Subcutaneous tocilizumab in adults with severe and critical COVID-19: A prospective open-label uncontrolled multicenter trial

Impact of FCGR2A rs1801274 and IL-6R rs2228145 polymorphisms on tocilizumab response in the Iranian population with severe COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Although several genetic biomarkers have been reported in the tocilizumab (TCZ) response in rheumatoid arthritis, no studies have addressed the pharmacogenomics effect of TCZ in COVID-19.

METHODS

In this prospective longitudinal study, 95 individuals with severe COVID-19 were selected between 2020-2022. The recovery process was measured at 24 h, 48 h, and 10 days before and after taking TCZ. All participants were genotyped using RFLP-PCR. Different genotypes of FCGR2A rs1801274 and IL-6R rs2228145 were compared in terms of the recovery process.

RESULTS

43.2% of patients were male and 56.8% were female with an average age of 58.20(± 16.214) years. The GA genotype for FCGR2A rs1801274 increased the risk of death (OR = 2.83, P = 0.038) and ventilation (OR = 2.71, P = 0.047) in TCZ-treated individuals. However, there was no risk of death and ventilation with IL-6R rs2228145 (P > 0.05). Additionally, docking analysis showed that not only IL6R but also FCGR2A can be a ligand for TCZ.

CONCLUSION

This study provides valuable insights into the impact of genetic variations on the response rate of TCZ in COVID-19 patients. The GA genotype for FCGR2A rs1801274 was associated with poor treatment outcomes.

Effect of subcutaneous vs. intravenous tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the efficacy of subcutaneous tocilizumab in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 and provide evidence for the rational use of subcutaneous tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19.

METHODS

This meta-analysis was carried out in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CNKI, SinoMed, and Wanfang Medical Network electronic databases up to 11 January 2023 to identify relevant studies. To obtain the most recent clinical studies of subcutaneous injection of tocilizumab for the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19, we also searched the preprint platforms medRxiv and ChinaXiv. Furthermore, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov for relevant unpublished studies. The studies were screened based on the PICOS principle. The included studies were classified and evaluated for quality based on research type. The RevMan 5.3 software was used to conduct the meta-analysis, and a descriptive analysis was performed to examine relevant outcome indicators.

RESULTS

Five observational studies were obtained, involving a total of 498 patients (240 patients in the subcutaneous injection group and 258 patients in the intravenous injection group). All of the studies were of the highest quality. The meta-analysis of the included studies revealed that the mortality rate of patients who received subcutaneous tocilizumab to treat COVID-19 was not significantly higher than that of the intravenous injection group [23.3% (45/193) vs. 18.4% (39/212), RD = 0.06, 95% CI = - 0.01 ~ 0.13, P = 0.11]. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients requiring mechanical ventilation between the two groups [24.5% (35/143) vs. 22% (35/159), RD = 0.03, 95% CI = - 0.07 ~ 0.12, P = 0.56].

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analyses do not provide evidence that subcutaneous and intravenous tocilizumab formulations for the treatment of severe COVID-19 infection differ regarding their effectiveness. Considering that the meta-analyses cannot replace an appropriately powered non-inferiority study, subcutaneous formulations still need to be used with caution and only when intravenous formulations are in short supply. At present, there is a lack of randomized controlled trials of subcutaneous injection of tocilizumab for the treatment of severe COVID-19, and more clinical research should be conducted.

Dosing and Administration Strategies of Tocilizumab in Patients With COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Tocilizumab may reduce the risk of death, length of stay, and time of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Limited data are available evaluating low-dose subcutaneous administration of tocilizumab in this setting.

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes of 2 tocilizumab dosing and administration strategies in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

METHODS

A retrospective, observational cohort study was conducted to compare clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 receiving tocilizumab 400 mg intravenously (400 mg IV) or 162 mg subcutaneously (162 mg SC). Hospitalized patients receiving a single dose of tocilizumab were eligible for inclusion and grouped by dosing and administration strategy. The primary endpoint was ventilator-free days at day 28. Secondary endpoints included length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, mechanical ventilation required after dose, 28-day readmission, 28-day mortality, and change in inflammatory markers.

