(1) Background: Based on its antiviral activity, anti-inflammatory properties, and functional inhibition effects on the acid sphingomyelinase/ceramide system (FIASMA), we sought to examine the ...potential usefulness of the H1 antihistamine hydroxyzine in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. (2) Methods: In a multicenter observational study, we included 15,103 adults hospitalized for COVID-19, of which 164 (1.1%) received hydroxyzine within the first 48 h of hospitalization, administered orally at a median daily dose of 25.0 mg (SD = 29.5). We compared mortality rates between patients who received hydroxyzine at hospital admission and those who did not, using a multivariable logistic regression model adjusting for patients' characteristics, medical conditions, and use of other medications. (3) Results: This analysis showed a significant association between hydroxyzine use and reduced mortality (AOR, 0.51; 95%CI, 0.29-0.88,
= 0.016). This association was similar in multiple sensitivity analyses. (4) Conclusions: In this retrospective observational multicenter study, the use of the FIASMA hydroxyzine was associated with reduced mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials of hydroxyzine for COVID-19 are needed to confirm these results, as are studies to examine the potential usefulness of this medication for outpatients and as post-exposure prophylaxis for individuals at high risk for severe COVID-19.
A prior meta-analysis showed that antidepressant use in major depressive disorder was associated with reduced plasma levels of several pro-inflammatory mediators, which have been associated with ...severe COVID-19. Recent studies also suggest that several antidepressants may inhibit acid sphingomyelinase activity, which may prevent the infection of epithelial cells with SARS-CoV-2, and that the SSRI fluoxetine may exert in-vitro antiviral effects on SARS-CoV-2. We examined the potential usefulness of antidepressant use in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in an observational multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted at AP-HP Greater Paris University hospitals. Of 7230 adults hospitalized for COVID-19, 345 patients (4.8%) received an antidepressant within 48 h of hospital admission. The primary endpoint was a composite of intubation or death. We compared this endpoint between patients who received antidepressants and those who did not in time-to-event analyses adjusted for patient characteristics, clinical and biological markers of disease severity, and other psychotropic medications. The primary analysis was a multivariable Cox model with inverse probability weighting. This analysis showed a significant association between antidepressant use and reduced risk of intubation or death (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43-0.73, p < 0.001). This association remained significant in multiple sensitivity analyses. Exploratory analyses suggest that this association was also significant for SSRI and non-SSRI antidepressants, and for fluoxetine, paroxetine, escitalopram, venlafaxine, and mirtazapine (all p < 0.05). These results suggest that antidepressant use could be associated with lower risk of death or intubation in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Double-blind controlled randomized clinical trials of antidepressant medications for COVID-19 are needed.
The dissemination of SARS-Cov2 may have delayed the diagnosis of new cancers. This study aimed at assessing the number of new cancers during and after the lockdown.
We prospectively collected the ...clinical data of the 11.4 million patients referred to the Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris Teaching Hospital. We identified new cancer cases between 1st January 2018 and 31st September 2020 and compared indicators for 2018 and 2019 to 2020 with a focus on the French lockdown (17th March to 11th May 2020) across cancer types and patient age classes.
Between January and September, 28,348, 27,272 and 23,734 new cancer cases were identified in 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively. The monthly median number of new cases reached 3168 (interquartile range, IQR, 3027; 3282), 3054 (IQR 2945; 3127) and 2723 (IQR 2085; 2,863) in 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively. From March 1st to May 31st, new cancer decreased by 30% in 2020 compared to the 2018–19 average; then by 9% from 1st June to 31st September. This evolution was consistent across all tumour types: −30% and −9% for colon, −27% and −6% for lung, −29% and −14% for breast, −33% and −12% for prostate cancers, respectively. For patients aged <70 years, the decrease of colorectal and breast new cancers in April between 2018 and 2019 average and 2020 reached 41% and 39%, respectively.
The SARS-Cov2 pandemic led to a substantial decrease in new cancer cases. Delays in cancer diagnoses may affect clinical outcomes in the coming years.
•A national lockdown occurred in France between 17th March to 11th May 2020.•In Paris, new cancer cases in March–May 2020 was 33% lower than in 2018–2019.•In Paris, new cancer cases in June–September 2020 was 19% lower than in 2018–2019.•In January–September 2020, the monthly new cases median was 1949 (IQR 1586; 2045).•Less new cancers have been seen since the beginning of the SARS-Cov2 pandemic.
