Effect of regular intravenous immunoglobulin therapy on prognosis of severe pneumonia in patients with COVID-19

Ig-M and Ig-A Enriched Ig-G Infusion as Adjuvant Therapy in the Critically ill Patients Experiencing SARS-CoV-2 Severe Infection

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 in patients who need Intensive Care (ICU) is associated with a mortality rate ranging from 10 to 40%-45%, with an increase in morbidity and mortality in presence of sepsis. Methods: We assumed that immunoglobulin (Ig) M and IgA enriched IgG (IGAM) therapy may support SARS COV-2 sepsis-related phase improving patient outcome. We conducted a retrospective case-control study on all the patients admitted to our ICU during the three pandemic waves between February 2020 and April 2021. Upon ICU admission, patients received anticoagulants with the standard supportive treatment (ST) ± IGAM therapy. After matching for the baseline characteristics and treatments, the patients receiving IGAM therapy too (group A), were compared with those undergoing ST (group B) only. Results: 85 patients were enrolled in group A, whereas 111 in group B. The mortality resulted lower in group A [37.6% versus 55.8%, OR: 0.7 (02-08), P = .01)]. A logistic regression analysis identified IGAM treatment as a survival predictor [OR: 0.35 (95%CI, 0.2-0.8)], whereas experiencing a super-infection [OR: 1.88 (95%CI, 1.5-4.9)] and a septic shock [OR: 1.92 (95%CI, 1.4-4.3)] as predictors of death. On day 7, the probability of dying was 3 times higher in patients treated with ST only. Variable life adjustment display (VLAD) was equal to 2.4 in group A, while - 2.2 group B (in terms of lives saved in relation with those expected, in according with Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) score. Conclusion: The treatment based on IGAM infusion seems to give an advantage chance of survival in SARS-CoV-2 severe infection. Further prospective studies are warranted.

Advances in acute respiratory distress syndrome: focusing on heterogeneity, pathophysiology, and therapeutic strategies

In recent years, the incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been gradually increasing. Despite advances in supportive care, ARDS remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients. ARDS is characterized by acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure with diffuse pulmonary inflammation and bilateral edema due to excessive alveolocapillary permeability in patients with non-cardiogenic pulmonary diseases. Over the past seven decades, our understanding of the pathology and clinical characteristics of ARDS has evolved significantly, yet it remains an area of active research and discovery. ARDS is highly heterogeneous, including diverse pathological causes, clinical presentations, and treatment responses, presenting a significant challenge for clinicians and researchers. In this review, we comprehensively discuss the latest advancements in ARDS research, focusing on its heterogeneity, pathophysiological mechanisms, and emerging therapeutic approaches, such as cellular therapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy. Moreover, we also examine the pathological characteristics of COVID-19-related ARDS and discuss the corresponding therapeutic approaches. In the face of challenges posed by ARDS heterogeneity, recent advancements offer hope for improved patient outcomes. Further research is essential to translate these findings into effective clinical interventions and personalized treatment approaches for ARDS, ultimately leading to better outcomes for patients suffering from ARDS.

Antibody Aggregation: A Problem Within the Biopharmaceutical Industry and Its Role in AL Amyloidosis Disease

Due to the large size and rapid growth of the global therapeutic antibody market, there is major interest in understanding the aggregation of protein products as it can compromise efficacy, concentration, and safety. Various production and storage conditions have been identified as capable of inducing aggregation of polyclonal and monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies such as low pH, freezing, light exposure, lyophilisation and increased ionic strength. The addition of stabilising excipients to these therapeutics helps to combat the formation of aggregates with future aggregation inhibition mechanisms involving the introduction of point mutations and glycoengineering within aggregation prone regions (APRs). Antibody aggregation also plays an integral role in the pathogenesis of a condition known as amyloid light chain (AL) amyloidosis which is characterised by the production of improperly folded and amyloidogenic immunoglobulin light chains (LCs). Current diagnostic tools rely heavily on histological staining with their future moving towards amyloid component identification and proteomic analysis. For many years, treatment options designed for multiple myeloma (MM) have been applied to AL amyloidosis patients by depleting plasma cell numbers. More recently, treatment strategies more specific to this condition have been developed with many designed to recognize amyloid fibrils and trigger their degradation without causing systemic plasma cell cytotoxicity. Amyloid fibrils in AL disease and aggregates in antibody therapeutics are both formed through the oligomerisation of misfolded / modified proteins attempting to reach a thermodynamically stable, free energy minimum that is lower than the respective monomers themselves. Although the final morphologies are different, by understanding the principles underlying such aggregation, we expect to find common insights that may contribute to the development of new and effective methods of antibody aggregation and/or amyloidosis management. We envision that this area of research will continue to be very relevant in both industry and clinical settings.

Outcomes of intravenous immunoglobulin treatment of immunocompromised patients with viral respiratory infections

BACKGROUND

Limited guidelines exist for treating immunocompromised patients hospitalized for acute viral respiratory infection. Little is known about clinical and economic benefits of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) administration in patients with acute viral respiratory infections.

OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical and economic outcomes among immunocompromised patients hospitalized with viral respiratory infections who received IVIG with those who did not.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study on all patients hospitalized for a respiratory viral infection between 2011 and 2016 at 2 large academic centers including data on age, sex, virus species, immunosuppression type, and receipt of IVIG. Outcomes included death, hospital readmission, length of stay (LOS) in the hospital, and LOS in the intensive care unit (ICU).

RESULTS

A total of 270 patient admissions were reviewed, and 35.6% received IVIG. The average age was 40.6 years, 50% were female, and 74% were transplant patients. The most common virus was rhinovirus (50.7%). Use of IVIG was significantly associated with a shorter ICU LOS (β = -0.534, P = .012) and a longer hospital LOS (β = 0.887, P < .01). IVIG administered within 48 hours of hospitalization (n = 229) was associated with a shorter ICU LOS (β = -2.08, P = .001) and a shorter hospital LOS for patients hospitalized at least 2 days (β = -0.461, P = .007). There were no significant differences in readmission rates or death.

CONCLUSION

This double-center, retrospective cohort analysis is one of the first studies to evaluate the effect of IVIG on immunocompromised patients hospitalized with respiratory viral infections. IVIG was associated with a shorter hospital and ICU LOS, especially when administered within 48 hours of admission.

Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Immunoglobulin (IVIG) in Moderate-to-Severe Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Randomized, Open-Label Parallel-Group Study

Purpose

Since February 2020, the world has been overwhelmed by the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, and several patients suffered interstitial pneumonia and respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, threatening the capability of healthcare systems to handle this amount of critical cases. Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) possess potential immunomodulatory properties beneficial for COVID-19 patients, yet evidence supporting IVIG as adjunctive therapy remains sparse. This study evaluated the outcomes of adjunctive IVIG with the standard of care (SoC) in moderate-to-severe COVID-19 patients.

Methods

This randomized study included 59 moderate-to-severe COVID-19 patients with known comorbidities. One arm (n = 33) received high-dose IVIG (400 mg/kg/day) within 48 hours for five days alongside SoC, while the other arm (n = 26) received SoC, comprising steroids, enoxaparin, and remdesivir. The primary endpoint was clinical improvement, as measured by the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) and discharged/death proportions. Secondary outcomes included IVIG safety, hospitalization duration, changes in oxygen saturation, inflammatory markers, IgG titer, CTSS (CT severity score), and radiological findings.

Results

There was an improvement in the NEWS2 at the end of treatment in the IVIG arm (5.67 vs. 5.96). A significant absolute effect improvement (Day 1 vs. Day 9) was seen in serum LDH, D-dimer, hs-CRP, IL-6, CTSS, procalcitonin, respiratory rate, and chest radiographic findings. SARS-CoV-2 IgG titer increased significantly in the IVIG arm. There was a statistically significant reduction in mortality in the IVIG group (5 vs. 10).

Conclusion

IVIG was a safe and effective adjunctive therapy to SoC treatment in moderate-to-severe COVID-19 patients needing ventilatory support. Furthermore, studies are required to validate our findings. This trial is registered with CTRI/2021/05/033622.

