Clinical outcome upon infection with SARS-CoV-2 ranges from silent infection to lethal COVID-19. We have found an enrichment in rare variants predicted to be loss-of-function (LOF) at the 13 human loci known to govern TLR3- and IRF7-dependent type I interferon (IFN) immunity to influenza virus, in 659 patients with life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia, relative to 534 subjects with asymptomatic or benign infection. By testing these and other rare variants at these 13 loci, we experimentally define LOF variants in 23 patients (3.5%), aged 17 to 77 years, underlying autosomal recessive or dominant deficiencies. We show that human fibroblasts with mutations affecting this pathway are vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2. Inborn errors of TLR3- and IRF7-dependent type I IFN immunity can underlie life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia in patients with no prior severe infection.

Objectives Molecular assays on nasopharyngeal swabs remain the cornerstone of COVID-19 diagnostic. The high technicalities of nasopharyngeal sampling and molecular assays, as well as scarce resources of reagents, limit our testing capabilities. Several strategies failed, to date, to fully alleviate this testing process (e.g. saliva sampling or antigen testing on nasopharyngeal samples). We assessed the clinical performances of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen (N-antigen) ELISA detection in serum or plasma using the COVID-19 Quantigene® (AAZ, France) assay. Methods Performances were determined on 63 sera from 63 non-COVID patients and 227 serum samples (165 patients) from the French COVID and CoV-CONTACT cohorts with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, including 142 serum (114 patients) obtained within 14 days after symptoms’ onset. Results Specificity was 98.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.3 to 100). Sensitivity was 79.3% overall (180/227, 95% CI, 74.0 to 84.6) and 93.0% (132/142, 95% CI, 88.7 to 97.2) within 14 days after symptoms onset. 91 included patients had a sera and nasopharyngeal swabs collected in the same 24 hours. Among those with high nasopharyngeal viral loads, i.e. Ct value below 30 and 33, only 1/50 and 4/67 tested negative for N-antigenemia, respectively. Among those with a negative nasopharyngeal RT-PCR, 8/12 presented positive N-antigenemia; the lower respiratory tract was explored for 6 of these 8 patients, showing positive RT-PCR in 5 cases. Conclusion This is the first evaluation of a commercially available serum N-antigen detection assay. It presents a robust specificity and sensitivity within the first 14 days after symptoms onset. This approach provides a valuable new option for COVID-19 diagnosis, only requiring a blood draw and easily scalable in all clinical laboratories.

Background The ISARIC prospective multinational observational study is the largest cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We present relationships of age, sex, and nationality to presenting symptoms. Methods International, prospective observational study of 60 109 hospitalized symptomatic patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 recruited from 43 countries between 30 January and 3 August 2020. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate relationships of age and sex to published COVID-19 case definitions and the most commonly reported symptoms. Results ‘Typical’ symptoms of fever (69%), cough (68%) and shortness of breath (66%) were the most commonly reported. 92% of patients experienced at least one of these. Prevalence of typical symptoms was greatest in 30- to 60-year-olds (respectively 80, 79, 69%; at least one 95%). They were reported less frequently in children (≤ 18 years: 69, 48, 23; 85%), older adults (≥ 70 years: 61, 62, 65; 90%), and women (66, 66, 64; 90%; vs. men 71, 70, 67; 93%, each P < 0.001). The most common atypical presentations under 60 years of age were nausea and vomiting and abdominal pain, and over 60 years was confusion. Regression models showed significant differences in symptoms with sex, age and country. Interpretation This international collaboration has allowed us to report reliable symptom data from the largest cohort of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Adults over 60 and children admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are less likely to present with typical symptoms. Nausea and vomiting are common atypical presentations under 30 years. Confusion is a frequent atypical presentation of COVID-19 in adults over 60 years. Women are less likely to experience typical symptoms than men.

Objective: To investigate whether intervention effect estimates for mortality differ between blinded and non-blinded randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in critical care. Design: Meta-epidemiological study, comparing effect estimates between blinded and non-blinded RCTs for the same research question. Data sources: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs evaluating a therapeutic intervention on mortality in critical care, published between January 2009 and March 2019 in high impact factor general medical or critical-care journals and by Cochrane.Data extraction: For each RCT included in eligible meta-analyses, we evaluated whether the trial was blinded (ie, double-blinded and/or reporting adequate methods) or not (ie, open-label, singleblinded or unclear). We collected risk of bias evaluated by the review authors and extracted trial results.Data synthesis: Within each meta-analysis, we compared intervention effect estimates between blinded and non-blinded RCTs by using a ratio of odds ratio (ROR) (ROR<1 indicates larger estimates in non-blinded than blinded RCTs). We then combined RORs across meta-analyses to obtain the average relative difference between non-blinded and blinded trials.Results: Among 467 RCTs included in 36 meta-analyses, 267 (57%) were considered blinded and 200 (43%) non-blinded. Intervention effect estimates were statistically significantly larger in nonblinded than blinded trials (combined ROR 0.91 [95% CI 0.84-0.99]). We found no heterogeneity across meta-analyses (p=0.72, I 2 =0%, τ 2 =0). Sensitivity analyses adjusting the main analysis on risk of bias items yielded consistent results.Conclusions: Intervention effect estimates of mortality were slightly larger in non-blinded than blinded RCTs conducted in critical care, but confounding cannot be excluded. Blinding of both patients and personnel is important to consider when possible in critical-care trials, even when evaluating mortality.