Adverse COVID-19 Outcomes Research Articles

Upstream Oil and Gas Production and Community COVID-19 Case and Mortality Rates in California, USA.

Higher concentrations of ambient air pollutants, including PM2.5 and NO2, and other pollutants have been found near active oil and gas wells and may be associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes. We assessed whether residential exposure to nearby oil and gas production was associated with higher rates of the respiratory infection COVID-19 and related mortality using a population-based ecological study in California. Using gridded population estimates, we estimated area-level exposure to annual average oil and gas production volume from active wells within 1kilometer (km) of populated areas within census block groups from 2018 to 2020. We geocoded confirmed cases and associated deaths to assess block group case and mortality rates from COVID-19 from February 2020 to January 2021. We fit hierarchical Poisson models with individual and area covariates (e.g., age, sex, socioeconomic disadvantage), and included time and other interactions to assess additional variation (e.g., testing, reporting rates). In the first 4months of the study period (February-May 2020), block groups in the highest tertile of oil and gas production exposure had 34% higher case rates (IRR: 1.34 95% CI: 1.20, 1.49) and 55% higher mortality rates (MRR: 1.52 95%: CI: 1.14, 2.03) than those with no estimated production, after accounting for area-level covariates. Over the entire study period, we observed moderately higher mortality rates in the highest group (MRR: 1.16 95%: CI: 1.01, 1.33) and null associations for case rates.

Antibody levels versus vaccination status in the outcome of older adults with COVID-19.

BACKGROUNDDespite the currently prevailing, milder Omicron variant of COVID-19, older adults remain at elevated risk of hospital admission, critical illness, and death. Loss of efficacy of the immune system, including reduced strength, quality, and durability of antibody responses, may render generalized recommendations on booster vaccinations inadequate. There is a lack of data on the efficacy of antibody levels in older adults and on the utility of vaccination status versus antibody levels as a correlate of protection. It is further unclear whether antibody levels may be used to guide the timing of booster vaccinations in older adults.METHODSWe conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study comprising hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies were measured on hospital admission. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Patients were stratified by age, antibody levels, and vaccination status. Multiple logistic regression and Cox regression analyses were conducted.RESULTSIn total, 785 older patients (≥60 years of age [a]) and 367 controls (<60a) were included. After adjusting for confounders, risk of mortality, ICU admission, endotracheal intubation, and oxygen administration was 4.9, 2.6, 6.5, and 2.3 times higher, respectively, if antibody levels were < 1,200 BAU/mL (aOR, 4.92 [95%CI, 2.59-9.34], P < 0.0001; aOR, 2.64 [95%CI, 1.52-4.62], P = 0.0006; aOR, 6.50 [95%CI, 1.48-28.47], P = 0.013; aOR, 2.34 [95%CI, 1.60-3.343], P < 0.0001). Older adults infected with the Omicron variant were approximately 6 times more likely to die if antibody levels were < 1,200 BAU/mL (aOR, 6.3 [95% CI, 2.43-16.40], P = 0.0002).CONCLUSIONAntibody levels were a stronger predictor of in-hospital mortality than vaccination status. Monitoring antibody levels may constitute a better and more direct approach for safeguarding older adults from adverse COVID-19 outcomes.

Tobacco consumption behavior change during the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with perceived COVID threat