RESULTS

A total of 303 patients were included, with 147 who received tocilizumab 400 mg IV and 156 who received 162 mg SC. There was no significant difference in average ventilator-free days at day 28 in patients receiving 400 mg IV compared with 162 mg SC (26.4 ± 5.3 vs 25.6 ± 6.8 days, respectively; P = 0.812). There was also no difference in LOS (10.4 ± 12.6 vs 10.5 ± 14.0 days; P = 0.637), ICU LOS (3.9 ± 9.0 vs 3.5 ± 8.3 days; P = 0.679), mechanical ventilation after dose (15.6% vs 19.2%; P = 0.412), 28-day readmission (6.1% vs 9.6%; P = 0.268), or 28-day mortality (23.1% vs 25.6%; P = 0.611). Finally, there was no difference regarding change in inflammatory markers at 48 hours (P > 0.05 for all interactions).

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

In this retrospective study involving hospitalized patients with COVID-19, there was no difference between tocilizumab 162 mg SC and 400 mg IV in terms of efficacy. The 162 mg SC dose may be a reasonable alternative to traditional doses.

Serum C-reactive protein greater than 75 mg/dL as an early available laboratory predictor of severe COVID-19: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Severe COVID-19 management is still challenging. Having a laboratory factor to predict the severity of a patient's condition can be very useful in how to approach each patient. There have been studies concentrating on the correlation between serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level and COVID-19 severity but we aim to reach a threshold for CRP in disease severity determination.

METHODS

We conducted a thorough search on PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases from early 2019 to October 2021, and 323 studies were assessed for eligibility in three phases. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to examine the validity of the studies. The t-test was applied for the CRP level cutoffs.

RESULTS

Eventually, 11 articles and 1615 patients were included in this systematic review. Our analysis evaluated combined mean, median, and standard deviation of severe patients' CRP to be respectively 73.37, 53.80, and 47.936. Based on the combined mean, 75 mg/dL was suggested as an initial threshold for baseline CRP in hospitalized patients for developing severe conditions.

CONCLUSION

This study recommends that COVID-19 patients with on-admission serum CRP levels of 75 mg/dL and more are likely associated with severe conditions. Thus, anti-inflammatory agents and further following may be helpful in these patients.

Prospects of Novel and Repurposed Immunomodulatory Drugs against Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Associated with COVID-19 Disease

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is intricately linked with SARS-CoV-2-associated disease severity and mortality, especially in patients with co-morbidities. Lung tissue injury caused as a consequence of ARDS leads to fluid build-up in the alveolar sacs, which in turn affects oxygen supply from the capillaries. ARDS is a result of a hyperinflammatory, non-specific local immune response (cytokine storm), which is aggravated as the virus evades and meddles with protective anti-viral innate immune responses. Treatment and management of ARDS remain a major challenge, first, because the condition develops as the virus keeps replicating and, therefore, immunomodulatory drugs are required to be used with caution. Second, the hyperinflammatory responses observed during ARDS are quite heterogeneous and dependent on the stage of the disease and the clinical history of the patients. In this review, we present different anti-rheumatic drugs, natural compounds, monoclonal antibodies, and RNA therapeutics and discuss their application in the management of ARDS. We also discuss on the suitability of each of these drug classes at different stages of the disease. In the last section, we discuss the potential applications of advanced computational approaches in identifying reliable drug targets and in screening out credible lead compounds against ARDS.

The Impact of Multidrug-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Infection in Critically Ill Patients with or without COVID-19 Infection

This is a single-center, retrospective, cohort study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of multi-drug resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii infections (MDR-AB) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with or without a COVID-19 infection and risk factors for blood stream infection. A total of 170 patients with MDR-AB were enrolled in the study. Of these, 118 (70%) patients were admitted to the ICU due to a COVID-19 infection. Comparing the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 groups, the use of mechanical ventilation (98.31% vs. 76.92%, p = 0.000), the presence of septic shock (96.61% vs. 82.69%, p = 0.002), and the use of steroid (99.15% vs. 71.15%, p = 0.000) and tocilizumab therapies (33.05% vs. 0%, p = 0.000) were more prevalent and statistically more significant in patients with COVID-19 infections. The average length of the ICU stay (21.2 vs. 28.33, p = 0.0042) was significantly lower in patients with COVID-19 infections. Survival rate was 21.19% for the COVID-19 group and 28.85% for non-COVID-19 group with a p-value = 0.0361. COVID-19 status was associated with significantly higher hazards of death (HR 1.79, CI 95% 1.02-3.15, p = 0.043). Higher SOFAB (15.07 vs. 12.07, p = 0.0032) and the placement of an intravascular device (97.06% vs. 89.71%, p = 0.046) were significantly associated with the development of a bloodstream infection. Our study has shown that critically ill patients with an MDR-AB infection, who were admitted due to a COVID-19 infection, had a higher hazard for death compared to non-COVID-19 infected patients.

