Background COVID-19 is a worldwide pandemic and has placed significant demand for acute and critical care services on hospitals in many countries. Objectives To determine the predictors of severe COVID-19 disease requiring admission to an ICU by comparing patients who were ICU admitted to non-ICU groups. Methods A cohort study was conducted for the laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients who were admitted to six Saudi Ministry of Health’s hospitals in Alahsa, between March 1, 2020, and July 30, 2020, by reviewing patient’s medical records retrospectively. Results This cohort included 1014 patients with an overall mean age of 47.2 ± 19.3 years and 582 (57%) were males. A total of 205 (20%) of the hospitalized patients were admitted to the ICU. Hypertension, diabetes and obesity were the most common comorbidities in all study patients (27.2, 19.9, and 9%, respectively). The most prevalent symptoms were cough (47.7%), shortness of breath (35.7%) and fever (34.3%). Compared with non-ICU group, ICU patients had older age (p ≤ 0.0005) and comprised a higher proportion of the current smokers and had higher respiratory rates (p ≤ 0.0005), and more percentage of body temperatures in the range of 37.3–38.0 °C (p ≥ 0.0005); and had more comorbidities including diabetes (p ≤ 0.0005), hypertension (p ≥ 0.0005), obesity (p = 0.048), and sickle cell disease (p = 0.039). There were significant differences between the non-ICU and ICU groups for fever, shortness of breath, cough, fatigue, vomiting, dizziness; elevated white blood cells, neutrophils, alanine aminotransferase and alkaline aminotransferase, lactate dehydrogenase, and ferritin, and decreased hemoglobin; and proportion of abnormal bilateral chest CT images (p < 0.05). Significant differences were also found for multiple treatments (p < 0.05). ICU patients group had a much higher mortality rate than those with non-ICU admission (p ≤ 0.0005). Conclusion Identifying key clinical characteristics of COVID-19 that predict ICU admission and high mortality can be useful for frontline healthcare providers in making the right clinical decision under time-sensitive and resource-constricted environment.

Background: Solid organ rejection post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COVID-19 infection is extremely rare but can occur. T-cell recognition of antigen is the primary and central event that leads to the cascade of events that result in rejection of a transplanted organ. Objectives: To describe the results of a systematic review for solid organ rejections following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COVID-19 infection. Methods: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Proquest, Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, Scopus and Nature through the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for studies on the incidence of solid organ rejection post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COVID-19 infection, published from 1 December 2019 to 31 May 2022, with English language restriction. Results: One hundred thirty-six cases from fifty-two articles were included in the qualitative synthesis of this systematic review (56 solid organs rejected post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and 40 solid organs rejected following COVID-19 infection). Cornea rejection (44 cases) was the most frequent organ observed post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and following COVID-19 infection, followed by kidney rejection (36 cases), liver rejection (12 cases), lung rejection (2 cases), heart rejection (1 case) and pancreas rejection (1 case). The median or mean patient age ranged from 23 to 94 years across the studies. The majority of the patients were male (n = 51, 53.1%) and were of White (Caucasian) (n = 51, 53.7%) and Hispanic (n = 15, 15.8%) ethnicity. A total of fifty-six solid organ rejections were reported post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination [Pfizer-BioNTech (n = 31), Moderna (n = 14), Oxford Uni-AstraZeneca (n = 10) and Sinovac-CoronaVac (n = 1)]. The median time from SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to organ rejection was 13.5 h (IQR, 3.2–17.2), while the median time from COVID-19 infection to organ rejection was 14 h (IQR, 5–21). Most patients were easily treated without any serious complications, recovered and did not require long-term allograft rejection therapy [graft success (n = 70, 85.4%), graft failure (n = 12, 14.6%), survived (n = 90, 95.7%) and died (n = 4, 4.3%)]. Conclusion: The reported evidence of solid organ rejections post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or COIVD-19 infection should not discourage vaccination against this worldwide pandemic. The number of reported cases is relatively small in relation to the hundreds of millions of vaccinations that have occurred, and the protective benefits offered by SARS-CoV-2 vaccination far outweigh the risks.

