Categories
COVID-19

Thoughts on COVID-19 June 15, 2020

  • It’s been a time of great unrest in the Unites States and around the world after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis at the hands of several police officers there. Demonstrations continue to occur around the country. Unquestionably we’ll see some disease surges in cities where protests occurred. Some factors that could lead to a greater surge include the use of tear gas and pepper spray which induce violent coughing, a significant driver of disease spread. Additionally, pepper spray and tear gas cause respiratory epithelial damage which could make protesters more susceptible. We know from sporting events like the UEFA Champion’s League match in Milan on February 19 between between Atalanta and Valencia that the gathering of thousands of screaming people can lead to devastating super-spreading events. Two days after that match Italy had its first case and epidemiologists feel that the match likely played a part in the region’s massive outbreak. Similarly, the protests saw much yelling likely introducing more virus into the air and onto surfaces. A mitigating factor of course, is that almost all protests occurred outdoors where dissipation of virus containing droplets occurs much faster than the still air inside buildings. We’ll likely start to see increasing cases in the next week as spikes generally occur 2-3 weeks after spreading events. Admittedly though, since there’s already a significant increase occurring in many localities due to reopening measures it may be hard to tease out causative factors.
  • There’s a bit of a notion that COVID-19 is merely a disease of the very old. While this disease unquestionably hits older ages disproportionately, the death toll for people pre-retirement age and younger is not insignificant. In the US, 19% of all deaths have occurred in ages 64 and below for a total of 36,906 deaths at the time of this writing. COVID-19’s disease burden is not limited to retirees and the risk to older, pre-retirement workers is substantial. This has impacts beyond death rates. The disease often leads to a long period of illness and potentially long hospitalizations. Having a significant number of employed individuals hospitalized and/or sick for extended periods of time has a measurable effect on the economy. Dismissing this disease as merely a disease of the very old is not just statistically wrong, it’s unwise on many levels for the wellbeing of the nation.
CDC Data for US COVID-19 Deaths by Age/CDC
  • A MMRW Early Release publication looked at how the US Air Force managed over 10,000 trainees and limited total COVID-19 cases to 5 with only 3 transmissions. Their success is no surprise to public health experts as it followed well established non-pharmaceutical interventions. Trainees were kept healthy utilizing arrival quarantine, social distancing, mandatory face coverings and rapid identification of exposed/infected individuals through rapid testing and contact tracing. As the disease grew around the country, recruits from heavily infected areas were not permitted onto the base for training. The success there indicates clearly that well-established public health interventions like those described above can very successfully prevent viral spread and can allow for business almost as usual. Just because it can’t be said too much–wear a face covering!!
  • The FDA rescinded its Emergency Use Authorization for hydroxychloroquine today after reviewing the growing data demonstrating that the medication is ineffective in the treatment of COVID-19 and carries significant cardiac risk. There are still a few large trials underway examining the medication’s usefulness and safety but the FDA’s action means the medication now should not be used outside of those trials.
  • There are over 135 vaccines in development for COVID-19. The most advanced trial (Phase III) is the Oxford University vaccine which is a viral vector vaccine–the spike protein from SARS-CoV-2 is delivered with a safe virus in order to generate an immune response. In the case of the Oxford vaccine that virus is an adenovirus which causes the common cold. Early data indicates that the Oxford vaccine may not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection but it may prevent fatal illness. Even that would make the vaccine a significant step forward against COVID-19. Right on Oxford’s heels is the Moderna vaccine which is a genetic vaccine (the mechanism was discussed in an earlier post). Moderna expects to have a large scale Phase III trial underway in July. If these vaccines make it through their trials and demonstrate efficacy and safety, it’s possible that emergency use for front-line healthcare workers, first responders and highest risk individuals may be possible in late 2020. So much has to line up for that to be a reality I hesitate to mention it for fear of raising hopes too much. But it’s always nice to end on an optimistic note so here’s to hope!
Categories
COVID-19

Hope for Remdesivir

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) released a statement today indicating that preliminary data from a government-run study of Remdesivir shows that the drug appears to reduce recovery time by 31% (median of 4 days) in patients with advanced COVID-19 disease and lung involvement. It may also have a benefit in mortality though it sounds like that’s less clear. The Remdesivir group had a mortality rate of 8% compared with 11.6% in the placebo group–this, however, did not reach statistical significance.

It definitely falls short of a home run but it’s very good news especially in light of the recently released study from Wuhan China which seemed to show no statistically significant difference between a Remdesivir group and a placebo group. The Chinese study, a double-blind, placebo controlled, multi-center, randomized trial was well designed but it never reached its goal of 453 patients, topping out instead at 237 patients. By March 12 there weren’t enough patients in the region who met the study’s criteria for inclusion. That resulted in an underpowered study and the authors themselves reported this limitation. In effect, if you aren’t able to study a large enough group, your findings may not reach statistical significance–meaning there’s too much of a possibility the findings are a result of chance, whether the medication looked to be beneficial or not. For what it’s worth, the Chinese study suggested a small benefit from Remdesivir.

The NIAID study–also a randomized, controlled trial–looked at 1063 patients with advanced COVID-19 and lung involvement and randomly placed them into either a treatment or a placebo group. The positive results from a study with significantly more power than than the Chinese study will likely lead the FDA to issue an emergency authorization for use of Remdesivir in treating COVID-19, at least for critical patients, since they previously did the same for the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine which had much less evidence supporting its use.

Bear in mind the study data has not been released, only the statement from the NIAID so deep review and analysis is not yet possible. We should always be cautious until the typical scientific process plays out in full.

Still, good news.