The COVID-19 pandemic proceeds in waves, with variable characteristics of the clinical picture resulting from the evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This study aimed to compare the epidemiological characteristics, symptomatology, and outcomes of the disease in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during periods of different variants dominance. Comparing the periods of dominance of variants preceding the Delta variant, the Delta period was characterized by a higher share of hospitalized females, less frequent comorbidities among patients, and a different age distribution. The lowest need for oxygen therapy and mechanical ventilation was observed under Omicron dominance. The triad of classic COVID-19 symptoms, cough, fever, dyspnoea, and fatigue, were most prevalent during the Delta period, and significantly less common under the Omicron dominance. During the Omicron period, nearly twice as many patients as in the previous periods could be discharged from the hospital within 7 days; the overall 28-day mortality was significantly lower compared to that of the Delta period. It also did not differ between periods that were dominated by the BA.1 and BA.2 subvariants. The study indicates that the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant that dominated between January and June 2022 caused a disease which resembled the common cold, and was caused by seasonal alpha and beta-coronaviruses with a low pathogenicity for humans. However, one should note that this effect may not only have been related to biological features of the Omicron lineage, but may additionally have been driven by the increased levels of immunization through natural infections and vaccinations, for which we could not account for due to a lack of sufficient data.

Because the optimal treatment for COVID-19 is still unknown, it is important to explore every potential way of improving the chances of survival for COVID-19 patients. The aim of the study was to analyze the effectiveness of convalescent plasma on COVID-19 patients. The study population consisted of 78 patients diagnosed with COVID-19, selected from the SARSTer national database, who received convalescent plasma. The impact on clinical and laboratory parameters was assessed. A clinical improvement was observed in 62 (79%) patients, and 10 (13%) patients died from COVID-19. No side effects of the convalescent plasma treatment were observed. When plasma was administered earlier than 7 days from diagnosis, the total hospitalization time was shorter (p < 0.05). Plasma efficacy was inferior to remdesivir in endpoints such as the necessity and duration of oxygen therapy, the duration of hospitalization, and mortality rate, and inferior to other drugs in the case of the duration of hospitalization and the necessity of constant oxygen therapy, but comparable in most other measured endpoints. A comparison of a 30-day mortality rate in patients who received plasma and remdesivir (4/25, 16%) and who received only plasma (6/53, 11%) showed no significant difference. Convalescent plasma efficacy is inferior to remdesivir when treating COVID-19 patients but the addition of remdesivir to plasma does not improve the treatment effectiveness. In most endpoints, plasma was comparable to other treatment options. In our opinion, convalescent plasma may be used as a supportive treatment in COVID-19 patients because of the low frequency of adverse effects and availability, but must be given as early from the diagnosis as possible.

Background: Patients with kidney failure are at an increased risk of progression to a severe form of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with high mortality. The current analysis was aimed to assess the impact of renal failure on the severity of COVID-19 and identify the risk factors of the fatal outcome in this population. Methods: The analysis included patients from the SARSTer database, a national real-world study evaluating treatment for COVID-19 in 30 Polish centers. Data were completed retrospectively and submitted online. Results: A total of 2322 patients were included in the analysis. Kidney failure was diagnosed in 455 individuals (19.65%), of whom 373 presented moderate stage and 82 patients, including 14 dialysis individuals, presented severe renal failure. Patients with kidney failure were significantly older and demonstrated a more severe course of COVID-19. The age, baseline SpO₂, the ordinal scale of 4 and 5, neutrophil and platelet count, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and C-reactive protein concentration as well as malignancy and arterial hypertension were the independent predictors of 28-day mortality in logistic regression analysis. Conclusions: Underlying kidney disease in patients with COVID-19 is among the leading factors associated with a higher risk of severe clinical presentation and increased mortality rate.

Aim of the study : To determine the influence of HBsAg and HBeAg negative but anti-HBc positive status on the sustained virological response (SVR) rate in HCV-infected patients treated with pegylated interferon alfa 2 (Peg-IFNα-2) and ribavirin (RBV). Material and methods: The study was...

Patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD) have increased susceptibility to viral infections, including SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this study was to analyse the SARD patient population with COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) in terms of baseline characteristics, severity, course and outcomes of the disease compared with the non-SARD group, and to identify factors associated with prognosis, including remdesivir therapy efficacy. Retrospective study comprised 8220 COVID-19 cases from the SARSTer database, including 185 with SARD. Length of hospitalisation, duration of oxygen therapy, mortality and the need for HFNO (high-flow nasal oxygen) and/or NIV (noninvasive ventilation) were significantly higher in the SARD versus non-SARD group. There was no difference in clinical features on admission to hospital. Patients with SARD were older and more likely to have cardiovascular, pulmonary and chronic kidney diseases. Age, the presence of cardiovascular disease, more severe conditions on admission and higher inflammatory marker values were found to be risk factors for death in the SARD group. In patients with SARD treated with remdesivir, there was a trend towards improved mortality but without statistical significance. Length of hospitalisation, 28-day mortality and the need for HFNO and/or NIV were higher in the SARD group. These patients often had other chronic diseases and were older.

Introduction: The aim of the study was to evaluate chemerin levels as a potentially useful marker in diagnosing early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as well as in HCC staging.Material and methods: The cohort comprised 76 patients: 45 people with cirrhosis and HCC (including 13 with a single HCC lesion in the liver and 32 with metastatic lesions/spread of HCC in the liver) and 21 people with isolated cirrhosis. The control group included 10 clinically healthy people.Results: The degree of liver failure in the whole cohort was assessed using the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score (class A – 34, class B – 28, class C – 4) and using the MELD score (≤ 12 points – 45 and > 12 points – 21 people). Serum chemerin level in patients with liver cirrhosis only was 53.30 ng/ml, in patients with a single HCC lesion 77.01 ng/ml, and in patients with disseminated HCC 83.58 ng/ml. In the control group, the chemerin level was 82.20 µg/ml. When patients with cirrhosis and with/without HCC were divided according to their CTP scores, the level of chemerin was as follows: class A – 83.90 µg/ml, class B – 61 µg/ml, class C – 30.10 µg/ml. For MELD scores ≤ and > 12 it was 75 µg/ml and 58 µg/ml, respectively. For BCLC staging the results were as follows: A – 20.10 µg/ml, B – 20.20 µg/ml, C –19.44 µg/ml.Conclusions: Chemerin increases with the number of neoplastic lesions and decreases with the progression of liver failure as assessed using the CTP score.