Background: Coinfection with bacteria, fungi, and respiratory viruses has been described as a factor associated with more severe clinical outcomes in children with COVID-19. Such coinfections in children with COVID-19 have been reported to increase morbidity and mortality. Objectives: To identify the type and proportion of coinfections with SARS-CoV-2 and bacteria, fungi, and/or respiratory viruses, and investigate the severity of COVID-19 in children. Methods: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched ProQuest, Medline, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, Scopus, and Nature through the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for studies on the incidence of COVID-19 in children with bacterial, fungal, and/or respiratory coinfections, published from 1 December 2019 to 1 October 2022, with English language restriction. Results: Of the 169 papers that were identified, 130 articles were included in the systematic review (57 cohort, 52 case report, and 21 case series studies) and 34 articles (23 cohort, eight case series, and three case report studies) were included in the meta-analysis. Of the 17,588 COVID-19 children who were tested for co-pathogens, bacterial, fungal, and/or respiratory viral coinfections were reported (n = 1633, 9.3%). The median patient age ranged from 1.4 months to 144 months across studies. There was an increased male predominance in pediatric COVID-19 patients diagnosed with bacterial, fungal, and/or viral coinfections in most of the studies (male gender: n = 204, 59.1% compared to female gender: n = 141, 40.9%). The majority of the cases belonged to White (Caucasian) (n = 441, 53.3%), Asian (n = 205, 24.8%), Indian (n = 71, 8.6%), and Black (n = 51, 6.2%) ethnicities. The overall pooled proportions of children with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who had bacterial, fungal, and respiratory viral coinfections were 4.73% (95% CI 3.86 to 5.60, n = 445, 34 studies, I2 85%, p < 0.01), 0.98% (95% CI 0.13 to 1.83, n = 17, six studies, I2 49%, p < 0.08), and 5.41% (95% CI 4.48 to 6.34, n = 441, 32 studies, I2 87%, p < 0.01), respectively. Children with COVID-19 in the ICU had higher coinfections compared to ICU and non-ICU patients, as follows: respiratory viral (6.61%, 95% CI 5.06–8.17, I2 = 0% versus 5.31%, 95% CI 4.31–6.30, I2 = 88%) and fungal (1.72%, 95% CI 0.45–2.99, I2 = 0% versus 0.62%, 95% CI 0.00–1.55, I2 = 54%); however, COVID-19 children admitted to the ICU had a lower bacterial coinfection compared to the COVID-19 children in the ICU and non-ICU group (3.02%, 95% CI 1.70–4.34, I2 = 0% versus 4.91%, 95% CI 3.97–5.84, I2 = 87%). The most common identified virus and bacterium in children with COVID-19 were RSV (n = 342, 31.4%) and Mycoplasma pneumonia (n = 120, 23.1%). Conclusion: Children with COVID-19 seem to have distinctly lower rates of bacterial, fungal, and/or respiratory viral coinfections than adults. RSV and Mycoplasma pneumonia were the most common identified virus and bacterium in children infected with SARS-CoV-2. Knowledge of bacterial, fungal, and/or respiratory viral confections has potential diagnostic and treatment implications in COVID-19 children.

