Active prescription of low-dose aspirin during or prior to hospitalization and mortality in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of adjusted effect estimates

The 125th Anniversary of Aspirin-The Story Continues

The year 2024 marks the 125th anniversary of aspirin, still one of the most frequently used drugs worldwide. Despite its veritable age, it is still relevant in pharmacotherapy and its use has spread to new areas over time. Due to aspirin's multiple pharmacological actions unified in one single molecule (i.e., analgesic, antipyretic, anti-inflammatory, antithrombotic, and antiviral effects), it continues to attract considerable attention in the scientific community and is subject to intense basic and clinical research. In fact, recent results confirmed aspirin's potential role as an antiviral drug and as an agent that can block harmful platelet functions in inflammatory/immunological processes. These features may open up new horizons for this ancient drug. The future of aspirin looks, therefore, bright and promising. Aspirin is not yet ready for retirement; on the contrary, its success story continues. This 125th anniversary paper will concisely review the various therapeutic uses of aspirin with a particular emphasis on the latest research results and their implications (e.g., use as an antiviral agent). In addition, the reader is provided with future perspectives for this remarkable drug.

COVID-19 thromboprophylaxis. New evidence

Recent publications have questioned the efficacy of using therapeutic or intermediate doses of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in COVID-19 patients, especially in the most severe patients. In order to update these recommendations, a non-systematic review has been carried out in the main medical databases. A total of 14 randomized clinical trials, 14 meta-analyses and the recommendations of 12 scientific societies were selected, stratified according to the type of patient (outpatient, hospitalized, admitted to critical care or post-discharge). The efficacy of LMWH and other therapeutic approaches (rivaroxaban, apixaban, sulodexide, acetylsalicylic acid and P2Y12 inhibitors) has been analyzed. The findings recommend using standard doses of LMWH as thromboprophylaxis in critically hospitalized COVID-19 patients and therapeutic doses in non-critically hospitalized patients if the risk of bleeding is low. In outpatients and those discharged from the hospital, LMWH could be used at a prophylactic dose if there are thrombotic risk factors, and the bleeding risk is low. It is not recommended to associate antiplatelet agents with LMWH unless previously indicated.

Risk Factors for Postdischarge Major Thromboembolism and Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 with Cardiovascular Comorbidities: Insights from the CORE-19 Registry

BACKGROUND

 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with venous and arterial thromboembolism (VTE and ATE) and all-cause mortality (ACM) in hospitalized patients. High-quality data are needed on postdischarge outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease.

OBJECTIVES

 To analyze outcomes and identify risk factors for ATE, VTE, and ACM in a high-risk subgroup of hospitalized COVID-19 patients with baseline cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

 We investigated postdischarge rates and associated risk factors of ATE, VTE, and ACM in 608 hospitalized COVID-19 patients with coronary artery disease, carotid artery stenosis (CAS), peripheral arterial disease (PAD), or ischemic stroke.

RESULTS

 Through 90 days postdischarge, outcome rates were: ATE 27.3% (10.2% myocardial infarction, 10.1% ischemic stroke, 13.2% systemic embolism, 12.7% major adverse limb event); VTE 6.9% (4.1% deep vein thrombosis, 3.6% pulmonary embolism); composite of ATE, VTE, or ACM 35.2% (214/608). Multivariate analysis showed significant association between this composite endpoint and age >75 years (odds ratio [OR]: 1.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22-2.94, p = 0.004), PAD (OR: 3.23, 95% CI: 1.80-5.81, p ≤ 0.0001), CAS (OR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.11-2.75, p = 0.017), congestive heart failure (CHF) (OR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.02-3.35, p = 0.044), previous VTE (OR: 3.08, 95% CI: 1.75-5.42, p < 0.0001), and intensive care unit (ICU) admission (OR: 2.93, 95% CI: 1.81-4.75, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

 COVID-19 inpatients with cardiovascular disease experience high rates of ATE, VTE, or ACM through 90 days postdischarge. Age >75 years, PAD, CAS, CHF, previous VTE, and ICU admission are independent risk factors.

Clinical use of ketoprofen lysine salt: a reappraisal in adolescents with acute respiratory infections

Upper respiratory infections are widespread, and they are mainly of viral etiology. It has to be remarked that every infection is always associated with an inflammatory response. Inflammation implicates a cascade of bothersome symptoms, including fever, pain (headache, myalgia, and arthralgia), malaise, and respiratory complaints. As a result, anti-inflammatory medications could be beneficial as they act on different pathogenetic pathways. The ketoprofen lysine salt (KLS) has a potent anti-inflammatory activity associated with effective analgesic and antipyretic effects and has a valuable safety profile. However, adolescents present peculiar psychological characteristics that determine their difficulty to be managed. In this regard, an adolescent with a respiratory infection requires a prompt and adequate cure. KLS, thanks to its pharmacologic profile, could be favorably used in this regard. A recent primary-care experience outlined its effectiveness in this issue.