RationaleTobacco use is a risk factor for COVID-19 adverse outcomes. Despite health implications, data conflict regarding COVID-19 and tobacco consumption. We present results from a survey of health behaviors during the pandemic to identify how COVID-19 influenced tobacco behaviors.MethodsA nationally administered, internet-based survey was deployed between May–September 2020. Of respondents, we analyzed participants who reported current smoking and/or vaping. Our primary outcome of interest was change in tobacco or vape use using measures from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, as well as whether participants reported that these changes were related to COVID-19. Our principal exposures were previously psychometrically evaluated measures of anxiety, depression, and novel perceived COVID-19 threat scale with additional adjustment for age. We employed multinomial logistic regression to determine associations between these factors and tobacco consumption.ResultsWe identified 500 respondents who reported ever smoking in their lifetime, 150 of which reported currently smoking at the time of the survey. Of 220 participants who reported any use of vapes, 110 reported currently vaping. Increased perceived threat of COVID-19 was associated with both increased (aRRincrease 1.75, 95% CI [1.07–2.86], P = 0.03) and decreased (aRRdecrease 1.72 [1.04–2.85], P = 0.03) tobacco consumption relative to no change. There were no significant relationships found between perceived threat of COVID-19 and vaping behavior.ConclusionsAs perceived COVID-19 threat increased, people were more likely to increase or decrease their smoking as opposed to continue at the same amount of use, even after controlling for anxiety and depression, both of which are known to affect smoking in either direction. Further study into motivators of changing tobacco consumption behaviors, and how barriers to care from safer-at-home policies and changes in care delivery moderate change in tobacco use will aid planning tobacco reduction interventions during the ongoing and future respiratory viral pandemics.Trial registrationThis manuscript is derived from baseline survey data obtained in the “Understanding Community Considerations, Opinions, Values, Impacts, and Decisions in COVID-19” study. ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT04373135, registered 04/30/2020.

County-level associations between drinking water PFAS contamination and COVID-19 mortality in the United States.

Epidemiologic and animal studies both support relationships between exposures to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and harmful effects on the immune system. Accordingly, PFAS have been identified as potential environmental risk factors for adverse COVID-19 outcomes. Here, we examine associations between PFAS contamination of U.S. community water systems (CWS) and county-level COVID-19 mortality records. Our analyses leverage two datasets: one at the subnational scale (5371 CWS serving 621 counties) and one at the national scale (4798 CWS serving 1677 counties). The subnational monitoring dataset was obtained from statewide drinking monitoring of PFAS (2016-2020) and the national monitoring dataset was obtained from a survey of unregulated contaminants (2013-2015). We conducted parallel analyses using multilevel quasi-Poisson regressions to estimate cumulative incidence ratios for the association between county-level measures of PFAS drinking water contamination and COVID-19 mortality prior to vaccination onset (Jan-Dec 2020). In the primary analyses, these regressions were adjusted for several county-level sociodemographic factors, days after the first reported case in the county, and total hospital beds. In the subnational analysis, detection of at least one PFAS over 5 ng/L was associated with 12% higher [95% CI: 4%, 19%] COVID-19 mortality. In the national analysis, detection of at least one PFAS above the reporting limits (20-90 ng/L) was associated with 13% higher [95% CI: 8%, 19%] COVID-19 mortality. Our findings provide evidence for an association between area-level drinking water PFAS contamination and higher COVID-19 mortality in the United States. These findings reinforce the importance of ongoing state and federal monitoring efforts supporting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 2024 drinking water regulations for PFAS. More broadly, this example suggests that drinking water quality could play a role in infectious disease severity. Future research would benefit from study designs that combine area-level exposure measures with individual-level outcome data.

The burden of COVID-19 mortality among solid organ transplant recipients in the United States

Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) have heightened risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes due to immunosuppression and medical comorbidity. We quantified the burden of COVID-19 mortality in US SOTRs. A sample of deaths documented in the US solid organ transplant registry from June 2020 through December 2022 were linked to the National Death Index to identify COVID-19 deaths and weighted to represent all SOTR deaths during the study period. Among 505,757 SOTRs, 57,575 deaths occurred and based on the linkage, 12,396 (21.5%) were due to COVID-19. COVID-19 mortality was higher in males (mortality rate ratio [MRR]: 1.13), SOTRs aged 65 and older (MRR: 1.50 in ages 65–74 vs. ages 55–64), and non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic SOTRs (MRRs: 1.55 and 1.79 vs. non-Hispanic White SOTRs). Kidney and lung recipients had the highest COVID-19 mortality, followed by heart, then liver recipients. COVID-19 mortality also varied over time and across US states. Overall, SOTRs had 7-fold increased risk of COVID-19 death compared to the US general population. SOTRs comprised 0.13% of the US population but accounted for 1.46% of all US COVID-19 deaths. SOTRs experience greatly elevated COVID-19 mortality. Clinicians should continue to prioritize COVID-19 prevention and treatment in this high-risk population.

