Background The clinical presentation of COVID-19 in patients admitted to hospital is heterogeneous. We aimed to determine whether clinical phenotypes of patients with COVID-19 can be derived from clinical data, to assess the reproducibility of these phenotypes and correlation with prognosis, and to derive and validate a simplified probabilistic model for phenotype assignment. Phenotype identification was not primarily intended as a predictive tool for mortality. MethodsIn this study, we used data from two cohorts: the COVID-19@Spain cohort, a retrospective cohort including 4035 consecutive adult patients admitted to 127 hospitals in Spain with COVID-19 between Feb 2 and March 17, 2020, and the COVID-19@HULP cohort, including 2226 consecutive adult patients admitted to a teaching hospital in Madrid between Feb 25 and April 19, 2020. The COVID-19@Spain cohort was divided into a derivation cohort, comprising 2667 randomly selected patients, and an internal validation cohort, comprising the remaining 1368 patients. The COVID-19@HULP cohort was used as an external validation cohort. A probabilistic model for phenotype assignment was derived in the derivation cohort using multinomial logistic regression and validated in the internal validation cohort. The model was also applied to the external validation cohort. 30-day mortality and other prognostic variables were assessed in the derived phenotypes and in the phenotypes assigned by the probabilistic model. Findings Three distinct phenotypes were derived in the derivation cohort (n=2667)-phenotype A (516 [19%] patients), phenotype B (1955 [73%]) and phenotype C (196 [7%])-and reproduced in the internal validation cohort (n=1368)phenotype A (233 [17%] patients), phenotype B (1019 [74%]), and phenotype C (116 [8%]). Patients with phenotype A were younger, were less frequently male, had mild viral symptoms, and had normal inflammatory parameters. Patients with phenotype B included more patients with obesity, lymphocytopenia, and moderately elevated inflammatory parameters. Patients with phenotype C included older patients with more comorbidities and even higher inflammatory parameters than phenotype B. We developed a simplified probabilistic model (validated in the internal validation cohort) for phenotype assignment, including 16 variables. In the derivation cohort, 30-day mortality rates were 2•5% (95% CI 1•4-4•3) for patients with phenotype A, 30•5% (28•5-32•6) for patients with phenotype B, and 60•7% (53•7-67•2) for patients with phenotype C (log-rank test p<0•0001). The predicted phenotypes in the internal validation cohort and external validation cohort showed similar mortality rates to the assigned phenotypes (internal validation cohort: 5•3% [95% CI 3•4-8•1] for phenotype A, 31•3% [28•5-34•2] for phenotype B, and 59•5% [48•8-69•3] for phenotype C; external validation cohort: 3•7% [2•0-6•4] for phenotype A, 23•7% [21•8-25•7] for phenotype B, and 51•4% [41•9-60•7] for phenotype C).Interpretation Patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 can be classified into three...

No abstract

No abstract

Angiotensin II (AII) receptor blockers offer an alternative means of blocking the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) to angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. Being highly selective for the AII receptor subtype AT(1), AII receptor blockers may avoid side-effects associated with ACE inhibitor treatment, such as cough. Eprosartan is a non-biphenyl, non-tetrazole competitive blocker that is chemically distinct from other AII receptor blockers, which may account for differences in its pharmacological properties. It induces dual blockade of AT(1) receptors both presynaptically and postsynaptically, reducing sympathetic nerve activity to a significantly greater degree than other AT(1) receptor blockers. At the recommended dose of 600 mg once daily, eprosartan effectively lowers blood pressure (BP) in hypertensive patients to a similar degree as seen with other AII receptor blockers and ACE inhibitors. However, a greater proportion of patients achieved adequate BP control compared with enalapril. When eprosartan is given in combination with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), it provides a significantly greater BP reduction compared with eprosartan alone. Eprosartan has a side-effect profile that is similar to placebo and to other AII receptor blockers, but is better than that of enalapril because it lacks the propensity to cause dry cough. Eprosartan is not metabolized by the cytochrome P450 enzyme system, and so has no interaction with drugs that affect this system. Eprosartan completely reverses renal vasoconstriction induced by AII and may, therefore, have further applications in situations where stimulation of the RAAS is a problem. In summary, eprosartan, alone or in combination with HCTZ, provides an effective and well-tolerated approach to lowering BP in patients with all grades of hypertension. Further development of eprosartan may offer therapeutic opportunities that go far beyond the current recommendations.

No abstract