Drugs in primary care that may alter COVID-19 risk and severity

ABSTRACT

This article describes drugs used in primary care that could alter patients' risk for and severity of COVID-19. The risks and benefits of each drug class were differentiated according to the strength of evidence from 58 selected randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Most of the studies reported on drugs affecting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Other classes included opioids, acid suppressants, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, vitamins, biguanides, and statins. Current evidence has not fully differentiated drugs that may increase risk versus benefits in COVID-19 infection. Further studies are needed in this area.

Atherosclerosis, Cardiovascular Disease, and COVID-19: A Narrative Review

Atherosclerosis is a chronic inflammatory and degenerative process that mainly occurs in large- and medium-sized arteries and is morphologically characterized by asymmetric focal thickenings of the innermost layer of the artery, the intima. This process is the basis of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), the most common cause of death worldwide. Some studies suggest a bidirectional link between atherosclerosis and the consequent CVD with COVID-19. The aims of this narrative review are (1) to provide an overview of the most recent studies that point out a bidirectional relation between COVID-19 and atherosclerosis and (2) to summarize the impact of cardiovascular drugs on COVID-19 outcomes. A growing body of evidence shows that COVID-19 prognosis in individuals with CVD is worse compared with those without. Moreover, various studies have reported the emergence of newly diagnosed patients with CVD after COVID-19. The most common treatments for CVD may influence COVID-19 outcomes. Thus, their implication in the infection process is briefly discussed in this review. A better understanding of the link among atherosclerosis, CVD, and COVID-19 could proactively identify risk factors and, as a result, develop strategies to improve the prognosis for these patients.

COVID-19 and Pulmonary Angiogenesis: The Possible Role of Hypoxia and Hyperinflammation in the Overexpression of Proteins Involved in Alveolar Vascular Dysfunction

COVID-19 has been considered a vascular disease, and inflammation, intravascular coagulation, and consequent thrombosis may be associated with endothelial dysfunction. These changes, in addition to hypoxia, may be responsible for pathological angiogenesis. This research investigated the impact of COVID-19 on vascular function by analyzing post-mortem lung samples from 24 COVID-19 patients, 10 H1N1pdm09 patients, and 11 controls. We evaluated, through the immunohistochemistry technique, the tissue immunoexpressions of biomarkers involved in endothelial dysfunction, microthrombosis, and angiogenesis (ICAM-1, ANGPT-2, and IL-6, IL-1β, vWF, PAI-1, CTNNB-1, GJA-1, VEGF, VEGFR-1, NF-kB, TNF-α and HIF-1α), along with the histopathological presence of microthrombosis, endothelial activation, and vascular layer hypertrophy. Clinical data from patients were also observed. The results showed that COVID-19 was associated with increased immunoexpression of biomarkers involved in endothelial dysfunction, microthrombosis, and angiogenesis compared to the H1N1 and CONTROL groups. Microthrombosis and vascular layer hypertrophy were found to be more prevalent in COVID-19 patients. This study concluded that immunothrombosis and angiogenesis might play a key role in COVID-19 progression and outcome, particularly in patients who die from the disease.

To Anticoagulate or Not to Anticoagulate in COVID-19: Lessons after 2 Years

A hypercoagulable state associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been well documented and is believed to be strongly supported by a proinflammatory state. The hypercoagulable state in turn results in increased incidence of arterial and venous thromboembolism (VTE) seen in hospitalized COVID-19 when compared with hospitalized non-COVID-19 patient cohorts. Moreover, patients with arterial or VTE and COVID-19 have higher mortality compared with COVID-19 patients without arterial or VTE. Prevention of arterial or VTE thus remains an essential question in the management of COVID-19 patients, especially because of high rates of reported microvascular and macrovascular thrombosis. This has prompted multiple randomized control trials (RCTs) evaluating different anticoagulation strategies in COVID-19 patients at various stages of the disease. Herein, we review findings from RCTs in the past 2 years of antithrombotic therapy in critically ill hospitalized patients, noncritically ill hospitalized patients, patients postdischarge from the hospital, and outpatients. RCTs in critically ill patients demonstrated therapeutic dose anticoagulation does not improve outcomes and has more bleeding than prophylaxis dose anticoagulant in these patients. Trials in noncritically ill hospitalized patients showed a therapeutic dose anticoagulation with a heparin formulation might improve clinical outcomes. Anticoagulation with a direct oral anticoagulant posthospital discharge may improve outcomes, although there is a large RCT in progress. Nonhospitalized COVID-19 patients have an insufficient burden of events to be candidates for antithrombotic therapy. Anticoagulation in pregnant and lactating patients with COVID-19, as well as antiplatelet therapy for COVID-19, is also reviewed.

