Explore the vast range of titles available.

Men are at higher risk for serious complications related to COVID-19 infection than women. More robust immune activation in women has been proposed to contribute to decreased disease severity, although systemic inflammation has been associated with worse outcomes in COVID-19 infection. Whether systemic inflammation contributes to sex differences in COVID-19 infection is not known. We examined sex differences in inflammatory markers among 453 men (mean age 61) and 328 women (mean age 62) hospitalized with COVID-19 infection at the Massachusetts General Hospital from March 8 to April 27, 2020. Multivariable linear regression models were used to examine the association of sex with initial and peak inflammatory markers. Exploratory analyses examined the association of sex and inflammatory markers with 28-day clinical outcomes using multivariable logistic regression. Initial and peak CRP were higher in men compared with women after adjustment for baseline differences (initial CRP: ß 0.29, SE 0.07, p = 0.0001; peak CRP: ß 0.31, SE 0.07, p<0.0001) with similar findings for IL-6, PCT, and ferritin (p<0.05 for all). Men had greater than 1.5-greater odds of dying compared with women (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.04-2.80, p = 0.03). Sex modified the association of peak CRP with both death and ICU admission, with stronger associations observed in men compared with women (death: OR 9.19, 95% CI 4.29-19.7, p <0.0001 in men vs OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.52-5.18, p = 0.009 in women, Pinteraction = 0.02). In a sample of 781 men and women hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, men exhibited more robust inflammatory activation as evidenced by higher initial and peak inflammatory markers, as well as worse clinical outcomes. Better understanding of sex differences in immune responses to COVID-19 infection may shed light on the pathophysiology of COVID-19 infection.

To evaluate differences by race/ethnicity in clinical characteristics and outcomes among hospitalized patients with Covid-19 at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH). The MGH Covid-19 Registry includes confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patients hospitalized at MGH and is based on manual chart reviews and data extraction from electronic health records (EHRs). We evaluated differences between White/Non-Hispanic and Hispanic patients in demographics, complications and 14-day outcomes among the N = 866 patients hospitalized with Covid-19 from March 11, 2020-May 4, 2020. Overall, 43% of patients hospitalized with Covid-19 were women, median age was 60.4 [IQR = (48.2, 75)], 11.3% were Black/non-Hispanic and 35.2% were Hispanic. Hispanic patients, representing 35.2% of patients, were younger than White/non-Hispanic patients [median age 51y; IQR = (40.6, 61.6) versus 72y; (58.0, 81.7) (p<0.001)]. Hispanic patients were symptomatic longer before presenting to care (median 5 vs 3d, p = 0.039) but were more likely to be sent home with self-quarantine than be admitted to hospital (29% vs 16%, p<0.001). Hispanic patients had fewer comorbidities yet comparable rates of ICU or death (34% vs 36%). Nonetheless, a greater proportion of Hispanic patients recovered by 14 days after presentation (62% vs 45%, p<0.001; OR = 1.99, p = 0.011 in multivariable adjusted model) and fewer died (2% versus 18%, p<0.001). Hospitalized Hispanic patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities compared to White/non-Hispanic patients; despite comparable rates of ICU care or death, a greater proportion recovered. These results have implications for public health policy and the design and conduct of clinical trials.

Background Identifying individuals hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 infection at increased risk of death is crucial for clinical decision making. Analyses must consider simultaneously the multitude of biomarkers across several domains and how these biomarker profiles change over time. Methods This electronic health records-based study included individuals hospitalized at a Massachusetts General Brigham hospital for at least 24 h within 5 days prior and 30 days after diagnosis of COVID-19. K-means clustering was used to identify profiles among 20 eligible biomarkers and proportional hazards models were used to model 30-day mortality at hospitalization and 7 days after hospitalization (i.e., landmark models). Results Twelve thousand, nine hundred forty-two individuals were included, among whom 1 , 198 died within 30 days. Six states were identified, characterized by the following abnormalities: (1) normal/reference, (2) hematologic, (3) inflammatory and hematological, (4) metabolic, (5) kidney, hematologic, and metabolic, and (6) cardio-thrombotic, liver, and metabolic. Risk of death within 30 days was higher in States 3, 4, 5, and 6 (adjusted hazard ratios ranging from 3.6 to 7.8) compared to individuals in State 1 at hospitalization. Landmark model findings were similar. Conclusions Distinct sub-phenotypes based on biomarker profiles were identified among patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and certain phenotypes are associated with greater risk of 30-day mortality.