Features of the covid-19 epidemic and characteristics of patients during the spread of the delta SARS-COV-2 in Russia

Aim: To study the manifestations of the COVID-19 epidemic and the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of adult patients with a new coronavirus infection during the dominance of the Delta SARS-COV-2 in the Russian Federation.Materials and Methods: Study included patients aged ≥18 years with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, detected in the period from 09/01/2021 to 11/30/2021 (n= 2 619 298) in 85 Russian regions.Results: There were 2 periods of rise and decline in the COVID-19 incidence and mortality during the spread of the Delta SARS-CoV-2 in Russia: June-September and OctoberDecember 2021 (Wald – Wolfowitz criterion, p&lt;0,05). The median age of patients was 49 [36–63] years, 61,1% were women. Most of patients were 30–39 years old (21,0%), the lowest proportion was among 18–29 years old (12.1%) (p&lt;0,05). Proportion of patients with mild disease was 75,4%, moderate – 18,8%, severe – 3,3%, extremely severe – 2,5% (p&lt;0.05). Hospitalization rate was 23,7%, proportion of patients treated in the intensive care unit was 12.9%, and rate of invasive mechanical ventilation was 9,8%. The median period from the onset of symptoms to the diagnosis was 3 [1-6] days, the duration of the disease and hospitalization was 13,0 [10–16] and 12,0 [9–17] days, respectively. The median age of the deceased patients was 73 [65–82] years, of which 59,1% were women, 61,5% were persons ≥70 years old. The presence of one or more comorbidities was found in 73,9% of deceased patients (OR=17,1; 95% CI: 16,8–17,3).Conclusion: during the period of the spread of the Delta SARS-COV-2 variant in Russia, the number of patients with severe and extremely severe disease among adult patients without taking into account the vaccine history was 5,8%. Old age and the presence of concomitant diseases were key risk factors for adverse outcomes of COVID-19.

Abstract B030: Assessing COVID-19 vaccination status and symptoms in persons with a history of cancer

Abstract Background: Persons with a history of cancer are at a higher risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes due to their immunosuppressed status. Vaccination to COVID-19 has proven effective in decreasing complications from COVID-19 infection. This study explored the vaccination status of persons receiving cancer care (received 1st dose/2nd dose/booster) and their symptoms. Methods: Persons with a cancer diagnosis receiving care at a cancer center clinical site were randomly invited to complete a voluntary survey via email, the EMR, or during an in-person appointment. Paper surveys were completed in the clinic, placed in a sealed collection bin, and collected by research staff weekly. Responses were anonymous. Participants were asked if they had received their 1st/2nd COVID-19 vaccine, their symptoms, and if they had/intended to receive the booster. The study was conducted between September 2021 to September 2022. An EMR review of vaccination uptake was conducted to assess representativeness of our sample. Results: 6,302 persons were invited to complete the survey; 1,733 (28%) responded. 1694 (98%) had received at least one vaccine dose. 67.46% of the participants were white, non-Latinx; 25.39% were Black; 3.17% were Asian. 13.25% were 18-50 years; 30.61% were 50-64;36.81% were 65-74; 19.33% were 75+. 33.13% had a breast cancer diagnosis; 5.47% had lung cancer, 5.41% had prostate cancer, 4.29% had colorectal carcinoma, and 47.42% had other cancers. 1016 (58.63%) received their 1st COVID-19 vaccine, 1437 (82.92%) the 1st/2nd dose, and 1052 (60.70%) had received the booster (3rd dose). Frequently reported symptoms were muscle soreness, pain, fatigue, fever and headache. Those over 65 years were significantly more likely to report fatigue (p&amp;lt;0.001), fever (p&amp;lt;0.0001), headache (p&amp;lt;0.0001), nausea (p=0.0005). Black persons were less likely to report fever (OR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.34 – 0.86, p=0.0097) and more likely to report pain (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.02 – 2.46, p=0.0427). For persons with breast cancer--29.46% reported muscle soreness, 12.95% reported fatigue, 10.13% reported headache, 9.19% reported fever, 7.13% reported pain. We were unable to stratify by other demographics or cancer type due insufficient sample size. EMR review of vaccination uptake revealed 24.17% had not initiated vaccination. Conclusion: Survey respondents were more likely to have initiated the COVID-19 vaccination process. Older adults were more likely to report fatigue, fever, headache and nausea. Black persons were less likely to report fever and more likely to report pain. Anticipating differences in COVID-19 vaccination symptoms allow for the development of tailored education and resources for self-management and care. Citation Format: Iqra Siddiqui, Ana Maria Lopez, FNU Nikita. Assessing COVID-19 vaccination status and symptoms in persons with a history of cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl):Abstract nr B030.

