Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak is evolving rapidly worldwide. Objective: To evaluate the risk of serious adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 by stratifying the comorbidity status. Methods: We analysed data from 1590 laboratory confirmed hospitalised patients from 575 hospitals in 31 provinces/autonomous regions/provincial municipalities across mainland China between 11 December 2019 and 31 January 2020. We analysed the composite end-points, which consisted of admission to an intensive care unit, invasive ventilation or death. The risk of reaching the composite end-points was compared according to the presence and number of comorbidities. Results: The mean age was 48.9 years and 686 (42.7%) patients were female. Severe cases accounted for 16.0% of the study population. 131 (8.2%) patients reached the composite end-points. 399 (25.1%) reported having at least one comorbidity. The most prevalent comorbidity was hypertension (16.9%), followed by diabetes (8.2%). 130 (8.2%) patients reported having two or more comorbidities. After adjusting for age and smoking status, COPD (HR (95% CI) 2.681 (1.424-5.048)), diabetes (1.59 (1.03-2.45)), hypertension (1.58 (1.07-2.32)) and malignancy (3.50 (1.60-7.64)) were risk factors of reaching the composite end-points. The hazard ratio (95% CI) was 1.79 (1.16-2.77) among patients with at least one comorbidity and 2.59 (1.61-4.17) among patients with two or more comorbidities. Conclusion: Among laboratory confirmed cases of COVID-19, patients with any comorbidity yielded poorer clinical outcomes than those without. A greater number of comorbidities also correlated with poorer clinical outcomes. This article has supplementary material available from

The current outbreak of viral pneumonia in the city of Wuhan, China, was caused by a novel coronavirus designated 2019-nCoV by the World Health Organization, as determined by sequencing the viral RNA genome. Many initial patients were exposed to wildlife animals at the Huanan seafood wholesale market, where poultry, snake, bats, and other farm animals were also sold. To investigate possible virus reservoir, we have carried out comprehensive sequence analysis and comparison in conjunction with relative synonymous codon usage (RSCU) bias among different animal species based on the 2019-nCoV sequence. Results obtained from our analyses suggest that the 2019-nCoV may appear to be a recombinant virus between the bat coronavirus and an origin-unknown coronavirus. The recombination may occurred within the viral spike glycoprotein, which recognizes a cell surface receptor. Additionally, our findings suggest that 2019-nCoV has most similar genetic information with bat coronovirus and most similar codon usage bias with snake. Taken together, our results suggest that homologous recombination may occur and contribute to the 2019-nCoV cross-species transmission. K E Y W O R D S 2019-nCoV, codon usage bias, cross-species transmission, phylogenetic analysis, recombination

Background: Accumulating evidence proposed Janus-associated kinase (JAK) inhibitors as therapeutic targets warranting rapid investigation. Objective: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib, a JAK1/2 inhibitor, for coronavirus disease 2019. Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled phase II trial involving patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019. Results: Forty-three patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ruxolitinib plus standard-of-care treatment (22 patients) or placebo based on standard-of-care treatment (21 patients). After exclusion of 2 patients (1 ineligible, 1 consent withdrawn) from the ruxolitinib group, 20 patients in the intervention group and 21 patients in the control group were included in the study. Treatment with ruxolitinib plus standard-of-care was not associated with significantly accelerated clinical improvement in severe patients with coronavirus disease 2019, although ruxolitinib recipients had a numerically faster clinical improvement. Eighteen (90%) patients from the ruxolitinib group showed computed tomography improvement at day 14 compared with 13 (61.9%) patients from the control group (P 5 .0495). Three patients in the control group died of respiratory failure, with 14.3% overall mortality at day 28; no patients died in the ruxolitinib group. Ruxolitinib was well tolerated with low toxicities and no new safety signals. Levels of 7 cytokines were significantly decreased in the ruxolitinib group in comparison to the control group. Conclusions: Although no statistical difference was observed, ruxolitinib recipients had a numerically faster clinical improvement. Significant chest computed tomography improvement, a faster recovery from lymphopenia, and favorable side-effect profile in the ruxolitinib group were encouraging and informative to future trials to test efficacy of ruxolitinib in a larger population. (