From June 2020, there were significant changes in the treatment of COVID-19 individuals, and for this reason, it has been performed a subanalysis of these two periods (1st wave vs

From June 2020, there were significant changes in the treatment of COVID-19 individuals, and for this reason, it has been performed a subanalysis of these two periods (1st wave vs. did not show relevant variations in demographic, comorbidities, medical features, and mortality, when compared with those with bad results. However, some laboratory checks (leukocytosis, neutrophilia, thrombocytosis) related with COVID-19 severity, as well as acute kidney injury (17 [65.4%] vs. 100 [40.2%]; test for continuous or ordinal variables. From June 2020, there were significant changes in the treatment of COVID-19 individuals, and for this reason, it has been performed a subanalysis IPI-145 (Duvelisib, INK1197) of these two periods (1st wave vs. second/third wave in Spain). Statistical significance was defined as (%)125 (45.5)13 (50.0)112 (45.0)0.820n.a??Second; (%)23 (8.4)1 (3.8)22 (8.8)??Third; (%)127 (46.2)12 (46.2)115 (46.2)Demographics??Age; median (IQC)64 (55C71)63 (57C73)64 (55C71)0.712n.a??Sex (male); (%)211 (76.7)24 (92.3)187 (75.1)0.0483.979 (0.914C17.32)Comorbidities??Malignancy; (%)31 (11.3)2 (7.7)29 (11.6)0.7500.632 (0.142C2.815)??Cardiac disease; (%)44 (16.0)4 (15.4)40 (16.1)1.0000.950 (0.311C2.905)??Chronic kidney disease; (%)38 (13.8)3 (11.5)35 (14.1)1.0000.798 (0.227C2.798)??Chronic liver disease; (%)24 (8.7)3 (11.5)21 (8.4)0.4841.416 (0.392C5.111)??Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; (%)45 (16.4)3 (11.5)42 (16.9)0.5900.643 (0.185C2.239)??Diabetes; (%)78 (28.4)7 (26.9)71 (28.5)0.8640.924 (0.372C2.293)Dyslipidemia; (%)135 (49.1)13 (50.0)122 (49.0)0.9221.041 (0.464C2.335)??Hypertension; (%)146 (53.1)13 (50.0)133 (53.4)0.7400.872 (0.389C1.957)??Obesity; (%)137 (49.8)11 (42.3)126 (50.6)0.4210.716 (0.316C1.620)??Smoking; (%)20 (7.3)0 (0.0)20 (8.0)0.233n.aSymptom onset and admission??Number of days from the appearance of clinical symptoms to admission to the hospital; median (IQR)8 (6C11)7 (6C8)8 (6C11)0.009n.a??Quantity of days from the hospital admission to the ICU; median (IQR)2 (0C6)3.5 (1C7)2 (0C6)0.352n.aBiological quantities in the 1st day in ICU??LEU,??109 cells/L; median (IQR)9.75 (8.59C14.3)13.7 (9.40C20.0)9.30 (6.65C13.5)0.001n.a??NEU,??109 cells/L; median (IQR)8.41 (5.72C12.7)12.7 (8.63C19.0)8.10 (5.65C11.9)0.001n.a??LYM,??109 cells/L; median (IQR)0.64 (0.38C0.96)0.51 (0.41C0.72)0.66 (0.37C0.98)0.067n.a??PLT,??109 cells/L; median (IQR)232 (173C303)260.5 (217C325)230 (168C298)0.038n.aapH, 1; median (IQR)7.35 (7.29C7.43)7.35 (7.30C7.39)7.35 (7.29C7.43)0.800n.a??(%)28 (10.2)3 (11.5)25 (10.0)0.7361.169 (0.328C4.170)??Individuals with ECMO; (%)25 (9.1)2 (7.7)23 (9.2)1.0000.819 (0.182C3.688)??(%)232 (84.4)22 (84.6)210 (84.3)1.0001.021 (0.334C3.127)??Individuals with nitric oxide administration during IMV; (%)38 (13.8)4 (15.4)34 (13.7)0.7671.150 (0.373C3.542)??Individuals positioned in prone position during IMV; (%)205 (74.5)18 (69.2)187 (75.1)0.5130.746 (0.309C1.800)??Quantity of days with IMV; median (IQR)13 (4C27)11 (3C17)13 (4C28)0.291n.aDrugs administration??Individuals treated with hydroxychloroquine; (%)126 (45.8)13 (50.0)113 (45.4)0.6531.204 (0.536C2.701)??Individuals treated with lopinavir/ritonavir; (%)85 