Mindfulness can improve overall well-being by training individuals to focus on the present moment without judging their thoughts. However, it is unknown how much mindfulness practice and training are necessary to improve well-being. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether a standard 8-session web-based mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) program, compared with a brief 3-session mindfulness intervention, improved overall participant well-being. In addition, we sought to explore whether the treatment effects differed based on the baseline characteristics of the participants (ie, moderators). Participants were recruited from 17 patient-powered research networks, web-based communities of stakeholders interested in a common research area. Participants were randomized to either a standard 8-session MBCT or a brief 3-session mindfulness training intervention accessed on the web. The participants were followed for 12 weeks. The primary outcome of the study was well-being, as measured by the World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index. We hypothesized that MBCT would be superior to a brief mindfulness training. We randomized 4411 participants, 3873 (87.80%) of whom were White and 3547 (80.41%) of female sex assigned at birth. The mean baseline World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index score was 50.3 (SD 20.7). The average self-reported well-being in each group increased over the intervention period (baseline to 8 weeks; model-based slope for the MBCT group: 0.78, 95% CI 0.63-0.93, and brief mindfulness group: 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.91) as well as the full study period (ie, intervention plus follow-up; baseline to 20 weeks; model-based slope for MBCT group: 0.41, 95% CI 0.34-0.48; and brief mindfulness group: 0.33, 95% CI 0.26-0.40). Changes in self-reported well-being were not significantly different between MBCT and brief mindfulness during the intervention period (model-based difference in slopes: -0.02, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.19; P=.80) or during the intervention period plus 12-week follow-up (-0.08, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.02; P=.10). During the intervention period, younger participants (P=.05) and participants who completed a higher percentage of intervention sessions (P=.005) experienced greater improvements in well-being across both interventions, with effects that were stronger for participants in the MBCT condition. Attrition was high (ie, 2142/4411, 48.56%), which is an important limitation of this study. Standard MBCT improved well-being but was not superior to a brief mindfulness intervention. This finding suggests that shorter mindfulness programs could yield important benefits across the general population of individuals with various medical conditions. Younger people and participants who completed more intervention sessions reported greater improvements in well-being, an effect that was more pronounced for participants in the MBCT condition. This finding suggests that standard MBCT may be a better choice for younger people as well as treatment-adherent individuals. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03844321; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03844321.

Many complex disease risk loci map to intergenic regions containing long intergenic noncoding RNAs (lincRNAs). The majority of these is not conserved outside humans, raising the question whether genetically regulated expression of non-conserved and conserved lincRNAs has similar rates of association with complex traits. Here we leveraged data from the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) project and multiple public genome-wide association study (GWAS) resources. Using an established transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) tool, FUSION, we interrogated the associations between cis-regulated expression of lincRNAs and multiple cardiometabolic traits. We found that cis-regulated expression of non-conserved lincRNAs had a strikingly similar trend of association with complex cardiometabolic traits as conserved lincRNAs. This finding challenges the conventional notion of conservation that has led to prioritization of conserved loci for functional studies and calls attention to the need to develop comprehensive strategies to study the large number of non-conserved human lincRNAs that may contribute to human disease.

Studies examining outcomes among individuals with COronaVIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) have consistently demonstrated that men have worse outcomes than women, with a higher incidence of myocardial injury, respiratory failure, and death. However, mechanisms of higher morbidity and mortality among men remain poorly understood. We aimed to identify mediators of the relationship between sex and COVID-19-associated mortality. Patients hospitalized at two quaternary care facilities, New York Presbyterian Hospital (CUIMC/NYPH) and Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), for SARS-CoV-2 infection between February and May 2020 were included. Five independent biomarkers were identified as mediators of sex effects, including high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTNT), high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), ferritin, D-dimer, and creatinine. In the CUIMC/NYPH cohort ( = 2,626, 43% female), male sex was associated with significantly greater mortality (26 vs. 21%, = 0.0146) and higher peak hs-cTNT, hs-CRP, ferritin, D-dimer, and creatinine ( < 0.001). The effect of male sex on the primary outcome of death was partially mediated by peak values of all five biomarkers, suggesting that each pathophysiological pathway may contribute to increased risk of death in men. Hs-cTnT, creatinine, and hs-CRP were the strongest mediators. Findings were highly consistent in the MGH cohort with the exception of D-dimer. This study suggests that the effect of sex on COVID-19 outcomes is mediated by cardiac and kidney injury, as well as underlying differences in inflammation and iron metabolism. Exploration of these specific pathways may facilitate sex-directed diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for patients with COVID-19 and provides a framework for the study of sex differences in other complex diseases.