Search

BackgroundThere is growing interest in identifying and recruiting research participants from health systems using electronic health records (EHRs). However, few studies have described the practical aspects of the recruitment process or compared electronic recruitment methods to in-person recruitment, particularly across health systems. ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to describe the steps and efficiency of the recruitment process and participant characteristics by recruitment strategy. MethodsEHR-based eligibility criteria included being an adult patient engaged in outpatient primary or bariatric surgery care at one of 5 health systems in the PaTH Clinical Research Network and having ≥2 weight measurements and 1 height measurement recorded in their EHR within the last 5 years. Recruitment strategies varied by site and included one or more of the following methods: (1) in-person recruitment by study staff from clinical sites, (2) US postal mail recruitment letters, (3) secure email, and (4) direct EHR recruitment through secure patient web portals. We used descriptive statistics to evaluate participant characteristics and proportion of patients recruited (ie, efficiency) by modality. ResultsThe total number of eligible patients from the 5 health systems was 5,051,187. Of these, 40,048 (0.8%) were invited to enter an EHR-based cohort study and 1085 were enrolled. Recruitment efficiency was highest for in-person recruitment (33.5%), followed by electronic messaging (2.9%), including email (2.9%) and EHR patient portal messages (2.9%). Overall, 779 (65.7%) patients were enrolled through electronic messaging, which also showed greater rates of recruitment of Black patients compared with the other strategies. ConclusionsWe recruited a total of 1085 patients from primary care and bariatric surgery settings using 4 recruitment strategies. The recruitment efficiency was 2.9% for email and EHR patient portals, with the majority of participants recruited electronically. This study can inform the design of future research studies using EHR-based recruitment.

BackgroundRace/ethnicity and low English proficiency healthcare disparities are well established in the United States. We sought to determine if there are race/ethnicity differences in anti-obesity medication (AOM) prescription rates among youth with severe obesity treated in a pediatric weight management clinic and if, among youth from non-primary English speaking families, there are differences in prescriptions between those using interpreters during visits versus not.MethodsWe reviewed electronic health records of 2- to 18-year-olds with severe obesity seen from 2012 to 2021. Race/ethnicity was self-report, and AOMs included topiramate, stimulants (e.g. phentermine, lisdexamfetamine), naltrexone (±bupropion), glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists, and orlistat. We used general linear regression models with log-link to compare incidence rate ratios (IRRs) within the first 1 and 3 years of being followed, controlling for age, percent of the 95th BMI percentile (%BMIp95), number of obesity-related comorbidities (e.g. insulin resistance, hypertension), median household income, and interpreter use. We repeated similar analyses among youth from non-primary English speaking families, comparing those using interpreters versus not.Results1,725 youth (mean age 11.5 years; %BMIp95 142%; 53% non-Hispanic White, 20% Hispanic/Latino, 16% non-Hispanic black; 6% used interpreters) were seen, of which 15% were prescribed AOMs within 1 year. The IRR for prescriptions was lower among Hispanic/Latino compared to non-Hispanic White youth at one (IRR 0.70; CI: 0.49-1.00; p = 0.047) but not 3 years. No other statistically significant differences by race/ethnicity were found. Among non-primary English speaking families, the IRR for prescriptions was higher at 1 year (IRR 2.49; CI: 1.32-4.70; p = 0.005) in those using interpreters versus not.ConclusionsAmong youth seen in a pediatric weight management clinic, AOM prescription incidence rates were lower in Hispanics/Latinos compared to non-Hispanic Whites. Interpreter use was associated with higher prescription incidence rates among non-primary English speakers. Interventions to achieve equity in AOM prescriptions may help mitigate disparities in pediatric obesity.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has evolved over time by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant, disease severity, treatment, and prevention. There is evidence of an elevated risk of incident diabetes after COVID-19; our objective was to evaluate whether this association is consistent across time and with contemporary viral variants. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) data to evaluate incident diabetes risk among COVID-positive adults compared with COVID-negative patients or control patients with acute respiratory illness (ARI). Cohorts were weighted on demographics, data site, and Charlson comorbidity index score. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence ratio (CIR) of incident diabetes for each viral variant era. RESULTS: Risk of incident diabetes 1 year after COVID-19 was increased for patients with any viral variant compared with COVID-negative control patients (ancestral CIR 1.16 [95% CI 1.12–1.21]; Alpha CIR 1.14 [95% CI 1.11–1.17]; Delta CIR 1.17 [95% CI 1.13–1.21]; Omicron CIR 1.13 [95% CI 1.10–1.17]) and control patients with ARI (ancestral CIR 1.17 [95% CI 1.11–1.22]; Alpha CIR 1.14 [95% CI 1.09–1.19]; Delta CIR 1.18 [95% CI 1.11–1.26]; Omicron CIR 1.20 [95% CI 1.13–1.27]). There was latency in the timing of incident diabetes risk with the Omicron variant; in contrast with other variants, the risk presented after 180 days. CONCLUSIONS: Incident diabetes risk after COVID-19 was similar across different SARS-CoV-2 variants. However, there was greater latency in diabetes onset in the Omicron variant era. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Metformin has antiviral activity against RNA viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The mechanism appears to be suppression of protein translation via targeting the host mechanistic target of rapamycin pathway. In the COVID-OUT randomized trial for outpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), metformin reduced the odds of hospitalizations/death through 28 days by 58%, of emergency department visits/hospitalizations/death through 14 days by 42%, and of long COVID through 10 months by 42%. Methods COVID-OUT was a 2 × 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial that assessed metformin, fluvoxamine, and ivermectin; 999 participants self-collected anterior nasal swabs on day 1 (n = 945), day 5 (n = 871), and day 10 (n = 775). Viral load was quantified using reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Results The mean SARS-CoV-2 viral load was reduced 3.6-fold with metformin relative to placebo (−0.56 log10 copies/mL; 95% confidence interval [CI], −1.05 to −.06; P =.027). Those who received metformin were less likely to have a detectable viral load than placebo at day 5 or day 10 (odds ratio [OR], 0.72; 95% CI,.55 to.94). Viral rebound, defined as a higher viral load at day 10 than day 5, was less frequent with metformin (3.28%) than placebo (5.95%; OR, 0.68; 95% CI,.36 to 1.29). The metformin effect was consistent across subgroups and increased over time. Neither ivermectin nor fluvoxamine showed effect over placebo. Conclusions In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial of outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2, metformin significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2 viral load, which may explain the clinical benefits in this trial. Metformin is pleiotropic with other actions that are relevant to COVID-19 pathophysiology. Clinical Trials Registration NCT04510194. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Observed activity of metformin in reducing the risk of severe COVID-19 suggests a potential use of the anti-hyperglycemic in the prevention of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). We assessed the 3-month and 6-month risk of PASC among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) comparing metformin users to sulfonylureas (SU) or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) users. Methods: We used de-identified patient level electronic health record data from the National Covid Cohort Collaborative (N3C) between October 2021 and April 2023. Participants were adults ≥ 18 years with T2DM who had at least one outpatient healthcare encounter in health institutions in the United States prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. The outcome of PASC was defined based on the presence of a diagnosis code for the illness or using a predicted probability based on a machine learning algorithm. We estimated the 3-month and 6-month risk of PASC and calculated crude and weighted risk ratios (RR), risk differences (RD), and differences in mean predicted probability. Results: We identified 5596 (mean age: 61.1 years; SD: 12.6) and 1451 (mean age: 64.9 years; SD 12.5) eligible prevalent users of metformin and SU/DPP4i respectively. We did not find a significant difference in risk of PASC at 3 months (RR = 0.86 [0.56; 1.32], RD = − 3.06 per 1000 [− 12.14; 6.01]), or at 6 months (RR = 0.81 [0.55; 1.20], RD = − 4.91 per 1000 [− 14.75, 4.93]) comparing prevalent users of metformin to prevalent users of SU/ DPP4i. Similar observations were made for the outcome definition using the ML algorithm. Conclusion: The observed estimates in our study are consistent with a reduced risk of PASC among prevalent users of metformin, however the uncertainty of our confidence intervals warrants cautious interpretations of the results. A standardized clinical definition of PASC is warranted for thorough evaluation of the effectiveness of therapies under assessment for the prevention of PASC. Plain Language Summary: Previous research suggests that metformin, due to its anti-viral, anti-inflammatory, and anti-thrombotic properties may reduce the risk of severe COVID-19. Given the shared etiology of COVID-19 and the post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC), and the proposed inflammatory processes of PASC, metformin may also be a beneficial preventive option. We investigated the benefit of metformin for PASC prevention in a population of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis who were on metformin or two other anti-hyperglycemic medications prior