Self-Reported COVID-19 Vaccine and Booster Acceptance and Hesitancy Among Autistic Adults in Pennsylvania: Cross-Sectional Analysis of Survey Data.

The autistic population is rapidly increasing; meanwhile, autistic adults face disproportionate risks for adverse COVID-19 outcomes. Limited research indicates that autistic individuals have been accepting of initial vaccination, but research has yet to document this population's perceptions and acceptance of COVID-19 boosters. This study aims to identify person-level and community characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccination and booster acceptance among autistic adults, along with self-reported reasons for their stated preferences. Understanding this information is crucial in supporting this vulnerable population given evolving booster guidelines and the ending of the public health emergency for the COVID-19 pandemic. Data are from a survey conducted in Pennsylvania from April 11 to September 12, 2022. Demographic characteristics, COVID-19 experiences, and COVID-19 vaccine decisions were compared across vaccination status groups. Chi-square analyses and 1-way ANOVA were conducted to test for significant differences. Vaccination reasons were ranked by frequency; co-occurrence was identified using phi coefficient correlation plots. Most autistic adults (193/266, 72.6%) intended to receive or received the vaccine and booster, 15% (40/266) did not receive or intend to receive any vaccine, and 12.4% (33/266) received or intended to receive the initial dose but were hesitant to accept booster doses. Reasons for vaccine acceptance or hesitancy varied by demographic factors and COVID-19 experiences. The most significant were previously contracting COVID-19, desire to access information about COVID-19, and discomfort with others not wearing a mask (all P=.001). County-level factors, including population density (P=.02) and percentage of the county that voted for President Biden (P=.001) were also significantly associated with differing vaccination acceptance levels. Reasons for accepting the initial COVID-19 vaccine differed among those who were or were not hesitant to accept a booster. Those who accepted a booster were more likely to endorse protecting others and trusting the vaccine as the basis for their acceptance, whereas those who were hesitant about the booster indicated that their initial vaccine acceptance came from encouragement from someone they trusted. Among the minority of those hesitant to any vaccination, believing that the vaccine was unsafe and would make them feel unwell were the most often reported reasons. Intention to receive or receiving the COVID-19 vaccination and booster was higher among autistic adults than the population that received vaccines in Pennsylvania. Autistic individuals who accepted vaccines prioritized protecting others, while autistic individuals who were vaccine hesitant had safety concerns about vaccines. These findings inform public health opportunities and strategies to further increase vaccination and booster rates among generally accepting autistic adults, to better support the already strained autism services and support system landscape. Vaccination uptake could be improved by leveraging passive information diffusion to combat vaccination misinformation among those not actively seeking COVID-19 information to better alleviate safety concerns.

Retrospective Study on the Features and Outcomes of a Tuscany COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients Cohort: Preliminary Results.

