Japanese rapid/living recommendations on drug management for COVID-19: updated guidelines (September 2021)

Therapeutic interventions and the length of hospital stay for pediatric patients with COVID-19: a multicenter cohort study

The evidence for pediatric patients with COVID-19 was very limited, which was attributed to the small number of the cases as well as the rare incidence of severe pneumonia in this population. This retrospective cohort study aimed to identify the characteristics of pediatric patients with COVID-19 in the early period of the pandemic by analyzing Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) data in Japan. This retrospective cohort analysis of Japanese multicenter research on COVID-19 using DPC data compared the outcomes and costs of treatment for pediatric patients with COVID-19. Of 4700 patients with COVID-19, 186 pediatric patients were included in this study. Among the included pediatric patients, 17 received therapeutic drugs specifically for COVID-19, while the remaining 169 pediatric patients received only symptomatic therapy. There were no significant differences in the length of hospital stay (9 vs. 8 days, p = 0.96), and medical cost (97,585 vs. 73,291 JPY) for the intervention and control groups, respectively by multiple regression analysis. This is the first epidemiological study to use DPC data to summarize the pathophysiology of pediatric patients in the early period of COVID-19 pandemic. There was no significant difference in length of hospital stay or medical cost by intervention.

Japanese rapid/living recommendations on drug management for COVID-19: updated guidelines (July 2022)

Background

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), an infectious disease caused by the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has spread worldwide since early 2020, and there are still no signs of resolution. The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock (J-SSCG) 2020 Special Committee created the Japanese Rapid/Living recommendations on drug management for COVID-19 using the experience of creating the J-SSCG.

Methods

The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to determine the certainty of the evidence and strength of recommendations. The first edition of this guideline was released on September 9, 2020, and this is the revised edition (version 5.0; released on July 15, 2022). Clinical questions (CQs) were set for the following 10 drugs: favipiravir (CQ1), remdesivir (CQ2), corticosteroids (CQ4), tocilizumab (CQ5), anticoagulants (CQ7), baricitinib (CQ8), casirivimab/imdevimab (CQ9-1), sotrovimab (CQ9-2), molnupiravir (CQ10), and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (CQ11).

Recommendations

Favipiravir is not suggested for all patients with COVID-19 (GRADE 2C). Remdesivir is suggested for patients with mild COVID-19 who do not require oxygen, and patients with moderate COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen/hospitalization (both GRADE 2B). Corticosteroids are recommended for moderate and severe COVID-19 (GRADE 1B, 1A). However, their administration is not recommended for mild COVID-19 (GRADE 1B). Tocilizumab is suggested for moderate and severe COVID-19 (GRADE 2B, 2C). Anticoagulant administration is recommended for moderate and severe COVID-19 (Good Practice Statement). Baricitinib is suggested for moderate and severe COVID-19 (both GRADE 2C). Casirivimab/imdevimab and sotrovimab are recommended for mild COVID-19 (both GRADE 2C). Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir are recommended for mild COVID-19 (both GRADE 2C). SARS-CoV-2 mutant strains emerge occasionally, and each time, the treatment policy at clinics is forced to change drastically. We ask health-care professionals in the field to refer to the recommendations in these guidelines and use these to keep up to date with COVID-19 epidemiological information.

Low SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers may be associated with poor clinical outcomes for patients with severe COVID-19

Recently, immune response to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has attracted attention where an association between higher antibody titer and worsening disease severity has been reported. However, our experiences with severe COVID-19 patients with low antibody titers led to hypothesizing that suppressed humoral immune response may be associated with poorer prognosis in severe COVID19. In this study, antibody titers in severe COVID19 patients were measured at 7, 10, 12, and 14 days after onset. Patients were divided into survivors and non-survivors. SARS-CoV-2 IgM in survivors and non-survivors were 0.06 AU and 0.02 AU (P = 0.048) at 10 days, 0.1 AU and 0.03 AU (P = 0.02) at 12 days, and 0.17 AU and 0.06 AU (P = 0.02) at 14 days. IgG in survivors and non-survivors were 0.01 AU and 0.01 AU (P = 0.04) at 7 days, 0.42 AU and 0.01 AU (P = 0.04) at 12 days, and 0.42 AU and 0.01 AU (P = 0.02) at 14 days. Multivariate analysis showed better survival among patients with IgM positivity at 12 days (P = 0.04), IgG positivity at 12 days (P = 0.04), IgM positivity at 14 days (P = 0.008), and IgG positivity at 14 days (P = 0.005). In severe COVID-19, low antibody titers on days 12 and 14 after onset were associated with poorer prognosis.