Coagulopathy in COVID-19 and anticoagulation clinical trials

Severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) first emerged in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 and has caused a global pandemic of a scale unprecedented in the modern era. People infected with SARS-CoV-2 can be asymptomatic, moderate symptomatic or develop severe COVID-19. Other than the typical acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), patients with moderate or severe COVID-19 also develop a distinctive systemic coagulopathy, known as COVID-19-associated coagulopathy (CAC), which is different from sepsis-related forms of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC). Endotheliopathy or endotheliitis are other unique features of CAC. The endothelial cell perturbation can further increase the risk of thrombotic events in COVID-19 patients. In this review, we will summarize the current knowledge on COVID-19 coagulopathy and the possible mechanisms for the condition. We also discuss the results of clinical trials testing methods for mitigating thrombosis events in COVID-19 patients.

Interleukin-6 cytokine: An overview of the immune regulation, immune dysregulation, and therapeutic approach

Several studies have shown that interleukin 6 (IL-6) is a multifunctional cytokine with both pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory activity, depending on the immune response context. Macrophages are among several cells that secrete IL-6, which they express upon activation by antigens, subsequently inducing fever and production of acute-phase proteins from the liver. Moreover, IL-6 induces the final maturation of B cells into memory B cells and plasma cells as well as an adaptive role for short-term energy allocation. Activation of IL-6 receptors results in the intracellular activation of the JAK/STAT pathway with resultant production of inflammatory cytokines. Several mechanisms-controlled IL-6 expression, but aberrant production was shown to be crucial in the pathogenesis of many diseases, which include autoimmune and chronic inflammatory diseases. IL-6 in combination with transforming growth factor β (TGF-β) induced differentiation of naïve T cells to Th17 cells, which is the cornerstone in autoimmune diseases. Recently, IL-6 secretion was shown to form the backbone of hypercytokinemia seen in the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated hyperinflammation and multiorgan failure. There are two classes of approved IL-6 inhibitors: anti-IL-6 receptor monoclonal antibodies (e.g., tocilizumab) and anti-IL-6 monoclonal antibodies (i.e., siltuximab). These drugs have been evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, cytokine release syndrome, and COVID-19 who have systemic inflammation. JAK/STAT pathway blockers were also successfully used in dampening IL-6 signal transduction. A better understanding of different mechanisms that modulate IL-6 expression will provide the much-needed solution with excellent safety and efficacy profiles for the treatment of autoimmune and inflammatory diseases in which IL-6 derives their pathogenesis.

Immune-based therapeutic approaches in COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), a member of the Coronaviridae family. On March 11, 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) has named the newly emerged rapidly-spreading epidemic as a pandemic. Besides the risk-reduction measures such as physical and social distancing and vaccination, a wide range of treatment modalities have been developed; aiming to fight the disease. The immune system is known as a double-edged sword in COVID-19 pathogenesis, with respect to its role in eliminating the pathogen and in inducing complications such as cytokine storm syndrome. Hence, immune-based therapeutic approaches have become an interesting field of COVID-19 research, including corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), interferon therapy, and more COVID-19-specific approaches such as anti-SARS-CoV-2-monoclonal antibodies. Herein, we did a comprehensive review on immune-based therapeutic approaches for COVID-19. DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT: Not applicable.

Biologics in COVID-19 So Far: Systematic Review

This systematic review aimed to reevaluate the available evidence of the use of biologics as treatment candidates for the treatment of severe and advanced COVID-19 disease; what are the rationale for their use, which are the most studied, and what kind of efficacy measures are described? A search through Cochrane, Embase, Pubmed, Medline, medrxiv.org, and Google scholar was performed on the use of biologic interventions in COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 infection, viral pneumonia, and sepsis, until 11 January 2022. Throughout the research, we identified 4821 records, of which 90 were selected for qualitative analysis. Amongst the results, we identified five popular targets of use: IL6 and IL1 inhibitors, interferons, mesenchymal stem cells treatment, and anti-spike antibodies. None of them offered conclusive evidence of their efficacy with consistency and statistical significance except for some studies with anti-spike antibodies; however, Il6 and IL1 inhibitors as well as interferons show encouraging data in terms of increased survival and favorable clinical course that require further studies with better methodology standardization.