Cardiovascular Complications in Coronavirus Disease 2019-Pathogenesis and Management

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a devastating impact on morbidity and mortality around the world. Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 has a characteristic tropism for the cardiovascular system by entering the host cells and binding to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors, which are expressed in different cells, particularly endothelial cells. This endothelial injury is linked by a direct intracellular viral invasion leading to inflammation, microthrombosis, and angiogenesis. COVID-19 has been associated with acute myocarditis, cardiac arrhythmias, new onset or worsening heart failure, ischemic heart disease, stroke, and thromboembolic disease. This review summarizes key relevant literature regarding the epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment, and preventive measures related to cardiovascular complications in the setting of COVID-19.

Analysis of Prior Aspirin Treatment on in-Hospital Outcome of Geriatric COVID-19 Infected Patients

Background and Objectives: Aspirin (ASA) is a commonly used antithrombotic drug that has been demonstrated to reduce venous thromboembolism. The aim was to analyze if geriatric COVID-19 patients undergoing a 100 mg/day Aspirin (ASA) treatment prior to hospitalization differ in hospital outcome compared to patients without previous ASA therapy. Materials and Methods: An observational retrospective study was carried out using an anonymized database including geriatric COVID-19 patients (March to April 2020) admitted to Madrid Hospitals Group. A group of COVID-19 patients were treated with low ASA (100 mg/day) prior to COVID-19 infection. Results: Geriatric ASA-treated patients were older (mean age over 70 years; n = 41), had higher frequency of hypertension and hyperlipidemia, and upon admission had higher D-dimer levels than non-ASA-treated patients (mean age over 73 years; n = 160). However, patients under ASA treatment did not show more frequent pulmonary thromboembolism (PE) than non-ASA-treated patients. ASA-treated geriatric COVID-19-infected patients in-hospital < 30 days all-cause mortality was more frequent than in non-ASA-treated COVID-19 patients. In ASA-treated COVID-19-infected geriatric patients, anticoagulant therapy with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) significantly reduced need of ICU care, but tended to increase in-hospital < 30 days all-cause mortality. Conclusions: Prior treatment with a low dose of ASA in COVID-19-infected geriatric patients increased frequency of in-hospital < 30 days all-cause mortality, although it seemed to not increase PE frequency despite D-dimer levels upon admission being higher than in non-ASA users. In ASA-treated geriatric COVID-19-infected patients, addition of LMWH therapy reduced frequency of ICU care, but tended to increase in-hospital < 30 days all-cause mortality.

Associations between the use of aspirin or other antiplatelet drugs and all-cause mortality among patients with COVID-19: A meta-analysis

Introduction: Whether aspirin or other antiplatelet drugs can reduce mortality among patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) remains controversial.

Methods: We identified randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and retrospective studies on associations between aspirin or other antiplatelet drug use and all-cause mortality among patients with COVID-19 in the PubMed database between March 2019 and September 2021. Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool were used to assess the risk of bias. The I2 statistic was used to assess inconsistency among trial results. The summary risk ratio (RR) and odds ratio (OR) were obtained through the meta-analysis.

Results: The 34 included studies comprised three randomized controlled trials, 27 retrospective studies, and 4 prospective cohort studies. The retrospective and prospective cohort studies showed low-to-moderate risks of bias per the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale score, while the randomized controlled trials showed low-to-high risks of bias per the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. The randomized controlled trials showed no significant effect of aspirin use on all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 {risk ratio (RR), 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90–1.03]}. In retrospective studies, aspirin reduced all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 by 20% [odds ratio (OR), 0.80 (95% CI 0.70–0.93)], while other antiplatelet drugs had no significant effects. In prospective cohort studies, aspirin decreased all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 by 15% [OR, 0.85 (95% CI 0.80–0.90)].

