Efficacy and safety of azithromycin in Covid-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Global antimicrobial resistance and antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients within health facilities: A systematic review and meta-analysis of aggregated participant data

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a significant threat to the global healthcare system, presenting a major challenge to antimicrobial stewardship worldwide. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date picture of global antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to determine the prevalence of AMR and antibiotic usage among COVID-19 patients receiving treatment in healthcare facilities. Our search encompassed the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus databases, spanning studies published from December 2019 to May 2023. We utilized random-effects meta-analysis to assess the prevalence of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) and antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients, aligning with both the WHO's priority list of MDROs and the AWaRe list of antibiotic products. Estimates were stratified by region, country, and country income. Meta-regression models were established to identify predictors of MDRO prevalence and antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD 42023449396).

RESULTS

Among the 11,050 studies screened, 173 were included in the review, encompassing a total of 892,312 COVID-19 patients. MDROs were observed in 42.9% (95% CI 31.1-54.5%, I2 = 99.90%) of COVID-19 patients: 41.0% (95% CI 35.5-46.6%) for carbapenem-resistant organisms (CRO), 19.9% (95% CI 13.4-27.2%) for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), 24.9% (95% CI 16.7-34.1%) for extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing organisms (ESBL), and 22.9% (95% CI 13.0-34.5%) for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus species (VRE), respectively. Overall, 76.2% (95% CI 69.5-82.9%, I2 = 99.99%) of COVID-19 patients were treated with antibiotics: 29.6% (95% CI 26.0-33.4%) with "Watch" antibiotics, 22.4% (95% CI 18.0-26.7%) with "Reserve" antibiotics, and 16.5% (95% CI 13.3-19.7%) with "Access" antibiotics. The MDRO prevalence and antibiotic use were significantly higher in low- and middle-income countries than in high-income countries, with the lowest proportion of antibiotic use (60.1% (95% CI 52.1-68.0%)) and MDRO prevalence (29.1% (95% CI 21.8-36.4%)) in North America, the highest MDRO prevalence in the Middle East and North Africa (63.9% (95% CI 46.6-81.2%)), and the highest proportion of antibiotic use in South Asia (92.7% (95% CI 90.4-95.0%)). The meta-regression identified antibiotic use and ICU admission as a significant predictor of higher prevalence of MDROs in COVID-19 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review offers a comprehensive and current assessment of MDRO prevalence and antibiotic use among COVID-19 patients in healthcare facilities. It underscores the formidable challenge facing global efforts to prevent and control AMR amidst the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings serve as a crucial warning to policymakers, highlighting the urgent need to enhance antimicrobial stewardship strategies to mitigate the risks associated with future pandemics.

A retrospective cohort study on early antibiotic use in vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 patients

The bacteriophage behavior of SARS-CoV-2 during the acute and post-COVID-19 phases appears to be an important factor in the development of the disease. The early use of antibiotics seems to be crucial to inhibit disease progression-to prevent viral replication in the gut microbiome, and control toxicological production from the human microbiome. To study the impact of specific antibiotics on recovery from COVID-19 and long COVID (LC) taking into account: vaccination status, comorbidities, SARS-CoV-2 wave, time of initiation of antibiotic therapy and concomitant use of corticosteroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). A total of 211 COVID-19 patients were included in the study: of which 59 were vaccinated with mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 while 152 were unvaccinated. Patients were enrolled in three waves: from September 2020 to October 2022, corresponding to the emergence of the pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The three criteria for enrolling patients were: oropharyngeal swab positivity or fecal findings; moderate symptoms with antibiotic intake; and measurement of blood oxygen saturation during the period of illness. The use of antibiotic combinations, such as amoxicillin with clavulanic acid (875 + 125 mg tablets, every 12 h) plus rifaximin (400 mg tablets every 12 h), as first choice, as suggested from the previous data, or azithromycin (500 mg tablets every 24 h), plus rifaximin as above, allows healthcare professionals to focus on the gut microbiome and its implications in COVID-19 disease during patient care. The primary outcome measured in this study was the estimated average treatment effect, which quantified the difference in mean recovery between patients receiving antibiotics and those not receiving antibiotics at 3 and 9 days after the start of treatment. In the analysis, both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups had a median illness duration of 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 6-9 days for each; recovery crude hazard ratio [HR] = 0.94, p = 0.700). The median illness duration for the pre-Delta and Delta waves was 8 days (IQR 7-10 days), while it was shorter, 6.5 days, for Omicron (IQR 6-8 days; recovery crude HR = 1.71, p < 0.001). These results were confirmed by multivariate analysis. Patients with comorbidities had a significantly longer disease duration: median 8 days (IQR 7-10 days) compared to 7 days (IQR 6-8 days) for those without comorbidities (crude HR = 0.75, p = 0.038), but this result was not confirmed in multivariate analysis as statistical significance was lost. Early initiation of antibiotic therapy resulted in a significantly shorter recovery time (crude HR = 4.74, p < 0.001). Concomitant use of NSAIDs did not reduce disease duration and in multivariate analysis prolonged the disease (p = 0.041). A subgroup of 42 patients receiving corticosteroids for a median of 3 days (IQR 3-6 days) had a longer recovery time (median 9 days, IQR 8-10 days) compared to others (median 7 days, IQR 6-8 days; crude HR = 0.542, p < 0.001), as confirmed also by the adjusted HR. In this study, a statistically significant reduction in recovery time was observed among patients who received early antibiotic treatment. Early initiation of antibiotics played a crucial role in maintaining higher levels of blood oxygen saturation. In addition, it is worth noting that a significant number of patients who received antibiotics in the first 3 days and for a duration of 7 days, during the acute phase did not develop LC.

