BACKGROUNDThere is considerable variation in disease behavior among patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 . Genomewide association analysis may allow for the identification of potential genetic factors involved in the development of Covid-19. METHODSWe conducted a genomewide association study involving 1980 patients with Covid-19 and severe disease (defined as respiratory failure) at seven hospitals in the Italian and Spanish epicenters of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Europe. After quality control and the exclusion of population outliers, 835 patients and 1255 control participants from Italy and 775 patients and 950 control participants from Spain were included in the final analysis. In total, we analyzed 8,582,968 single-nucleotide polymorphisms and conducted a meta-analysis of the two case-control panels. RESULTSWe detected cross-replicating associations with rs11385942 at locus 3p21.31 and with rs657152 at locus 9q34.2, which were significant at the genomewide level (P<5×10 −8 ) in the meta-analysis of the two case-control panels (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48 to 2.11; P = 1.15×10 −10 ; and odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.20 to 1.47; P = 4.95×10 −8 , respectively). At locus 3p21.31, the association signal spanned the genes SLC6A20, LZTFL1, CCR9, FYCO1, CXCR6 and XCR1. The association signal at locus 9q34.2 coincided with the ABO blood group locus; in this cohort, a blood-group-specific analysis showed a higher risk in blood group A than in other blood groups (odds ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.20 to 1.75; P = 1.48×10 −4 ) and a protective effect in blood group O as compared with other blood groups (odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.79; P = 1.06×10 −5 ). CONCLUSIONSWe identified a 3p21.31 gene cluster as a genetic susceptibility locus in patients with Covid-19 with respiratory failure and confirmed a potential involvement of the ABO blood-group system. (Funded by Stein Erik Hagen and others.

We described features of hospitalized Covid-19 patients and identified predictors of clinical deterioration. We included patients consecutively admitted at Humanitas Research Hospital (Rozzano, Milan, Italy); retrospectively extracted demographic; clinical; laboratory and imaging findings at admission; used survival methods to identify factors associated with clinical deterioration (defined as intensive care unit (ICU) transfer or death), and developed a prognostic index. Overall; we analyzed 239 patients (29.3% females) with a mean age of 63.9 (standard deviation [SD]; 14.0) years. Clinical deterioration occurred in 70 patients (29.3%), including 41 (17.2%) ICU transfers and 36 (15.1%) deaths. The most common symptoms and signs at admission were cough (77.8%) and elevated respiratory rate (34.1%), while 66.5% of patients had at least one coexisting medical condition. Imaging frequently revealed ground-glass opacity (68.9%) and consolidation (23.8%). Age; increased respiratory rate; abnormal blood gas parameters and imaging findings; coexisting coronary heart disease; leukocytosis; lymphocytopenia; and several laboratory parameters (elevated procalcitonin; interleukin-6; serum ferritin; C-reactive protein; aspartate aminotransferase; lactate dehydrogenase; creatinine; fibrinogen; troponin-I; and D-dimer) were significant predictors of clinical deterioration. We suggested a prognostic index to assist risk-stratification (C-statistic; 0.845; 95% CI; 0.802–0.887). These results could aid early identification and management of patients at risk, who should therefore receive additional monitoring and aggressive supportive care.

Background. Respiratory failure is a key feature of severe Covid-19 and a critical driver of mortality, but for reasons poorly defined affects less than 10% of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. Methods. We included 1,980 patients with Covid-19 respiratory failure at seven centers in the Italian and Spanish epicenters of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Europe (Milan, Monza, Madrid, San Sebastian and Barcelona) for a genome-wide association analysis. After quality control and exclusion of population outliers, 835 patients and 1,255 population-derived controls from Italy, and 775 patients and 950 controls from Spain were included in the final analysis. In total we analyzed 8,582,968 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and conducted a meta-analysis of both case-control panels. Results. We detected cross-replicating associations with rs11385942 at chromosome 3p21.31 and rs657152 at 9q34, which were genome-wide significant (P<5x10-8) in the meta-analysis of both study panels, odds ratio [OR], 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48 to 2.11; P=1.14x10-10 and OR 1.32 (95% CI, 1.20 to 1.47; P=4.95x10-8), respectively. Among six genes at 3p21.31, SLC6A20 encodes a known interaction partner with angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). The association signal at 9q34 was located at the ABO blood group locus and a blood-group-specific analysis showed higher risk for A-positive individuals (OR=1.45, 95% CI, 1.20 to 1.75, P=1.48x10-4) and a protective effect for blood group O (OR=0.65, 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.79, P=1.06x10-5). Conclusions. We herein report the first robust genetic susceptibility loci for the development of respiratory failure in Covid-19. Identified variants may help guide targeted exploration of severe Covid-19 pathophysiology.

