: Background.  Community‐acquired pneumonia (CAP) is the leading infectious cause of death in developed countries. Risk stratification has previously been difficult.Methods.  Markers of cardiac stress (B‐type natriuretic peptide, BNP) and inflammation (C‐reactive protein, white blood cell count, procalcitonin) as well as the pneumonia severity index (PSI) were determined in 302 consecutive patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with CAP. The accuracy of these parameters to predict death was evaluated as the primary endpoint. Prediction of treatment failure was considered as the secondary endpoint.Results.  B‐type natriuretic peptide levels increased with rising disease severity as classified by the PSI (P = 0.015). BNP levels were significantly higher in nonsurvivors compared to survivors [median 439.2 (IQR 137.1–1384.6) vs. 114.3 (51.3–359.6) pg mL⁻¹, P < 0.001]. In a receiver operating characteristic analysis for the prediction of survival the area under the curve (AUC) for BNP was comparable to the AUC of the PSI (0.75 vs. 0.71, P = 0.52). Importantly, the combination of BNP and the PSI significantly improved the prognostic accuracy of the PSI alone (AUC 0.78 vs. 0.71; P = 0.02). The optimal cut‐off for BNP was 279 pg mL⁻¹. The accuracy of BNP to predict treatment failure was identical to the accuracy to predict death (AUC 0.75).Conclusions.  In patients with CAP, BNP levels are powerful and independent predictors of death and treatment failure. When used in conjunction with the PSI, BNP levels significantly improve the risk prediction when compared with the PSI alone.

Background: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) represents one of the leading causes of hospitalization and has a substantial impact on the financial burden of healthcare. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with the length of hospital stay (LOHS), rehospitalization and mortality of patients admitted for CAP. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted with patients presenting to a Swiss public hospital between January 2019 and December 2019. Zero-truncated negative binomial and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess risk factors. Results: A total of 300 patients were analyzed (median 78 years, IQR [67.56, 85.50] and 53% males) with an average LOHS of 7 days (IQR [5.00, 9.00]). Of the 300 patients, 31.6% (97/300) were re-hospitalized within 6 months, 2.7% (8/300) died within 30 days and 11.7% (35/300) died within 1 year. The results showed that sex (IRR = 0.877, 95% CI = 0.776–0.992, p-value = 0.036), age (IRR = 1.007, 95% CI = 1.002–1.012, p-value = 0.003), qSOFA score (IRR = 1.143, 95% CI = 1.049–1.246, p-value = 0.002) and atypical pneumonia (IRR = 1.357, 95% CI = 1.012–1.819, p-value = 0.04) were predictive of LOHS. Diabetes (OR = 2.149, 95% CI = 1.104–4.172, p-value = 0.024), a higher qSOFA score (OR = 1.958, 95% CI = 1.295–3.002, p-value = 0.002) and rehabilitation after discharge (OR = 2.222, 95% CI = 1.017–4.855, p-value = 0.044) were associated with a higher chance of being re-hospitalized within 6 months, whereas mortality within 30 days and within one year were both associated with older age (OR = 1.248, 95% CI = 1.056–1.562, p-value = 0.026 and OR = 1.073, 95% CI = 1.025–1.132, p-value = 0.005, respectively) and the presence of a cancer diagnosis (OR = 32.671, 95% CI = 4.787–369.1, p-value = 0.001 and OR = 4.408, 95% CI = 1.680–11.43, p-value = 0.002, respectively). Conclusion: This study identified routinely available predictors for LOHS, rehospitalization and mortality in patients with CAP, which may further advance our understanding of CAP and thereby improve patient management, discharge planning and hospital costs.

Background: Asthma is a chronic airway disease, affecting over 300 million people worldwide. 5–10% of patients suffer from severe asthma and account for 50% of asthma-related financial burden. Availability of real-life data about the clinical course of severe asthma is insufficient. Objectives: The aims of this study were to characterize patients with severe asthma in Switzerland, enrolled in the Swiss Severe Asthma Registry (SSAR), and evaluate predictors for asthma control. Method: A descriptive characterisation of 278 patients was performed, who were prospectively enrolled in the registry until January 2022. Socio-demographic variables, comorbidities, diagnostic values, asthma treatment, and healthcare utilisation were evaluated. Groups of controlled and uncontrolled asthma according to the asthma control test were compared. Results: Forty-eight percent of patients were female and the mean age was 55.8 years (range 13–87). The mean body mass index (BMI) was 27.4 kg/m2 (±6). 10.8% of patients were current smokers. Allergic comorbidities occurred in 54.3% of patients, followed by chronic rhinosinusitis (46.4%) and nasal polyps (34.1%). According to the ACT score, 54.7% had well controlled, 16.2% partly controlled and 25.9% uncontrolled asthma. The most common inhalation therapy was combined inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists (78.8%). Biologics were administered to 81.7% of patients and 19.1% received oral steroids. The multivariable analysis indicated that treatment with biologics was positively associated with asthma control whereas higher BMI, oral steroids, exacerbations, and COPD were negative predictors for asthma control. Conclusion: Biologics are associated with improved control in severe asthma. Further studies are required to complete the picture of severe asthma in order to provide improved care for those patients.