Antibiotic Consumption 2017-2022 in 30 Private Hospitals in France: Impact of Antimicrobial Stewardship Tools and COVID-19 Pandemic

Our aim was to determine the impact of antimicrobial stewardship tools (ASTs) and the COVID-19 pandemic on antibiotic consumption (AC). We used the national software Consores® to determine AC in DDD/1000 days of hospitalization from 2017 to 2022 in voluntary private hospitals in France. The ASTs considered were: 1. internal guidelines; 2. the list of antibiotics with restricted access; 3. the presence of an antibiotic referent or 4. an ID specialist; and 5. proof of an annual meeting on antimicrobial resistance. Institutions with dedicated units for COVID-19 patients were specified. In 30 institutions, the total AC varied from (means) 390 to 405 DDD/1000 DH from 2017 to 2022. Fluoroquinolones and amoxicillin/clavulanate consumption decreased from 50 to 36 (p = 0.003) and from 112 to 77 (p = 0.025), respectively, but consumption of piperacillin/tazobactam increased from 9 to 21 (p < 0.001). Over the study period, 10 institutions with ≤2 AST had lower AC compared to 20 institutions with ≥3 AST (p < 0.01). COVID-19 units opened in 10 institutions were associated with a trend toward higher macrolide consumption from 15 to 25 from 2017 to 2020 (p = 0.065) and with an acceleration of piperacillin/tazobactam consumption from 2020 to 2022 (p ≤ 0.003). Antibiotic consumption in 30 private hospitals in France was inversely related to the number of AST. The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with limited impact on AC, but special attention should be paid to piperacillin/tazobactam consumption.

Global landscape of COVID-19 research: a visualization analysis of randomized clinical trials

The emergence of COVID-19 in 2019 has resulted in a significant global health crisis. Consequently, extensive research was published to understand and mitigate the disease. In particular, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been considered the benchmark for assessing the efficacy and safety of interventions. Hence, the present study strives to present a comprehensive overview of the global research landscape pertaining to RCTs and COVID-19. A bibliometric analysis was performed using the Scopus database. The search parameters included articles published from 2020 to 2022 using keywords specifically related to COVID-19 and RCTs. The data were analyzed using various bibliometric indicators. The volume of publications, contributions of countries and institutions, funding agencies, active journals, citation analysis, co-occurrence analysis, and future research direction analysis were specifically analyzed. A total of 223,480 research articles concerning COVID-19 were published, with 3,727 of them related to RCTs and COVID-19. The ten most productive countries collectively produced 75.8% of the documents, with the United States leading the way by contributing 31.77%, followed by the UK with 14.03% (n = 523), China with 12.96% (n = 483) and Canada with 7.16% (n = 267). Trials (n = 173, 4.64%), BMJ Open (n = 81, 2.17%), PLOS One (n = 73, 1.96%) and JAMA Network Open (n = 53, 1.42%) were the most active journals in publishing articles related to COVID-19 RCTs. The co-occurrence analysis identified four clusters of research areas: the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines, mental health strategies to cope with the impact of the pandemic, the use of monoclonal antibodies to treat patients with COVID-19, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses of COVID-19 research. This paper offers a detailed examination of the global research environment pertaining to RCTs and their use in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The comprehensive body of research findings was found to have been generated by the collaborative efforts of multiple countries, institutions, and funding organizations. The predominant research areas encompassed COVID-19 vaccines, strategies for mental health, monoclonal antibodies, and systematic reviews. This information has the potential to aid researchers, policymakers, and funders in discerning areas of weakness and establishing areas of priority.

Clinical Efficacy of Ulinastatin Combined with Azithromycin in the Treatment of Severe Pneumonia in Children and the Effects on Inflammatory Cytokines and Oxidative Stress: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose

This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of ulinastatin (UTI) and azithromycin (AZM) combination therapy in treating severe pneumonia in children and its impact on inflammatory cytokines and oxidative stress.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2019, to January 1, 2021, involving pediatric patients diagnosed with severe mycoplasma pneumonia (SMPP). The pediatric patients were divided into two groups: those receiving UTI and AZM combination therapy (treatment group) and those receiving azithromycin alone (control group). We compared the two groups regarding clinical data, disease outcomes, inflammatory cytokines, and oxidative stress levels.

