·05, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1·01-1·10, p=0·029). Also, the risk for ICU admission (30·5% vs. 28·0%, OR 1·14, 95% CI 1·10-1·19, p<0·0001) and intubation (14·7% vs. 12·9%, OR 1·18, 95% CI 1·12-1·25 p<0·0001) was higher for weekends compared to routine-hour admissions. There were no differences in 30-day readmission rates. Night shift admission, compared to routine-hour admission, also had a higher risk for ICU admission and intubation, whereas in-hospital mortality was not increased. Interpretation: Among hospitalisations with a main diagnosis of sepsis, weekend admissions were associated with higher risk for in-hospital mortality, ICU admission, and intubation. Whether these findings can be explained by staffing-level differences needs to be addressed. Funding Statement: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF_407440_167376) Declaration of Interests: All authors declare no competing interests. Ethics Approval Statement: Ethics Commission Northwest and Central Switzerland approved the study.

Underlying conditions and risk of hospitalisation, ICU admission and mortality among those with COVID-19 in Ireland: A national surveillance study.

Individuals with no known comorbidities or risk factors may develop severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The present study assessed the effect of certain host polymorphisms and viral lineage on the severity of COVID-19 among hospitalized patients with no known comorbidities in Mexico. The analysis included 117 unrelated hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Patients were stratified by whether they required intensive care unit (ICU) admission: the ICU group (n = 40) and non-ICU group (n = 77). COVID-19 was diagnosed on the basis of a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay and clinical and radiographic criteria. The presence of the IL1B-31 (T/C) polymorphism was determined for all patients using PCR and nucleotide sequencing. Genotyping of the IL-4 (-590, T/C) and IL-8 (-251, T/A) polymorphisms was performed by the amplification refractory mutation system-PCR method. Genotyping of IL1-RN was performed using PCR. Viral genome sequencing was performed using the ARTIC Network amplicon sequencing protocol using a MinION. Logistic regression analysis identified the carriage of IL-1 B*-31 *C as an independent potential risk factor (odds ratio [OR] = 3.1736, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0748-9.3705, p = 0.0366) for ICU admission and the presence of IL-RN*2 as a protective factor (OR = 0.4371, 95% CI = 0.1935-0.9871, p = 0.0465) against ICU admission. Under the codominant model, the CC genotype of IL1B-31 significantly increased the risk of ICU admission (OR: 6.38, 95% CI: 11.57-25.86, p < 0.024). The IL1B-31 *C-IL-4-590 *T haplotype increased the risk of ICU admission (OR = 2.53, 95% CI = 1.02-6.25, p = 0.047). The 42 SARS-CoV-2 genomes sequenced belonged to four clades, 20A-20D. No association was detected between SARS-CoV-2 clades and ICU admission or death. Thus, in patients with no known comorbidities or risk factors, the IL1B-31*C proinflammatory allele was observed to be associated with the risk of ICU admission owing to COVID-19.