Intravenous immunoglobulins for the treatment of prolonged COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients: a brief report

Primary humoral deficiency and secondary B-cell depletion may lead to prolonged Sars-Cov-2 infection due to a decreased viral clearance. Prolonged infection is mainly driven by the lack of anti-Sars-Cov-2 immunoglobulin (IVIg) especially in patients with no vaccine response. Anti-spike immunoglobulin can be provided by infusion of convalescent patients' plasma: recent studies highlighted that commercial immunoglobulin show high titers of neutralizing IgG. We conducted a single center retrospective cohort. We included 9 patients (6 males, median age 74 years old): one patient with X-linked agammaglobulinemia and 8 patients treated with rituximab (2 granulomatosis with polyangiitis, 1 neuromyelitis optica, 4 low grade B-cell lymphoma and 1 EBV post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder). Mean serum globulin was 4 ± 1.6 g/L. 7/8 had received at least 3 doses of mRNA anti-Sars-Cov-2 vaccine (median 4) with no response (anti-Spike IgG 0 for 6 patients). In this specific population requiring oxygen therapy but no intensive care support, the administration of IVIg was well tolerated and provided a swift improvement of clinical status, a significant decrease of inflammation associated to the an improvement of radiological patterns. Our results suggest that immunoglobulin could be used as a salvage therapy as an alternative to convalescent plasma but highly stringent patient selection is required due to the worldwide shortage of IVIg.

Impact of Anti-angiogenic Drugs on Severity of COVID-19 in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has reshaped oncology practice, but the impact of anti-angiogenic drugs on the severity of COVID-19 in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear. Patients and Methods: We carried out a retrospective study involving 166 consecutive patients with NSCLC who were positive for COVID-19, aiming to determine the effects of anti-angiogenic drugs on disease severity, as defined by severe/critical symptoms, intensive care unit (ICU) admission/intubation, and mortality outcomes. Risk factors were identified using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Results: Of the participants, 73 had been administered anti-angiogenic drugs (termed the anti-angiogenic therapy (AT) group), while 93 had not (non-AT group). Comparative analyses showed no significant disparity in the rates of severe/critical symptoms (21.9% vs 35.5%, P = 0.057), ICU admission/intubation (6.8% vs 7.5%, P = 0.867), or death (11.0% vs 9.7%, P = 0.787) between these two groups. However, elevated risk factors for worse outcomes included age ≥ 60 (odds ratio (OR): 2.52, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.07-5.92), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (OR: 21.29, 95% CI: 4.98-91.01), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR: 7.25, 95% CI: 1.65-31.81), hypertension (OR: 2.98, 95% CI: 1.20-7.39), and use of immunoglobulin (OR: 5.26, 95% CI: 1.06-26.25). Conclusion: Our data suggests that the use of anti-angiogenic drugs may not exacerbate COVID-19 severity in NSCLC patients, indicating their potential safe application even during the pandemic period.

Blood-derived product therapies for SARS-CoV-2 infection and long COVID

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is capable of large-scale transmission and has caused the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Patients with COVID-19 may experience persistent long-term health issues, known as long COVID. Both acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and long COVID have resulted in persistent negative impacts on global public health. The effective application and development of blood-derived products are important strategies to combat the serious damage caused by COVID-19. Since the emergence of COVID-19, various blood-derived products that target or do not target SARS-CoV-2 have been investigated for therapeutic applications. SARS-CoV-2-targeting blood-derived products, including COVID-19 convalescent plasma, COVID-19 hyperimmune globulin, and recombinant anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing immunoglobulin G, are virus-targeting and can provide immediate control of viral infection in the short term. Non-SARS-CoV-2-targeting blood-derived products, including intravenous immunoglobulin and human serum albumin exhibit anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antioxidant, and anticoagulatory properties. Rational use of these products can be beneficial to patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection or long COVID. With evidence accumulated since the pandemic began, we here summarize the progress of blood-derived product therapies for COVID-19, discuss the effective methods and scenarios regarding these therapies, and provide guidance and suggestions for clinical treatment.

Passive antibody therapy in emerging infectious diseases

The epidemic of corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 and its variants of concern (VOCs) has been ongoing for over 3 years. Antibody therapies encompassing convalescent plasma, hyperimmunoglobulin, and neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) applied in passive immunotherapy have yielded positive outcomes and played a crucial role in the early COVID-19 treatment. In this review, the development path, action mechanism, clinical research results, challenges, and safety profile associated with the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma, hyperimmunoglobulin, and mAbs were summarized. In addition, the prospects of applying antibody therapy against VOCs was assessed, offering insights into the coping strategies for facing new infectious disease outbreaks.

A study of factors affecting the length of hospital stay (LOS) of COVID-19 patients: A qualitative evidence in Iranian hospital

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to identify the administrators' and physicians' experiences and viewpoints about the factors affecting the length of stay (LOS) of COVID-19 patients and provide valid operational evidence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The current study was carried out qualitatively and phenomenologically on experts, officials, and administrators of hospitals in 2021. Purposeful sampling was performed with the maximum diversity. To achieve a comprehensive view, snowball sampling was conducted. Twenty-one experts in the field of healthcare and emerging diseases participated in this study. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect the data. The study sites were universities of medical sciences and hospitals of the Ministry of Health of Iran. The interview questions included questions about the factors affecting the LOS and strategies for controlling the LOS of COVID-19 patients in infectious units. Text analysis was performed through the content analysis method in MAXQDA-10 software.

RESULTS

Based on the experts' viewpoints, several factors affected the LOS in COVID-19 patients. These factors were divided into five clinical, preclinical, economic, social, and management subcategories. The proposed solutions included policy solutions (supportive policies, development of home care services, training and culture building, and establishment of clinical guidelines) and operational solutions (drug management, promotion of equipment and facilities, telehealth or telemedicine services, and promotion of clinical and support processes).

CONCLUSION

One of the main tasks of hospital administrators is identifying the factors affecting the reduction of LOS. Among these factors, clinical and management factors in the hospital are more important and need more planning and attention by hospital officials.

Multifaceted Tissue-Protective Functions of Polyvalent Immunoglobulin Preparations in Severe Infections-Interactions with Neutrophils, Complement, and Coagulation Pathways

Severe infections induce immune defense mechanisms and initial tissue damage, which produce an inflammatory neutrophil response. Upon dysregulation of these responses, inflammation, further tissue damage, and systemic spread of the pathogen may occur. Subsequent vascular inflammation and activation of coagulation processes may cause microvascular obstruction at sites distal to the primary site of infection. Low immunoglobulin (Ig) M and IgG levels have been detected in patients with severe infections like sCAP and sepsis, associated with increased severity and mortality. Based on Ig's modes of action, supplementation with polyvalent intravenous Ig preparations (standard IVIg or IgM/IgA-enriched Ig preparations) has long been discussed as a treatment option for severe infections. A prerequisite seems to be the timely administration of Ig preparations before excessive tissue damage has occurred and coagulopathy has developed. This review focuses on nonclinical and clinical studies that evaluated tissue-protective activities resulting from interactions of Igs with neutrophils, complement, and the coagulation system. The data indicate that coagulopathy, organ failure, and even death of patients can possibly be prevented by the timely combined interactions of (natural) IgM, IgA, and IgG with neutrophils and complement.

The prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in patients treated with hemodialysis

Patients treated with hemodialysis are often immunocompromised due to concomitant disease. As a result, this population is at high risk of infection and mortality from COVID-19. In addition to symptomatic treatment, a series of antiviral drugs targeting COVID-19 are now emerging. However, these antivirals are used mainly in mild or moderate patients with high-risk factors for progression to severe disease and are not available as pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19. There is a lack of clinical data on the use of anti-COVID-19 drugs, especially in patients treated with hemodialysis, therefore, vaccination remains the main measure to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in these patients. Here, we review the clinical features and prognosis of patients on hemodialysis infected with SARS-CoV-2, the main anti-COVID-19 drugs currently available for clinical use, and the safety and efficacy of anti-COVID-19 drugs or COVID-19 vaccination in patients treated with hemodialysis. This information will provide a reference for the treatment and vaccination of COVID-19 in patients treated with hemodialysis and maximize the health benefits of these patients during the outbreak.

SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibody therapies: Recent advances and future challenges

The COVID-19 pandemic represents an unparalleled global public health crisis. Despite concerted research endeavours, the repertoire of effective treatment options remains limited. However, neutralising-antibody-based therapies hold promise across an array of practices, encompassing the prophylaxis and management of acute infectious diseases. Presently, numerous investigations into COVID-19-neutralising antibodies are underway around the world, with some studies reaching clinical application stages. The advent of COVID-19-neutralising antibodies signifies the dawn of an innovative and promising strategy for treatment against SARS-CoV-2 variants. Comprehensively, our objective is to amalgamate contemporary understanding concerning antibodies targeting various regions, including receptor-binding domain (RBD), non-RBD, host cell targets, and cross-neutralising antibodies. Furthermore, we critically examine the prevailing scientific literature supporting neutralising antibody-based interventions, and also delve into the functional evaluation of antibodies, with a particular focus on in vitro (vivo) assays. Lastly, we identify and consider several pertinent challenges inherent to the realm of COVID-19-neutralising antibody-based treatments, offering insights into potential future directions for research and development.

Convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review

BACKGROUND

Convalescent plasma may reduce mortality in patients with viral respiratory diseases, and is being investigated as a potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A thorough understanding of the current body of evidence regarding benefits and risks of this intervention is required.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of convalescent plasma transfusion in the treatment of people with COVID-19; and to maintain the currency of the evidence using a living systematic review approach.

SEARCH METHODS

To identify completed and ongoing studies, we searched the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease Research Database, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and the Epistemonikos COVID-19 L*OVE Platform. We searched monthly until 03 March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating convalescent plasma for COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. We excluded studies that included populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)), as well as studies evaluating standard immunoglobulin.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies we used RoB 2. We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of evidence for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality at up to day 28, worsening and improvement of clinical status (for individuals with moderate to severe disease), hospital admission or death, COVID-19 symptoms resolution (for individuals with mild disease), quality of life, grade 3 or 4 adverse events, and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

In this fourth review update version, we included 33 RCTs with 24,861 participants, of whom 11,432 received convalescent plasma. Of these, nine studies are single-centre studies and 24 are multi-centre studies. Fourteen studies took place in America, eight in Europe, three in South-East Asia, two in Africa, two in western Pacific and three in eastern Mediterranean regions and one in multiple regions. We identified a further 49 ongoing studies evaluating convalescent plasma, and 33 studies reporting as being completed. Individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease 29 RCTs investigated the use of convalescent plasma for 22,728 participants with moderate to severe disease. 23 RCTs with 22,020 participants compared convalescent plasma to placebo or standard care alone, five compared to standard plasma and one compared to human immunoglobulin. We evaluate subgroups on detection of antibodies detection, symptom onset, country income groups and several co-morbidities in the full text. Convalescent plasma versus placebo or standard care alone Convalescent plasma does not reduce all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.03; 220 per 1000; 21 RCTs, 19,021 participants; high-certainty evidence). It has little to no impact on need for invasive mechanical ventilation, or death (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.11; 296 per 1000; 6 RCTs, 14,477 participants; high-certainty evidence) and has no impact on whether participants are discharged from hospital (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.02; 665 per 1000; 6 RCTs, 12,721 participants; high-certainty evidence). Convalescent plasma may have little to no impact on quality of life (MD 1.00, 95% CI -2.14 to 4.14; 1 RCT, 483 participants; low-certainty evidence). Convalescent plasma may have little to no impact on the risk of grades 3 and 4 adverse events (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.42; 212 per 1000; 6 RCTs, 2392 participants; low-certainty evidence). It has probably little to no effect on the risk of serious adverse events (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.44; 135 per 1000; 6 RCTs, 3901 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Convalescent plasma versus standard plasma We are uncertain whether convalescent plasma reduces or increases all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.19; 129 per 1000; 4 RCTs, 484 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether convalescent plasma reduces or increases the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, or death (RR 5.59, 95% CI 0.29 to 108.38; 311 per 1000; 1 study, 34 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and whether it reduces or increases the risk of serious adverse events (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.15; 236 per 1000; 3 RCTs, 327 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any study reporting other key outcomes. Convalescent plasma versus human immunoglobulin Convalescent plasma may have little to no effect on all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.50; 464 per 1000; 1 study, 190 participants; low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any study reporting other key outcomes. Individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mild disease We identified two RCTs reporting on 536 participants, comparing convalescent plasma to placebo or standard care alone, and two RCTs reporting on 1597 participants with mild disease, comparing convalescent plasma to standard plasma. Convalescent plasma versus placebo or standard care alone We are uncertain whether convalescent plasma reduces all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (odds ratio (OR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.46; 8 per 1000; 2 RCTs, 536 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It may have little to no effect on admission to hospital or death within 28 days (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.84; 117 per 1000; 1 RCT, 376 participants; low-certainty evidence), on time to COVID-19 symptom resolution (hazard ratio (HR) 1.05, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.30; 483 per 1000; 1 RCT, 376 participants; low-certainty evidence), on the risk of grades 3 and 4 adverse events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.19; 144 per 1000; 1 RCT, 376 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the risk of serious adverse events (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.94; 133 per 1000; 1 RCT, 376 participants; low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any study reporting other key outcomes. Convalescent plasma versus standard plasma We are uncertain whether convalescent plasma reduces all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.75; 2 per 1000; 2 RCTs, 1597 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It probably reduces admission to hospital or death within 28 days (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.75; 36 per 1000; 2 RCTs, 1595 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Convalescent plasma may have little to no effect on initial symptom resolution at up to day 28 (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.27; 1 RCT, 416 participants; low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any study reporting other key outcomes. This is a living systematic review. We search monthly for new evidence and update the review when we identify relevant new evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the comparison of convalescent plasma versus placebo or standard care alone, our certainty in the evidence that convalescent plasma for individuals with moderate to severe disease does not reduce mortality and has little to no impact on clinical improvement or worsening is high. It probably has little to no effect on SAEs. For individuals with mild disease, we have very-low to low certainty evidence for most primary outcomes and moderate certainty for hospital admission or death. There are 49 ongoing studies, and 33 studies reported as complete in a trials registry. Publication of ongoing studies might resolve some of the uncertainties around convalescent plasma therapy for people with asymptomatic or mild disease.

Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in severe/critical COVID-19 adult patients

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a huge obstacle to the health system due to the high rate of contagion. It is postulated that intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) can lower the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related inflammation and prevent the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The main advantages of IVIG treatment might be targeting cytokine storm in severe and critical COVID-19 by influences on complement, innate immune cells, effector T-cells, and Tregs. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs evaluating the safety and efficacy of IVIG in patients with severe/critical COVID-19 were performed. It seems that early administration of high-dose IVIG (in the acceleration phase of the disease) in severe or especially critical COVID-19 may be an effective therapeutic option, but there are no strong data to use it routinely. The results regarding mortality reduction are inconclusive. Additionally, IVIG treatment carries a risk of complications that should be considered when initiating treatment. However, given the COVID-19 mortality rate and limited therapeutic options, the use of IVIG is worth considering. This review summarizes the development and highlights recent advances in treatment with IVIG of severe/critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Adults Associated With COVID-19: A Case Series on the Importance of Early Diagnosis and Corticosteroid Therapy in Prognosis

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A) is a rare condition that can occur after an adult has been infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It can occur anywhere between two and 12 weeks after the beginning of acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and is characterized by extrapulmonary multiorgan failure. It is primarily seen in young and previously healthy individuals. The exact prevalence of MIS-A is unclear. It is likely underdiagnosed due to overlapping symptoms with severe COVID-19 and difficulty in identifying the syndrome without a preceding COVID-19 infection. The pathogenesis of MIS-A is also largely unknown but is likely caused by an immune response that is dysregulated or antibody-mediated. Treatment primarily involves corticosteroids, but severe cases may require intravenous immune globulin (IVIG). The timing of starting corticosteroid therapy is crucial, as delays can result in increased complications and a longer hospital stay.

Convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review

BACKGROUND

Convalescent plasma may reduce mortality in patients with viral respiratory diseases, and is being investigated as a potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A thorough understanding of the current body of evidence regarding benefits and risks of this intervention is required.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of convalescent plasma transfusion in the treatment of people with COVID-19; and to maintain the currency of the evidence using a living systematic review approach.