Conclusion: The administration of aspirin may reduce all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Antiplatelet therapy for patients with COVID-19: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials

Background

Hyperinflammation and coagulopathy are hallmarks of COVID-19 and synergistically contribute to illness progression. Antiplatelet agents have been proposed as candidate drugs for COVID-19 treatment on the basis of their antithrombotic and anti-inflammatory properties. A systematic review and meta-analysis that included early observational studies and recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to summarize and compare evidence on this issue.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched to identify studies published up to Nov 7, 2021, and the results of registered clinical trials were followed up to Mar 30, 2022. We included RCTs and observational studies assessing the effect of antiplatelet therapy in adult patients with COVID-19. Data on baseline patient characteristics, interventions, controls, and outcomes were extracted by two independent reviewers. The primary outcome was mortality. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

Results

Twenty-seven studies were included, of which 23 observational studies were pooled in a meta-analysis, and the remaining four RCTs (ACTIV-4B, RECOVERY, ACTIV-4a, and REMAP-CAP) were narratively synthesized. Based on 23 observational studies of 87,824 COVID-19 patients, antiplatelet treatment favors a lower risk of mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61–0.85; I² = 87.0%, P < 0.01]. The narrative synthesis of RCTs showed conflicting evidence, which did not support adding antiplatelet therapy to the standard care, regardless of the baseline illness severity and concomitant anticoagulation intensity.

Conclusion

While the rationale for using antiplatelet treatment in COVID-19 patients is compelling and was supported by the combined result of early observational studies, evidence from RCTs did not confirm this approach. Several factors that could explain this inconsistency were highlighted alongside perspectives on future research directions.

Evolution of Approaches to Therapeutic Prevention and Treatment of the New Coronavirus Infection

The means of drug intervention for the prevention and treatment of new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) are discussed. Changes in approaches aimed at the main links of pathogenesis and capable of positively influencing the course and outcome of the disease that have been implemented after the appearance of the results of numerous randomized trials are presented. Some aspects of the ongoing study of the problem are characterized.

Does aspirin have an effect on risk of death in patients with COVID-19? A meta-analysis

Purpose

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has shown unprecedented impact world-wide since the eruption in late 2019. Importantly, emerging reports suggest an increased risk of thromboembolism development in patients with COVID-19. Meanwhile, it is found that aspirin reduced mortality in critically ill patients with non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed to investigate the effects of aspirin on COVID-19 mortality.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in 10 electronic databases and 4 registries. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (Cis) to estimate the effect of aspirin on COVID-19 mortality. Relevant subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

Results

The results showed that aspirin use was associated with a reduction in COVID-19 mortality (adjusted RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.50–0.95; P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis found that the low-dose group was associated with a reduced COVID-19 mortality (adjusted RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.48–0.85; P < 0.01). Aspirin use was associated with reduced COVID-19 mortality in Europe and America (crude RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.52–0.98; P = 0.04), and results from cohort studies suggested that aspirin use was a protective factor for COVID-19 mortality (adjusted RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.52–0.99; P = 0.04). Meanwhile, aspirin use was not associated with bleeding risk (crude RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.80–1.87; P = 0.96).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis found that aspirin use was associated with a reduction in mortality in patients with COVID-19 and not with an increased risk of bleeding.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-022-03356-5.

[The effect of antiplatelet therapy on the course of COVID-19]

Numerous studies demonstrate that a new coronavirus infection is associated with an increased risk of thrombosis, which underlies many of the complications of COVID-19. At the same time, many elderly patients with COVID-19 and with concomitant cordial pathology receive antiplatelet therapy to prevent recurrent ischemic events. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effect of antiplatelet therapy on the risk of thrombotic complications and disease course in SARS-COV-2 infected patients. We carried out the search of the articles published from 2019 to 2021 with the keywords «antiplatelet therapy» and «COVID-19» in the PubMed database. A total of 209 articles were retrieved out of which 16 which were included in the review. According to majority of retrospective studies (7 out of 10 studies, more than 30.000 patients), antiplatelet therapy is associated with a statistically significant and prominent reduction in overall mortality. Several studies showed that antiplatelet therapy positively influences the risks of severe respiratory disorders, need of invasive lung ventilation and decreases the probability of thrombotic events. However the only prospective randomized placebo-controlled study did not show a benefit of antiplatelet therapy in symptomatic patients with mild stable COPD-19. None of the studies reported a negative effect of antiplatelet therapy on the course of a new coronavirus infection. Therefore, to date there is no conclusive evidence based on prospective randomized trials, of a positive effect of antiplatelet therapy on the course of COVID-19. Further research on this issue using the double-blind method is needed. However, there are no reports of significant adverse effects of antiplatelet agents, who have previously been given antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention.

Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and adverse outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are concerns that the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may increase the risk of adverse outcomes among patients with coronavirus COVID-19. This study aimed to synthesize the evidence on associations between the use of NSAIDs and adverse outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic search of WHO COVID-19 Database, Medline, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, China Biology Medicine disc, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database for all articles published from January 1, 2020, to November 7, 2021, as well as a supplementary search of Google Scholar. We included all comparative studies that enrolled patients who took NSAIDs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data extraction and quality assessment of methodology of included studies were completed by two reviewers independently. We conducted a meta-analysis on the main adverse outcomes, as well as selected subgroup analyses stratified by the type of NSAID and population (both positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or not).