Results

Baseline characteristics did not significantly differ between the two groups. UTI, in combination with AZM, significantly improved blood oxygen levels, inflammatory infection markers, and relevant clinical symptoms in patients with SMPP on the 3rd day of treatment. Additionally, it significantly reduced the levels of inflammatory cytokines TNF-a, IL-6, IL-1β, and IL-10, as well as oxidative stress markers GSH and SOD.

Conclusion

Combining UTI and AZM can rapidly alleviate clinical symptoms and effectively control the progression of patients with SMPP. Therefore, this treatment approach deserves consideration for clinical promotion and utilization.

Effect of anti-inflammatory drugs on the storm of inflammatory factors in respiratory tract infection caused by SARS-CoV-2: an updated meta-analysis

Background

New reports suggest that anti-inflammatory drugs are widely used to treat respiratory tract infections caused by SARS-CoV-2. Anti-inflammatory drugs were the most frequently used treatment for the COVID-19-related cytokine storm in China. However, the efficacy of anti-inflammatory drugs has yet to be systematically analyzed, and clinicians are often uncertain which class of anti-inflammatory drug is the most effective in treating patients with respiratory tract infections caused by SARS-CoV-2, especially those with severe disease.

Methods

From 1 October 2022, relevant studies were searched in the PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. A total of 16,268 publications were retrieved and collated according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and sensitivity analyses were performed using STATA 14 software. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's test. Study quality was assessed using the PEDro scale, and the combined advantage ratio was expressed as a 95% confidence interval (CI). In total, 19 randomized controlled trials were included in the study. STATA 14 software was used for all random effects model analyses, and the results are expressed as relative risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI.

Results

Quantitative analyses were performed on 14,514 patients from 19 relevant randomized controlled clinical trials. Pooled estimates (RR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.44-0.80) revealed that the use of anti-inflammatory drugs resulted in a significant reduction in mortality in patients with respiratory tract infection caused by SARS-CoV-2 compared with controls, and methylprednisolone (RR = 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.56) was more effective than other anti-inflammatory drugs. Anti-inflammatory drugs were effective in reducing mortality in critically ill patients (RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.45-0.98) compared with non-critically ill patients (RR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.76); however, more clinical evidence is needed to confirm these findings.

Conclusion

The use of anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with respiratory infections caused by SARS-CoV-2 reduces patient mortality, especially in severe cases. In individual studies, methylprednisolone was more effective than other drugs.

Insights into COVID-19: Perspectives on Drug Remedies and Host Cell Responses

In light of the COVID-19 global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2, ongoing research has centered on minimizing viral spread either by stopping viral entry or inhibiting viral replication. Repurposing antiviral drugs, typically nucleoside analogs, has proven successful at inhibiting virus replication. This review summarizes current information regarding coronavirus classification and characterization and presents the broad clinical consequences of SARS-CoV-2 activation of the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor expressed in different human cell types. It provides publicly available knowledge on the chemical nature of proposed therapeutics and their target biomolecules to assist in the identification of potentially new drugs for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

What we learned from steroid therapy in the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused a pandemic named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that has become the greatest worldwide public health threat. Although different treatment recommendations are offered for COVID-19 infection, steroid treatment remains important.

Aim

We aimed to demonstrate the effect of pulse steroid therapy (PST) on inflammatory markers and patient outcomes in moderate/severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the patients 18 years and older hospitalized in our hospital's COVID-19 clinics between April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2020, and July 1, 2021, to November 30, 2021. Patients in the moderate/severe COVID-19 pneumonia category, according to the World Health Organization COVID-19 guidelines, were included in the study. The demographic characteristics of the patients, treatments, inflammatory markers, and patient outcomes (need for intensive care, length of hospital stay, high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) requirement, mechanical ventilation (MV), and mortality rates) were recorded and analyzed.

Results

Patients who received PST had more advanced age (P < 0.01), more comorbidities (P < 0.001), and more HFNO need (P < 001) compared with the patients who did not receive PST. There was no statistically significant difference between clinical outcomes: the need for intensive care, length of hospital stay, need for MV, and mortality rates (P = 0.54, P = 0.3, P = 0.14, and P = 0.09, respectively). When we evaluated the unvaccinated patients, there was a statistically significant difference in the MV need and mortality rates between those who received PST and those who did not (P = 0.017, P = 0.014, respectively).

Conclusion

It was observed that PST provided similar mortality, ICU, and MV requirements in patients with older age and comorbidities. Lower MV requirements and mortality were observed in the unvaccinated group receiving PST compared with the unvaccinated group not receiving steroids. PST is still promising in COVID-19 infection, and more studies are needed for standard doses and applications.