SEARCH METHODS

To identify completed and ongoing studies, we searched the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease Research Database, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and the Epistemonikos COVID-19 L*OVE Platform. We searched monthly until 03 March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating convalescent plasma for COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. We excluded studies that included populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)), as well as studies evaluating standard immunoglobulin.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies we used RoB 2. We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of evidence for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality at up to day 28, worsening and improvement of clinical status (for individuals with moderate to severe disease), hospital admission or death, COVID-19 symptoms resolution (for individuals with mild disease), quality of life, grade 3 or 4 adverse events, and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

In this fourth review update version, we included 33 RCTs with 24,861 participants, of whom 11,432 received convalescent plasma. Of these, nine studies are single-centre studies and 24 are multi-centre studies. Fourteen studies took place in America, eight in Europe, three in South-East Asia, two in Africa, two in western Pacific and three in eastern Mediterranean regions and one in multiple regions. We identified a further 49 ongoing studies evaluating convalescent plasma, and 33 studies reporting as being completed. Individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease 29 RCTs investigated the use of convalescent plasma for 22,728 participants with moderate to severe disease. 23 RCTs with 22,020 participants compared convalescent plasma to placebo or standard care alone, five compared to standard plasma and one compared to human immunoglobulin. We evaluate subgroups on detection of antibodies detection, symptom onset, country income groups and several co-morbidities in the full text. Convalescent plasma versus placebo or standard care alone Convalescent plasma does not reduce all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.03; 220 per 1000; 21 RCTs, 19,021 participants; high-certainty evidence). It has little to no impact on need for invasive mechanical ventilation, or death (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.11; 296 per 1000; 6 RCTs, 14,477 participants; high-certainty evidence) and has no impact on whether participants are discharged from hospital (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.02; 665 per 1000; 6 RCTs, 12,721 participants; high-certainty evidence). Convalescent plasma may have little to no impact on quality of life (MD 1.00, 95% CI -2.14 to 4.14; 1 RCT, 483 participants; low-certainty evidence). Convalescent plasma may have little to no impact on the risk of grades 3 and 4 adverse events (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.42; 212 per 1000; 6 RCTs, 2392 participants; low-certainty evidence). It has probably little to no effect on the risk of serious adverse events (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.44; 135 per 1000; 6 RCTs, 3901 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Convalescent plasma versus standard plasma We are uncertain whether convalescent plasma reduces or increases all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.19; 129 per 1000; 4 RCTs, 484 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether convalescent plasma reduces or increases the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, or death (RR 5.59, 95% CI 0.29 to 108.38; 311 per 1000; 1 study, 34 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and whether it reduces or increases the risk of serious adverse events (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.15; 236 per 1000; 3 RCTs, 327 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any study reporting other key outcomes. Convalescent plasma versus human immunoglobulin Convalescent plasma may have little to no effect on all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.50; 464 per 1000; 1 study, 190 participants; low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any study reporting other key outcomes. Individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mild disease We identified two RCTs reporting on 536 participants, comparing convalescent plasma to placebo or standard care alone, and two RCTs reporting on 1597 participants with mild disease, comparing convalescent plasma to standard plasma. Convalescent plasma versus placebo or standard care alone We are uncertain whether convalescent plasma reduces all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (odds ratio (OR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.46; 8 per 1000; 2 RCTs, 536 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It may have little to no effect on admission to hospital or death within 28 days (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.84; 117 per 1000; 1 RCT, 376 participants; low-certainty evidence), on time to COVID-19 symptom resolution (hazard ratio (HR) 1.05, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.30; 483 per 1000; 1 RCT, 376 participants; low-certainty evidence), on the risk of grades 3 and 4 adverse events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.19; 144 per 1000; 1 RCT, 376 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the risk of serious adverse events (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.94; 133 per 1000; 1 RCT, 376 participants; low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any study reporting other key outcomes. Convalescent plasma versus standard plasma We are uncertain whether convalescent plasma reduces all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.75; 2 per 1000; 2 RCTs, 1597 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It probably reduces admission to hospital or death within 28 days (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.75; 36 per 1000; 2 RCTs, 1595 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Convalescent plasma may have little to no effect on initial symptom resolution at up to day 28 (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.27; 1 RCT, 416 participants; low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any study reporting other key outcomes. This is a living systematic review. We search monthly for new evidence and update the review when we identify relevant new evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the comparison of convalescent plasma versus placebo or standard care alone, our certainty in the evidence that convalescent plasma for individuals with moderate to severe disease does not reduce mortality and has little to no impact on clinical improvement or worsening is high. It probably has little to no effect on SAEs. For individuals with mild disease, we have low certainty evidence for our primary outcomes. There are 49 ongoing studies, and 33 studies reported as complete in a trials registry. Publication of ongoing studies might resolve some of the uncertainties around convalescent plasma therapy for people with asymptomatic or mild disease.

Benefits of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin on mortality in patients with severe COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The clinical benefits of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) in treating COVID-19 remained controversial.

Methods

We systematically searched databases up to February 17, 2022, for studies examining the efficacy of IVIg compared to routine care. Meta-analyses were conducted using the random-effects model. Subgroup analysis, meta-regression, and trial series analysis w ere performed to explore heterogeneity and statistical significance.

Results

A total of 4,711 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (1,925 IVIg treated and 2786 control) were collected from 17 studies, including five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 12 cohort studies. The application of IVIg was not associated with all-cause mortality (RR= 0.89 [0.63, 1.26], P= 0.53; I² = 75%), the length of hospital stays (MD= 0.29 [-3.40, 6.44] days, P= 0.88; I2 = 96%), the needs for mechanical ventilation (RR= 0.93 ([0.73, 1.19], P= 0.31; I2 = 56%), or the incidence of adverse events (RR= 1.15 [0.99, 1.33], P= 0.06; I2 = 20%). Subgroup analyses showed that overall mortality among patients with severe COVID-19 was reduced in the high-dose IVIg subgroup (RR= 0.33 [0.13, 0.86], P= 0.02, I² = 68%; very low certainty).

Conclusions

Results of this study suggest that severe hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with high-dose IVIg would have a lower risk of death than patients with routine care.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021231040, identifier CRD42021231040.

Critical illness-associated weakness and related motor disorders

Weakness of limb and respiratory muscles that occurs in the course of critical illness has become an increasingly common and serious complication of adult and pediatric intensive care unit patients and a cause of prolonged ventilatory support, morbidity, and prolonged hospitalization. Two motor disorders that occur singly or together, namely critical illness polyneuropathy and critical illness myopathy, cause weakness of limb and of breathing muscles, making it difficult to be weaned from ventilatory support, commencing rehabilitation, and extending the length of stay in the intensive care unit, with higher rates of morbidity and mortality. Recovery can take weeks or months and in severe cases, and may be incomplete or absent. Recent findings suggest an improved prognosis of critical illness myopathy compared to polyneuropathy. Prevention and treatment are therefore very important. Its management requires an integrated team approach commencing with neurologic consultation, creatine kinase (CK) measurement, detailed electrodiagnostic, respiratory and neuroimaging studies, and potentially muscle biopsy to elucidate the etiopathogenesis of the weakness in the peripheral and/or central nervous system, for which there may be a variety of causes. These tenets of care are being applied to new cases and survivors of the coronavirus-2 disease pandemic of 2019. This chapter provides an update to the understanding and approach to critical illness motor disorders.

Effectiveness of mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin, compared to other biomarkers (including lymphocyte subpopulations and immunoglobulins), as a prognostic biomarker in COVID-19 critically ill patients: New evidence from a 15-month observational prospective study

Background

Mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM), an endothelium-related peptide, is a predictor of death and multi-organ failure in respiratory infections and sepsis and seems to be effective in identifying COVID-19 severe forms. The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of MR-proADM in comparison to routine inflammatory biomarkers, lymphocyte subpopulations, and immunoglobulin (Ig) at an intensive care unit (ICU) admission and over time in predicting mortality in patients with severe COVID-19.

Methods

All adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted between March 2020 and June 2021 in the ICUs of a university hospital in Italy were enrolled. MR-proADM, lymphocyte subpopulations, Ig, and routine laboratory tests were measured within 48 h and on days 3 and 7. The log-rank test was used to compare survival curves with MR-proADM cutoff value of >1.5 nmol/L. Predictive ability was compared using the area under the curve (AUC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of different receiver-operating characteristic curves.

Results

A total of 209 patients, with high clinical severity [SOFA 7, IQR 4-9; SAPS II 52, IQR 41-59; median viral pneumonia mortality score (MuLBSTA)-11, IQR 9-13] were enrolled. ICU and overall mortality were 55.5 and 60.8%, respectively. Procalcitonin, lactate dehydrogenase, D-dimer, the N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide, myoglobin, troponin, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, and natural killer lymphocyte count were significantly different between survivors and non-survivors, while lymphocyte subpopulations and Ig were not different in the two groups. MR-proADM was significantly higher in non-survivors (1.17 ± 0.73 vs. 2.31 ± 2.63, p < 0.0001). A value of >1.5 nmol/L was an independent risk factor for mortality at day 28 [odds ratio of 1.9 (95% CI: 1.220-3.060)] after adjusting for age, lactate at admission, SOFA, MuLBSTA, superinfections, cardiovascular disease, and respiratory disease. On days 3 and 7 of the ICU stay, the MR-proADM trend evaluated within 48 h of admission maintained a correlation with mortality (p < 0.0001). Compared to all other biomarkers considered, the MR-proADM value within 48 h had the best accuracy in predicting mortality at day 28 [AUC = 0.695 (95% CI: 0.624-0.759)].