FINDINGS

Forty comparative studies evaluating 4,867,795 adult cases were identified. Twenty-eight (70%) of the included studies enrolled patients positive to SARS-CoV-2 tests. The use of NSAIDs did not reduce mortality outcomes among people with COVID-19 (number of studies [N] = 29, odds ratio [OR] = 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75 to 1.14, I²  = 89%). Results suggested that the use of NSAIDs was not significantly associated with higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with or without COVID-19 (N = 10, OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.07, I²  = 78%; N = 8, aOR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.09, I²  = 26%), or an increased probability of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (N = 12, OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.75, I²  = 82% ; N = 4, aOR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.22, I²  = 60%), requiring mechanical ventilation (N = 11, OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.54, I²  = 63%; N = 5, aOR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.24, I²  = 66%), or administration of supplemental oxygen (N = 5, OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.24, I²  = 63%; N = 2, aOR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.12, I²  = 0%). The subgroup analysis revealed that, compared with patients not using any NSAIDs, the use of ibuprofen (N = 5, OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.50 to 2.39; N = 4, aOR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.16) and COX-2 inhibitor (N = 4, OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.35 to 1.11; N = 2, aOR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.18) were not associated with an increased risk of death.

INTERPRETATION

Data suggests that NSAIDs such as ibuprofen, aspirin and COX-2 inhibitor, can be used safely among patients positive to SARS-CoV-2. However, for some of the analyses the number of studies were limited and the quality of evidence was overall low, therefore more research is needed to corroborate these findings.

FUNDING

There was no funding source for this study.

Clinical update on COVID-19 for the emergency and critical care clinician: Medical management

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in millions of cases worldwide. As the pandemic has progressed, the understanding of this disease has evolved.

OBJECTIVE

This is the second part in a series on COVID-19 updates providing a focused overview of the medical management of COVID-19 for emergency and critical care clinicians.

DISCUSSION

COVID-19, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. A variety of medical therapies have been introduced for use, including steroids, antivirals, interleukin-6 antagonists, monoclonal antibodies, and kinase inhibitors. These agents have each demonstrated utility in certain patient subsets. Prophylactic anticoagulation in admitted patients demonstrates improved outcomes. Further randomized data concerning aspirin in outpatients with COVID-19 are needed. Any beneficial impact of other therapies, such as colchicine, convalescent plasma, famotidine, ivermectin, and vitamins and minerals is not present in reliable medical literature. In addition, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are not recommended.

CONCLUSION

This review provides a focused update of the medical management of COVID-19 for emergency and critical care clinicians to help improve care for these patients.

Effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and other eicosanoid pathway modifiers on antiviral and allergic responses: EAACI task force on eicosanoids consensus report in times of COVID-19

Non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and other eicosanoid pathway modifiers are among the most ubiquitously used medications in the general population. Their broad anti‐inflammatory, antipyretic, and analgesic effects are applied against symptoms of respiratory infections, including SARS‐CoV‐2, as well as in other acute and chronic inflammatory diseases that often coexist with allergy and asthma. However, the current pandemic of COVID‐19 also revealed the gaps in our understanding of their mechanism of action, selectivity, and interactions not only during viral infections and inflammation, but also in asthma exacerbations, uncontrolled allergic inflammation, and NSAIDs‐exacerbated respiratory disease (NERD). In this context, the consensus report summarizes currently available knowledge, novel discoveries, and controversies regarding the use of NSAIDs in COVID‐19, and the role of NSAIDs in asthma and viral asthma exacerbations. We also describe here novel mechanisms of action of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs), outline how to predict responses to LTRA therapy and discuss a potential role of LTRA therapy in COVID‐19 treatment. Moreover, we discuss interactions of novel T2 biologicals and other eicosanoid pathway modifiers on the horizon, such as prostaglandin D2 antagonists and cannabinoids, with eicosanoid pathways, in context of viral infections and exacerbations of asthma and allergic diseases. Finally, we identify and summarize the major knowledge gaps and unmet needs in current eicosanoid research.

