Impact of COVID-19 infection on lung function and nutritional status amongst individuals with cystic fibrosis:A global cohort study

Background: Factors associated with severe COVID-19 infection have been identified; however, the impact of infection on longer-term outcomes is unclear. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of COVID-19 infection on the trajectory of lung function and nutritional status in people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF). Methods: This is a retrospective global cohort study of pwCF who had confirmed COVID-19 infection diagnosed between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Forced expiratory volume in one second percent predicted (ppFEV1) and body mass index (BMI) twelve months prior to and following a diagnosis of COVID-19 were recorded. Change in mean ppFEV1 and BMI were compared using a t-test. A linear mixed-effects model was used to estimate change over time and to compare the rate of change before and after infection. Results: A total of 6,500 cases of COVID-19 in pwCF from 33 countries were included for analysis. The mean difference in ppFEV1 pre- and post-infection was 1.4 %, (95 % CI 1.1, 1.7). In those not on modulators, the difference in rate of change pre- and post-infection was 1.34 %, (95 % CI -0.88, 3.56) per year (p = 0.24) and -0.74 % (-1.89, 0.41) per year (p = 0.21) for those on elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor. No clinically significant change was noted in BMI or BMI percentile before and after COVID-19 infection. Conclusions: No clinically meaningful impact on lung function and BMI trajectory in the year following infection with COVID-19 was identified. This work highlights the ability of the global CF community to unify and address critical issues facing pwCF.</p

Impact of COVID-19 infection on lung function and nutritional status amongst individuals with cystic fibrosis: A global cohort study

International audienceBackground: Factors associated with severe COVID-19 infection have been identified; however, the impact of infection on longer-term outcomes is unclear. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of COVID-19 infection on the trajectory of lung function and nutritional status in people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF).Methods: This is a retrospective global cohort study of pwCF who had confirmed COVID-19 infection diagnosed between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Forced expiratory volume in one second percent predicted (ppFEV 1 ) and body mass index (BMI) twelve months prior to and following a diagnosis of COVID-19 were recorded. Change in mean ppFEV 1 and BMI were compared using a t-test. A linear mixed-effects model was used to estimate change over time and to compare the rate of change before and after infection.Results: A total of 6,500 cases of COVID-19 in pwCF from 33 countries were included for analysis. The mean difference in ppFEV 1 pre-and post-infection was 1.4 %, (95 % CI 1.1, 1.7). In those not on modulators, the difference in rate of change pre-and post-infection was 1.34 %, (95 % CI -0.88, 3.56) per year (p = 0.24) and -0.74 % (-1.89, 0.41) per year (p = 0.21) for those on elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor. No clinically significant change was noted in BMI or BMI percentile before and after COVID-19 infection.Conclusions: No clinically meaningful impact on lung function and BMI trajectory in the year following infection with COVID-19 was identified. This work highlights the ability of the global CF community to unify and address critical issues facing pwCF

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.)