Th1 cytokine endotype discriminates and predicts severe complications in COVID-19

Treatment of severe and critical cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still a top priority in public health. Previously, we reported distinct Th1 cytokines related to the pathophysiology of severe COVID-19 condition. In the present study, we investigated the association of Th1 and Th2 cytokine/chemokine endotypes with cell-mediated immunity via multiplex immunophenotyping, single-cell RNA-Seq analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and analysis of the clinical features of COVID-19 patients. Based on serum cytokine and systemic inflammatory markers, COVID-19 cases were classified into four clusters of increasing (I-IV) severity. Two prominent clusters were of interest and could be used as prognostic reference for a targeted treatment of severe COVID-19 cases. Cluster III reflected severe/critical pathology and was characterized by decreased in CCL17 levels and increase in IL-6, C-reactive protein CXCL9, IL-18, and IL-10 levels. The second cluster (Cluster II) showed mild to moderate pathology and was characterized by predominated CXCL9 and IL-18 levels, levels of IL-6 and CRP were relatively low. Cluster II patients received anti-inflammatory treatment in early-stage, which may have led prevent disease prognosis which is accompanied to IL-6 and CRP induction. In Cluster III, a decrease in the proportion of effector T cells with signs of T cell exhaustion was observed. This study highlights the mechanisms of endotype clustering based on specific inflammatory markers in related the clinical outcome of COVID-19.

JAK inhibitors and COVID-19

During SARS-CoV-2 infection, the innate immune response can be inhibited or delayed, and the subsequent persistent viral replication can induce emergency signals that may culminate in a cytokine storm contributing to the severe evolution of COVID-19. Cytokines are key regulators of the immune response and virus clearance, and, as such, are linked to the—possibly altered—response to the SARS-CoV-2. They act via a family of more than 40 transmembrane receptors that are coupled to one or several of the 4 Janus kinases (JAKs) coded by the human genome, namely JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, and TYK2. Once activated, JAKs act on pathways for either survival, proliferation, differentiation, immune regulation or, in the case of type I interferons, antiviral and antiproliferative effects. Studies of graft-versus-host and systemic rheumatic diseases indicated that JAK inhibitors (JAKi) exert immunosuppressive effects that are non-redundant with those of corticotherapy. Therefore, they hold the potential to cut-off pathological reactions in COVID-19. Significant clinical experience already exists with several JAKi in COVID-19, such as baricitinib, ruxolitinib, tofacitinib, and nezulcitinib, which were suggested by a meta-analysis (Patoulias et al.) to exert a benefit in terms of risk reduction concerning major outcomes when added to standard of care in patients with COVID-19. Yet, only baricitinib is recommended in first line for severe COVID-19 treatment by the WHO, as it is the only JAKi that has proven efficient to reduce mortality in individual randomized clinical trials (RCT), especially the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT-2) and COV-BARRIER phase 3 trials. As for secondary effects of JAKi treatment, the main caution with baricitinib consists in the induced immunosuppression as long-term side effects should not be an issue in patients treated for COVID-19.

We discuss whether a class effect of JAKi may be emerging in COVID-19 treatment, although at the moment the convincing data are for baricitinib only. Given the key role of JAK1 in both type I IFN action and signaling by cytokines involved in pathogenic effects, establishing the precise timing of treatment will be very important in future trials, along with the control of viral replication by associating antiviral molecules.

PaO 2 / FiO 2 ratio responsiveness to prone positioning in intubated patients with severe COVID ‐19: a retrospective observational study

Aim

Prone positioning of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients could improve oxygenation. However, clinical data on prone positioning of intubated COVID‐19 patients are limited. We investigated trends of PaO₂ / FiO₂ ratio values in patients during prone positioning to identify a predictive factor for early detection of patients requiring advanced therapeutic intervention such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

Methods

This retrospective, observational cohort study was undertaken between April 2020 and May 2021 in a tertiary referral hospital for COVID‐19 in Osaka, Japan. We included intubated adult COVID‐19 patients treated with prone positioning within the first 72 h of admission to the intensive care unit and followed them until hospital discharge or death. Primary outcomes were in‐hospital mortality and escalation of care to ECMO. We used unsupervised k‐means clustering modeling to categorize COVID‐19 patients by PaO₂ / FiO₂ ratio responsiveness to prone positioning.

Results

The final study cohort comprised 54 of 155 consecutive severe COVID‐19 patients. Three clusters were generated according to trends in PaO₂ / FiO₂ ratios during prone positioning (cluster A, n = 16; cluster B, n = 24; cluster C, n = 14). Baseline characteristics of all clusters were almost similar. Cluster A (no increase in PaO₂ / FiO₂ ratio during prone positioning) had a significantly higher proportion of patients placed on ECMO or who died (6/16, 37.5%). Numbers of patients with ECMO and with in‐hospital death were significantly different between the three groups (p = 0.017).

Conclusion

In Japanese patients intubated due to COVID‐19, clinicians should consider earlier escalation of treatment, such as facility transfer or ECMO, if the PaO₂ / FiO₂ ratio does not increase during initial prone positioning.