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-IV) inhibitor was associated with mortality reduction in COVID-19 - A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the latest evidence on the effect of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-IV) inhibitor in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search from the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov up until 15 July 2021. Studies that met the following criteria were included: prospective or retrospective observational studies or case series or randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting DPP-IV inhibitor use in patients with COVID-19 and mortality. The intervention group was patients receiving DPP-IV inhibitor. The control group was patients that did not receive DPP-IV inhibitor. The outcome was mortality reported as odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

There were 11 studies consisting of 5950 patients in this meta-analysis. DPP-IV inhibitor use was associated with reduced mortality (OR 0.75 [0.56, 0.99], p = 0.043, I²: 42.9, p = 0.064) compared to those that did not receive DPP-IV inhibitor. Sensitivity analysis using the fixed-effect model (OR 0.75 [0.63, 0.88], p < 0.001, I²: 42.9, p = 0.064) also showed mortality benefit. The association between DPP-IV inhibitor and mortality was not significantly affected by age (p = 0.540), sex (p = 0.054), hypertension (p = 0.320), location (continent; p = 0.532), and retrospective/prospective nature of the study (p = 0.840). However, the association was affected by metformin (OR 1.03 [95% CI 1.01, 1.06], p = 0.010) and ACEI/ARB use (OR 1.06 [95% CI 1.02, 1.10], p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that DPP-IV inhibitor was associated with reduced mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Effect of colchicine on mortality in patients with COVID-19 - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the latest evidence on the association between colchicine and mortality in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search from the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, EuropePMC, and Clinicaltrials.gov up until 02 January 2022. We include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting colchicine use in patients with COVID-19 and mortality within 30 days. The intervention group was patients given colchicine during the course of treatment. The control group was patients given placebo or standard of care at the respective institutions. The outcome was mortality. The effect estimate was reported as risk ratio (RR).

RESULTS

There were 12 studies comprising of 6953 patients included in this meta-analysis. Mortality rate was 0.18 [95%CI 0.10, 0.26] in the colchicine group and 0.26 [95%CI 0.15, 0.38] in the control group. Colchicine was associated with reduction in mortality (RR 0.66 [95%CI 0.53, 0.83], p < 0.001; I²: 42%). Sensitivity analysis using fixed-effect model (RR 0.73 [95%CI 0.63, 0.83], p < 0.001; I²: 42%. Subgroup analysis on the four RCTs showed non-significant result (RR 0.81 [95%CI 0.54, 1.20], p = 0.29; I²: 10%). Meta-regression showed that the association between colchicine and reduced mortality was not affected by age (p = 0.613) [Fig. 3], sex (p = 0.915), diabetes (p = 0.795), and hypertension (p = 0.403).

CONCLUSION

Though the meta-analysis showed decreased mortality with colchicine in patients with COVID-19, the meta-analysis of randomized trials did not show any significant effect of colchicine on mortality.

Additional evidence against widespread use of inpatient antiplatelet therapy in coronavirus infection: data from a randomized controlled trial

.

Additional evidence against widespread use of inpatient antiplatelet therapy in coronavirus infection: data from a randomized controlled trial

.

Aspirin and Infection: A Narrative Review

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is one of the most commonly used drugs in the world. It derives from the extract of white willow bark, whose therapeutic potential was known in Egypt since 1534 BC. ASA’s pharmacological effects are historically considered secondary to its anti-inflammatory, platelet-inhibiting properties; however, human studies demonstrating a pro-inflammatory effect of ASA exist. It is likely that we are aware of only part of ASA’s mechanisms of action; moreover, the clinical effect is largely dependent on dosages. During the past few decades, evidence of the anti-infective properties of ASA has emerged. We performed a review of such research in order to provide a comprehensive overview of ASA and viral, bacterial, fungal and parasitic infections, as well as ASA’s antibiofilm properties.

Aspirin as an Adjunctive Pharmacologic Therapy Option for COVID-19: Anti-Inflammatory, Antithrombotic, and Antiviral Effects All in One Agent

Introduction

Pharmacologic therapy options for COVID-19 should include antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and anticoagulant agents. With the limited effectiveness, currently available virus-directed therapies may have a substantial impact on global health due to continued reports of mutant variants affecting repeated waves of COVID-19 around the world.

Methods

We searched articles pertaining to aspirin, COVID-19, acute lung injury and pharmacology in PubMed and provide a comprehensive appraisal of potential use of aspirin in the management of patients with COVID-19. The scope of this article is to provide an overview of the rationale and currently available clinical evidence that supports aspirin as an effective therapeutic option in COVID-19.

Results

Experimental and clinical evidence are available for the potential use of aspirin in patients with COVID-19.

Discussion

Aspirin targets the intracellular signaling pathway that is essential for viral replication, and resultant inflammatory responses, hypercoagulability, and platelet activation. With these multiple benefits, aspirin can be a credible adjunctive therapeutic option for the treatment of COVID-19. In addition, inhaled formulation with its rapid effects may enhance direct delivery to the lung, which is the key organ damaged in COVID-19 during the critical initial course of the disease, whereas the 150-325 mg/day can be used for long-term treatment to prevent thrombotic event occurrences. Being economical and widely available, aspirin can be exploited globally, particularly in underserved communities and remote areas of the world to combat the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Treatments Associated with Lower Mortality among Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients remains high. Although randomized controlled trials must continue to definitively evaluate treatments, further hypothesis-generating efforts to identify candidate treatments are required. This study's hypothesis was that certain treatments are associated with lower COVID-19 mortality.