IPI-145 (Duvelisib, INK1197) (30.9)11 (42.3)74 (29.7)0.1861.734 (0.761C3.954)??Individuals treated with remdesivir; (%)53 (19.3)5 (19.2)48 (19.3)0.9950.997 (0.358C2.778)??Patients treated with azithromycin; (%)69 (25.1)5 (19.2)64 (25.7)0.4690.688 (0.249C1.901)??Individuals treated with tocilizumab; (%)84 (30.5)9 (34.6)75 (30.1)0.6361.228 (0.524C2.880)??Individuals treated with corticosteroids; (%)253 (92.0)25 (96.2)228 (91.6)0.7052.303 (0.297C17.85)??Individuals treated with interferon beta 1; (%)29 (10.5)3 (11.5)26 (10.4)0.7441.119 (0.314C3.983)??Patients treated with enoxaparin; (%)250 (91.2)26 (100.0)224 (90.3)0.144n.a??Individuals treated with IPI-145 (Duvelisib, INK1197) anticoagulants with prophylactic or therapeutic goal; (%) 275 (100)26 (100.0)249 (100.0)n.an.a Open in a separate window (%)77 (28.0)5 (19.2)72 (28.9)0.2950.585 (0.213C1.612)??Individuals with thrombotic complications; (%)50 (18.2)5 (19.2)45 (18.1)0.7951.079 (0.389C3.015)??Individuals with hemorrhagical complications; (%)27 (9.8)4 (15.4)23 (9.2)0.3011.787 (0.567C5.634)??Individuals with cardiovascular complications; (%)56 (20.4)5 (19.2)51 (20.5)0.8800.924 (0.332C2.570)??Individuals with acute kidney injury; (%)117 (42.5)17 (65.4)100 (40.2)0.0132.814 (1.207C6.563)??Individuals with superinfection; (%)207 (75.3)19 (73.1)188 (75.5)0.7850.881 (0.353C2.195)??Individuals with sepsis; (%)134 (48.7)11 (42.3)123 (49.4)0.4910.751 (0.332C1.700)??Individuals with septic shock; (%)70 (25.5)4 (15.4)66 (26.5)0.2150.504 (0.167C1.517)??Individuals with multiple organ failure; (%)56 (20.4)5 (19.2)51 (20.5)0.8800.924 (0.332C2.570)Final status??Exitus; (%)143 (52.0)12 (46.2)131 (52.6)0.5310.772 (0.343C1.736) Open in a separate window em OR /em , odds-ratio; em CI /em , confidence interval; em ICU /em , rigorous care unit; em IQR /em , interquartilic range; em n.a. Mouse monoclonal to KRT13 /em , not applicable Figures in daring indicate a em p /em -value? ?0.05 We found that 49 (17.8%) of these 275 individuals were positive for auto-Abs against type I IFNs (IFN-2 and/or IFN-) by ELISA, of which 19 (6.9%) only against IFN-2, 8 (2.9%) only against IFN-, and 22 (8.0%) against both. Next, we targeted to confirm the neutralizing activity of these auto-Abs. A obstructing activity of 10?ng/mL was observed in 26 (53.1%) of these 49 individuals with positive auto-Abs against IFNs results. Auto-Abs were neutralizing against both IFN-2 and IFN- in 21 (80.8%) of these 26 individuals, against only IFN-2 in four individuals (15.4%), and in only one patient (3.8%) for IFN-. We further assessed the medical, analytical, and evolutive data of life-threatening COVID-19 individuals admitted to the ICU depending on whether or not auto-Abs neutralizing high concentrations of type I IFNs are present (Furniture ?(Furniture1,1, ?,2,2, and ?and3).3). Table S1 shows the same data but classifies ICU individuals following a WHO 8-point ordinal scale. Almost all the individuals with positive results of neutralizing auto-Abs were men, becoming statistically higher than in the group of individuals showing negative results (24 [92.3%] vs. IPI-145 (Duvelisib, INK1197) 187 [75.1]; em p /em ?=?0.048). No relevant variations were observed in the main comorbidities between the two organizations. The median quantity of days from your onset of symptoms to admission to the hospital was significantly lower.