For some SARS-CoV-2 survivors, recovery from the acute phase of the infection has been grueling with lingering effects. Many of the symptoms characterized as the post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 ...(PASC) could have multiple causes or are similarly seen in non-COVID patients. Accurate identification of PASC phenotypes will be important to guide future research and help the healthcare system focus its efforts and resources on adequately controlled age- and gender-specific sequelae of a COVID-19 infection.
In this retrospective electronic health record (EHR) cohort study, we applied a computational framework for knowledge discovery from clinical data, MLHO, to identify phenotypes that positively associate with a past positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test for COVID-19. We evaluated the post-test phenotypes in two temporal windows at 3-6 and 6-9 months after the test and by age and gender. Data from longitudinal diagnosis records stored in EHRs from Mass General Brigham in the Boston Metropolitan Area was used for the analyses. Statistical analyses were performed on data from March 2020 to June 2021. Study participants included over 96 thousand patients who had tested positive or negative for COVID-19 and were not hospitalized.
We identified 33 phenotypes among different age/gender cohorts or time windows that were positively associated with past SARS-CoV-2 infection. All identified phenotypes were newly recorded in patients' medical records 2 months or longer after a COVID-19 RT-PCR test in non-hospitalized patients regardless of the test result. Among these phenotypes, a new diagnosis record for anosmia and dysgeusia (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.94-3.46), alopecia (OR 3.09, 95% CI 2.53-3.76), chest pain (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.09-1.48), chronic fatigue syndrome (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.22-2.10), shortness of breath (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.22-1.64), pneumonia (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.28-2.16), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.22-1.64) is one of the most significant indicators of a past COVID-19 infection. Additionally, more new phenotypes were found with increased confidence among the cohorts who were younger than 65.
The findings of this study confirm many of the post-COVID-19 symptoms and suggest that a variety of new diagnoses, including new diabetes mellitus and neurological disorder diagnoses, are more common among those with a history of COVID-19 than those without the infection. Additionally, more than 63% of PASC phenotypes were observed in patients under 65 years of age, pointing out the importance of vaccination to minimize the risk of debilitating post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 among younger adults.
Coincident with the tsunami of COVID-19-related publications, there has been a surge of studies using real-world data, including those obtained from the electronic health record (EHR). Unfortunately, ...several of these high-profile publications were retracted because of concerns regarding the soundness and quality of the studies and the EHR data they purported to analyze. These retractions highlight that although a small community of EHR informatics experts can readily identify strengths and flaws in EHR-derived studies, many medical editorial teams and otherwise sophisticated medical readers lack the framework to fully critically appraise these studies. In addition, conventional statistical analyses cannot overcome the need for an understanding of the opportunities and limitations of EHR-derived studies. We distill here from the broader informatics literature six key considerations that are crucial for appraising studies utilizing EHR data: data completeness, data collection and handling (eg, transformation), data type (ie, codified, textual), robustness of methods against EHR variability (within and across institutions, countries, and time), transparency of data and analytic code, and the multidisciplinary approach. These considerations will inform researchers, clinicians, and other stakeholders as to the recommended best practices in reviewing manuscripts, grants, and other outputs from EHR-data derived studies, and thereby promote and foster rigor, quality, and reliability of this rapidly growing field.
We leveraged the largely untapped resource of electronic health record data to address critical clinical and epidemiological questions about Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). To do this, we formed ...an international consortium (4CE) of 96 hospitals across five countries (www.covidclinical.net). Contributors utilized the Informatics for Integrating Biology and the Bedside (i2b2) or Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) platforms to map to a common data model. The group focused on temporal changes in key laboratory test values. Harmonized data were analyzed locally and converted to a shared aggregate form for rapid analysis and visualization of regional differences and global commonalities. Data covered 27,584 COVID-19 cases with 187,802 laboratory tests. Case counts and laboratory trajectories were concordant with existing literature. Laboratory tests at the time of diagnosis showed hospital-level differences equivalent to country-level variation across the consortium partners. Despite the limitations of decentralized data generation, we established a framework to capture the trajectory of COVID-19 disease in patients and their response to interventions.