Conclusion

MR-proADM seems to be the best biomarker for the stratification of mortality risk in critically ill patients with COVID-19. The Ig levels and lymphocyte subpopulations (except for natural killers) seem not to be correlated with mortality. Larger, multicentric studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Intravenous IgM-enriched immunoglobulins in critical COVID-19: a multicentre propensity-weighted cohort study

Background

A profound inflammation-mediated lung injury with long-term acute respiratory distress and high mortality is one of the major complications of critical COVID-19. Immunoglobulin M (IgM)-enriched immunoglobulins seem especially capable of mitigating the inflicted inflammatory harm. However, the efficacy of intravenous IgM-enriched preparations in critically ill patients with COVID-19 is largely unclear.

Methods

In this retrospective multicentric cohort study, 316 patients with laboratory-confirmed critical COVID-19 were treated in ten German and Austrian ICUs between May 2020 and April 2021. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Analysis was performed by Cox regression models. Covariate adjustment was performed by propensity score weighting using machine learning-based SuperLearner to overcome the selection bias due to missing randomization. In addition, a subgroup analysis focusing on different treatment regimens and patient characteristics was performed.

Results

Of the 316 ICU patients, 146 received IgM-enriched immunoglobulins and 170 cases did not, which served as controls. There was no survival difference between the two groups in terms of mortality at 30 days in the overall cohort (HR_adj: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.55 to 1.25; p = 0.374). An improved 30-day survival in patients without mechanical ventilation at the time of the immunoglobulin treatment did not reach statistical significance (HR_adj: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.05 to 1.08; p = 0.063). Also, no statistically significant difference was observed in the subgroup when a daily dose of ≥ 15 g and a duration of ≥ 3 days of IgM-enriched immunoglobulins were applied (HR_adj: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.41 to 1.03; p = 0.068).

Conclusions

Although we cannot prove a statistically reliable effect of intravenous IgM-enriched immunoglobulins, the confidence intervals may suggest a clinically relevant effect in certain subgroups. Here, an early administration (i.e. in critically ill but not yet mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients) and a dose of ≥ 15 g for at least 3 days may confer beneficial effects without concerning safety issues. However, these findings need to be validated in upcoming randomized clinical trials.

Trial registrationDRKS00025794, German Clinical Trials Register, https://www.drks.de. Registered 6 July 2021.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04059-0.

Assessment of drugs administered in the Middle East as part of the COVID-19 management protocols

The pandemic spread of coronavirus (COVID-19) has been reported first at the end of 2019. It continues disturbing various human aspects with multiple pandemic waves showing more fatal novel variants. Now Egypt faces the sixth wave of the pandemic with controlled governmental measures. COVID-19 is an infectious respiratory disease-causing mild to moderate illness that can be progressed into life-threatening complications based on patients- and variant type-related factors. The symptoms vary from dry cough, fever to difficulty in breathing that required urgent hospitalization. Most countries have authorized their national protocols for managing manifested symptoms and thus lowering the rate of patients' hospitalization and boosting the healthcare systems. These protocols are still in use even with the development and approval of several vaccines. These protocols were instructed to aid home isolation, bed rest, dietary supplements, and additionally the administration of antipyretic, steroids, and antiviral drugs. The current review aimed to highlight the administered protocols in the Middle East, namely in Egypt and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia demonstrating how these protocols have shown potential effectiveness in treating patients and saving many soles.

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) therapy in hospitalised adult COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) therapy has been suggested as a potential treatment option for hospitalised COVID-19 patients. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the potential impact of IVIg on mortality and length of hospitalisation in adult COVID-19 patients. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and medRxiv were searched in the week of 20.12.2021 for English language, prospective trials, and retrospective studies with control groups, reporting on the use of intravenous immunoglobulin therapy in adult hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Exclusion criteria were: studies evaluating the use of IVIg in paediatric COVID-19 cases, trials using convalescent anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma or immunoglobulins derived from convalescent anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma. A random effects meta-analysis with subgroup analyses regarding study design and patient disease severity according to WHO criteria was also performed. A total of 13 studies were included, of which 6 were prospective, on a total of 2313 (IVIg = 1104, control = 1209) patient outcomes. Meta-analysis results indicated that IVIg therapy had no statistically significant effect on mortality (RR 0.91 [0.59; 1.39], p = 0.65, I2  = 69% [46%; 83%]) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.51 [-2.80; 3.81], p = 0.76, I2  = 96% [94%; 98%]). Subgroup analyses indicated no statistically significant impact on either outcome, but prospective studies' results suggested that IVIg may increase the length of hospitalisation in the severe COVID-19 patient group (MD 2.66 [1.43; 3.90], p < 0.01, I2  = 0% [0%; >90%]). The results of this meta-analysis do not support use of IVIg in hospitalised adult COVID-19 patients.

Intravenous cannula induced phlebitis in a tertiary care referral hospital: A prospective observational study with implication from patient's feedback system

BACKGROUND

Medicines delivered directly to systemic circulation have saved many lives from life-threatening conditions, but also can impart undesirable effects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective observational study was performed for 10 months in the tertiary care hospital to identify and evaluate cannula induced phlebitis in our study population. The data collection form retrieved demographic details, diseases and cannulation particulars of each patient. Moreover, a patient feedback questionnaire (Cronbach's alpha=0.70) retrieved their concerns toward cannulation.

RESULTS

Phlebitis was identified in 96 patients out of 146 subjects enrolled in the study; 52% had the first sign of phlebitis. Female patients were more prone, and the complication occurred irrespective of age (p>0.05). On the other hand, those on IV cefoperazone-sulbactam (n=13, 13.5%) followed by amoxicillin clavulanic acid (n=6, 6%) had significant cannulation complication (p<0.01). The cannula indwells time (p=0.001) and vein assessment (p=0.001) were statistically associated with incidence of phlebitis. Half of our samples had pain lasting about five minutes (χ²=9.2, p<0.05). Nevertheless, limited patients (n = 35, 36.5%) were prescribed topical Heparin Benzyl Nitrate, and none preferred to self-medicate nor opted for other home remedies.

CONCLUSIONS

The study depicted high prevalence of phlebitis factored in by poor vein assessment and increase in indwelling time. We recommend proper awareness with on-site skill improvement program for health professionals on administration techniques and monitoring principles in order to lower cannulation related complications.

Immunomodulatory therapy for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Understanding the physiological and immunological processes underlying the clinical manifestations of COVID-19 is vital for the identification and rational design of effective therapies.

AIM

To describe the interaction of SARS-CoV-2 with the immune system and the subsequent contribution of hyperinflammation and abnormal immune responses to disease progression together with a complete narrative review of the different immunoadjuvant treatments used so far in COVID-19 and their indication in severe and life-threatening subsets.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was developed. Authors reviewed the selected manuscripts following the PRISMA recommendations for systematic review and meta-analysis documents and selected the most appropriate. Finally, a recommendation of the use of each treatment was established based on the level of evidence of the articles and documents reviewed. This recommendation was made based on the consensus of all the authors.

RESULTS

A brief rationale on the SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis, immune response, and inflammation was developed. The usefulness of 10 different families of treatments related to inflammation and immunopathogenesis of COVID-19 was reviewed and discussed. Finally, based on the level of scientific evidence, a recommendation was established for each of them.

CONCLUSION

Although several promising therapies exist, only the use of corticosteroids and tocilizumab (or sarilumab in absence of this) have demonstrated evidence enough to recommend its use in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Endotypes including both, clinical and biological characteristics can constitute specific targets for better select certain therapies based on an individualized approach to treatment.

A database of anti-coronavirus peptides

Since 2019, the novel coronavirus (SARS-COV-2) disease (COVID-19) has caused a worldwide epidemic. Anti-coronavirus peptides (ACovPs), a type of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs), have demonstrated excellent inhibitory effects on coronaviruses. However, state-of-the-art AMP databases contain only a small number of ACovPs. Additionally, the fields of these databases are not uniform, and the units or evaluation standards of the same field are inconsistent. Most of these databases have not included the target domains of ACovPs and description of in vitro and in vivo assays to measure the inhibitory effects of ACovPs. Here, we present a database focused on ACovPs (ACovPepDB), which contains comprehensive and precise ACovPs information of 518 entries with 214 unique ACovPs manually collected from public databases and published peer-reviewed articles. We believe that ACovPepDB is of great significance for facilitating the development of new peptides and improving treatment for coronavirus infection. The database will become a portal for ACovPs and guide and help researchers perform further studies. The ACovPepDB is available at http://i.uestc.edu.cn/ACovPepDB/.

Measurement(s)	Inhibition effect of anti-coronavirus peptide
Technology Type(s)	Antiviral assay

Lipid rafts as viral entry routes and immune platforms: A double-edged sword in SARS-CoV-2 infection?

