Objectives To analyse the characteristics and predictors of death in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Spain. Methods A retrospective observational study was performed of the first consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 confirmed by real-time PCR assay in 127 Spanish centres until 17 March 2020. The follow-up censoring date was 17 April 2020. We collected demographic, clinical, laboratory, treatment and complications data. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with death. Results Of the 4035 patients, male subjects accounted for 2433 (61.0%) of 3987, the median age was 70 years and 2539 (73.8%) of 3439 had one or more comorbidity. The most common symptoms were a history of fever, cough, malaise and dyspnoea. During hospitalization, 1255 (31.5%) of 3979 patients developed acute respiratory distress syndrome, 736 (18.5%) of 3988 were admitted to intensive care units and 619 (15.5%) of 3992 underwent mechanical ventilation. Virus- or host-targeted medications included lopinavir/ritonavir (2820/4005, 70.4%), hydroxychloroquine (2618/3995, 65.5%), interferon beta (1153/3950, 29.2%), corticosteroids (1109/3965, 28.0%) and tocilizumab (373/3951, 9.4%). Overall, 1131 (28%) of 4035 patients died. Mortality increased with age (85.6% occurring in older than 65 years). Seventeen factors were independently associated with an increased hazard of death, the strongest among them including advanced age, liver cirrhosis, low age-adjusted oxygen saturation, higher concentrations of C-reactive protein and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate. Conclusions Our findings provide comprehensive information about characteristics and complications of severe COVID-19, and may help clinicians identify patients at a higher risk of death.

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives The aim of the study was to assess the rates of discontinuation of integrase inhibitor regimens because of any neuropsychiatric adverse event (NPAE) and the factors associated with discontinuation. Methods A population‐based, prospective, multicentre cohort study was carried out. Treatment‐naïve subjects starting therapy with a regimen containing integrase inhibitors, or those switching to such a regimen, with plasma HIV‐1 RNA < 50 HIV‐1 RNA copies/mL in 14 hospitals in Catalonia or the Balearic Islands (Spain) were included in the study. Every discontinuation because of adverse events (AEs) was double‐checked directly with treating physicians. Multivariable Cox models identified factors correlated with discontinuation. Results A total of 4165 subjects (37% treatment‐naïve) started regimens containing dolutegravir (n = 1650; 91% with abacavir), raltegravir (n = 930) or elvitegravir/cobicistat (n = 1585). There were no significant differences among regimens in the rate of discontinuation because of any AE. Rates of discontinuation because of NPAEs were low but higher for dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine [2.1%; 2.9 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.0, 4.2) discontinuations/100 patients/year] versus elvitegravir/cobicistat (0.5%; 0.8 (95% CI 0.3, 1.5) discontinuations/100 patients/year], with significant differences among centres for dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine and NPAEs (P = 0.003). We identified an association of female gender and lower CD4 count with increased risk of discontinuation because of any AE [Incidence ratio (IR) 2.3 (95% CI 1.4, 4.0) and 1.8 (95% CI 1.1, 2.8), respectively]. Female gender, age > 60 years and abacavir use were not associated with NPAE discontinuations. NPAEs were commonly grade 1–2, and had been present before and improved after drug withdrawal. Conclusions In this large prospective cohort study, patients receiving dolutegravir, raltegravir or elvitegravir/cobicistat did not show significant differences in the rate of discontinuation because of any toxicity. The rate of discontinuations because of NPAEs was low, but was significantly higher for dolutegravir than for elvitegravir/cobicistat, with significant differences among centres, suggesting that greater predisposition to believe that a given adverse event is caused by a given drug of some treating physicians might play a role in the discordance seen between cohorts.

No abstract