IMPORTANCEThe efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19 is uncertain.OBJECTIVE To determine whether antiplatelet therapy improves outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSIn an ongoing adaptive platform trial (REMAP-CAP) testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, 1557 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 were enrolled between October 30, 2020, and June 23, 2021, from 105 sites in 8 countries and followed up for 90 days (final follow-up date: July 26, 2021).INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive either open-label aspirin (n = 565), a P2Y12 inhibitor (n = 455), or no antiplatelet therapy (control; n = 529). Interventions were continued in the hospital for a maximum of 14 days and were in addition to anticoagulation thromboprophylaxis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based respiratory or cardiovascular organ support) within 21 days, ranging from −1 for any death in hospital (censored at 90 days) to 22 for survivors with no organ support. There were 13 secondary outcomes, including survival to discharge and major bleeding to 14 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. An odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. Efficacy was defined as greater than 99% posterior probability of an OR greater than 1. Futility was defined as greater than 95% posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 vs control. Intervention equivalence was defined as greater than 90% probability that the OR (compared with each other) was between 1/1.2 and 1.2 for 2 noncontrol interventions. RESULTSThe aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitor groups met the predefined criteria for equivalence at an adaptive analysis and were statistically pooled for further analysis. Enrollment was discontinued after the prespecified criterion for futility was met for the pooled antiplatelet group compared with control. Among the 1557 critically ill patients randomized, 8 patients withdrew consent and 1549 completed the trial (median age, 57 years; 521 [33.6%] female). The median for organ support-free days was 7 (IQR, −1 to 16) in both the antiplatelet and control groups (median-adjusted OR, 1.02 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.86-1.23]; 95.7% posterior probability of futility). The proportions of patients surviving to hospital discharge were 71.5% (723/1011) and 67.9% (354/521) in the antiplatelet and control groups, respectively (median-adjusted OR, 1.27 [95% CrI, 0.99-1.62]; adjusted absolute difference, 5% [95% CrI, −0.2% to 9.5%]; 97% posterior probability of efficacy). Among survivors, the median for organ support-free days was 14 in both groups. Major bleeding occurred in 2.1% and 0.4% of patients in the antiplatelet and control groups (adjusted OR, 2.97 [95% CrI,; adjusted absolute risk increase, 0.8% [95% CrI, 0.1%-2.7%]; 99.4% probability of harm).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among crit...

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), employs angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) for cellular entry. 1 The effects of ACE inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) on ACE2 expression and activity are unclear. Concerns arose about possible interactions between renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors and SARS-CoV-2 infectivity and virulence. 2 An opposite hypothesis 1 suggests that SARS-CoV-2 down-regulates ACE2 expression after cell entry, increasing RAAS activation and angiotensin II levels. Early evidence suggested that angiotensin II serum levels are increased in COVID-19 patients, and directly correlated with viral load and lung injury, 3 while large observational studies did not detect harmful associations between ACEi/ARB therapy and the likelihood of COVID-19 or in-hospital mortality. 4,5 However, no evidence is available on the effect on mortality of ACEi/ARB continuation or discontinuation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital (Rozzano-Milan, Lombardy, Italy) up to 1 April 2020 were enrolled in a prospective registry, which complies with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by our institutional Ethics Committee. Discontinuation was defined as ACEi/ARB interruption at the time of hospital admission in patients known to be taking ACEis/ARBs at home. Patients suspending ACEis/ARBs during hospitalization for clinical reasons (e.g. hypotension, worsening renal function, etc.) were considered as the ACEi/ARB continuation group. The primary outcome was mortality. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated with binary logistic regression. Clinical follow-up was censored at the