Lipid rafts are nanoscopic compartments of cell membranes that serve a variety of biological functions. They play a crucial role in viral infections, as enveloped viruses such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can exploit rafts to enter or quit target cells. On the other hand, lipid rafts contribute to the formation of immune synapses and their proper functioning is a prerequisite for adequate immune response and viral clearance. In this narrative review we dissect the panorama focusing on this singular aspect of cell biology in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection and therapy. A lipid raft-mediated mechanism can be hypothesized for many drugs recommended or considered for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection, such as glucocorticoids, antimalarials, immunosuppressants and antiviral agents. Furthermore, the additional use of lipid-lowering agents, like statins, may affect the lipid composition of membrane rafts and thus influence the processes occurring in these compartments. The combination of drugs acting on lipid rafts may be successful in the treatment of more severe forms of the disease and should be reserved for further investigation.

Therapeutic approaches and vaccination in fighting COVID-19 infections: A review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a remarkably contagious and pathogenic viral infection arising from the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which first appeared in Wuhan, China. For the time being, COVID-19 is not treated with a specific therapy. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Remdesivir as the first drug to treat COVID-19. However, many other therapeutic approaches are being investigated as possible treatments for COVID-19. As part of this review, we discussed the development of various drugs, their mechanism of action, and how they might be applied to different cases of COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, this review highlights an update in the emergence of new prophylactic or therapeutic vaccines against COVID-19. In addition to FDA or The World Health Organization (WHO) approved vaccines, we intended to incorporate the latest published data from phase III trials about different COVID-19 vaccines and provide clinical data released on the networks or peer-review journals.

Drugs repurposing for SARS-CoV-2: new insight of COVID-19 druggability

INTRODUCTION

The ongoing epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) creates a massive panic worldwide due to the absence of effective medicines. Developing a new drug or vaccine is time-consuming to pass safety and efficacy testing. Therefore, repurposing drugs have been introduced to treat COVID-19 until effective drugs are developed.

AREA COVERED

A detailed search of repurposing drugs against SARS-CoV-2 was carried out using the PubMed database, focusing on articles published 2020 years onward. A different class of drugs has been described in this article to target hosts and viruses. Based on the previous pandemic experience of SARS-CoV and MERS, several antiviral and antimalarial drugs are discussed here. This review covers the failure of some repurposed drugs that showed promising activity in the earlier CoV-pandemic but were found ineffective against SARS-CoV-2. All these discussions demand a successful drug development strategy for screening and identifying an effective drug for better management of COVID-19. The drug development strategies described here will serve a new scope of research for academicians and researchers.

EXPERT OPINION

Repurposed drugs have been used since COVID-19 to eradicate disease propagation. Drugs found effective for MERS and SARS may not be effective against SARS-CoV-2. Drug libraries and artificial intelligence are helpful tools to screen and identify different molecules targeting viruses or hosts.

Efficacy of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin in severe and critical COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Coronavirus disease 2019 in Saudi Arabia: A nationwide real-world characterization study

Background

On March 11th, 2020, The World Health Organization (WHO) declared that the COVID-19 is a pandemic due to its worldwide spread. The COVID-19 pandemic has extended its impact to Saudi Arabia. By mid-February 2021, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has reported more than 373,000 COVID-19 cases impacting different population categories (i.e., male, female, different age groups, comorbidities status). The objective of this nationwide study was to describe and explore the characteristics of hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia.

Methods

This study was an observational epidemiological study based on collected clinical data from ten health institutions across all regions in Saudi Arabia. The study was conducted during the period from March 2nd, 2020, to January 31st, 2021. The data were collected included demographics, medical information, medications, and laboratory and diagnostic. More detailed information on usually missing factors such as smoking status, comorbidities, length of hospital stay were also collected. Both descriptive and inferential analyses were conducted using the statistical analysis software "SAS®" version 9.4.

Results

During the study period, 5286 patients were included in this study. Of these, (79.15%) were male. Of all 5286 patients, quite a high number of the studied population 2010 (38.02%) were smokers. The majority of the patients 3436 (65%) were reported to have comorbidities, with hypertension being the most common disease 1725 (32.6%), followed by diabetes 1641(31.04%). A high proportion of the patients, 2220 patients (41.99%), were admitted to the intensive care unit; of these, (33.52%) were on mechanical ventilation. Most patients received anticoagulant prophylaxis medications (n = 4414, 83.5%). All patients were given more than one antibiotic prophylaxis. Overall, the median hospital stay was 5.5 days, and the median length in the intensive care unit was 4.26 days. Around (89.14%) of patients were discharged from the hospital, and (10.8%) died.

Conclusion

In this real-world study utilizing a large sample size, this study provides confirmatory results on the COVID-19 patients characteristics that are similar to other populations. Healthcare professionals need to give COVID-19 patients with specific characteristics including smoking, diabetes mellitus and cardiac disease more care to avoid losing these patients.

Antibody and T Cell Immune Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Peptides in COVID-19 Convalescent Patients

Identifying immunogenic targets of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is critical to advance diagnostic and disease control strategies. We analyzed humoral (ELISA) and T-cell (ELISpot) immune responses to spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N) SARS-CoV-2 proteins as well as to human endemic coronavirus (eCoV) peptides in serum from convalescent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients from Tatarstan, Russia. We identified multiple SARS-CoV-2 peptides that were reactive with serum antibodies and T cells from convalescent COVID-19. In addition, age and gender associated differences in the reactivity to S and N protein peptides were identified. Moreover, several SARS-CoV-2 peptides tested negatively correlated with disease severity and lung damage. Cross-reactivity to eCoV peptides was analyzed and found to be lower in COVID-19 compared to controls. In this study, we demonstrate the changing pattern of immunogenic peptide reactivity in COVID-19 serum based on age, gender and previous exposure to eCoVs. These data highlight how humoral immune responses and cytotoxic T cell responses to some of these peptides could contribute to SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis.

Impact of Hypogammaglobulinemia on the Course of COVID-19 in a Non-Intensive Care Setting: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Severity and mortality of COVID-19 largely depends on the ability of the immune system to clear the virus. Among various comorbidities potentially impacting on this process, the weight and the consequences of an antibody deficiency have not yet been clarified.

Methods

We used serum protein electrophoresis to screen for hypogammaglobulinemia in a cohort of consecutive adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, hospitalized in non-intensive care setting between December 2020 and January 2021. The disease severity, measured by a validated score and by the need for semi intensive (sICU) or intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and the 30-day mortality was compared between patients presenting hypogammaglobulinemia (HYPO) and without hypogammaglobulinemia (no-HYPO). Demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 specific treatment during the hospital stay, disease duration, complications and laboratory parameters were also evaluated in both groups.

Results

We enrolled 374 patients, of which 39 represented the HYPO cohort (10.4%). In 10/39 the condition was previously neglected, while in the other 29/39 hematologic malignancies were common (61.5%); 2/39 were on regular immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT). Patients belonging to the HYPO group more frequently developed a severe COVID-19 and more often required sICU/ICU admission than no-HYPO patients. IgRT were administered in 8/39 during hospitalization; none of them died or needed sICU/ICU. Among HYPO cohort, we observed a significantly higher prevalence of neoplastic affections, of active oncologic treatment and bronchiectasis, together with higher prevalence of viral and bacterial superinfections, mechanical ventilation, convalescent plasma and SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies administration during hospital stay, and longer disease duration. Multivariate logistic regression analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression confirmed the impact of hypogammaglobulinemia on the COVID-19 severity and the probability of sICU/ICU admission. The analysis of the mortality rate in the whole cohort showed no significant difference between HYPO and no-HYPO.

Conclusions

Hypogammaglobulinemia, regardless of its cause, in COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a non-intensive care setting was associated to a more severe disease course and more frequent admission to s-ICU/ICU, particularly in absence of IgRT. Our findings emphasize the add-value of routine serum protein electrophoresis evaluation in patients admitted with COVID-19 to support clinicians in patient care and to consider IgRT initiation during hospitalization.

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.

Refractory primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP): current clinical challenges and therapeutic perspectives

Chronic primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) can today benefit from multiple therapeutic approaches with proven clinical efficacy, including rituximab, thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RA), and splenectomy. However, some ITP patients are unresponsive to multiple lines of therapy with prolonged and severe thrombocytopenia. The diagnosis of refractory ITP is mainly performed by exclusion of other disorders and is based on the clinician's expertise. However, it significantly increases the risk of drug-related toxicity and of bleedings, including life-threatening events. The management of refractory ITP remains a major clinical challenge. Here, we provide an overview of the currently available treatment options, and we discuss the emerging rationale of new therapeutic approaches and their strategic combination. Particularly, combination strategies may target multiple pathogenetic mechanisms and trigger additive or synergistic effects. A series of best practices arising both from published studies and from real-life clinical experience is also included, aiming to optimize the management of refractory ITP.

