StopCOVID cohort : An observational study of 3,480 patients admitted to the Sechenov University hospital network in Moscow city for suspected COVID-19 infection

© 2020 Oxford University Press. This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Clinical Infectious Diseases following peer review. The version of record is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1535.BACKGROUND: The epidemiology, clinical course, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients in the Russian population are unknown. Information on the differences between laboratory-confirmed and clinically-diagnosed COVID-19 in real-life settings is lacking. METHODS: We extracted data from the medical records of adult patients who were consecutively admitted for suspected COVID-19 infection in Moscow, between April 8 and May 28, 2020. RESULTS: Of the 4261 patients hospitalised for suspected COVID-19, outcomes were available for 3480 patients (median age 56 years (interquartile range 45-66). The commonest comorbidities were hypertension, obesity, chronic cardiac disease and diabetes. Half of the patients (n=1728) had a positive RT-PCR while 1748 were negative on RT-PCR but had clinical symptoms and characteristic CT signs suggestive of COVID-19 infection.No significant differences in frequency of symptoms, laboratory test results and risk factors for in-hospital mortality were found between those exclusively clinically diagnosed or with positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR.In a multivariable logistic regression model the following were associated with in-hospital mortality; older age (per 1 year increase) odds ratio [OR] 1.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 - 1.06); male sex (OR 1.71, 1.24 - 2.37); chronic kidney disease (OR 2.99, 1.89 - 4.64); diabetes (OR 2.1, 1.46 - 2.99); chronic cardiac disease (OR 1.78, 1.24 - 2.57) and dementia (OR 2.73, 1.34 - 5.47). CONCLUSIONS: Age, male sex, and chronic comorbidities were risk factors for in-hospital mortality. The combination of clinical features were sufficient to diagnoseCOVID-19 infection indicating that laboratory testing is not critical in real-life clinical practice.Peer reviewe

StopCOVID cohort: an observational study of 3,480 patients admitted to the Sechenov University hospital network in Moscow city for suspected COVID-19 infection

Background The epidemiology, clinical course, and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the Russian population are unknown. Information on the differences between laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed COVID-19 in real-life settings is lacking. Methods We extracted data from the medical records of adult patients who were consecutively admitted for suspected COVID-19 infection in Moscow between 8 April and 28 May 2020. Results Of the 4261 patients hospitalized for suspected COVID-19, outcomes were available for 3480 patients (median age, 56 years; interquartile range, 45–66). The most common comorbidities were hypertension, obesity, chronic cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. Half of the patients (n = 1728) had a positive reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), while 1748 had a negative RT-PCR but had clinical symptoms and characteristic computed tomography signs suggestive of COVID-19. No significant differences in frequency of symptoms, laboratory test results, and risk factors for in-hospital mortality were found between those exclusively clinically diagnosed or with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RT-PCR. In a multivariable logistic regression model the following were associated with in-hospital mortality: older age (per 1-year increase; odds ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.03–1.06), male sex (1.71; 1.24–2.37), chronic kidney disease (2.99; 1.89–4.64), diabetes (2.1; 1.46–2.99), chronic cardiovascular disease (1.78; 1.24–2.57), and dementia (2.73; 1.34–5.47). Conclusions Age, male sex, and chronic comorbidities were risk factors for in-hospital mortality. The combination of clinical features was sufficient to diagnose COVID-19 infection, indicating that laboratory testing is not critical in real-life clinical practice

Genome-wide significant association with seven novel multiple sclerosis risk loci

Objective A recent large-scale study in multiple sclerosis (MS) using the ImmunoChip platform reported on 11 loci that showed suggestive genetic association with MS. Additional data in sufficiently sized and independent data sets are needed to assess whether these loci represent genuine MS risk factors. Methods The lead SNPs of all 11 loci were genotyped in 10 796 MS cases and 10 793 controls from Germany, Spain, France, the Netherlands, Austria and Russia, that were independent from the previously reported cohorts. Association analyses were performed using logistic regression based on an additive model. Summary effect size estimates were calculated using fixed-effect meta-analysis. Results Seven of the 11 tested SNPs showed significant association with MS susceptibility in the 21 589 individuals analysed here. Meta-analysis across our and previously published MS case-control data (total sample size n=101 683) revealed novel genome-wide significant association with MS susceptibility (p<5x10(-8)) for all seven variants. This included SNPs in or near LOC100506457 (rs1534422, p=4.03x10(-12)), CD28 (rs6435203, p=1.35x10(-9)), LPP (rs4686953, p=3.35x10(-8)), ETS1 (rs3809006, p=7.74x10(-9)), DLEU1 (rs806349, p=8.14x10(-12)), LPIN3 (rs6072343, p=7.16x10(-12)) and IFNGR2 (rs9808753, p=4.40x10(-10)). Cis expression quantitative locus effects were observed in silico for rs6435203 on CD28 and for rs9808753 on several immunologically relevant genes in the IFNGR2 locus. Conclusions This study adds seven loci to the list of genuine MS genetic risk factors and further extends the list of established loci shared across autoimmune diseases