Development of Evidence-Based COVID-19 Management Guidelines for Local Context: The Methodological Challenges

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has presented as a therapeutic challenge for clinicians worldwide due to its rapid spread along with evolving evidence and understanding of the disease. Internationally, recommendations to guide the management of COVID-19 have been created and updated continuously by the WHO and CDC, which have been locally adapted by different countries. Similarly, Pakistan's National Command Operation Center (NCOC), in its national COVID-19 management strategy, generated guidelines for national implementation. Keeping the guidelines updated has proved challenging globally and locally. Here, we present a summary of the process to assess the evidence, including a time-restricted systematic review based on NCOC Clinical Management Guidelines for COVID-19 Infections v4 published on 11^th December 2020 version, correlating it with current recommendations and with input one of the guidelines authors, particularly noting the methodological challenges.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review synthesizing global research on treatment options for COVID-19 hospitalized patients, limiting it to pharmacological interventions for hospitalized COVID-19 patients included in Pakistan's NCOC's national guidelines v4 published on 11^th December 2020. Each treatment recommendation's strength and quality of evidence was assessed based on the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) methodology. These were then compared to the most current living WHO COVID-19 pharmacological treatment guidelines v7.1. One of the authors of the NCOC guidelines reviewed and commented on the findings as well.

Results

We note that the data from our systematic review strongly supports corticosteroids use in treating severe and critically ill COVID-19 hospitalized patients correlating with WHO v7.1 guidelines 24 September 2021. However, evidence from our review and WHO v7.1 for the use of tocilizumab had some conflicting evidence, with data from our review until December 2020 supporting only a weak recommendation for its use, compared to the strong recommendation by the WHO for the use of tocilizumab in patients with severe or critical COVID-19 infection. Regarding the use of antibiotics and ivermectin use in treating COVID-19 hospitalized patients, data from our review and WHO v 7.1 recommend against their use.

Conclusion

Research data about the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions to treat hospitalized patients with COVID-19 are rapidly evolving, and based on it, the evidence for or against recommendations changes accordingly. Our study illustrates the challenges of keeping up with the evidence; the recommendations were based on studies up till December 2021, and we have compared our recommendations with the WHO v7.1, which showed some significant changes in the use of pharmacological treatment options.

Secondary Infections in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia Treated with Tocilizumab Compared to Those Not Treated with Tocilizumab: A Retrospective Study at a Tertiary Hospital in Kenya

INTRODUCTION

From the first case of SARS-Co-2 in Wuhan, China, to the virus being declared as a pandemic in March 2020, the world has witnessed morbidity and mortality on a global scale. Scientists have worked at a record pace to deliver a vaccine for the prevention of this deadly disease. Tocilizumab, an interleukin-6 (IL-6) blocker, received an emergency use authorization (EUA) by the Federal Drug Agency (FDA) in June 2021.

METHODS

This retrospective observational cohort study was conducted at the Aga Khan University Hospital, Nairobi, from March 8, 2020, to December 31, 2020. All patients with PCR confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia were included. Data were obtained from the medical records, and the admission registry was used to identify the patients, and both their electronic and paper-based files were retrieved from the medical records. Patient demographic data, medical history, baseline comorbidities, clinical characteristics, and outcome data were collected to study the infectious complications of Tocilizumab in patients affected by COVID-19 pneumonia.

RESULTS

A total of 913 patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 were included. The overall superinfection infection rate among the COVID-19 patients was 6%. Superinfection in patients who received the Tocilizumab was 17.2% and in the non-Tocilizumab group was 4.8%. The superinfection rate among severe and critically ill patients was even higher at 41.8% and 69.9% (Tocilizumab group) and 2.1% and 11.8% (non-Tocilizumab group), respectively (p < 0.001). There was no difference in mortality observed between the groups (p = 0.846). Infection among HIV co-infection was very low at 2.3%.

CONCLUSION

Contrary to some studies, a higher rate of infection was observed among the Tocilizumab group, and no difference in mortality was observed between Tocilizumab and the non-Tocilizumab group. Infection among patients with HIV remains low in this susceptible population.