METHODS

This was a 1-yr retrospective cohort study involving all COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units in six hospitals affiliated with Yale New Haven Health System from February 13, 2020, to March 4, 2021. The exposures were any COVID-19-related pharmacologic and organ support treatments. The outcome was in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

This study analyzed 2,070 patients after excluding 23 patients who died within 24 h after intensive care unit admission and 3 patients who remained hospitalized on the last day of data censoring. The in-hospital mortality was 29% (593 of 2,070). Of 23 treatments analyzed, apixaban (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.363 to 0.48; corrected CI, 0.336 to 0.52) and aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.87; corrected CI, 0.54 to 0.96) were associated with lower mortality based on the multivariable analysis with multiple testing correction. Propensity score-matching analysis showed an association between apixaban treatment and lower mortality (with vs. without apixaban, 27% [96 of 360] vs. 37% [133 of 360]; hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.337 to 0.69) and an association between aspirin treatment and lower mortality (with vs. without aspirin, 26% [121 of 473] vs. 30% [140 of 473]; hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.78). Enoxaparin showed similar associations based on the multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.97; corrected CI, 0.61 to 1.05) and propensity score-matching analysis (with vs. without enoxaparin, 25% [87 of 347] vs. 34% [117 of 347]; hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.367 to 0.77).

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with the known hypercoagulability in severe COVID-19, the use of apixaban, enoxaparin, or aspirin was independently associated with lower mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Does admission acetylsalicylic acid uptake in hospitalized COVID-19 patients have a protective role? Data from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is widely used in the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disorders. Our objective is to evaluate its possible protective role, not only in mortality but also in other aspects such as inflammation, symptomatic thrombosis, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We realized an observational retrospective cohort study of 20,641 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia collected and followed-up from Mar 1st, 2020 to May 1st, 2021, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to determine whether treatment with ASA affected outcomes in COVID-19 patients. On hospital admission, 3291 (15.9%) patients were receiving ASA. After PSM, 3291 patients exposed to ASA and 2885 not-exposed patients were analyzed. In-hospital mortality was higher in the ASA group (30.4 vs. 16.9%, p < 0.001) in the global sample. After PSM, no differences were found between groups (30.4 vs. 30.3%, p = 0.938). There were no differences in inflammation, symptomatic thrombosis, or ICU admission. In conclusion, ASA intake is not associated with in-hospital mortality or any other health outcome evaluated after applying PSM analysis in a real-world large sample of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Home pharmacological therapy in early COVID-19 to prevent hospitalization and reduce mortality: Time for a suitable proposal

The COVID‐19 pandemic is a highly dramatic concern for mankind. In Italy, the pandemic exerted its major impact throughout the period of February to June 2020. To date, the awkward amount of more than 134,000 deaths has been reported. Yet, post‐mortem autopsy was performed on a very modest number of patients who died from COVID‐19 infection, leading to a first confirmation of an immune‐thrombosis of the lungs as the major COVID‐19 pathogenesis, likewise for SARS. Since then (June–August 2020), no targeted early therapy considering this pathogenetic issue was approached. The patients treated with early anti‐inflammatory, anti‐platelet, anticoagulant and antibiotic therapy confirmed that COVID‐19 was an endothelial inflammation with immuno‐thrombosis. Patients not treated or scarcely treated with the most proper and appropriate therapy and in the earliest, increased the hospitalization rate in the intensive care units and also mortality, due to immune‐thrombosis from the pulmonary capillary district and alveoli. The disease causes widespread endothelial inflammation, which can induce damage to various organs and systems. Therapy must be targeted in this consideration, and in this review, we demonstrate how early anti‐inflammatory therapy may treat endothelia inflammation and immune‐thrombosis caused by COVID‐19, by using drugs we are going to recommend in this paper.

COVID-19 and Cardiovascular Complications: An Updated Review

COVID-19 has become a global pandemic. Patients with pre-existing comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) are associated with greater severity and higher mortality. COVID-19 can cause cardiovascular complications, including myocardial injury, myocarditis, heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, and coagulation abnormalities. Possible pathophysiology and molecular pathways driving these disease processes are cytokine release syndrome, RAAS system dysregulation, plaque destabilization and coagulation disorders  Myocarditis is one concern among persons who received mRNA-Based COVID-19 vaccines. There are several cardiovascular complications that are possibly caused by COVID-19 treatments, such as QT interval prolongation, arrhythmia, and hypotension. Due to increasingly recognized CVD damage in COVID-19, we need to understand about COVID-19 related to cardiovascular complications and treatment strategies.

