The characterization of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral kinetics in hospitalized patients and its association with mortality is unknown. We analyzed death and nasopharyngeal viral kinetics in 655 hospitalized patients from the prospective French COVID cohort. The model predicted a median peak viral load that coincided with symptom onset. Patients with age ≥65 y had a smaller loss rate of infected cells, leading to a delayed median time to viral clearance occurring 16 d after symptom onset as compared to 13 d in younger patients (P < 10−4). In multivariate analysis, the risk factors associated with mortality were age ≥65 y, male gender, and presence of chronic pulmonary disease (hazard ratio [HR] > 2.0). Using a joint model, viral dynamics after hospital admission was an independent predictor of mortality (HR = 1.31, P < 10−3). Finally, we used our model to simulate the effects of effective pharmacological interventions on time to viral clearance and mortality. A treatment able to reduce viral production by 90% upon hospital admission would shorten the time to viral clearance by 2.0 and 2.9 d in patients of age <65 y and ≥65 y, respectively. Assuming that the association between viral dynamics and mortality would remain similar to that observed in our population, this could translate into a reduction of mortality from 19 to 14% in patients of age ≥65 y with risk factors. Our results show that viral dynamics is associated with mortality in hospitalized patients. Strategies aiming to reduce viral load could have an effect on mortality rate in this population.

Background The antiviral efficacy of remdesivir against SARS-CoV-2 is still controversial. We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of remdesivir plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, with indication of oxygen or ventilator support. Methods DisCoVeRy was a phase 3, open-label, adaptive, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial conducted in 48 sites in Europe (France, Belgium, Austria, Portugal, Luxembourg). Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness of any duration were eligible if they had clinical evidence of hypoxaemic pneumonia, or required oxygen supplementation. Exclusion criteria included elevated liver enzymes, severe chronic kidney disease, any contraindication to one of the studied treatments or their use in the 29 days before random assignment, or use of ribavirin, as well as pregnancy or breastfeeding. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1) to receive standard of care alone or in combination with remdesivir, lopinavir–ritonavir, lopinavir–ritonavir and interferon beta-1a, or hydroxychloroquine. Randomisation used computer-generated blocks of various sizes; it was stratified on severity of disease at inclusion and on European administrative region. Remdesivir was administered as 200 mg intravenous infusion on day 1, followed by once daily, 1-h infusions of 100 mg up to 9 days, for a total duration of 10 days. It could be stopped after 5 days if the participant was discharged. The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15 measured by the WHO seven-point ordinal scale, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population and was one of the secondary outcomes. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT2020-000936-23, and ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04315948 . Findings Between March 22, 2020, and Jan 21, 2021, 857 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to remdesivir plus standard of care (n=429) or standard of care only (n=428). 15 participants were excluded from analysis in the remdesivir group, and ten in the control group. At day 15, the distribution of the WHO ordinal scale was: (1) not hospitalised, no limitations on activities (61 [15%] of 414 in the remdesivir group vs 73 [17%] of 418 in the control group); (2) not hospitalised, limitation on activities (129 [31%] vs 132 [32%]); (3) hospitalised, not requiring supplemental oxygen (50 [12%] vs 29 [7%]); (4) hospitalised, requiring supplemental oxygen (76 [18%] vs 67 [16%]); (5) hospitalised, on non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen devices (15 [4%] vs 14 [3%]); (6) hospitalised, on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporea...

Our results provide the basis for a detailed prospective evaluation of autoimmunity and inflammation in the context of PIDs, with a view to accurately assessing these risks and describing the possible effect of medical intervention.

No abstract

SARS-CoV-2 antibodies point of care tests ELISA s u m m a r y Objectives: SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays are needed for serological surveys and as a complement to molecular tests to confirm COVID-19. However, the kinetics of the humoral response against SARS-CoV-2 remains poorly described and relies on the performance of the different serological tests. Methods: In this study, we evaluated the performance of six CE-marked point-of-care tests (POC) and three ELISA assays for the diagnosis of COVID-19 by exploring seroconversions in hospitalized patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Results: Both the ELISA and POC tests were able to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in at least half of the samples collected seven days or more after the onset of symptoms. After 15 days, the rate of detection rose to over 80% but without reaching 100%, irrespective of the test used. More than 90% of the samples collected after 15 days tested positive using the iSIA and Accu-Tell® POC tests and the ID.Vet IgG ELISA assay. Seroconversion was observed 5 to 12 days after the onset of symptoms. Three assays suffer from a specificity below 90% (EUROIMMUN IgG and IgA, UNscience, Zhuhai Livzon). Conclusions: The second week of COVID-19 seems to be the best period for assessing the sensitivity of commercial serological assays. To achieve an early diagnosis of COVID-19 based on antibody detection, a dual challenge must be met: the immunodiagnostic window period must be shortened and an optimal specificity must be conserved.

Previous conflicting results appear to be related to differences in statistical methods. When using appropriate models, we found that VS was significantly associated with reduced long-term mortality.

No abstract

No abstract