Therapeutic role of immunomodulators during the COVID-19 pandemic- a narrative review

The emergency state caused by COVID-19 saw the use of immunomodulators despite the absence of robust research. To date, the results of relatively few randomized controlled trials have been published, and methodological approaches are riddled with bias and heterogeneity. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, convalescent plasma and the JAK inhibitor baricitinib have gained Emergency Use Authorizations and tentative recommendations for their use in clinical practice alone or in combination with other therapies. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are predominating the management of non-hospitalized patients, while the inpatient setting is seeing the use of convalescent plasma, baricitinib, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, sarilumab, and corticosteroids, as applicable. Available clinical data also suggest the potential clinical benefit of the early administration of blood-derived products (e.g. convalescent plasma, non-SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobins) and the blockade of factors implicated in the hyperinflammatory state of severe COVID-19 (Interleukin 1 and 6; Janus Kinase). Immune therapies seem to have a protective effect and using immunomodulators alone or in combination with viral replication inhibitors and other treatment modalities might prevent progression into severe COVID-19 disease, cytokine storm and death. Future trials should address existing gaps and reshape the landscape of COVID-19 management.

The Use of Corticosteroids or Tocilizumab in COVID-19 Based on Inflammatory Markers

BACKGROUND

The inflammatory cascade is the main cause of death in COVID-19 patients. Corticosteroids (CS) and tocilizumab (TCZ) are available to treat this escalation but which patients to administer it remains undefined.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of immunosuppressive/anti-inflammatory therapy in COVID-19, based on the degree of inflammation.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study with data on patients collected and followed up from March 1st, 2020, to May 1st, 2021, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Patients under treatment with CS vs. those under CS plus TCZ were compared. Effectiveness was explored in 3 risk categories (low, intermediate, high) based on lymphocyte count, C-reactive protein (CRP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), ferritin, and D-dimer values.

PATIENTS

A total of 21,962 patients were included in the Registry by May 2021. Of these, 5940 met the inclusion criteria for the present study (5332 were treated with CS and 608 with CS plus TCZ).

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome of the study was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were the composite variable of in-hospital mortality, requirement for high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), or intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 5940 met the inclusion criteria for the present study (5332 were treated with CS and 608 with CS plus TCZ). No significant differences were observed in either the low/intermediate-risk category (1.5% vs. 7.4%, p=0.175) or the high-risk category (23.1% vs. 20%, p=0.223) after propensity score matching. A statistically significant lower mortality was observed in the very high-risk category (31.9% vs. 23.9%, p=0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

The prescription of CS alone or in combination with TCZ should be based on the degrees of inflammation and reserve the CS plus TCZ combination for patients at high and especially very high risk.

Beneficial and harmful outcomes of tocilizumab in severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The results of studies of tocilizumab (TCZ) in COVID-19 are contradictory. Our study aims to update medical evidence from controlled observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the use of TCZ in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched the following databases from January 1, 2020 to April 13, 2021 (date of the last search): MEDLINE database through the PubMed search engine and Scopus, using the terms ("COVID-19" [Supplementary Concept]) AND "tocilizumab" [Supplementary Concept]).

RESULTS

Sixty four studies were included in the present study: 54 were controlled observational studies (50 retrospective and 4 prospective) and 10 were RCTs. The overall results provided data from 20,616 hospitalized patients with COVID-19: 7668 patients received TCZ in addition to standard of care (SOC) (including 1915 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with reported mortality) and 12,948 patients only receiving SOC (including 4410 patients admitted to the ICU with reported mortality). After applying the random-effects model, the hospital-wide (including ICU) pooled mortality odds ratio (OR) of patients with COVID-19 treated with TCZ was 0.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.56-0.93). The pooled hospital-wide mortality OR was 1.25 (95% CI = 0.74-2.18) in patients admitted at conventional wards versus 0.66 (95% CI = 0.59-0.76) in patients admitted to the ICU. The pooled OR of hospital-wide mortality (including ICU) of COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ plus corticosteroids (CS) was 0.67 (95% CI = 0.54-0.84). The pooled in-hospital mortality OR was 0.71 (95% CI = 0.35-1.42) when TCZ was early administered (≤10 days from symptom onset) versus 0.83 (95% CI 0.48-1.45) for late administration (>10 days from symptom onset). The meta-analysis did not find significantly higher risk for secondary infections in COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ.