Trends in COVID-19-related Medication Use in US Nursing Homes, 2018-2022

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about how COVID-19 treatment patterns have evolved over time in nursing homes (NHs) despite the devastating effects of COVID-19 in this setting. The aim was to describe changes in COVID-19-related medication use over time among NH residents in the United States.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This study used electronic health records (EHR) from 11 different US NH corporations between January 1, 2018, and March 31, 2022.

METHODS

The use of medications approved for COVID-19-related conditions or known to be used off-label for COVID-19 during the study period is identified. We described trends in the use of each drug and combined use per 1000 NH residents over calendar time (quarters [Q]).

RESULTS

A total of 59,022 unique residents with the use of an eligible medication were identified. Hydroxychloroquine use sharply increased from 9.8 in 2020Q1 to 30.2 orders per 1000 individuals in 2020Q2. Dexamethasone use increased sharply from 14.8 in 2020Q2 to a peak of 121.9 orders per 1000 individuals in 2020Q4. Azithromycin use increased from 44.1 in 2019Q3 to a peak of 99.9 orders per 1000 individuals in 2020Q4, with a drop in 2020Q3 of 51.3 per 1000 individuals in 2020Q3. Concurrent use of azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine increased sharply from 0.3 in 2020Q1 to 10.6 orders per 1000 residents in 2020Q2 and then drastically decreased to 0.6 per 1000 residents in 2020Q3. Concurrent use of dexamethasone and azithromycin rose considerably from 0.7 in 2020Q2 to 28.2 orders per 1000 residents in 2020Q4.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

As in other settings, COVID-19-related medication use in NHs appears to have changed in response to the shifting evidence base and availability of medications during the pandemic. Providers should continue to diligently modify their prescribing as new evidence accrues.

Changing Trends in the Global Consumption of Treatments Used in Hospitalized Patients for COVID-19: A Time Series Multicentre Study

AIM

To analyze trends in the prescription of COVID-19 treatments for hospitalized patients during the pandemic.

METHODS

Multicenter, ecological, time-series study of aggregate data for all adult patients with COVID-19 treated in five acute-care hospitals in Barcelona, Spain, between March 2020 and May 2021. Trends in the monthly prevalence of drugs used against COVID-19 were analyzed by the Mantel-Haenszel test.

RESULTS

The participating hospitals admitted 22,277 patients with COVID-19 during the study period, reporting an overall mortality of 10.8%. In the first months of the pandemic, lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine were the most frequently used antivirals, but these fell into disuse and were replaced by remdesivir in July 2020. By contrast, the trend in tocilizumab use varied, first peaking in April and May 2020, declining until January 2021, and showing a discrete upward trend thereafter. Regarding corticosteroid use, we observed a notable upward trend in the use of dexamethasone 6 mg per day from July 2020. Finally, there was a high prevalence of antibiotics use, especially azithromycin, in the first three months, but this decreased thereafter.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 evolved with the changing scientific evidence during the pandemic. Initially, multiple drugs were empirically used that subsequently could not demonstrate clinical benefit. In future pandemics, stakeholders should strive to promote the early implementation of adaptive randomized clinical trials.

Multi-Perspective Views and Hesitancy toward COVID-19 Vaccines: A Mixed Method Study

The worldwide uptake of COVID-19 vaccines was suboptimal throughout the pandemic; vaccine hesitancy played a principle role in low vaccine acceptance both globally and in Armenia. In order to understand the factors behind the slow vaccine uptake in Armenia, we aimed to explore the prevailing perceptions and experiences of healthcare providers and the general public related to COVID-19 vaccines. The study applied a convergent parallel mixed-methods study design (QUAL-quant) through in-depth interviews (IDI) and a telephone survey. We completed 34 IDIs with different physician and beneficiary groups and a telephone survey with 355 primary healthcare (PHC) providers. The IDIs found that physicians held variable views on the need for COVID-19 vaccination which, combined with mixed messaging in the media landscape, fueled the public’s vaccine hesitancy. The survey results were mostly consistent with the qualitative findings as 54% of physicians hypothesized that COVID-19 vaccines were rushed without appropriate testing and 42% were concerned about the safety of those vaccines. Strategies to improve vaccination rates must target the main drivers of hesitancy, such as physicians’ poor knowledge of specific vaccines and spiraling misconceptions about them. Meanwhile, timely educational campaigns with targeted messaging for the general public should address misinformation, promote vaccine acceptance, and empower their capacity to make decisions about their health.

Clinical efficacy of Azithromycin for COVID-19 management: A systematic meta-analysis of meta-analyses

Background

Azithromycin has been adopted as a component of the COVID-19 management protocol throughout the global healthcare settings but with a questionable if not downright unsubstantiated evidence base.