The outcome of using intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in critically ill COVID-19 patients': a retrospective, multi-centric cohort study

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, different treatments have been used in critically ill patients. Using intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) has been suggested in various studies as an effective option. Our study aims to access the efficacy of IVIG in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective matched cohort study, records of three tertiary centers with a large number of COVID-19 admissions were evaluated and used. Based on treatment options, patients were divided into two groups, standard COVID-19 treatment (109 patients) and IVIG treatment (74 patients) patients. Also, the effect of IVIG in different dosages was evaluated. Patients with IVIG treatment were divided into three groups of low (0.25 gr/kg), medium (0.5 gr/kg), and high (1 gr/kg) dose. Data analysis was performed using an independent t test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare the outcomes between two groups, including duration of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and mortality rate.

RESULTS

The duration of hospitalization in the IVIG group was significantly longer than standard treatment (13.74 days vs. 11.10 days, p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in ICU length of stay, the number of intubated patients, and duration of mechanical ventilation (p > 0.05). Also, initial outcomes in IVIG subgroups were compared separately with the standard treatment group. The results indicated that only the duration of hospitalization in the IVIG subgroup with medium dose is significantly longer than the standard treatment group (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Our data indicate that the use of IVIG in critically ill COVID-19 patients could not be beneficial, based on no remarkable differences in duration of hospitalization, ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and even mortality rate.

Intravenous immunoglobulins in patients with COVID-19-associated moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ICAR): multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a major complication of COVID-19 and is associated with high mortality and morbidity. We aimed to assess whether intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) could improve outcomes by reducing inflammation-mediated lung injury.

METHODS

In this multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, done at 43 centres in France, we randomly assigned patients (1:1) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for up to 72 h with PCR confirmed COVID-19 and associated moderate-to-severe ARDS to receive either IVIG (2 g/kg over 4 days) or placebo. Random assignment was done with a web-based system and was stratified according to the participating centre and the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation before inclusion in the trial (<12 h, 12-24 h, and >24-72 h), and treatment was administered within the first 96 h of invasive mechanical ventilation. To minimise the risk of adverse events, the IVIG administration was divided into four perfusions of 0·5 g/kg each administered over at least 8 hours. Patients in the placebo group received an equivalent volume of sodium chloride 0·9% (10 mL/kg) over the same period. The primary outcome was the number of ventilation-free days by day 28, assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04350580.

FINDINGS

Between April 3, and October 20, 2020, 146 patients (43 [29%] women) were eligible for inclusion and randomly assigned: 69 (47%) patients to the IVIG group and 77 (53%) to the placebo group. The intention-to-treat analysis showed no statistical difference in the median number of ventilation-free days at day 28 between the IVIG group (0·0 [IQR 0·0-8·0]) and the placebo group (0·0 [0·0-6·0]; difference estimate 0·0 [0·0-0·0]; p=0·21). Serious adverse events were more frequent in the IVIG group (78 events in 22 [32%] patients) than in the placebo group (47 events in 15 [20%] patients; p=0·089).

INTERPRETATION

In patients with COVID-19 who received invasive mechanical ventilation for moderate-to-severe ARDS, IVIG did not improve clinical outcomes at day 28 and tended to be associated with an increased frequency of serious adverse events, although not significant. The effect of IVIGs on earlier disease stages of COVID-19 should be assessed in future trials.

FUNDING

Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique.

TREATMENT OF MYASTHENIA GRAVIS PATIENTS WITH COVID-19: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the late 2019 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), causes a respiratory disease which could put myasthenia gravis (MG) patients at a greater risk of developing severe disease course, since infections and some drugs are a well-recognized trigger of symptom exacerbation in MG patients. Out of ten most commonly used past and present drugs used in COVID-19 treatment, two (quinolone derivatives and azithromycin) are known to worsen MG symptoms, whereas another two (tocilizumab and eculizumab) might have positive effect on MG symptoms. Colchicine, remdesivir, lopinavir, ritonavir and favipiravir seem to be safe to use, while data are insufficient for bamlanivimab, although it is also probably safe to use. Considering MG treatment options in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, acetylcholine esterase inhibitors are generally safe to use with some preliminary studies even demonstrating therapeutic properties in regard to COVID-19. Corticosteroids are in general safe to use, even recommended in specific circumstances, whereas other immunosuppressive medications (mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate) are probably safe to use. The only exception is rituximab since the resulting B cell depletion can lead to more severe COVID-19 disease. Concerning plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulins, both can be used in COVID-19 while taking into consideration thromboembolic properties of the former and hemodynamic disturbances of the latter. As current data suggest, all known COVID-19 vaccines are safe to use in MG patients.

Efficacy of High-Dose Polyclonal Intravenous Immunoglobulin in COVID-19: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Although several therapeutic strategies have been investigated, the optimal treatment approach for patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) remains to be elucidated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of polyclonal intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) therapy in COVID-19.

METHODS

A systematic literature search using appropriate medical subject heading (MeSH) terms was performed through Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, SCOPUS, OVID and Cochrane Library electronic databases. The main outcomes considered were mortality and safety of IVIG versus placebo/standard of care. This review was carried out in accordance with Cochrane methodology including the risk bias assessment and grading of the quality of evidence. Measures of treatment effect were mean differences (MD) together with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcome measures and risk ratio (RR) or MD for binary outcomes. Two reviewers independently extracted data from individual studies, and disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer.

RESULTS

A total of 2401 COVID-19 patients from 10 studies (four randomized controlled trials (RCT) and six non-randomized controlled trials (non-RCTs)) were included in the analysis. Participants received IVIG or placebo/standard of care. The use of IVIG was not associated with a significantly reduced risk of death (RR 0.50, 95% CIs 0.18-1.36, p = 0.17 for RCTs; RR 0.95, 95% CIs 0.61-1.58, p = 0.94 for non-RCTs; low certainty of evidence). IVIG significantly reduced the length of hospital stay (MD -2.24, 95% CIs -3.20/-1.27; p = 0.00001; low certainty of evidence), although this difference was significant only for studies evaluating moderate COVID-19 patients. No significant difference was observed in the incidence of overall and serious adverse events between IVIG recipients and controls (very low certainty of evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence from the literature does not support the use of IVIG in COVID-19 patients.

COVID-19: Potential Repurposing Drugs

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is one of the most infectious diseases which has been caused by coronavirus in 2019 (COVID-19). It has widely spread worldwide and infected more than 28 million people in 215 countries, and more than 920,000 have now died from COVID-19. To date, no effective antiviral drugs or specific vaccines have been discovered yet. Considering this situation, the potential therapeutic antiviral drug targets for the COVID-19 are being repurposed to speed up the discovery of effective treatment. The most potential drug targets that are continuously being recommended include Favipiravir, Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine, and Remdesivir. Moreover, the antiviral target proteins and anti-host target proteins are being reported continuously. This review has summarized the current research studies on potential therapeutic drug targets that are being tested against the SARS-CoV-2. It will provide information related to potential repurposing drugs for overcoming COVID-19.

The Functional Role of IgA in the IgM/IgA-Enriched Immunoglobulin Preparation Trimodulin

In comparison to human immunoglobulin (Ig) G, antibodies of IgA class are not well investigated. In line with this, the functional role of the IgA component in IgM/IgA-enriched immunoglobulin preparations is also largely unknown. In recent years, powerful anti-pathogenic and immunomodulatory properties of human serum IgA especially on neutrophil function were unraveled. Therefore, the aim of our work is to investigate functional aspects of the trimodulin IgA component, a new plasma-derived polyvalent immunoglobulin preparation containing ~56% IgG, ~23% IgM and ~21% IgA. The functional role of IgA was investigated by analyzing the interaction of IgA with FcαRI, comparing trimodulin with standard intravenous IgG (IVIG) preparation and investigating Fc receptor (FcR)-dependent functions by excluding IgM-mediated effects. Trimodulin demonstrated potent immunomodulatory, as well as anti-pathogenic effects in our neutrophil model (neutrophil-like HL-60 cells). The IgA component of trimodulin was shown to induce a strong FcαRI-dependent inhibitory immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activation motif (ITAMi) signaling, counteract lipopolysaccharide-induced inflammation and mediate phagocytosis of Staphylococcus aureus. The fine-tuned balance between immunomodulatory and anti-pathogenic effects of trimodulin were shown to be dose-dependent. Summarized, our data demonstrate the functional role of IgA in trimodulin, highlighting the importance of this immunoglobulin class in immunoglobulin therapy.