CONCLUSIONS

TCZ prevented mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. This benefit was seen to a greater extent in patients receiving concomitant CS and when TCZ administration occurred within the first 10 days after symptom onset.

Neutralizing antibodies for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) initiates the infection process by binding to the viral cellular receptor angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 through the receptor-binding domain (RBD) in the S1 subunit of the viral spike (S) protein. This event is followed by virus-cell membrane fusion mediated by the S2 subunit, which allows virus entry into the host cell. Therefore, the SARS-CoV-2 S protein is a key therapeutic target, and prevention and treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have focused on the development of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (nAbs) that target this protein. In this review, we summarize the nAbs targeting SARS-CoV-2 proteins that have been developed to date, with a focus on the N-terminal domain and RBD of the S protein. We also describe the roles that binding affinity, neutralizing activity, and protection provided by these nAbs play in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 and discuss the potential to improve nAb efficiency against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants. This review provides important information for the development of effective nAbs with broad-spectrum activity against current and future SARS-CoV-2 strains.

Pharmacology and Adverse Events of Emergency-Use Authorized Medication in Moderate to Severe COVID-19

Some effective drugs have been approved or issued an Emergency Use Authorization for the treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients, but post-market surveillance is warranted to monitor adverse events. We reviewed clinical trials and case reports in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 infection who received remdesivir, baricitinib, tocilizumab, or sarilumab. The drug-specific pharmacokinetics, toxicity, and drug interactions are summarized in this study. Remdesivir and baricitinib are small-molecule drugs that are mainly metabolized by the kidneys, while tocilizumab and sarilumab are monoclonal antibody drugs with metabolic pathways that are currently not fully understood. The most common adverse events of these drugs are alterations in liver function, but serious adverse events have rarely been attributed to them. Only a few studies have reported that remdesivir might be cardiotoxic and that baricitinib might cause thromboembolism. Biological agents such as baricitinib, tocilizumab, and sarilumab could inhibit the pathway of inflammatory processes, leading to immune dysregulation, so the risk of secondary infection should be assessed before prescribing. Further recognition of the pathogenic mechanism and risk factors of adverse events is essential for optimizing treatment strategies.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of anakinra, sarilumab, siltuximab and tocilizumab for COVID-19

BACKGROUND

There is accumulating evidence for an overly activated immune response in severe COVID-19, with several studies exploring the therapeutic role of immunomodulation. Through systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess the effectiveness of specific interleukin inhibitors for the treatment of COVID-19.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched on 7 January 2021 to identify studies of immunomodulatory agents (anakinra, sarilumab, siltuximab and tocilizumab) for the treatment of COVID-19. The primary outcomes were severity on an Ordinal Scale measured at day 15 from intervention and days to hospital discharge. Key secondary endpoints included overall mortality.

RESULTS

71 studies totalling 22 058 patients were included, 6 were randomised trials. Most studies explored outcomes in patients who received tocilizumab (60/71). In prospective studies, tocilizumab was associated with improved unadjusted survival (risk ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96, I2=0.0%), but conclusive benefit was not demonstrated for other outcomes. In retrospective studies, tocilizumab was associated with less severe outcomes on an Ordinal Scale (generalised OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.64, I2=98%) and adjusted mortality risk (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.66, I2=76.6%). The mean difference in duration of hospitalisation was 0.36 days (95% CI -0.07 to 0.80, I2=93.8%). There was substantial heterogeneity in retrospective studies, and estimates should be interpreted cautiously. Other immunomodulatory agents showed similar effects to tocilizumab, but insufficient data precluded meta-analysis by agent.

CONCLUSION

Tocilizumab was associated with a lower relative risk of mortality in prospective studies, but effects were inconclusive for other outcomes. Current evidence for the efficacy of anakinra, siltuximab or sarilumab in COVID-19 is insufficient, with further studies urgently needed for conclusive findings.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020176375.