Background: A few months after the COVID-19 pandemic onset, knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 infection and outcomes and treatments blew up. This paper aimed to evaluate the features of a Tuscany COVID-19 hospitalized cohort and to identify risk factors for COVID-19 severity. Methods: This retrospective observational COVID-19 cohort study (1 March 2020-1 March 2021) was conducted on patients ≥ 18 years old, admitted to Tuscany Hospital, and subjected to follow-up within 12 months after discharge. Patients were enrolled at Pisana, Senese and Careggi University Hospitals, and South East, North West, and Center Local Hospitals. Results: 2888 patients (M = 58.5%, mean age = 66.2 years) were enrolled, of whom 14.3% (N = 413) were admitted to an intensive care unit. Smokers were 25%, and overweight and obese 65%. The most used drugs were corticosteroids, antacids, antibiotics, and antithrombotics, all antiviral drugs, with slight differences between 2020 and 2021. A strong association was found between outcomes of evolution towards critical COVID-19 (non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) and/or admission to intensive care) and smoking (RR = 4.91), ex-smoking (RR = 3.48), overweight (RR = 1.30), obese subjects (RR = 1.62), comorbidities (aRR = 1.38). The alteration of liver enzymes (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, or gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase) was associated with NIV (aOR = 2.28). Conclusions: Our cohort, characterized by patients with a mean age of 66.2 years, showed 65% of patients were overweight and obese. Smoking/ex-smoking, overweight/obesity, and other comorbidities were associated with COVID-19 adverse outcomes. The findings also demonstrated that alterations in liver enzymes were associated with worse outcomes.

Predicting Factors of Worse Prognosis in COVID-19: Results from a Cross-sectional Study on 52 Inpatients Admitted to the Internal Medicine Department.

The initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic posed a real need for clinicians to identify patients at risk of poor prognosis as soon as possible after hospital admission. The study aimed to assess the role of baseline anamnestic information, clinical parameters, instrumental examination, and serum biomarkers in predicting adverse outcomes of COVID-19 in a hospital setting of Internal Medicine. Fifty-two inpatients consecutively admitted to the Unit of Internal Medicine "Baccelli," Azienda Ospedaliero - Universitaria Policlinico of Bari (February 1 - May 31, 2021) due to confirmed COVID-19 were grouped into two categories based on the specific outcome: good prognosis (n=44), patients discharged at home after the acute phase of the infection; poor prognosis, a composite outcome of deaths and intensive care requirements (n=8). Data were extracted from medical records of patients who provided written informed consent to participate. The two study groups had similar demographic, anthropometric, clinical, and radiological characteristics. Higher interleukin 6 (IL-6) levels and leucocyte count, and lower free triiodothyronine (fT3) levels were found in patients with poor than those with good prognosis. Higher IL-6 levels and leucocyte count, lower fT3 concentration, and pre-existing hypercholesterolemia were independent risk factors of poor outcomes in our study population. A predicting risk score, built by assigning one point if fT3 < 2 pg/mL, IL-6 >25 pg/mL, and leucocyte count >7,000 n/mm3, revealed that patients totalizing at least 2 points by applying the predicting score had a considerably higher risk of poor prognosis than those scoring <2 points (OR 24.35 (1.32; 448), p = 0.03). The weight of pre-existing hypercholesterolemia did not change the risk estimation. Four specific baseline variables, one anamnestic (pre-existing hypercholesterolemia) and three laboratory parameters (leucocyte count, IL-6, and fT3), were significantly associated with poor prognosis as independent risk factors. To prevent adverse outcomes, the updated 4-point score could be useful in identifying at-risk patients, highlighting the need for specific trials to estimate the safety and efficacy of targeted treatments.

