Background COVID-19 can course with respiratory and extrapulmonary disease. SARS-CoV-2 RNA is detected in respiratory samples but also in blood, stool and urine. Severe COVID-19 is characterized by a dysregulated host response to this virus. We studied whether viral RNAemia or viral RNA load in plasma is associated with severe COVID-19 and also to this dysregulated response. Methods A total of 250 patients with COVID-19 were recruited (50 outpatients, 100 hospitalized ward patients and 100 critically ill). Viral RNA detection and quantification in plasma was performed using droplet digital PCR, targeting the N1 and N2 regions of the SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein gene. The association between SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and viral RNA load in plasma with severity was evaluated by multivariate logistic regression. Correlations between viral RNA load and biomarkers evidencing dysregulation of host response were evaluated by calculating the Spearman correlation coefficients. Results The frequency of viral RNAemia was higher in the critically ill patients (78%) compared to ward patients (27%) and outpatients (2%) (p < 0.001). Critical patients had higher viral RNA loads in plasma than non-critically ill patients, with non-survivors showing the highest values. When outpatients and ward patients were compared, viral RNAemia did not show significant associations in the multivariate analysis. In contrast, when ward patients were compared with ICU patients, both viral RNAemia and viral RNA load in plasma were associated with critical illness (OR [CI 95%], p): RNAemia (3.92 [1.183–12.968], 0.025), viral RNA load (N1) (1.962 [1.244–3.096], 0.004); viral RNA load (N2) (2.229 [1.382–3.595], 0.001). Viral RNA load in plasma correlated with higher levels of chemokines (CXCL10, CCL2), biomarkers indicative of a systemic inflammatory response (IL-6, CRP, ferritin), activation of NK cells (IL-15), endothelial dysfunction (VCAM-1, angiopoietin-2, ICAM-1), coagulation activation (D-Dimer and INR), tissue damage (LDH, GPT), neutrophil response (neutrophils counts, myeloperoxidase, GM-CSF) and immunodepression (PD-L1, IL-10, lymphopenia and monocytopenia). Conclusions SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and viral RNA load in plasma are associated with critical illness in COVID-19. Viral RNA load in plasma correlates with key signatures of dysregulated host responses, suggesting a major role of uncontrolled viral replication in the pathogenesis of this disease.

No abstract

Background: Severe COVID-19 is characterized by clinical and biological manifestations typically observed in sepsis. SARS-CoV-2 RNA is commonly detected in nasopharyngeal swabs, however viral RNA can be found also in peripheral blood and other tissues. Whether systemic spreading of the virus or viral components plays a role in the pathogenesis of the sepsis like disease observed in severe COVID-19 is currently unknown. Methods: We determined the association of plasma SARS-CoV-2 RNA with the biological responses and the clinical severity of patients with COVID-19. 250 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection were recruited (50 outpatients, 100 hospitalised ward patients, and 100 critically ill). The association between plasma SARS-CoV-2 RNA and laboratory parameters was evaluated using multivariate GLM with a gamma distribution. The association between plasma SARS-CoV-2 RNA and severity was evaluated using multivariate ordinal logistic regression analysis and Generalized Linear Model (GLM) analysis with a binomial distribution. Results: The presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA viremia was independently associated with a number of features consistently identified in sepsis: 1) high levels of cytokines (including CXCL10, CCL-2, IL-10, IL-1ra, IL-15, and G-CSF); 2) higher levels of ferritin and LDH; 3) low lymphocyte and monocyte counts 4) and low platelet counts. In hospitalised patients, the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA viremia was independently associated with critical illness: (adjusted OR= 8.30 [CI95%=4.21-16.34], p < 0.001). CXCL10 was the most accurate identifier of SARS-CoV-2-RNA viremia in plasma (area under the curve (AUC), [CI95%], p) = 0.85 [0.80 0.89), <0.001]), suggesting its potential role as a surrogate biomarker of viremia. The cytokine IL-15 most accurately differentiated clinical ward patients from ICU patients (AUC: 0.82 [0.76 0.88], <0.001). Conclusions: systemic dissemination of genomic material of SARS-CoV-2 is associated with a sepsis-like biological response and critical illness in patients with COVID-19. RNA viremia could represent an important link between SARS-CoV-2 infection, host response dysfunction and the transition from moderate illness to severe, sepsis-like COVID-19 disease.

Background: There are no specific generally accepted therapies for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The full spectrum of COVID-19 ranges from asymptomatic disease to mild respiratory tract illness to severe pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multisystem organ failure, and death. The efficacy of corticosteroids in viral ARDS remains unknown. We postulated that adjunctive treatment of established ARDS caused by COVID-19 with intravenous dexamethasone might change the pulmonary and systemic inflammatory response and thereby reduce morbidity, leading to a decrease in duration of mechanical ventilation and in mortality. Methods/design: This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, parallel, open-label, superiority trial testing dexamethasone in 200 mechanically ventilated adult patients with established moderate-to-severe ARDS caused by confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Established ARDS is defined as maintaining a PaO 2 /FiO 2 ≤ 200 mmHg on PEEP ≥ 10 cmH 2 O and FiO 2 ≥ 0.5 after 12 ± 3 h of routine intensive care. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive either dexamethasone plus standard intensive care or standard intensive care alone. Patients in the dexamethasone group will receive an intravenous dose of 20 mg once daily from day 1 to day 5, followed by 10 mg once daily from day 6 to day 10. The primary outcome is 60-day mortality. The secondary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days, defined as days alive and free from mechanical ventilation at day 28 after randomization. All analyses will be done according to the intention-to-treat principle.