Objectives

In order to amalgamate and critically appraise the conflicting evidence around the clinical efficacy of Azithromycin (AZO) vis a vis COVID-19 management outcomes, a meta-analysis of meta-analyses was carried out to establish an evidence-based holistic status of AZO vis a vis its efficacy as a component-in-use of the COVID-19 management protocol.

Methods

A comprehensive systematic search was carried out through PubMed/Medline, Cochrane and Epistemonikos with a subsequent appraisal of abstracts and full-texts, as required. The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) checklist and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) methodology were adopted to assess the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses. Random-effects models were developed to calculate summarized pool Odds Ratios (with 95% confidence interval) for the afore determined primary and secondary outcomes.

Results

AZO, when compared with best available therapy (BAT) including or excluding Hydroxychloroquine, exhibited statistically insignificant reduction in mortality [(n= 27,204 patients) OR= 0.77 (95% CI: 0.51-1.16) (I2= 97%)], requirement of mechanical ventilation [(n= 14,908 patients) OR= 1.4 (95% CI: 0.58-3.35) (I²= 98%)], induction of arrhythmia [(n= 9,723 patients) OR= 1.21 (95% CI: 0.63-2.32) (I²= 92%)] and QTc prolongation (a surrogate for torsadogenic effect) [(n= 6,534 patients) OR= 0.62 (95% CI: 0.23-1.73) (I²= 96%)].

Conclusion

The meta-analysis of meta-analyses portrays AZO as a pharmacological agent that does not appear to have a comparatively superior clinical efficacy than BAT when it comes to COVID-19 management. Secondary to a very real threat of anti-bacterial resistance, it is suggested that AZO be discontinued and removed from COVID-19 management protocols.

Acute Improvements of Oxygenation with Cpap and Clinical Outcomes in Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study

It is not known if the degrees of improvement in oxygenation obtained by CPAP can predict clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. This was a retrospective study conducted on patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia treated with CPAP in three University hospitals in Milan, Italy, from March 2020 to March 2021. Arterial gas analysis was obtained before and 1 h after starting CPAP. CPAP failure included either death in the respiratory units while on CPAP or the need for intubation. Two hundred and eleven patients (mean age 64 years, 74% males) were included. Baseline median PaO2, PaO2/FiO2 ratio (P/F), and the alveolar-arterial (A-a) O2 gradient were 68 (57−83) mmHg, 129 (91−179) mmHg and 310 (177−559) mmHg, respectively. Forty-two (19.9%) patients died in the respiratory units and 51 (24.2%) were intubated. After starting CPAP, PaO2/FiO2 increased by 57 (12−113; p < 0.001) mmHg, and (A-a) O2 was reduced by 68 (−25−250; p < 0.001) mmHg. A substantial overlap of PaO2, P/F, and A-a gradient at baseline and during CPAP was observed in CPAP failures and successes; CPAP-associated improvements in oxygenation in both groups were similar. In conclusion, CPAP-associated improvements in oxygenation do not predict clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Local Delivery of Azithromycin Nanoformulation Attenuated Acute Lung Injury in Mice

Humanity has suffered from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic over the past two years, which has left behind millions of deaths. Azithromycin (AZ), an antibiotic used for the treatment of several bacterial infections, has shown antiviral activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as well as against the dengue, Zika, Ebola, and influenza viruses. Additionally, AZ has shown beneficial effects in non-infective diseases such as cystic fibrosis and bronchiectasis. However, the systemic use of AZ in several diseases showed low efficacy and potential cardiac toxicity. The application of nanotechnology to formulate a lung delivery system of AZ could prove to be one of the solutions to overcome these drawbacks. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the attenuation of acute lung injury in mice via the local delivery of an AZ nanoformulation. The hot emulsification-ultrasonication method was used to prepare nanostructured lipid carrier of AZ (AZ-NLC) pulmonary delivery systems. The developed formulation was evaluated and characterized in vitro and in vivo. The efficacy of the prepared formulation was tested in the bleomycin (BLM) -mice model for acute lung injury. AZ-NLC was given by the intratracheal (IT) route for 6 days at a dose of about one-eighth oral dose of AZ suspension. Samples of lung tissues were taken at the end of the experiment for immunological and histological assessments. AZ-NLC showed an average particle size of 453 nm, polydispersity index of 0.228 ± 0.07, zeta potential of -30 ± 0.21 mV, and a sustained release pattern after the initial 50% drug release within the first 2 h. BLM successfully induced a marked increase in pro-inflammatory markers and also induced histological changes in pulmonary tissues. All these alterations were significantly reversed by the concomitant administration of AZ-NLC (IT). Pulmonary delivery of AZ-NLC offered delivery of the drug locally to lung tissues. Its attenuation of lung tissue inflammation and histological injury induced by bleomycin was likely through the downregulation of the p53 gene and the modulation of Bcl-2 expression. This novel strategy could eventually improve the effectiveness and diminish the adverse drug reactions of AZ. Lung delivery could be a promising treatment for acute lung injury regardless of its cause. However, further work is needed to explore the stability of the formulation, its pharmacokinetics, and its safety.