Effects of Recent Prior Dengue Infection on Risk and Severity of Subsequent SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Elucidating whether prior dengue potentially confers cross-protection against COVID-19 is of public health importance in tropical countries at risk of overlapping dengue and COVID-19 epidemics. However, studies to date have yielded conflicting results. We aimed to assess effects of recent prior dengue infection on risk and severity of subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection among adult Singaporeans. A retrospective cohort study including all adult Singaporeans aged ≥18 years was conducted from 1 July 2021 through 31 October 2022, when a dengue outbreak driven by the DENV3 serotype preceded subsequent waves of SARS-CoV-2 Delta/Omicron transmission in Singapore. SARS-CoV-2 and dengue infection status were classified using national registries. Cox regression models adjusted for demographics, COVID-19 vaccination status, comorbidity, and socioeconomic-status were used to assess risks and severity (hospitalization, severe illness) of SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring after previous recorded dengue infection. A total of 3 366 399 individuals were included, contributing 1 399 696 530 person-days of observation. A total of 13 434 dengue infections and 1 253 520 subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infections were recorded; with an average of 94.7 days (standard deviation = 83.8) between dengue infection and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Preceding dengue infection was associated with a modest increase in risk of subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection (adjusted hazards ratio [aHR] = 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-1.17), and significantly elevated risk of subsequent COVID-19 hospitalization (aHR = 3.25; 95% CI, 2.78-3.82) and severe COVID-19 (aHR = 3.39; 95% CI, 2.29-5.03). Increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and adverse COVID-19 outcomes were observed following preceding dengue infection in a national population-based cohort of adult Singaporeans. This observation is of significance in tropical countries with overlapping dengue and COVID-19 outbreaks.

Gaps in Long COVID treatments research: A scoping review

Background Long COVID affects 6 to 10% of people following SARS-CoV-2 infection. It has been documented worldwide, with over 200 symptoms reported. This scoping review assesses the evidence on Long COVID treatments to identify gaps in the evidence-base to inform research prioritisation. Methods We searched four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane’s Trial register, Epistemonikos) supplemented by a grey literature search up to April 2023. Two reviewers screened articles and extracted data. Data were analysed using a thematic approach. Results Of 3675 records identified, 26 studies were included. Most were in high-income countries (92%), with two in upper-middle-income countries (8%). None reported inclusion of children, nor pregnant women and only 37.5% included adults over 64 years. Five (20.8%) presented ethnicity data, of these 92.9% of participants were of white ethnicity. Treatments included nutritional supplements (46%), conventional medicines (38%), hyperbaric medicine (8%), COVID-19 vaccination (4%) and complementary, alternative medicine (4%). Conclusion This scoping review highlights that more than four years after the start of the pandemic, research gaps remain for Long COVID treatments. There is a lack of research in low-income countries, despite trials being best placed locally to reflect different population demographics. There is a lack of inclusion of population sub-groups, particularly children, pregnant women and ethnic minority groups. Inclusion of these groups in future research is important given they may be at a higher risk of adverse outcomes of COVID-19, and a lack of appropriate treatments for Long COVID may contribute to the widening of health inequalities.

Associations between COVID-19 therapies and outcomes in rural and urban America: A multisite, temporal analysis from the Alpha to Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants.

To investigate the enduring disparities in adverse COVID-19 events between urban and rural communities in the United States, focusing on the effects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and therapeutic advances on patient outcomes. Using National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) data from 2021 to 2023, this retrospective cohort study examined COVID-19 hospitalization, inpatient death, and other adverse events. Populations were categorized into urban, urban-adjacent rural (UAR), and nonurban-adjacent rural (NAR). Adjustments included demographics, variant-dominant waves, comorbidities, region, and SARS-CoV-2 treatment and vaccination. Statistical methods included Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, multivariable logistic, and Cox regression. The study included 3,018,646 patients, with rural residents constituting 506,204. These rural dwellers were older, had more comorbidities, and were less vaccinated than their urban counterparts. Adjusted analyses revealed higher hospitalization odds in UAR and NAR (aOR 1.07 [1.05-1.08] and 1.06 [1.03-1.08]), greater inpatient death hazard (aHR 1.30 [1.26-1.35] UAR and 1.37 [1.30-1.45] NAR), and greater risk of other adverse events compared to urban dwellers. Delta increased, while Omicron decreased, inpatient adverse events relative to pre-Delta, with rural disparities persisting throughout. Treatment effectiveness and vaccination were similarly protective across all cohorts, but dexamethasone post-ventilation was effective only in urban areas. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir better protected rural residents against hospitalization. Despite advancements in treatment and vaccinations, disparities in adverse COVID-19 outcomes persist between urban and rural communities. The effectiveness of some therapeutic agents appears to vary based on rurality, suggesting a nuanced relationship between treatment and geographic location while highlighting the need for targeted rural health care strategies.