IntroductionInhaled low-dose methoxyflurane is approved in Europe for emergency relief of moderate-to-severe trauma-related pain in adults, but data versus active comparators are sparse. The phase IIIb Methoxyflurane in Emergency Department in ITAly (MEDITA) trial investigated the analgesic efficacy, practicality and safety of methoxyflurane versus standard analgesic treatment (SAT) for acute trauma pain.MethodsThis was a randomised, active-controlled, parallel-group, open-label trial conducted in 15 Italian emergency units. Adults with limb trauma and pain score ≥ 4 on numerical rating scale (NRS) were randomised 1:1 to inhaled methoxyflurane 3 mL or SAT [intravenously administered (IV) morphine 0.1 mg/kg for severe pain (NRS ≥ 7); IV paracetamol 1 g or IV ketoprofen 100 mg for moderate pain (NRS 4–6)]. The primary endpoint was overall change in visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity from baseline (time of randomisation) to 3, 5 and 10 min. Non-inferiority and superiority of methoxyflurane versus SAT were concluded if the upper 95% confidence interval (CI) for the treatment comparison (methoxyflurane–SAT) was less than 1 and less than 0, respectively.ResultsBetween 8 February 2018 and 8 February 2019, 272 patients were randomised (136 per treatment group). A total of 270 patients (mean age 51 years; 49% male; 34% with severe pain; mean baseline VAS 67 mm) were treated and analysed for efficacy and safety. Superiority of methoxyflurane was demonstrated for moderate-to-severe pain (adjusted mean treatment difference − 5.94 mm; 95% CI − 8.83, − 3.06 mm), moderate pain (− 5.97 mm; 95% CI − 9.55, − 2.39 mm) and severe pain (− 5.54 mm; 95% CI − 10.49, − 0.59 mm). Median onset of pain relief was 9 min for methoxyflurane and 15 min for SAT. Practicality of methoxyflurane treatment was rated “Excellent”, “Very Good” or “Good” by 90% of clinicians vs. 64% for SAT. Adverse events (all non-serious) were reported by 17% of methoxyflurane-treated patients and 3% of SAT-treated patients.ConclusionMethoxyflurane provided superior pain relief to SAT in patients with moderate-to-severe trauma pain and may offer a simple, fast, effective non-opioid treatment option.Trial registrationTrial registered with EudraCT (2017-001565-25) on 2 March 2018 and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03585374) on 13 July 2018.FundingMundipharma Pharmaceuticals S.r.l.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-019-01055-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

S ince February 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has spread to Italy affecting more than 100,000 people. Several studies have reported a high prevalence of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, and investigated their potential association with clinical outcomes. 1 The timing, clinical significance, and possible impact on viral spread of GI symptoms presentation have not been fully elucidated. Elevation of liver function tests and other laboratory values has also been reported; however, their prognostic significance has not been clearly established. 2 We analyzed a cohort of reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 patients 3 consecutively admitted to Humanitas Hospital, Milan, Italy, to describe the prevalence of GI symptoms and GI/ liver tests abnormalities, and their association with clinical outcomes.

Vaccination against an airborne pathogen is very effective if it induces also the development of mucosal antibodies that can protect against infection. The mRNA‐based vaccine‐encoding SARS‐CoV‐2 full‐length spike protein (BNT162b2, Pfizer/BioNTech) protects also against infection despite being administered systemically. Here, we show that upon vaccination, cognate IgG molecules are also found in the saliva and are more abundant in SARS‐CoV‐2 previously exposed subjects, paralleling the development of plasma IgG. The antibodies titer declines at 3 months from vaccination. We identified a concentration of specific IgG in the plasma above which the relevant IgG can be detected in the saliva. Regarding IgA antibodies, we found only protease‐susceptible IgA1 antibodies in plasma while they were present at very low levels in the saliva over the course of vaccination of SARS‐CoV‐2‐naïve subjects. Thus, in response to BNT162b2 vaccine, plasma IgG can permeate into mucosal sites and participate in viral protection. It is not clear why IgA1 are detected in low amount, they may be proteolytically cleaved.