A review on computer-aided chemogenomics and drug repositioning for rational COVID-19 drug discovery

Application of materials capable of energy harvesting to increase the efficiency and environmental adaptability is sometimes reflected in the ability of discovery of some traces in an environment-either experimentally or computationally-to enlarge practical application window. The emergence of computational methods, particularly computer-aided drug discovery (CADD), provides ample opportunities for the rapid discovery and development of unprecedented drugs. The expensive and time-consuming process of traditional drug discovery is no longer feasible, for nowadays the identification of potential drug candidates is much easier for therapeutic targets through elaborate in silico approaches, allowing the prediction of the toxicity of drugs, such as drug repositioning (DR) and chemical genomics (chemogenomics). Coronaviruses (CoVs) are cross-species viruses that are able to spread expeditiously from the into new host species, which in turn cause epidemic diseases. In this sense, this review furnishes an outline of computational strategies and their applications in drug discovery. A special focus is placed on chemogenomics and DR as unique and emerging system-based disciplines on CoV drug and target discovery to model protein networks against a library of compounds. Furthermore, to demonstrate the special advantages of CADD methods in rapidly finding a drug for this deadly virus, numerous examples of the recent achievements grounded on molecular docking, chemogenomics, and DR are reported, analyzed, and interpreted in detail. It is believed that the outcome of this review assists developers of energy harvesting materials and systems for detection of future unexpected kinds of CoVs or other variants.

Benefits of probiotic use on COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

SARS-CoV-2 is the virus that causes the new global pandemic, which has already resulted in millions of deaths, affecting the world's health and economy. Probiotics have shown benefits in a variety of diseases, including respiratory infections, and may be beneficial in the adjunctive treatment of COVID-19. This study analyzed the effectiveness of probiotics as adjunctive treatment in reducing symptoms of patients with COVID-19, through a systematic review with meta-analysis. The EMBASE (Elsevier), Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) were searched through March 16, 2022. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was estimated using a fixed-effect model. RoB 2 and ROBINS I were used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. Nine studies were included (7 clinical trials and 2 cohorts), of which three clinical trials comprised the meta-analysis. Results showed that probiotics were associated with a significant 51% reduction in symptoms reported by COVID-19 patients (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40-0.61). There was a significant improvement in cough (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37-0.83), headaches (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.05-0.65), and diarrhea (RR 0. 33, 95% CI 0.12-0.96) of patients on probiotic therapy. These findings suggest that probiotic supplementation is effective in improving symptoms of COVID-19.

Azithromycin through the Lens of the COVID-19 Treatment

Azithromycin has become famous in the last two years, not for its main antimicrobial effect, but for its potential use as a therapeutic agent for COVID-19 infection. Initially, there were some promising results that supported its use, but it has become clear that scientific results are insufficient to support such a positive assessment. In this review we will present all the literature data concerning the activity of azithromycin as an antimicrobial, an anti-inflammatory, or an antivirus agent. Our aim is to conclude whether its selection should remain as a valuable antivirus agent or if its use simply has an indirect therapeutic contribution due to its antimicrobial and/or immunomodulatory activity, and therefore, if its further use for COVID-19 treatment should be interrupted. This halt will prevent further antibiotic resistance expansion and will keep azithromycin as a valuable anti-infective therapeutic agent.

Co-Administration of Remdesivir and Azithromycin May Protect against Intensive Care Unit Admission in COVID-19 Pneumonia Requiring Hospitalization: A Real-Life Observational Study

The benefits of remdesivir treatment, with or without co-administration of antibiotics such as azithromycin, are uncertain in COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this retrospective single-center study was to assess the effects of remdesivir, with or without azithromycin, on hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and need of non-invasive ventilation. The clinical records of the COVID-19 patients hospitalized in an Italian ward in March 2021 were analyzed, and data on comorbidities and clinical, radiological, and laboratory presentation of the disease were collected. Among 394 participants (234 M), 173 received remdesivir (43.9%), including 81 with azithromycin (20.5%). Remdesivir recipients were younger, with less comorbidities, and had better PaO₂/FiO₂ and clinical outcomes, including reduced mortality, but the differences were not independent of covariates. Rates of ICU transferal were 17%, 9%, and 1% in the no remdesivir, remdesivir without azithromycin, and remdesivir/azithromycin groups, respectively. In a stepwise multivariate logistic regression model, remdesivir/azithromycin co-treatment was independently associated with reduced ICU admission (vs remdesivir alone, OR 0.081, 95% CI 0.008-0.789, p = 0.031; vs no remdesivir, OR 0.060, 95% CI 0.007-0.508, p = 0.010). These data suggest that the therapeutical effect of remdesivir in COVID-19 pneumonia may be potentiated by azithromycin. The association between the two drugs should be further investigated.