Background: Tixagevimab/cilgavimab (TGM/CGM) are neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed against different epitopes of the receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that have been considered as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Objectives: This study seeks to assess the efficacy and safety of TGM/CGM to prevent COVID-19 in patients at high risk for breakthrough and severe SARS-CoV-2 infection who never benefited maximally from SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and for those who have a contraindication to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Design: This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was followed. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, medRxiv, ProQuest, Wiley online library, Medline, and Nature) were searched from 1 December 2021 to 30 November 2022 in the English language using the following keywords alone or in combination: 2019-nCoV, 2019 novel coronavirus, COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019, SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, tixagevimab, cilgavimab, combination, monoclonal, passive, immunization, antibody, efficacy, clinical trial, cohort, pre-exposure, prophylaxis, and prevention. We included studies in moderate to severe immunocompromised adults (aged ≥18 years) and children (aged ≥12 years) who cannot be vaccinated against COVID-19 or may have an inadequate response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The effect sizes of the outcome of measures were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and risk ratios (RRs). Results: Of the 76 papers that were identified, 30 articles were included in the qualitative analysis and 13 articles were included in the quantitative analysis (23 cohorts, 5 case series, 1 care report, and 1 randomized clinical trial). Studies involving 27,932 patients with high risk for breakthrough and severe COVID-19 that reported use of TGM/CGM combination were analyzed (all were adults (100%), 62.8% were men, and patients were mainly immunocompromised (66.6%)). The patients’ ages ranged from 19.7 years to 79.8 years across studies. TGM/CGM use was associated with lower COVID-19-related hospitalization rate (0.54% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.27), lower ICU admission rate (0.6% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.68), lower mortality rate (0.2% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.67), higher neutralization of COVID-19 Omicron variant rate (12.9% vs. 6%, p = 0.60), lower proportion of patients who needed oxygen therapy (8% vs. 41.2%, p = 0.27), lower RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate (2.1% vs. 5.8%, p < 0.01), lower proportion of patients who had severe COVID-19 (0% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.79), lower proportion of patients who had symptomatic COVID-19 (1.8% vs. 6%, p = 0.22), and higher adverse effects rate (11.1% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.0066) than no treatment or other alternative treatment in the prevention of COVID-19. Conclusion: For PrEP, TGM/CGM-based treatment can be associated with a better clinical outcome than no treatment or other alternative treatment. However, more randomized control trials are warranted to confirm our findings and investigate the efficacy and safety of TGM/CGM to prevent COVID-19 in patients at risk for breakthrough or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Background Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) are more likely to develop severe course of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and experience increased risk of mortality compared to SARS-CoV-2 patients without CRC. Objectives To estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patients and analyse the demographic parameters, clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes in CRC patients with COVID-19 illness. Methods For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Proquest, Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, Scopus and Nature for studies on the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patients, published from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2021, with English language restriction. Effect sizes of prevalence were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Sub-group analyses were performed to minimize heterogeneity. Binary logistic regression model was used to explore the effect of various demographic and clinical characteristics on patient’s final treatment outcome (survival or death). Results Of the 472 papers that were identified, 69 articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis (41 cohort, 16 case-report, 9 case-series, 2 cross-sectional, and 1 case-control studies). Studies involving 3362 CRC patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (all patients were adults) were analyzed. The overall pooled proportions of CRC patients who had laboratory-confirmed community-acquired and hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections were 8.1% (95% CI 6.1 to 10.1, n = 1308, 24 studies, I2 98%, p = 0.66), and 1.5% (95% CI 1.1 to 1.9, n = 472, 27 studies, I2 94%, p < 0.01). The median patient age ranged from 51.6 years to 80 years across studies. The majority of the patients were male (n = 2243, 66.7%) and belonged to White (Caucasian) (n = 262, 7.8%), Hispanic (n = 156, 4.6%) and Asian (n = 153, 4.4%) ethnicity. The main source of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patients was community-acquired (n = 2882, 85.7%; p = 0.014). Most of those SARS-CoV-2 patients had stage III CRC (n = 725, 21.6%; p = 0.036) and were treated mainly with surgical resections (n = 304, 9%) and chemotherapies (n = 187, 5.6%), p = 0.008. The odd ratios of death were significantly high in patients with old age (≥ 60 years) (OR 1.96, 95% CI 0.94–0.96; p < 0.001), male gender (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.41–0.47; p < 0.001) CRC stage III (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.02–1.05; p = 0.041), CRC stage IV (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.17–1.2; p = 0.009), recent active treatment with chemotherapies (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.5–0.66; p = 0.023) or surgical resections (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.8–0.73; p = 0.016) and admission to ICU (OR 1.88, 95% CI 0.85–1.12; p < 0.001) compared to those who survived. Conclusion SARS-CoV-2 infection in CRC patient is not uncommon and results in a mortality rate of 26.2%. Key determinants that lead to increased mortality in CRC patients infected with COVID-19 include older age (≥ 60 years old); male gender; Asian and Hispanic ethnicity; if SARS-CoV-2 was acquired from hospital source; advanced CRC (stage III and IV); if patient received chemotherapies or surgical treatment; and if patient was admitted to ICU, ventilated or experienced ARDS.