Sex differences in clinical findings among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and severe condition

Introduction

From December 2019, a pneumonia with unknown cause emerged in the Huanan seafood wholesale market, Wuhan, Hubei province. On January 3, 2020, the first complete genome of the novel β genus coronaviruses was identified in samples of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) from a patient[1], which is different from the known 6 coronaviruses and named 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by WHO[2]. Soon later, the novel virus has proved to share more than 79% of same sequence with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)[3]. Therefore, the virus is formally designated as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by the Coronavirus Study Group (CSG) of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses[4]. The disease caused by the virus is named as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

In the following months, SARS-CoV-2 quickly spread throughout China and even other countries[5-8]. However, the knowledge and understanding of the COVID-19 are still limited. Generally, the disease could be classified into four clinical types: mild, moderate, severe and critical pneumonia[9]. According data released by Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on February 17, 2020, a total of 44,672 cases (61.8%) has been confirmed COVID-19[10]. Among them, more than 80% are mild or moderate with relatively good short-term prognosis due to self-limiting process. However, 6,168 (13.8%) cases belong to the severe type and is more likely to develop into the critical pneumonia followed by a death rate of 49%, far beyond the average mortality of 2.3%. Although some data regarding clinical characteristics of COVID-19 has been recently revealed[5-7, 10, 11], those focusing on patients with the severe type is scarce. Moreover, since SARS-CoV-2 is highly homologous with prior SARS-CoV, it comes naturally that they may have similar clinical features, such as highly contagious infection, high lethality rate, and even sex differences[12].

In this study, we aim to compare clinical findings between men and women with severe type of COVID-19, and hope to contribute to the prevention and treatment.

Methods

Results

From February 8 to February 11, 2020, 47 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients were classified as severe pneumonia at the area, 28 (59.6%) cases were men. About 63.8% of patients had comorbidities. History of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was non-significant higher but hypertension and cardiovascular disease (CVD) was lower in men than in women. The initial symptoms were mainly fever, cough, myalgia and fatigue. Three men and one woman had oxygen saturation below 93% after routine nasal oxygen supply (Table 1).

The serum procalcitonin and NTproBNP level were higher in men than in women. Five men had positive influenza A antibody, but no women. Antibiotic therapy was applied more in the men group than the women group (Table 2).

By the end of February 22, 2020, 5 men and 1 woman deteriorated and were reclassified as critical condition. At the same period, 4 women and 1 man recovered and discharged from hospital according to the Criteria of Diagnosis and Treatment of Pneumonia Infected by Novel Coronavirus (5th trial edition). The remaining were in stable condition. (Table 3)

Discussion

In this retrospective study, we analyzed data from 47 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 of severe type. Common symptoms were similar between men and women, consistent with the recent research[6, 7, 11, 13]. Men were more likely to have prior COPD, develop secondary infections, receive complicated treatments as well as experience worse in-hospital outcomes, as compared to women.

During two-week treatment, men accounted for five of six patients (83.3%) shifting from severe to critical type. On the other side, only one man (20.0%) in five patients discharged from hospital. The similar phenomenon has also been reported in prior SARS-CoV infection in 2003. Karlberg et al.[12] analyzed 1755 SARS cases and found that men had a significantly higher mortality than women did (21.9% versus 13.2%, p < 0.0001). Leung et al.[14] showed that male sex was independently associated with a greater risk for adverse events in SARS patients. Interestingly, there is no clear evidence showing the sex difference in prognosis of influenza[15-17]. It seems that the different prognosis between men and women might be a feature for coronavirus infections.

The reason for sex difference is unknown. Some studies suggested that different outcomes between men and women could be explained by estrogen which might protect females from worse outcomes after SARS-CoV infection[12, 18]. Another possible explanation for this is that the prevalence of malignancy was higher in males. Liang et al.[19] found that in severe COVID-19 patients, those with cancer had poorer outcomes from COVID-19. In addition, more men in our study were co-infected with bacteria or influenza virus, which may somewhat result in high risk.

Rothberg et al.[20] reported that bacterial infection was a common pulmonary complication of influenza. We found that positive influenza A antibody were detected in 5 men patients but not in women. Otherwise a higher rate of increased procalcitonin was also observed in men. These findings suggested that men with severe COVID-19 is susceptible to secondary infections with virus or bacteria, resulting in higher utilization rate of advanced antiviral therapy and antibiotics. Chen et al.[11] observed that 71% of confirmed COVID-19 patients used antibiotic treatment, but no comparison between men and women. It will be clinically meaningful to further investigate why and which type of influenza virus or bacteria are more likely to co-infect with SARS-CoV-2 in men.

Another, we observed that NTproBNP but not cTnI was higher in men, suggesting more damage in heart function might exist in men after SARS-CoV-2 infection. It was reported that women were associated with less remodeling after cardiac injury, due to the protection of estrogens[21]. Our findings imply that physicians should pay more attention to cardiac function in men with severe COVID-19.

Limitations

Our study has several limitations. First, it’s a study with small sample size, confounding factors and selection bias are inevitable. Second, the available data was limited in the early phase of SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. Third, observation period is too short to describe patients’ outcome accurately.

Conclusion

Sex differences may exist in COVID-19 patients with severe clinical condition. Men probably have more complicated clinical status and worse in-hospital outcomes as compared to women. Further studies with large sample size are needed to verify our findings.

Conflict of interest

All authors have nothing to declare.