SARS-CoV-2 and Prevotella spp.: friend or foe? A systematic literature review

During this global pandemic of the COVID-19 disease, a lot of information has arisen in the media and online without scientific validation, and among these is the possibility that this disease could be aggravated by a secondary bacterial infection such as Prevotella, as well as the interest or not in using azithromycin, a potentially active antimicrobial agent. The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic literature review, to prove or disprove these allegations by scientific arguments. The search included Medline, PubMed, and Pubtator Central databases for English-language articles published 1999-2021. After removing duplicates, a total of final eligible studies (n=149) were selected. There were more articles showing an increase of Prevotella abundance in the presence of viral infection like that related to Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), Papillomavirus (HPV), Herpesviridae and respiratory virus, highlighting differences according to methodologies and patient groups. The arguments for or against the use of azithromycin are stated in light of the results of the literature, showing the role of intercurrent factors, such as age, drug consumption, the presence of cancer or periodontal diseases. However, clinical trials are lacking to prove the direct link between the presence of Prevotella spp. and a worsening of COVID-19, mainly those using azithromycin alone in this indication.

Perspective: repurposed drugs for COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

The article aims to emphasize the necessity of proper research design, both scientifically and ethically, in order to provide good evidence for physicians to base their decisions on when prescribing drug treatment.

METHODS

Research articles and guidelines related to therapy of COVID-19 were searched from the PubMed database.

RESULTS

Only remdesivir and tocilizumab are medicines that have been approved by the US FDA's decision to approve their clinical use in moderate and severe COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Favipiravir, ivermectin and andrographolide need further well-conducted research to confirm the efficacy and safety against COVID-19 at different stages.

Evaluation of early antibiotic use in patients with non-severe COVID-19 without bacterial infection

OBJECTIVES

The use of antibiotics was common in some countries during the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but adequate evaluation remains lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of early antibiotic use in patients with non-severe COVID-19 admitted without bacterial infection.

METHODS

This multi-centre retrospective cohort study included 1,373 inpatients with non-severe COVID-19 admitted without bacterial infection. Patients were divided into two groups according to their exposure to antibiotics within 48 h of admission. The outcomes were progression to severe COVID-19, length of stay >15 days and mortality rate. A mixed-effect Cox model and random effect logistic regression were used to explore the association between early antibiotic use and outcomes.

RESULTS

During the 30-day follow-up period, the proportion of patients who progressed to severe COVID-19 in the early antibiotic use group was almost 1.4 times that of the comparison group. In the mixed-effect model, the early use of antibiotics was associated with higher probability of developing severe COVID-19 and staying in hospital for >15 days. However, there was no significant association between early use of antibiotics and mortality. Analysis with propensity-score-matched cohorts displayed similar results. In subgroup analysis, patients receiving any class of antibiotic were at increased risk of adverse health outcomes. Azithromycin did not improve disease progression and length of stay in patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

It is suggested that antibiotic use should be avoided unless absolutely necessary in patients with non-severe COVID-19, particularly in the early stages.

Learning through a Pandemic: The Current State of Knowledge on COVID-19 and Cancer

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has left patients with current or past history of cancer facing disparate consequences at every stage of the cancer trajectory. This comprehensive review offers a landscape analysis of the current state of the literature on COVID-19 and cancer including the immune response to COVID-19, risk factors for severe disease, and impact of anticancer therapies. We also review the latest data on treatment of COVID-19 and vaccination safety and efficacy in patients with cancer, as well as impact of the pandemic on cancer care, including the urgent need for rapid evidence generation and real-world study designs.

Azithromycin in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Azithromycin has been widely used in the management of COVID-19. However, the evidence on its actual effects remains disperse and difficult to apply in clinical settings. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes the available evidence to date on the beneficial and adverse effects of azithromycin in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

The PRISMA 2020 statement criteria were followed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated with and without azithromycin, indexed until 5 July 2021, were searched in PubMed, Embase, The Web of Science, Scopus, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and MedRXivs. We used random-effects models to estimate pooled effect size from aggregate data.

Results

The initial search produced 4950 results. Finally, 16 studies, 5 RCTs and 11 with an observational design, with a total of 22 984 patients, were included. The meta-analysis showed no difference in mortality for those treated with or without azithromycin, in observational studies [OR: 0.90 (0.66–1.24)], RCTs [OR: 0.97 (0.87–1.08)] and also when both types of studies were pooled together [with an overall OR: 0.95 (0.79–1.13)]. Different individual studies also reported no significant difference for those treated with or without azithromycin in need for hospital admission or time to admission from ambulatory settings, clinical severity, need for intensive care, or adverse effects.