We hypothesized that neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) compared to conventional lung-protective mechanical ventilation (MV) decreases duration of MV and mortality in patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Methods: We carried out a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial in patients with ARF from several etiologies. Intubated patients ventilated for ≤ 5 days expected to require MV for ≥ 72 h and able to breathe spontaneously were eligible for enrollment. Eligible patients were randomly assigned based on balanced treatment assignments with a computerized randomization allocation sequence to two ventilatory strategies: (1) lung-protective MV (control group), and (2) lung-protective MV with NAVA (NAVA group). Allocation concealment was maintained at all sites during the trial. Primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days (VFDs) at 28 days. Secondary outcome was all-cause hospital mortality. All analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. Results: Between March 2014 and October 2019, we enrolled 306 patients and randomly assigned 153 patients to the NAVA group and 153 to the control group. Median VFDs were higher in the NAVA than in the control group (22 vs. 18 days; between-group difference 4 days; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0 to 8 days; p = 0.016). At hospital discharge, 39 (25.5%) patients in the NAVA group and 47 (30.7%) patients in the control group had died (between-group difference − 5.2%, 95% CI − 15.2 to 4.8, p = 0.31). Other clinical, physiological or safety outcomes did not differ significantly between the trial groups. Conclusion: NAVA decreased duration of MV although it did not improve survival in ventilated patients with ARF.

Background: Stratification of the severity of infection is currently based on the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, which is difficult to calculate outside the ICU. Biomarkers could help to stratify the severity of infection in surgical patients.Methods: Levels of ten biomarkers indicating endothelial dysfunction, 22 indicating emergency granulopoiesis, and six denoting neutrophil degranulation were compared in three groups of patients in the first 12 h after diagnosis at three Spanish hospitals.Results: There were 100 patients with infection, 95 with sepsis and 57 with septic shock. Seven biomarkers indicating endothelial dysfunction (mid-regional proadrenomedullin (MR-ProADM), syndecan 1, thrombomodulin, angiopoietin 2, endothelial cell-specific molecule 1, vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 and E-selectin) had stronger associations with sepsis than infection alone. MR-ProADM had the highest odds ratio (OR) in multivariable analysis (OR 11⋅53, 95 per cent c.i. 4⋅15 to 32⋅08; P = 0⋅006) and the best area under the curve (AUC) for detecting sepsis (0⋅86, 95 per cent c.i. 0⋅80 to 0⋅91; P < 0⋅001). In a comparison of sepsis with septic shock, two biomarkers of neutrophil degranulation, proteinase 3 (OR 8⋅09, 1⋅34 to 48⋅91; P = 0⋅028) and lipocalin 2 (OR 6⋅62, 2⋅47 to 17⋅77; P = 0⋅002), had the strongest association with septic shock, but lipocalin 2 exhibited the highest AUC (0⋅81, 0⋅73 to 0⋅90; P < 0⋅001). Conclusion: MR-ProADM and lipocalin 2 could be alternatives to the SOFA score in the detection of sepsis and septic shock respectively in surgical patients with infection. Healthy control Infection Sepsis Septic shockBiomarkers of a,b emergency granulopoiesis and c acute-phase response. Levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) are in mg/l, those of procalcitonin (PCT) are in ng/ml, and those of the remaining biomarkers are copies of cDNA per ng mRNA. MMP, matrix metalloproteinase; LTF, lactoferrin; PRTN, proteinase; LCN, lipocalin, OLFM, olfactomedin; ELANE, elastase, neutrophil expressed; MPO, myeloperoxidase; CTSG, cathepsin G; AZU, azurocidin; BPI, bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein; DEFA, defensin α; CEACAM, carcinoembryonic antigen-related cell adhesion molecule; CD, cluster of differentiation; TCN, transcobalamin; STOM, stomatin; IL1R2, interleukin-1 receptor type 2; CHIT, chitinase. *P ≤ 0⋅050 versus healthy control;†P ≤ 0⋅050 (Kruskal-Wallis test).

Low anti-SARS-CoV-2 S antibody levels predict increased mortality and dissemination of viral components in the blood of critical COVID-19 patients.

Background The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is frequently used to measure frailty in critically ill adults. There is wide variation in the approach to analysing the relationship between the CFS score and mortality after admission to the ICU. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of modelling approach on the association between the CFS score and short-term mortality and quantify the prognostic value of frailty in this context. Methods We analysed data from two multicentre prospective cohort studies which enrolled intensive care unit patients ≥ 80 years old in 26 countries. The primary outcome was mortality within 30-days from admission to the ICU. Logistic regression models for both ICU and 30-day mortality included the CFS score as either a categorical, continuous or dichotomous variable and were adjusted for patient’s age, sex, reason for admission to the ICU, and admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. Results The median age in the sample of 7487 consecutive patients was 84 years (IQR 81–87). The highest fraction of new prognostic information from frailty in the context of 30-day mortality was observed when the CFS score was treated as either a categorical variable using all original levels of frailty or a nonlinear continuous variable and was equal to 9% using these modelling approaches (p < 0.001). The relationship between the CFS score and mortality was nonlinear (p < 0.01). Conclusion Knowledge about a patient’s frailty status adds a substantial amount of new prognostic information at the moment of admission to the ICU. Arbitrary simplification of the CFS score into fewer groups than originally intended leads to a loss of information and should be avoided. Trial registration NCT03134807 (VIP1), NCT03370692 (VIP2)