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease proposed in 2011 a new system to classify chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients into risk groups A-D, which considers symptoms and future exacerbation risk to grade disease severity. The aim of this study was to investigate the agreement between COPD risk group classifications using COPD assessment test (CAT) or modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and severity grades or past-year exacerbations. Furthermore, physical activity across risk groups was examined. 87 patients with stable COPD were classified into risk groups A-D. CAT and mMRC were completed. Severity grades I-IV were determined using spirometry and the number of past-year exacerbations was recorded. To test the interrater agreement, Cohen’s Kappa was calculated. Daily physical activity was measured by the SenseWear Mini armband. Using CAT, 65.5% of patients were in high-symptom groups (B and D). With mMRC, only 37.9% were in B and D. Using severity grades, 20.7% of patients were in high-exacerbation risk groups (C and D). With past-year exacerbations, 9.2% were in C and D. Interrater agreement between CAT and mMRC (κ = 0.21) and between severity grades and past-year exacerbations (κ = 0.31) was fair. Daily steps were reduced in risk groups B and C + D compared to A (p < 0.01), using either classification. When classifying COPD patients into risk groups A-D, the use of CAT or mMRC and severity grades or past-year exacerbations does not provide equal results. Daily steps decreased with increasing COPD risk groups.

Background. Good cardiorespiratory fitness (high VO2max) has beneficial effects on morbidity and mortality. Therefore, a tool to estimate VO2max in daily clinical practice is of great value for preventing chronic diseases in healthy adults. This study aimed at exploring the cardiometabolic profile in a representative Swiss working population. Based on these insights, a regression model was derived revealing factors associated with VO2max. Methods. Cross-sectional data of 337 healthy and full-time employed adults recruited in the Basel region, Switzerland, were collected. Anthropometric measurements to compute body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) were performed. A 20-meter shuttle run test was conducted to determine individual VO2max. Heart rate (HR) was measured at rest, during maximal exertion, and two minutes after exercise. Systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were assessed at rest and after exercise. A multiple linear regression model was built to identify a set of nonexercise predictor variables of VO2max. Results. Complete data of 303 individuals (63% male) aged 18 to 61 years (mean 33 ± 12 years) were considered for analysis. The regression model (adjusted R² = 0.647, SE = 5.3) identified sex (β = -0.699, p < 0.001), WC (β = -0.403, p < 0.001), difference of maximal to resting HR (β = 0.234, p < 0.001), smoking (β = -0.171, p < 0.001), and age (β = -0.131, p < 0.01) as the most important factors associated with VO2max, while BMI, SBP, and DBP did not contribute to the regression model. Conclusions. This study introduced a simple model to evaluate VO2max based on nonexercise parameters as part of daily clinical routine without needing a time-consuming, cost-intense, and physically demanding direct assessment of VO2max. Knowledge about VO2max may help identifying individuals at increased cardiovascular risk and may provide the basis for health counselling and tailoring preventive measures.

Background: The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused millions of deaths, and new treatments are urgently needed. Factors associated with a worse COVID-19 prognosis include old age (> 65 years), ethnicity, male sex, obesity, and people with comorbidities. Furthermore, vitamin D deficiency was reported as a predictor of poor prognosis in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. According to a recent clinical case series, vitamin D deficiency is a modifiable risk factor, which has the prospect of reducing hospital stay, intensive care, and fatal outcomes. Vitamin D has potent immunomodulatory properties, and its supplementation might improve important outcomes in critically ill and vitamin D-deficient COVID-19 patients. Despite the evidence that supports an association between vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 severity, there is uncertainty about the direct link. Therefore, the aim of the trial is to assess if high-dose vitamin D supplementation has a therapeutic effect in vitamin D-deficient patients with COVID-19. Methods: As the trial design, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multi-center approach was chosen to compare a high single dose of vitamin D (140,000 IU) followed by treatment as usual (TAU) (VitD + TAU) with treatment as usual only (placebo + TAU) in patients with COVID-19 and vitamin D deficiency. Discussion: Vitamin D substitution in patients with COVID-19 and vitamin D deficiency should be investigated for efficacy and safety. The study aim is to test the hypothesis that patients with vitamin D deficiency suffering from COVID-19 treated under standardized conditions in hospital will recover faster when additionally treated with high-dose vitamin D supplementation. Latest studies suggest that vitamin D supplementation in patients with COVID-19 is highly recommended to positively influence the course of the disease. With this randomized controlled trial, a contribution to new treatment guidelines shall be made. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04525820 and SNCTP 2020-01401