Search

Purpose: Over the course of COVID-19 pandemic, evidence has accumulated that SARS-CoV-2 infections may affect multiple organs and have serious clinical sequelae, but on-site clinical examinations with non-hospitalized samples are rare. We, therefore, aimed to systematically assess the long-term health status of samples of hospitalized and non-hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals from three regions in Germany. Methods: The present paper describes the COVIDOM-study within the population-based cohort platform (POP) which has been established under the auspices of the NAPKON infrastructure (German National Pandemic Cohort Network) of the national Network University Medicine (NUM). Comprehensive health assessments among SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals are conducted at least 6 months after the acute infection at the study sites Kiel, Würzburg and Berlin. Potential participants were identified and contacted via the local public health authorities, irrespective of the severity of the initial infection. A harmonized examination protocol has been implemented, consisting of detailed assessments of medical history, physical examinations, and the collection of multiple biosamples (e.g., serum, plasma, saliva, urine) for future analyses. In addition, patient-reported perception of the impact of local pandemic-related measures and infection on quality-of-life are obtained. Results: As of July 2021, in total 6813 individuals infected in 2020 have been invited into the COVIDOM-study. Of these, about 36% wished to participate and 1295 have already been examined at least once. Conclusion: NAPKON-POP COVIDOM-study complements other Long COVID studies assessing the long-term consequences of an infection with SARS-CoV-2 by providing detailed health data of population-based samples, including individuals with various degrees of disease severity. Trial registration: Registered at the German registry for clinical studies (DRKS00023742). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic causes a high burden of acute and long-term morbidity and mortality worldwide despite global efforts in containment, prophylaxis, and therapy. With unprecedented speed, the global scientific community has generated pivotal insights into the pathogen and the host response evoked by the infection. However, deeper characterization of the pathophysiology and pathology remains a high priority to reduce morbidity and mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)., Methods: NAPKON-HAP is a multi-centered prospective observational study with a long-term follow-up phase of up to 36 months post-SARS-CoV-2 infection. It constitutes a central platform for harmonized data and biospecimen for interdisciplinary characterization of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and long-term outcomes of diverging disease severities of hospitalized patients., Results: Primary outcome measures include clinical scores and quality of life assessment captured during hospitalization and at outpatient follow-up visits to assess acute and chronic morbidity. Secondary measures include results of biomolecular and immunological investigations and assessment of organ-specific involvement during and post-COVID-19 infection. NAPKON-HAP constitutes a national platform to provide accessibility and usability of the comprehensive data and biospecimen collection to global research., Conclusion: NAPKON-HAP establishes a platform with standardized high-resolution data and biospecimen collection of hospitalized COVID-19 patients of different disease severities in Germany. With this study, we will add significant scientific insights and provide high-quality data to aid researchers to investigate COVID-19 pathophysiology, pathology, and chronic morbidity., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) pathway are safe and effective treatments for migraine prevention. However, the high cost of these novel therapies has led to reimbursement policies requiring patients to try multiple traditional preventives before access. In Germany, a recent change in insurance policy significantly expanded coverage for the CGRP receptor mAb erenumab, enabling migraine patients who failed just one prior prophylactic medication to receive this mAb. Here, we compare the clinical response to treatment with erenumab in migraine patients treated using the old and new coverage policy., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we included CGRP-mAb naïve patients with episodic or chronic migraine, who started erenumab at our headache center according to either the old or the new insurance policy and received at least 3 consecutive injections. Headache diaries and electronic documentation were used to evaluate reductions in monthly headache and migraine days (MHD and MMD) and ≥ 50% and ≥ 30% responder rates at month 3 (weeks 9-12) of treatment., Results: We included 146 patients who received erenumab according to the old policy and 63 patients that were treated using the new policy. At weeks 9-12 of treatment, 37.7% of the old policy group had a 50% or greater reduction in MHD, compared to 63.5% of the new policy group (P < 0.001). Mean reduction in MHD was 5.02 days (SD = 5.46) and 6.67 days (SD = 5.32, P = 0.045) in the old and new policy cohort, respectively. After propensity score matching, the marginal effect of the new policy on treatment outcome was 2.29 days (standard error, SE: 0.715, P = 0.001) more reduction in MHD, and 30.1% (SE: 10.6%, P = 0.005) increase in ≥ 50% response rate for MHD., Conclusions: Starting erenumab earlier in the course of migraine progression in a real-world setting may lead to a better response than starting after multiple failed prophylactic attempts. Continually gathering real-world evidence may help policymakers in deciding how readily to cover CGRP-targeted therapies in migraine prevention., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

The medial portrayal of migraine is often stereotypical and inaccurate but reflects how society perceives migraine. The discrepancy between others' views and the reality of affected individuals may negatively affect access to treatment and the disease course of patients with migraine. This study aimed to investigate whether images presented in the media as typical migraine attacks are perceived as realistic and representative by migraine patients in Rostock, a smaller town in rural Germany, and compare the results to those from Berlin, a large metropolis. We performed an online survey in Rostock. Migraine patients were shown ten images of migraine attacks, which were among the most downloaded stock pictures on the internet under the search term "migraine". They rated on a scale of 0-100 to what extent the pictures were realistic for migraine attacks (realism score), representative of their own migraine (representation score), or the society's view of migraine (society score). In addition, we compared our results with a recently published study from the metropolitan region of Berlin. A total of 174 migraine patients completed our survey. Mean (SD) realism, representation, and society scores were 59.9 (17.5), 56.7 (18.3), and 58.4 (17.1) respectively. Images of older patients were perceived as significantly more realistic and representative than those of younger patients (P < .001). Patients in Rostock (rural region) rated the images as significantly more realistic and representative than survey participants in Berlin (metropolis). Migraine patients in a rural region found typical migraine images only moderately realistic and representative but to a higher degree than their counterparts from a metropolis., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: TH has nothing to disclose. JBH has nothing to disclose. KSL reports personal fees from Teva. LHO has nothing to disclose. PT has nothing to disclose. FR received honoraria for consulting and lectures from Allergan/Abbvie, Novartis, Teva, Lilly, Ipsen, Lundbeck, Hormosan. He has received royalties from Elsevier. TPJ has served on advisory boards and has received honoraria for lectures from Allergan, Abbvie, Grünenthal, Lilly, Lundbeck, Hormosan, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, TEVA. He has received royalties from Elsevier. His research is supported by Grants from the Innovationsfonds/Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss and the European Union (EFRE). PK received honoraria for consulting and lectures from Allergan, Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis, and Takeda. UR received honoraria for consulting and lectures from Amgen, Allergan, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis, electroCore, Medscape, StreaMedUp, and Teva. UR received research funding from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research and Novartis. BR received honoraria for consulting and lectures from Abbvie/Allergan, Lilly, Novartis, and Teva as well as research funding from the German Research Foundation, the German Migraine and Headache Society and Novartis. All financial and non-financial support was received outside of the submitted work. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials., (Copyright: © 2023 Hamann et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)