Efficacy of Different Types of Therapy for COVID-19: A Comprehensive Review

A new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has already affected millions of people in 213 countries. The possibilities of treatment have been reviewed in recent publications but there are many controversial results and conclusions. An analysis of the studies did not reveal a difference in mortality level between people treated with standard therapy, such as antiviral drugs and dexamethasone, and new antiviral drugs/additional immune therapy. However, most studies describe clinical improvement and a decrease in mortality among patients with severe and critical conditions, with the early initiation of additional immune therapy. Possible new targets based on viral life cycles were considered. Unfortunately, the data analysis on the efficacy of different medicine and therapy regimens among patients with COVID-19, showed little success in decreasing the mortality rate in all treatment methods. Some efficacy has been shown with an immunosuppressive therapy in small patient samples, but when a larger number of patients were analyzed the data did not differ significantly from the control groups.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of tocilizumab in persons with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)

We performed a meta-analysis to determine safety and efficacy of tocilizumab in persons with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Medline using Boolean operators for studies with the terms coronavirus OR COVID-19 OR 2019-nCoV OR SARS-CoV-2 AND tocilizumab. Review Manager 5.4 was used to analyze data and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa and Jadad scales for quality assessment. We identified 32 studies in 11,487 subjects including three randomized trials and 29 cohort studies with a comparator cohort, including historical controls (N = 5), a matched cohort (N = 12), or concurrent controls (N = 12). Overall, tocilizumab decreased risk of death (Relative Risk [RR] = 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59, 0.93; P = 0.008; I2 = 80%) but not of surrogate endpoints including ICU admission (RR = 1.40 [0.64,3.06]; P = 0.4; I2 = 88%), invasive mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.83 [0.57,1.22]; P = 0.34; I2 = 65%) or secondary infections (RR = 1.30 [0.97,1.74]; P = 0.08; I2 = 65%) and increased interval of hospitalization of subjects discharged alive(mean difference [MD] = 2 days [<1, 4 days]; P = 0.006; I2 = 0). RRs of death in studies with historical controls (RR = 0.28 [0.16,0.49; P < 0.001]; I2 = 62%) or a matched cohort (RR = 0.68 [0.53, 0.87]; P = 0.002; I2 = 42%) were decreased. In contrast, RRs of death in studies with a concurrent control (RR = 1.10 [0.77, 1.56]; P = 0.60; I2 = 85%) or randomized (RR = 1.18 [0.57,2.44]; P = 0.66; I2 = 0) were not decreased. A reduced risk of death was not confirmed in our analyses which questions safety and efficacy of tocilizumab in persons with COVID-19.

Modalities and Mechanisms of Treatment for Coronavirus Disease 2019

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is spreading rapidly throughout the world. Although COVID-19 has a relatively low case severity rate compared to SARS and Middle East Respiratory syndrome it is a major public concern because of its rapid spread and devastating impact on the global economy. Scientists and clinicians are urgently trying to identify drugs to combat the virus with hundreds of clinical trials underway. Current treatments could be divided into two major part: anti-viral agents and host system modulatory agents. On one hand, anti-viral agents focus on virus infection process. Umifenovir blocks virus recognizing host and entry. Remdesivir inhibits virus replication. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine involve preventing the whole infection process, including virus transcription and release. On the other hand, host system modulatory agents are associated with regulating the imbalanced inflammatory reaction and biased immune system. Corticosteroid is believed to be commonly used for repressing hyper-inflammation, which is one of the major pathologic mechanisms of COVID-19. Convalescent plasma and neutralizing antibodies provide essential elements for host immune system and create passive immunization. Thrombotic events are at high incidence in COVID-19 patients, thus anti-platelet and anti-coagulation are crucial, as well. Here, we summarized these current or reproposed agents to better understand the mechanisms of agents and give an update of present research situation.

An Up-to-Date Overview of Therapeutic Agents for the Treatment of COVID-19 Disease

Acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has a great potential to overwhelm the world healthcare systems that may lead to high morbidity and mortality. It also affects world economic development in the future. Currently, no proven effective drugs or vaccines are available for the management of COVID-19 disease. The pace of normal drug development progression is unacceptable in the context of the current pandemic. Therefore, repurposing the existing drugs that were used for the treatment of malaria, Ebola, and influenza helps rapid drug development for COVID-19. Currently, several repurposing candidate drugs are in a clinical trial including, chloroquine monoclonal antibodies, convalescent plasma, interferon, and antiviral therapies. Antiviral drugs like arbidol, remdesiv and favirnavir are the most promising due to the similarities of the viruses regarding viral entry, fusion, uncoating, and replication. This review article provides an overview of the potential therapeutic agent, which displayed better clinical treatment outcomes. Moreover, with further understanding of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, new drugs targeting specific SARS-CoV-2 viral components arise, and investigations on these novels anti-SARSCoV- 2 agents are also reviewed.