Endogenous interferon-beta but not interferon-alpha or interferon-lambda levels in nasal mucosa predict clinical outcome in critical COVID-19 patients independent of viral load ================================================================================================================================================================================ * Soraya Maria Menezes * Marcos Braz * Veronica Llorens-Rico * Joost Wauters * Johan Van Weyenbergh ## Abstract Although the subject of intensive preclinical and clinical research, controversy on the protective vs. deleterious effect of interferon (IFN) in COVID-19 remains. Some apparently conflicting results are likely due to the intricacy of IFN subtypes (type I: IFN-alpha/beta, type III: IFN-lambda), timing and mode of administration (nebulized/subcutaneous) and clinical groups targeted (asymptomatic/mild, moderate, severe/critical COVID-19). Within the COntAGIouS (COvid-19 Advanced Genetic and Immunologic Sampling) clinical trial, we investigated endogenous type I and type III IFNs in nasal mucosa as possible predictors of clinical outcome in critical patients, as well as their correlation to SARS-CoV-2 viral load, using nCounter technology. We found that endogenous IFN-beta expression in the nasal mucosa predicts clinical outcome, independent of viral replication or Apache II score, and should be considered as a prognostic tool in a precision medicine approach of IFN therapy in COVID-19 clinical management. ## INTRODUCTION Although the subject of intensive preclinical and clinical research, controversy on the protective vs. deleterious effect of interferon (IFN) in COVID-19 remains. Some apparently conflicting results are likely due to the intricacy of IFN subtypes (type I: IFN-alpha/beta, type III: IFN-lambda), timing and mode of administration (nebulized/subcutaneous) and clinical groups targeted (asymptomatic/mild, moderate, severe/critical COVID-19). Two recent phase-2 clinical trials1,2 reporting the use of type I and type III IFN achieved their primary clinical and virological outcomes in hospitalized and ambulatory COVID-19 patients, respectively. As set forth previously3, understanding the different kinetics of endogenous IFN production in mild and severe COVID-19 patients, relative to viral replication, will help identify the therapeutic window. Thus, endogenous IFN(s) add another layer of complexity to the COVID-19 IFN conundrum but have been understudied in critical (ICU) patients. ## PATIENTS AND METHODS The COntAGIouS trial (COvid-19 Advanced Genetic and Immunologic Sampling; an in-depth characterization of the dynamic host immune response to coronavirus SARS-CoV-2) proposes a transdisciplinary approach to identify host factors resulting in hyper-susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Within this prospective clinical trial ([NCT04327570](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04327570&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F26%2F2021.03.23.21253748.atom)), we investigated viral and host transcriptomes in the nasal mucosa of patients with COVID-19 critical disease, admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. Nasal swabs were collected from 57 critical COVID-19 patients on admission in ICU and/or first bronchoscopy. RNA was extracted and mRNA levels for IFN-beta (*IFNB1* gene), IFN-alpha (*IFNA2* gene) and IFN-lambda (*IFNL2* and *IFNL3* genes) were quantified by nCounter technology (Nanostring) as previously described4. Viral load (total SARS-CoV-2 transcripts corresponding to Surface glycoprotein, Nucleoprotein, Envelope protein, Membrane protein, ORF1AB, ORF3A and ORF7A) was quantified as described5, using digital transcriptomics (nCounter, Nanostring) previously validated in a large cohort of acute respiratory infection6. All ICU patients received standard-of-care treatment (corticosteroids, anticoagulants, vasopressors and/or antibiotics, in addition to ventilation/ECMO) but none received IFN treatment. ## RESULTS AND DISCUSSION As primary endpoint, we investigated length of stay in the ICU (ranging from 3 to 74 days) with type I and III IFN as predictors, using Kaplan-Meier curves. As shown in Fig. 1A-B-C, *IFNB1* transcript levels (Hazard ratio (HR) 0.30 95%CI[0.16-0.56], p=0.0001) but not *IFNA2* (HR 0.82 95%CI[0.46-1.50], p=0.53) or *IFNL2/IFNL3* transcript levels (HR 0.67 95%CI[0.35-1.27], p=0.22), nor viral load (HR 1.13 95%CI[0.64-1.98], p=0.68, data not shown) predicted the length of ICU stay. Multivariable regression confirmed *IFNB1* levels (β=0.45 [0.24-0.67], p=0.0002) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (Apache) II score (β=1.06 [0.49-1.65], p=0.0009) as independent predictors, whereas viral load, age, gender, BMI or Charlson Comorbidity index were not. Moreover, *IFNB1* levels also predicted worse clinical outcome measured by maximal WHO ordinal scale or maximal oxygen support (Mann-Whitney, p=0.027 and p=0.0068, respectively), as well as a composite score (discharge to rehabilitation centre, hospital stay >60 days or death; Mann-Whitney p=0.040). Noteworthy, 45% (5 of 11) of *IFNB1*-positive patients required ECMO vs. only 9% (4 of 46) of *IFNB1*-negative patients. The total days on ECMO was also higher in *IFNB1*+ patients (median 24.0 vs. 10.5 days, Mann-Whitney p=0.016). *IFNB1* levels also predicted multi-organ involvement, another hallmark of critical COVID-19, as measured by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (median SOFA score 7 for *IFNB1*-negative vs. 12 for *IFNB1*+, Mann-Whitney p=0.0072). Surprisingly, *IFNB1* levels were not correlated to viral load (Fig. 1D), in contrast to *IFNA2* (r=0.45, p=0.0007) and *IFNL2/IFNL3* (r=0.47, p=0.0003). ![Fig. 1:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/03/26/2021.03.23.21253748/F1.medium.gif) [Fig. 1:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/26/2021.03.23.21253748/F1) Fig. 1: Upper respiratory tract IFN-beta transcript levels, but not IFN-alpha or IFN-lambda transcript levels, predict length of ICU stay in critical COVID-19 patients. Kaplan-Meier curves of **(A)** *IFNB1*-positive vs. *IFNB1*-negative, **(B)** *IFNA2-*positive vs. *IFNA2*-negative, and (C) *IFNL2/3-*positive vs. *IFNL2/3*-negative ICU patients were compared using Log-rank test (\***|p=0.0001 for *IFNB1*, not significant for *IFNA2, IFNL2/IFNL3* or viral load, not shown). (D) Viral load was correlated to *IFNB1, IFNA2*, and *IFNL2/IFNL3* transcripts (Spearman correlation). Viral load and IFNL2/IFNL3 data were missing from 3 patients (n=54). In conclusion, endogenous IFN-beta production in the nasal mucosa predicts clinical outcome, independent of viral replication or Apache II score, and should be considered as a prognostic tool in a precision medicine approach of IFN therapy in COVID-19 clinical management. ## Data Availability All data are available in the manuscript or upon request from the authors. * Received March 23, 2021. * Revision received March 23, 2021. * Accepted March 26, 2021. * © 2021, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NoDerivs 4.0 International), CC BY-ND 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/) ## References 1. 1.Feld et al. Peginterferon lambda for the treatment of outpatients with COVID-19: a phase 2, placebo-controlled randomised trial. Lancet Respir Med 2021 [https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30566-X](https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30566-X) 2. 2.Monk et al. Safety and efficacy of inhaled nebulised interferon beta-1a (SNG001) for treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Respir Med 2021 [https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30511-7](https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30511-7) 3. 3.Park & Iwasaki. Type I and Type III Interferons – Induction, Signaling, Evasion, and Application to Combat COVID-19. Cell Host & Microbe 2020. [https://doi-org/10.1016/j.chom.2020.05.008](https://doi-org/10.1016/j.chom.2020.05.008) 4. 4.Fukutani et al. In situ Immune Signatures and Microbial Load at the Nasopharyngeal Interface in Children with Acute Respiratory Infection. Front Microbiol. 2018 Nov 9;9:2475. [https://doi-org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02475](https://doi-org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02475) 5. 5.Ackermann et al. Pulmonary Vascular Endothelialitis, Thrombosis, and Angiogenesis in Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020 Jul 9;383(2):120–128. [https://doi-org/10.1056/NEJMoa2015432](https://doi-org/10.1056/NEJMoa2015432) [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa2015432&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F03%2F26%2F2021.03.23.21253748.atom) 6. 6.Bouzas et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital RNA quantification versus real-time PCR for the detection of respiratory syncytial virus in nasopharyngeal aspirates from children with acute respiratory infection. J Clin Virol. 2018 Sep;106:34–40. [https://doi-org/10.1016/j.jcv.2018.07.003](https://doi-org/10.1016/j.jcv.2018.07.003)