Background: There are limited data on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes at a national level, and none after 60 days of follow up. The aim of this study was to describe national, 60-day all-cause mortality associated with COVID-19, and to identify risk factors associated with admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study including the first consecutive 5000 patients with COVID-19 in Qatar who completed 60 days of follow up by June 17, 2020. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 60 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. In addition, we explored risk factors for admission to ICU. Results: Included patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 28 and April 17, 2020. The majority (4436, 88.7%) were males and the median age was 35 years [interquartile range (IQR) 28–43]. By 60 days after COVID-19 diagnosis, 14 patients (0.28%) had died, 10 (0.2%) were still in hospital, and two (0.04%) were still in ICU. Fatal COVID-19 cases had a median age of 59.5 years (IQR 55.8–68), and were mostly males (13, 92.9%). All included pregnant women (26, 0.5%), children (131, 2.6%), and healthcare workers (135, 2.7%) were alive and not hospitalized at the end of follow up. A total of 1424 patients (28.5%) required hospitalization, out of which 108 (7.6%) were admitted to ICU. Most frequent co-morbidities in hospitalized adults were diabetes (23.2%), and hypertension (20.7%). Multivariable logistic regression showed that older age [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.041, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.022–1.061 per year increase; P < 0.001], male sex (aOR 4.375, 95% CI 1.964–9.744; P < 0.001), diabetes (aOR 1.698, 95% CI 1.050–2.746; P 0.031), chronic kidney disease (aOR 3.590, 95% CI 1.596–8.079, P 0.002), and higher BMI (aOR 1.067, 95% CI 1.027–1.108 per unit increase; P 0.001), were all independently associated with increased risk of ICU admission. Conclusions: In a relatively younger national cohort with a low co-morbidity burden, COVID-19 was associated with low all-cause mortality. Independent risk factors for ICU admission included older age, male sex, higher BMI, and co-existing diabetes or chronic kidney disease.

Background: The role of convalescent plasma therapy for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) is unclear.Methods: We retrospectively compared outcomes in a cohort of critical COVID‐19 patients who received standard care (SC Group) and those who, in addition, received convalescent plasma (CP Group).Results: In total, 40 patients were included in each group. The median patient age was 53.5 years (interquartile range [IQR] 42–60.5), and the majority of patients required invasive ventilation (69, 86.2%). Plasma was harvested from donors after a median of 37 days (IQR 31–46) from the first positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) result and 26 days (IQR 21–32) after documented viral clearance; it was administered after a median of 10 days (IQR 9–10) from the onset of symptoms and 2.5 days (IQR 2–4) from admission to intensive care unit. The primary endpoint of improvement in respiratory support status within 28 days was achieved in 26 patients (65%) in the SC Group and 31 patients (77.5%) in the CP Group (p = .32). The 28‐day all‐cause mortality (12.5% vs. 2.5%; p = .22) and viral clearance (65% vs. 55%; p = .49) were not significantly different between the two groups. Convalescent plasma was not significantly associated with the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.51–1.49; p = .62). Adverse events were balanced between the two study groups.Conclusion: In severe COVID‐19, convalescent plasma therapy was not associated with clinical benefits. Randomized trials are required to confirm our findings.