The effectiveness of vaccination on the COVID-19 epidemic in California

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused overwhelming morbidity, mortality, and hospitalization worldwide, including in the state of California. Vaccination efforts have been an important measure in curtailing the adverse outcomes of COVID-19. To quantify the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccinations in California, we conducted a retrospective cohort study investigating how vaccination has impacted the extent of COVID-19 contraction, hospitalizations, and death totals. We compared outcomes ofthe Delta Wave, Omicron Wave, and Pre-Delta Period. Vaccinated individuals have far-lower incidence risk ratio (IRR) of and odds of contracting a COVID-19 case (Delta IRR: 0.197) being hospitalized from COVID-19 (Delta IRR: 0.105), and dying from COVID-19 compared with an unvaccinated individual (Delta IRR: 0.0941). The preventive fraction of the unexposed and population-preventive fractions for cases, deaths, and hospitalizations also showed significant proportions. All tests showed P<.001. Vaccination was most effective in the Delta Wave, then in the Omicron Wave, and least effective in the Pre-Delta Period. Deaths were the most prevented outcome, followed by hospitalizations, then cases. This study exposes the massive impact of vaccinations in California in reducing COVID-19 outcomes and the potential for fewer adverse outcomes had there been greater vaccination compliance, demonstrating the need to increase vaccination efforts.

Frequency of Mortality and Adverse Outcomes of COVID-19 in Hospitalized Type 2 Diabetics with a History of Sitagliptin or Metformin Use

Background: The relationship between various blood glucose-lowering treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and the mortality and complication rates of COVID-19 infection holds significant relevance. Objectives: This retrospective study aimed to investigate the clinical progression of COVID-19 in T2DM patients previously treated with sitagliptin, metformin, or a combination of both. Methods: The study reviewed the medical records of T2DM patients with COVID-19 who had received treatment with sitagliptin, metformin, or both. Participants were selected from those admitted to Naft Hospital in Ahvaz, Iran, from March 2020 to March 2022. Data on mortality and adverse outcomes related to COVID-19 were gathered from the medical records. Results: The study included 529 diabetic patients treated with metformin (n = 197), sitagliptin (n = 231), or both (n = 101) for a minimum of three months. The overall mortality rate among diabetic patients was 15.1%, with the metformin group showing the highest mortality rate at 28.9% (P &lt; 0.0001). Significant differences were observed among the three treatment groups in terms of the frequency of acute respiratory failure (P &lt; 0.0001), stroke (P = 0.002), pulmonary embolism (P &lt; 0.0001), and the necessity for ICU admission (P &lt; 0.0001). Nonetheless, the incidence of myocardial infarction did not significantly differ between the groups. Conclusions: The findings suggest that sitagliptin use for blood sugar control in T2DM patients may help reduce adverse outcomes and the risk of death due to COVID-19. Mortality and morbidity rates were found to be higher in patients treated with metformin compared to those in the other groups.

Thymic Hyperplasia and COVID-19 Pulmonary Sequelae: A Bicentric CT-Based Follow-Up Study

Thymic Hyperplasia and COVID-19 Pulmonary Sequelae: A Bicentric CT-Based Follow-Up Study

Exploring Pre-Pandemic SARS-CoV-2-Specific B Cell Responses in the West African Population.