The effects of aspirin on the outcome of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Repurposing the use of aspirin to treat hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is a sensible approach. However, several previous studies showed conflicting results. This meta-analysis was aimed to assess the effect of aspirin on the outcome in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Systematic search using relevant keywords was carried out via several electronic databases until February 21, 2021. Research studies on adults COVID-19 patients with documentation on the use of aspirin and reported our outcomes of interest were included in the analysis. Our main outcome of interest was all types of mortality, while the incidence of thrombosis and bleeding were considered as secondary outcomes. Estimated risk estimates of the included studies were then pooled using DerSimonian-Laird random-effect models regardless heterogeneity.

Results

Seven studies with a total of 34,415 patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The use of aspirin was associated with a reduced risk of mortality (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.38–0.81, P = 0.002; I²: 68%, P = 0.005). Sensitivity analysis by differentiating in-hospital (active aspirin prescription) and pre-hospital use of aspirin could significantly reduce the heterogeneity (I²: 1%, P = 0.4). Only one study reported the incidence of major bleeding between aspirin and non-aspirin users (6.1% vs. 7.6%, P = 0.61). The association between the use of aspirin and the incidence of thrombosis were contradictory in two studies.

Conclusion

The use of aspirin was significantly associated with a reduced risk of mortality among patients with COVID-19. Due to limited studies, the effect of aspirin on the incidence of thrombosis and bleeding in patients with COVID-19 could not be drawn definitively.

Acetylsalicylic Acid Compared with Enoxaparin for the Prevention of Thrombosis and Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, aspirin) is a well-known and frequently studied drug for primary and secondary prevention of disease due to its anti-inflammatory and coagulopathic effects. COVID-19 complications are attributed to the role of thrombo-inflammation. Studies regarding the use of low-dose ASA in COVID-19 are limited. For this reason, we propose that the use of low-dose ASA may have protective effects in COVID-19-related thromboembolism and lung injury. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy of low-dose ASA compared with enoxaparin, an anticoagulant, for the prevention of thrombosis and mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study on COVID-19-confirmed hospitalized patients at the Mansoura University Quarantine Hospital, outpatients, and home-isolated patients from September to December 2020 in Mansoura governorate, Egypt. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to assess the effect of ASA compared with enoxaparin on thromboembolism, and mechanical ventilation needs.

RESULTS

This study included 225 COVID-19 patients. Use of ASA-only (81-162 mg orally daily) was significantly associated with reduced thromboembolism (OR 0.163, p = 0.020), but both low-dose ASA and enoxaparin, and enoxaparin-only (0.5 mg/kg subcutaneously (SC) daily as prophylactic dose or 1 mg/kg SC every 12 hours as therapeutic dose) were more protective (odds ratio [OR] 0.010, OR 0.071, respectively, p < 0.001). Neither ASA-only nor enoxaparin-only were associated with a reduction in mechanical ventilation needs. Concomitant use of low-dose ASA and enoxaparin was associated with reduced mechanical ventilation (OR 0.032, 95% CI 0.004-0.226, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose ASA-only use may reduce the incidence of COVID-19-associated thromboembolism, but the reduction may be less than that of enoxaparin-only, and both ASA and enoxaparin. Concomitant use of ASA and enoxaparin demonstrates promising results with regard to the reduction of thrombotic events, and mechanical ventilation needs.

Ivermectin and mortality in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the effect of ivermectin on mortality in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov from the inception of databases up until April 9, 2021. The intervention group was ivermectin and the control group was standard of care or placebo. The primary outcome was mortality reported as risk ratio (RR).

RESULTS

There were 9 RCTs comprising of 1788 patients included in this meta-analysis. Ivermectin was associated with decreased mortality (RR 0.39 [95% 0.20-0.74], p = 0.004; I²: 58.2%, p = 0.051). Subgroup analysis in patients with severe COVID-19 showed borderline statistical significance towards mortality reduction (RR 0.42 [95% 0.18-1.00], p = 0.052; I²: 68.3, p = 0.013). The benefit of ivermectin and mortality was reduced by hypertension (RR 1.08 [95% CI 1.03-1.13], p = 0.001); but was not influenced by age (p = 0.657), sex (p = 0.466), diabetes (p = 0.429). Sensitivity analysis using fixed-effect model showed that ivermectin decreased mortality in general (RR 0.43 [95% CI 0.29-0.62], p < 0.001) and severe COVID-19 subgroup (RR 0.48 [95% CI 0.32-0.72], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Ivermectin was associated with decreased mortality in COVID-19 with a low certainty of evidence. Further adequately powered double-blinded placebo-controlled RCTs are required for definite conclusion.