Riociguat treatment in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: Final safety data from the EXPERT registry

Objective: The soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator riociguat is approved for the treatment of adult patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and inoperable or persistent/recurrent chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) following Phase 3 randomized trials. The EXPosurE Registry RiociguaT in patients with pulmonary hypertension (EXPERT) study was designed to monitor the long-term safety of riociguat in clinical practice. Methods: EXPERT was an international, multicenter, prospective, uncontrolled, non-interventional cohort study of patients treated with riociguat. Patients were followed for at least 1 year and up to 4 years from enrollment or until 30 days after stopping riociguat treatment. Primary safety outcomes were adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred terms and System Organ Classes version 21.0, collected during routine clinic visits and collated via case report forms. Results: In total, 956 patients with CTEPH were included in the analysis. The most common AEs in these patients were peripheral edema/edema (11.7%), dizziness (7.5%), right ventricular (RV)/cardiac failure (7.7%), and pneumonia (5.0%). The most common SAEs were RV/cardiac failure (7.4%), pneumonia (4.1%), dyspnea (3.6%), and syncope (2.5%). Exposure-adjusted rates of hemoptysis/pulmonary hemorrhage and hypotension were low and comparable to those in the long-term extension study of riociguat (Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Soluble Guanylate Cyclase–Stimulator Trial [CHEST-2]). Conclusion: Data from EXPERT show that in patients with CTEPH, the safety of riociguat in routine practice was consistent with the known safety profile of the drug, and no new safety concerns were identified

Riociguat treatment in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: Final safety data from the EXPERT registry

Objective: The soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator riociguat is approved for the treatment of adult patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and inoperable or persistent/recurrent chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) following Phase 3 randomized trials. The EXPosurE Registry RiociguaT in patients with pulmonary hypertension (EXPERT) study was designed to monitor the long-term safety of riociguat in clinical practice. Methods: EXPERT was an international, multicenter, prospective, uncontrolled, non-interventional cohort study of patients treated with riociguat. Patients were followed for at least 1 year and up to 4 years from enrollment or until 30 days after stopping riociguat treatment. Primary safety outcomes were adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred terms and System Organ Classes version 21.0, collected during routine clinic visits and collated via case report forms. Results: In total, 956 patients with CTEPH were included in the analysis. The most common AEs in these patients were peripheral edema/edema (11.7%), dizziness (7.5%), right ventricular (RV)/cardiac failure (7.7%), and pneumonia (5.0%). The most common SAEs were RV/cardiac failure (7.4%), pneumonia (4.1%), dyspnea (3.6%), and syncope (2.5%). Exposure-adjusted rates of hemoptysis/pulmonary hemorrhage and hypotension were low and comparable to those in the long-term extension study of riociguat (Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Soluble Guanylate Cyclase–Stimulator Trial [CHEST-2]). Conclusion: Data from EXPERT show that in patients with CTEPH, the safety of riociguat in routine practice was consistent with the known safety profile of the drug, and no new safety concerns were identified

Edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation

Contains fulltext : 125374.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Edoxaban is a direct oral factor Xa inhibitor with proven antithrombotic effects. The long-term efficacy and safety of edoxaban as compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation is not known. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial comparing two once-daily regimens of edoxaban with warfarin in 21,105 patients with moderate-to-high-risk atrial fibrillation (median follow-up, 2.8 years). The primary efficacy end point was stroke or systemic embolism. Each edoxaban regimen was tested for noninferiority to warfarin during the treatment period. The principal safety end point was major bleeding. RESULTS: The annualized rate of the primary end point during treatment was 1.50% with warfarin (median time in the therapeutic range, 68.4%), as compared with 1.18% with high-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.79; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.99; P<0.001 for noninferiority) and 1.61% with low-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 1.07; 97.5% CI, 0.87 to 1.31; P=0.005 for noninferiority). In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was a trend favoring high-dose edoxaban versus warfarin (hazard ratio, 0.87; 97.5% CI, 0.73 to 1.04; P=0.08) and an unfavorable trend with low-dose edoxaban versus warfarin (hazard ratio, 1.13; 97.5% CI, 0.96 to 1.34; P=0.10). The annualized rate of major bleeding was 3.43% with warfarin versus 2.75% with high-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.91; P<0.001) and 1.61% with low-dose edoxaban (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.55; P<0.001). The corresponding annualized rates of death from cardiovascular causes were 3.17% versus 2.74% (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.97; P=0.01), and 2.71% (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.96; P=0.008), and the corresponding rates of the key secondary end point (a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, or death from cardiovascular causes) were 4.43% versus 3.85% (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.96; P=0.005), and 4.23% (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.05; P=0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Both once-daily regimens of edoxaban were noninferior to warfarin with respect to the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism and were associated with significantly lower rates of bleeding and death from cardiovascular causes. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo Pharma Development; ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00781391.)