to infection with SARS-CoV-2. Our results were consistent with a reduction in the risk of PASC with the use of metformin, however, the imprecise confidence intervals obtained warrants further investigation of this association of the potential beneficial effect of metformin for preventing PASC in patients with medication-managed diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key Points: Question: Does 100 mg of fluvoxamine twice daily for 13 days, compared with placebo, shorten symptom duration among outpatient adults (aged ≥30 years) with symptomatic mild to moderate COVID-19? Findings: In this platform randomized clinical trial with 1175 US participants enrolled during the time that Omicron COVID-19 subvariants were circulating, there was no reportable difference in the time to sustained recovery between fluvoxamine and placebo groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.99 [95% credible interval, 0.89-1.09]; P for efficacy =.40). Median time to sustained recovery was 10 days (95% CI, 10-11) in both the intervention and placebo group. Meaning: Fluvoxamine, 100 mg twice daily, does not shorten the duration of symptoms in outpatient adults with mild to moderate COVID-19. Importance: The effect of higher-dose fluvoxamine in reducing symptom duration among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 remains uncertain. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of fluvoxamine, 100 mg twice daily, compared with placebo, for treating mild to moderate COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ACTIV-6 platform randomized clinical trial aims to evaluate repurposed medications for mild to moderate COVID-19. Between August 25, 2022, and January 20, 2023, a total of 1175 participants were enrolled at 103 US sites for evaluating fluvoxamine; participants were 30 years or older with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and at least 2 acute COVID-19 symptoms for 7 days or less. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive fluvoxamine, 50 mg twice daily on day 1 followed by 100 mg twice daily for 12 additional days (n = 601), or placebo (n = 607). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery (defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms). Secondary outcomes included time to death; time to hospitalization or death; a composite of hospitalization, urgent care visit, emergency department visit, or death; COVID-19 clinical progression scale score; and difference in mean time unwell. Follow-up occurred through day 28. Results: Among 1208 participants who were randomized and received the study drug, the median (IQR) age was 50 (40-60) years, 65.8% were women, 45.5% identified as Hispanic/Latino, and 76.8% reported receiving at least 2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Among 589 participants who received fluvoxamine and 586 who received placebo included in the primary analysis, differences in time to sustained recovery were not observed (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% credible interval, 0.89-1.09]; P for efficacy =.40]). Additionally, unadjusted median time to sustained recovery was 10 (95% CI, 10-11) days in both the intervention and placebo groups. No deaths were reported. Thirty-five participants reported health care use events (a priori defined as death, hospitalization, or emergency department/urgent care visit): 14 in the fluvoxamine group compared with 21 in the placebo group (HR, 0.69 [95% credible interval, 0.27-1.21]; P for efficacy =.86) There were 7 serious adverse events in 6 participants (2 with fluvoxamine and 4 with placebo) but no deaths. Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with fluvoxamine does not reduce duration of COVID-19 symptoms. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530 This randomized study examines the effect of higher-dose fluvoxamine on time to sustained recovery from mild to moderate COVID-19 or progression to severe disease in nonhospitalized adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Post-COVID-19 condition (also known as long COVID) is an emerging chronic illness potentially affecting millions of people. We aimed to evaluate whether outpatient COVID-19 treatment with metformin, ivermectin, or fluvoxamine soon after SARS-CoV-2 infection could reduce the risk of long COVID. We conducted a decentralised, randomised, quadruple-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 trial (COVID-OUT) at six sites in the USA. We included adults aged 30–85 years with overweight or obesity who had COVID-19 symptoms for fewer than 7 days and a documented SARS-CoV-2 positive PCR or antigen test within 3 days before enrolment. Participants were randomly assigned via 2 × 3 parallel factorial randomisation (1:1:1:1:1:1) to receive metformin plus ivermectin, metformin plus fluvoxamine, metformin plus placebo, ivermectin plus placebo, fluvoxamine plus placebo, or placebo plus placebo. Participants, investigators, care providers, and outcomes assessors were masked to study group assignment. The primary outcome was severe COVID-19 by day 14, and those data have been published previously. Because the trial was delivered remotely nationwide, the a priori primary sample was a modified intention-to-treat sample, meaning that participants who did not receive any dose of study treatment were excluded. Long COVID diagnosis by a medical provider was a prespecified, long-term secondary outcome. This trial is complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04510194. Between Dec 30, 2020, and Jan 28, 2022, 6602 people were assessed for eligibility and 1431 were enrolled and randomly assigned. Of 1323 participants who received a dose of study treatment and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, 1126 consented for long-term follow-up and completed at least one survey after the assessment for long COVID at day 180 (564 received metformin and 562 received matched placebo; a subset of participants in the metformin vs placebo trial were also randomly assigned to receive ivermectin or fluvoxamine). 