Background: There are limited data on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes at a national level, and none after 60 days of follow up. The aim of this study was to describe national, 60-day all-cause mortality associated with COVID-19, and to identify risk factors associated with admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study including the first consecutive 5000 patients with COVID-19 in Qatar who completed 60 days of follow up by June 17, 2020. Outcomes included all-cause mortality at 60 days after COVID-19 diagnosis, and risk factors for admission to ICU. Results: Included patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 28 and April 17, 2020. The majority (4436, 88.7%) were males and the median age was 35 years [interquartile range (IQR) 28– 43]. By 60 days after COVID-19 diagnosis, 14 patients (0.28%) had died, 10 (0.2%) were still in hospital, and two (0.04%) were still in ICU. Fatal COVID-19 cases had a median age of 59.5 years (IQR 55.8–68), and were mostly males (13, 92.9%). All included pregnant women (26, 0.5%), children (131, 2.6%), and healthcare workers (135, 2.7%) were alive and not hospitalized at the end of follow up. A total of 1424 patients (28.5%) required hospitalization, out of which 108 (7.6%) were admitted to ICU. Most frequent co-morbidities in hospitalized adults were diabetes (23.2%), and hypertension (20.7%). Multivariable logistic regression showed that older age [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.041, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.022–1.061 per year increase; P <0.001], male sex (aOR 4.375, 95% CI 1.964–9.744; P <0.001), diabetes (aOR 1.698, 95% CI 1.050–2.746; P 0.031), chronic kidney disease (aOR 3.590, 95% CI 1.596–8.079, P 0.002), and higher BMI (aOR 1.067, 95% CI 1.027–1.108 per unit increase; P 0.001), were all independently associated with increased risk of ICU admission. Conclusions: In a relatively younger national cohort with a low co-morbidity burden, COVID-19 was associated with low all-cause mortality. Independent risk factors for ICU admission included older age, male sex, higher BMI, and co-existing diabetes or chronic kidney disease.

Background: As of 26 June 2020, the global number of infections caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), had reached 11 million, with more than 500 thousand associated deaths. Limited clinical information about COVID-19 on solid organ transplant (SOT) are available so far. We herein report our preliminary experience with COVID-19 in SOT recipients in the first few weeks of the outbreak in Qatar. Method: All SOT recipients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 up to 23 May 2020 were included. Baseline characteristics, antivirals and immunosuppressive management, complications, and outcomes were retrospectively extracted from the electronic health system. Categorical data are summarized as frequency and percentages, while continuous variables are presented as medians and ranges. Results: Twenty-four SOT patients with COVID-19 were included in this report (kidney: 16, liver: 6, heart: 1, and combined liver and kidney: 1). The median age was 57 years (range 24–72). Thanks to proactive screening, five (21%) asymptomatic cases were diagnosed (). Among the other 19 symptomatic patients, fever (15/19) and cough (13/19) were the most frequent presenting symptoms (). All patients were hospitalized; 5 (21%) required invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) ( ). Eleven (46%) patients developed acute kidney injury as a complication, including 3 in association with drug-drug interactions involving investigational COVID-19 therapies (). Maintenance of immunosuppressive therapy was changed in 18 (75%) patients, but systemic corticosteroids were not withdrawn in any. After a median follow up of 43 days (26–89), 18 (75%) patients had been discharged home, 3 (12.3%) were still hospitalized, 2 (8.3%) were still in ICU, and 1 (4.2%) had died (). Conclusion: Although higher mortality rates were observed in other reports, our results suggest that asymptomatic COVID-19 is possible in SOT recipients and that overall outcomes are not consistently worse than other immunocompetent patients. The results require validation in larger cohorts.

Echinocandins are recommended as initial treatment for candidemia. The safety and efficacy of both anidulafungin and caspofungin are well established, yet; no direct comparison was made pertaining to their efficacy and safety. This was a retrospective study to compare efficacy and safety of anidulafungin versus caspofungin in patients with candidemia. All adult patients with candidemia who were treated with either anidulafungin or caspofungin for ≥ 5 days, over a period of 6 years were retrospectively included. Baseline demographics, infection characteristics and patient courses were assessed. The primary end point was global response defined as clinical and microbiological success at the end of treatment duration. A total of 171 patients received either anidulafungin (n = 135) or caspofungin (n = 36) based on physician preference. The most common isolated candida species were candida glabrata (31.6%) followed by candida albicans (25.1%). Around 6% had chronic liver disease, and source control (mainly catheter removal) was achieved in 91.8%. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups suggesting similar risks and treatment response. Response rates were similar among both groups with the primary outcome of global response being not significantly different (50% for caspofungin group vs 65.2% for anidulafungin, p=0.666). Similarly, no differences between the two groups were observed in terms of 90-day all-cause mortality (p=0.405) and hepatic safety profile defined as elevated liver function tests ≥ 3 times from baseline (p=0.521) Our data suggested that among patients with candidemia, there was no difference between anidulafungin and caspofungin for the primary endpoint of global response. Both studied echinocandins had similar rate of 90-day all-cause mortality and liver safety profile. All Authors: No reported disclosures