Abstract The emergence of the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, during the COVID-19 pandemic prompted investigations into pre-existing immunity in human populations. Despite being a new coronavirus, individuals had previous exposure to common seasonal human coronaviruses. In this study, we examined SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B cells in six pre-pandemic Lassa virus-infected patients from West Africa. By incorporating a SARS-CoV-2 Spike Antigen (WA-1 strain) into a broader antigen panel that included Lassa virus GPC and a control, we identified and sorted antigen-positive B cells. Further analysis revealed a distinct population of SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B cells. Native paired monoclonal antibody (mAb) sequences were recovered from 598 SARS-CoV-2 Spike-positive B cells, demonstrating a surprisingly high frequency of pre-existing SARS-CoV-2-specific B cells. Remarkably, Spike-specific mAbs were recovered from all six donors, each contributing to at least one expanded clonal lineage. Notably, most IgM antibodies belonged to the same lineages. These findings suggest a notable prevalence of pre-existing immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in pre-pandemic patients, potentially influencing susceptibility to the virus and contributing to adverse COVID-19 outcomes. This study provides insights for risk management and supports the development of universal coronavirus vaccines by highlighting the complex interplay between pre-existing immunity and susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2.

Association between COVID-19 severity and tobacco smoking status: a retrospective cohort study using propensity score matching weights analysis

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic continues to be a global threat to public health, with over 766 million confirmed cases and more than 6 million reported deaths. Patients with a smoking history...

Possible causes of morbidity and adverse outcomes of COVID-19 in vaccinated elderly patients

A prospective randomized observational study was conducted in cohorts of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients hospitalized in one of the Moscow hospitals and diagnozed with COVID-19 in the period from 06.23.2021 to 01.05.2022.The purpose of the study was to identify the epidemiological features of COVID-19 in vaccinated people and to present scientifically based data on the need for vaccination and its importance in stopping the epidemic process.Materials and Methods. The samples were studied in comparison for a number of indicators: age, clinical condition at admission, the presence and number of concomitant systemic chronic diseases as well as disease outcomes.Results. It was proven that the risk of COVID-19 morbidity in vaccinated people decreased by 1.5 times, mortality by 1.5 times, and hospitalization due to the severity of the condition by 3.1 times. The mortality risk among vaccinated patients shifted to older age (76.9 years), while among unvaccinated patients, the mortality risk was higher for older people (73.7 years), which indicates an increase in life expectancy of vaccinated people.

Clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease in patients with breast cancer treated with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor following chemotherapy: Triangulation of evidence using population-based cohort and Mendelian randomization analyses.

Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration in patients with cancer and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) remains controversial. Concerns exist that it may worsen COVID-19 outcomes by triggering an inflammatory cytokine storm, despite its common use for managing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) or febrile neutropenia post-chemotherapy. Here, we determined whether prophylactic or therapeutic G-CSF administration following chemotherapy exacerbates COVID-19 progression to severe/critical conditions in breast cancer patients with COVID-19. Between December 2022 and February 2023, all 503 enrolled breast cancer patients had concurrent COVID-19 and received G-CSF post-chemotherapy, with most being vaccinated pre-chemotherapy. We prospectively observed COVID-19-related adverse outcomes, conducted association analyses, and subsequently performed Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses to validate the causal effect of genetically predicted G-CSF or its associated granulocyte traits on COVID-19 adverse outcomes. Only 0.99% (5/503) of breast cancer patients experienced COVID-19-related hospitalization following prophylactic or therapeutic G-CSF administration after chemotherapy. No mortality or progression to severe/critical COVID-19 occurred after G-CSF administration. Notably, no significant associations were observed between the application, dosage, or response to G-CSF and COVID-19-related hospitalization (all p >.05). Similarly, the MR analyses showed no evidence of causality of genetically predicted G-CSF or related granulocyte traits on COVID-19-related hospitalization or COVID-19 severity (all p >.05). There is insufficient evidence to substantiate the notion that the prophylactic or therapeutic administration of G-CSF after chemotherapy for managing CIN in patients with breast cancer and COVID-19 would worsen COVID-19 outcomes, leading to severe or critical conditions, or even death, especially considering the context of COVID-19 vaccination.