1074 (95%) of 1126 participants completed at least 9 months of follow-up. 632 (56·1%) of 1126 participants were female and 494 (43·9%) were male; 44 (7·0%) of 632 women were pregnant. The median age was 45 years (IQR 37–54) and median BMI was 29·8 kg/m2 (IQR 27·0–34·2). Overall, 93 (8·3%) of 1126 participants reported receipt of a long COVID diagnosis by day 300. The cumulative incidence of long COVID by day 300 was 6·3% (95% CI 4·2–8·2) in participants who received metformin and 10·4% (7·8–12·9) in those who received identical metformin placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·59, 95% CI 0·39–0·89; p=0·012). The metformin beneficial effect was consistent across prespecified subgroups. When metformin was started within 3 days of symptom onset, the HR was 0·37 (95% CI 0·15–0·95). There was no effect on cumulative incidence of long COVID with ivermectin (HR 0·99, 95% CI 0·59–1·64) or fluvoxamine (1·36, 0·78–2·34) compared with placebo. Outpatient treatment with metformin reduced long COVID incidence by about 41%, with an absolute reduction of 4·1%, compared with placebo. Metformin has clinical benefits when used as outpatient treatment for COVID-19 and is globally available, low-cost, and safe. Parsemus Foundation; Rainwater Charitable Foundation; Fast Grants; UnitedHealth Group Foundation; National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases; National Institutes of Health; and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Observational and preclinical data suggest metformin may prevent severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. PURPOSE: We conducted a systematic review of randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials of metformin treatment for COVID-19 to determine whether metformin affects clinical or laboratory outcomes in individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and present a structured summary of preclinical data. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov on 1 February 2023 with no date restrictions for trials where investigators randomized adults with COVID-19 to metformin versus control and assessed clinical and/or laboratory outcomes of interest. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool was used to assess bias. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers extracted data pertaining to prespecified outcomes of each interest from each included trial. DATA SYNTHESIS: The synthesis plan was developed a priori and was guided by Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines. Summary tables and narrative synthesis were used (PROSPERO, 2022, CRD42022349896). Three randomized trials met inclusion criteria. In two of the trials investigators found that metformin improved clinical outcomes (prevented need for oxygen and prevented need for acute health care use), and in the third trial a larger portion of adults with diabetes were enrolled but results did show a direction of benefit similar to that of the other trials in the per-protocol group. In the largest trial, subjects were enrolled during the delta and omicron waves and vaccinated individuals were included. The certainty of evidence that metformin prevents health care use due to COVID-19 was moderate per Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Many preclinical studies have shown metformin to be effective against SARS-CoV-2. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include inclusion of only three trials and heterogeneity between trials. CONCLUSIONS: Future trials will help define the role of metformin in COVID-19 treatment guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While vaccination is the most important way to combat the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there may still be a need for early outpatient treatment that is safe, inexpensive, and currently widely available in parts of the world that do not have access to the vaccine. There are in-silico, in-vitro, and in-tissue data suggesting that metformin inhibits the viral life cycle, as well as observational data suggesting that metformin use before infection with SARS-CoV2 is associated with less severe COVID-19. Previous observational analyses from single-center cohorts have been limited by size. Methods: Conducted a retrospective cohort analysis in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) for associations between metformin use and COVID-19 outcomes with an active comparator design of prevalent users of therapeutically equivalent