Conclusions

The results presented in this systematic review do not support the use of azithromycin in the management of COVID-19. Future research on treatment for patients with COVID-19 may need to focus on other drugs.

Antibiotics for the treatment of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The effect of antibiotics with potential antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties are being investigated in clinical trials as treatment for COVID-19. The use of antibiotics follows the intention-to-treat the viral disease and not primarily to treat bacterial co-infections of individuals with COVID-19. A thorough understanding of the current evidence regarding effectiveness and safety of antibiotics as anti-viral treatments for COVID-19 based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is required.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of antibiotics compared to each other, no treatment, standard of care alone, placebo, or any other active intervention with proven efficacy for treatment of COVID-19 outpatients and inpatients.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (including MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, medRxiv, CENTRAL), Web of Science and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies to 14 June 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs were included that compared antibiotics with each other, no treatment, standard of care alone, placebo, or another proven intervention, for treatment of people with confirmed COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, treated in the in- or outpatient settings. Co-interventions had to be the same in both study arms. We excluded studies comparing antibiotics to other pharmacological interventions with unproven efficacy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed risk of bias of primary outcomes using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB 2) for RCTs. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence for the following primary outcomes: 1. to treat inpatients with moderate to severe COVID-19: mortality, clinical worsening defined as new need for intubation or death, clinical improvement defined as being discharged alive, quality of life, adverse and serious adverse events, and cardiac arrhythmias; 2. to treat outpatients with asymptomatic or mild COVID-19: mortality, clinical worsening defined as hospital admission or death, clinical improvement defined as symptom resolution, quality of life, adverse and serious adverse events, and cardiac arrhythmias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies with 11,281 participants with an average age of 54 years investigating antibiotics compared to placebo, standard of care alone or another antibiotic. No study was found comparing antibiotics to an intervention with proven efficacy. All studies investigated azithromycin, two studies investigated other antibiotics compared to azithromycin. Seven studies investigated inpatients with moderate to severe COVID-19 and four investigated mild COVID-19 cases in outpatient settings. Eight studies had an open-label design, two were blinded with a placebo control, and one did not report on blinding. We identified 19 ongoing and 15 studies awaiting classification pending publication of results or clarification of inconsistencies. Of the 30 study results contributing to primary outcomes by included studies, 17 were assessed as overall low risk and 13 as some concerns of bias. Only studies investigating azithromycin reported data eligible for the prioritised primary outcomes. Azithromycin doses and treatment duration varied among included studies.  Azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19 compared to placebo or standard of care alone in inpatients We are very certain that azithromycin has little or no effect on all-cause mortality at day 28 compared to standard of care alone (risk ratio (RR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.06; 8600 participants; 4 studies; high-certainty evidence). Azithromycin probably has little or no effect on clinical worsening or death at day 28 (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03; 7311 participants; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence), on clinical improvement at day 28 (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.11; 8172 participants; 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), on serious adverse events during the study period (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.40; 794 participants; 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), and cardiac arrhythmias during the study period (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.15; 7865 participants; 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard of care alone. Azithromycin may increase any adverse events slightly during the study period (RR 1.20; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.57; 355 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence) compared to standard of care alone. No study reported quality of life up to 28 days. Azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19 compared to placebo or standard of care alone in outpatients Azithromycin may have little or no effect compared to placebo or standard of care alone on all-cause mortality at day 28 (RR 1.00 ; 95% CI 0.06 to 15.69; 876 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), on admission to hospital or death within 28 days (RR 0.94 ; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.56; 876 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), and on symptom resolution at day 14 (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.12; 138 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether azithromycin increases or reduces serious adverse events compared to placebo or standard of care alone (0 participants experienced serious adverse events; 454 participants; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). No study reported on adverse events, cardiac arrhythmias during the study period or quality of life up to 28 days. Azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19 compared to any other antibiotics in inpatients and outpatients One study compared azithromycin to lincomycin in inpatients, but did not report any primary outcome. Another study compared azithromycin to clarithromycin in outpatients, but did not report any relevant outcome for this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are certain that risk of death in hospitalised COVID-19 patients is not reduced by treatment with azithromycin after 28 days. Further, based on moderate-certainty evidence, patients in the inpatient setting with moderate and severe disease probably do not benefit from azithromycin used as potential antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatment for COVID-19 regarding clinical worsening or improvement. For the outpatient setting, there is currently low-certainty evidence that azithromycin may have no beneficial effect for COVID-19 individuals. There is no evidence from RCTs available for other antibiotics as antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatment of COVID-19. With accordance to the living approach of this review, we will continually update our search and include eligible trials to fill this evidence gap. However, in relation to the evidence for azithromycin and in the context of antimicrobial resistance, antibiotics should not be used for treatment of COVID-19 outside well-designed RCTs.