diabetes monotherapy: metformin versus dipeptidyl-peptidase-4-inhibitors (DPP4i) and sulfonylureas (SU). This took place in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) longitudinal U.S. cohort of adults with +SARS-CoV-2 result between January 1 2020 to June 1 2021. Findings included hospitalization or ventilation or mortality from COVID-19. Back pain was assessed as a negative control outcome. Results: 6,626 adults with T2DM and +SARS-CoV-2 from 36 sites. Mean age was 60.7 +/- 12.0 years; 48.7% male; 56.7% White, 21.9% Black, 3.5% Asian, and 16.7% Latinx. Mean BMI was 34.1 +/- 7.8kg/m2. Overall 14.5% of the sample was hospitalized; 1.5% received mechanical ventilation; and 1.8% died. In adjusted outcomes, compared to DPP4i, metformin had non-significant associations with reduced need for ventilation (RR 0.68, 0.32–1.44), and mortality (RR 0.82, 0.41–1.64). Compared to SU, metformin was associated with a lower risk of ventilation (RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.28–0.98, p = 0.044) and mortality (RR 0.56, 95%CI 0.33–0.97, p = 0.037). There was no difference in unadjusted or adjusted results of the negative control. Conclusions: There were clinically significant associations between metformin use and less severe COVID-19 compared to SU, but not compared to DPP4i. New-user studies and randomized trials are needed to assess early outpatient treatment and post-exposure prophylaxis with therapeutics that are safe in adults, children, pregnancy and available worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severity of infection with longer-term glycemic control and weight in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the U.S. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using longitudinal electronic health record data of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C). Patients were ≥18 years old with an ICD-10 diagnosis of T2D and at least one HbA1c and weight measurement prior to and after an index date of their first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis or negative SARS-CoV-2 test. We used propensity scores to identify a matched cohort balanced on demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and medications used to treat diabetes. The primary outcome was the postindex average HbA1c and postindex average weight over a 1 year time period beginning 90 days after the index date among patients who did and did not have SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondary outcomes were postindex average HbA1c and weight in patients who required hospitalization or mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the postindex average HbA1c or weight in patients who had SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with control subjects. Mechanical ventilation was associated with a decrease in average HbA1c after COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter cohort of patients in the U.S. with preexisting T2D, there was no significant change in longer-term average HbA1c or weight among patients who had COVID-19. Mechanical ventilation was associated with a decrease in HbA1c after COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: The effectiveness of ivermectin to shorten symptom duration or prevent hospitalization among outpatients in the US with mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 is unknown.Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin, 400 μg/kg, daily for 3 days compared with placebo for the treatment of early mild to moderate COVID-19.Design, Setting, and Participants: ACTIV-6, an ongoing, decentralized, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled platform trial, was designed to evaluate repurposed therapies in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. A total of 1591 participants aged 30 years and older with confirmed COVID-19, experiencing 2 or more symptoms of acute infection for 7 days or less, were enrolled from June 23, 2021, through February 4, 2022, with follow-up data through May 31, 2022, at 93 sites in the US.Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive ivermectin, 400 μg/kg (n = 817), daily for 3 days or placebo (n = 774).Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to sustained recovery, defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms. There were 7 secondary outcomes, including a composite of hospitalization or death by day 28.Results: Among 1800 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 48 [12] years; 932 women [58.6%]; 753 [47.3%] reported receiving at least 2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine), 1591 completed the trial. The hazard ratio (HR) for improvement in time to recovery was 1.07 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.96-1.17; posterior P value [HR >1] = .91). The median time to recovery was 12 days (IQR, 11-13) in the ivermectin group and 13 days (IQR, 12-14) in the placebo group. There were 10 hospitalizations or deaths in the ivermectin group and 9 in the placebo group (1.2% vs 1.2%; HR, 1.1 [95% CrI, 0.4-2.6]). The most common serious adverse events were COVID-19 pneumonia (ivermectin [n = 5]; placebo [n = 7]) and venous thromboembolism (ivermectin [n = 1]; placebo [n = 5]).Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]