Pathogenesis and treatment of cytokine storm in COVID-19

COVID-19 is a viral infection caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that killed a large number of patients around the world. A hyperinflammatory state resulting in a cytokine storm and adult respiratory distress syndrome seems to be the major cause of the death. Many mechanisms have been suggested in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 associated cytokine storm (COVID-CS). Insufficient viral clearance and persistence of a strong cytokine response despite inadequate antiviral immunity seem to be the main mechanisms underlying the pathogenesis. The diagnosis of COVID-19 is based on relatively constant clinical symptoms, clinical findings, laboratory tests, and imaging techniques, while the diagnosis of COVID-CS is a rather dynamic process, based on evolving or newly emerging findings during the clinical course. Management of COVID-19 consists of using antiviral agents to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication and treating potential complications including the cytokine storm together with general supportive measures. COVID-CS may be treated using appropriate immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory drugs that reduce the level of inappropriate systemic inflammation, which has the potential to cause organ damage. Currently corticosteroids, IL-6 blockers, or IL-1 blockers are most widely used for treating COVID-CS.

Targeting Macrophage Dysregulation for Viral Infections: Novel Targets for Immunomodulators

A major barrier to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1) cure is the latent viral reservoir, which persists despite antiretroviral therapy (ART), including across the non-dividing myeloid reservoir which is found systemically in sanctuary sites across tissues and the central nervous system (CNS). Unlike activated CD4+ T cells that undergo rapid cell death during initial infection (due to rapid viral replication kinetics), viral replication kinetics are delayed in non-dividing myeloid cells, resulting in long-lived survival of infected macrophages and macrophage-like cells. Simultaneously, persistent inflammation in macrophages confers immune dysregulation that is a key driver of co-morbidities including cardiovascular disease (CVD) and neurological deficits in people living with HIV-1 (PLWH). Macrophage activation and dysregulation is also a key driver of disease progression across other viral infections including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and chikungunya viruses, underscoring the interplay between macrophages and disease progression, pathogenesis, and comorbidity in the viral infection setting. This review discusses the role of macrophages in persistence and pathogenesis of HIV-1 and related comorbidities, SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses. A special focus is given to novel immunomodulatory targets for key events driving myeloid cell dysregulation and reservoir maintenance across a diverse array of viral infections.

Clinical outcomes of intravenous immunoglobulin therapy in COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) has been used as an immunomodulatory therapy to counteract severe systemic inflammation in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). But its use in COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is not well established.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of electronic health records of COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) at Hazm Mebaireek General Hospital, Qatar, between March 7, 2020 and September 9, 2020. Patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for moderate-to-severe ARDS were divided into two groups based on whether they received IVIG therapy or not. The primary outcome was all-cause ICU mortality. Secondary outcomes studied were ventilator-free days and ICU-free days at day-28, and incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI). Propensity score matching was used to adjust for confounders, and the primary outcome was compared using competing-risks survival analysis.

RESULTS

Among 590 patients included in the study, 400 received routine care, and 190 received IVIG therapy in addition to routine care. One hundred eighteen pairs were created after propensity score matching with no statistically significant differences between the groups. Overall ICU mortality in the study population was 27.1%, and in the matched cohort, it was 25.8%. Mortality was higher among IVIG-treated patients (36.4% vs. 15.3%; sHR 3.5; 95% CI 1.98-6.19; P < 0.001). Ventilator-free days and ICU-free days at day-28 were lower (P < 0.001 for both), and incidence of AKI was significantly higher (85.6% vs. 67.8%; P = 0.001) in the IVIG group.

CONCLUSION

IVIG therapy in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 related moderate-to-severe ARDS was associated with higher ICU mortality. A randomized clinical trial is needed to confirm this observation further.

Intravenous immunoglobulin as an important adjunct in the prevention and therapy of coronavirus 2019 disease

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) challenged globally with its morbidity and mortality. A small percentage of affected patients (20%) progress into the second stage of the disease clinically presenting with severe or fatal involvement of lung, heart and vascular system, all contributing to multiple-organ failure. The so-called 'cytokines storm' is considered the pathogenic basis of severe disease and it is a target for treatment with corticosteroids, immunotherapies and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg). We provide an overview of the role of IVIg in the therapy of adult patients with COVID-19 disease. After discussing the possible underlying mechanisms of IVIg immunomodulation in COVID-19 disease, we review the studies in which IVIg was employed. Considering the latest evidence that show a link between new coronavirus and autoimmunity, we also discuss the use of IVIg in COVID-19 and anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination related autoimmune diseases and the post-COVID-19 syndrome. The benefit of high-dose IVIg is evident in almost all studies with a rapid response, a reduction in mortality and improved pulmonary function in critically ill COVID-19 patients. It seems that an early administration of IVIg is crucial for a successful outcome. Studies' limitations are represented by the small number of patients, the lack of control groups in some and the heterogeneity of included patients. IVIg treatment can reduce the stay in ICU and the demand for mechanical ventilation, thus contributing to attenuate the burden of the disease.

Potential therapeutic approach of intravenous immunoglobulin against COVID-19

Since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), the therapeutic and management options to reduce the burden of the COVID-19 disease are under investigation. IVIG therapy is used as an effective treatment for immunodeficient patients and patients with inflammatory or autoimmune conditions. The therapeutic effect of IVIG in COVID-19 patients has been investigated. But, the results are controversial and some studies reported no benefit of IVIG therapy. More clinical trials on the effect of IVIG therapy in COVID-19 patients should be performed to establish a certain conclusion about IVIG effectiveness.

Recent advances in antibody-based immunotherapy strategies for COVID-19

The emergence of a new acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of the 2019-nCOV disease (COVID-19), has caused a pandemic and a global health crisis. Rapid human-to-human transmission, even from asymptomatic individuals, has led to the quick spread of the virus worldwide, causing a wide range of clinical manifestations from cold-like symptoms to severe pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multiorgan injury, and even death. Therefore, using rapid and accurate diagnostic methods to identify the virus and subsequently select appropriate and effective treatments can help improvement of patients and control the pandemic. So far, various treatment regimens along with prophylactic vaccines have been developed to manage COVID-19-infected patients. Among these, antibody-based therapies, including neutralizing antibodies (against different parts of the virus), polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies, plasma therapy, and high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) have shown promising outcomes in accelerating and improving the treatment process of patients, avoiding the viral spreading widely, and managing the pandemic. In the current review paper, different types and applications of therapeutic antibodies in the COVID-19 treatment are comprehensively discussed.

High-dose intravenous immunoglobulins as a therapeutic option in critical illness polyneuropathy accompanying SARS-CoV-2 infection: A case-based review of the literature (Review)

The still ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the medical community to a number of major challenges. A significant number of patients require admission to intensive care unit (ICU) services due to severe respiratory, thrombotic and septic complications and require long-term hospitalization. Neuromuscular weakness is a common complication in critically ill patients who are treated in ICUs and are mechanically ventilated. This complication is frequently caused by critical illness myopathy (CIM) or critical illness polyneuropathy (CIP) and leads to difficulty in weaning from the ventilator. It is thought to represent an important neurologic manifestation of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). COVID-19 infection is known to trigger strong immune dysregulation, with an intense cytokine storm, as a result, the frequency of CIP is expected to be higher in this setting. The mainstay in the diagnosis of this entity beside the high level of clinical awareness is the electrophysiological examination that provides evidence of axonal motor and sensory polyneuropathy. The present article presents the case of a 54-year-old woman with severe COVID 19 infection who developed neuromuscular weakness, which turned out to be secondary to CIP and was treated successfully with a high dose of human intravenous immunoglobulins. Related to this case, we reviewed the relevant literature data regarding the epidemiology, pathophysiology and clinical features of this important complication and discussed also the treatment options and prognosis.

Platelets in the perspective of COVID-19; pathophysiology of thrombocytopenia and its implication as prognostic and therapeutic opportunity

Despite endorsed and exponential research to improve diagnostic and therapeutic strategies, efforts have not yet converted into a better prospect for patients infected with the novel coronavirus (2019nCoV), and still, the name of SARS-CoV-2 is coupled with numerous unanswered questions. One of these questions is concerning how this respiratory virus reduces the number of platelets (PLTs)? The results of laboratory examinations showed that about a quarter of COVID-19 cases experience thrombocytopenia, and more remarkably, about half of these patients succumb to the infection due to coagulopathy. These findings have positioned PLTs as a pillar in the management as well as stratifying COVID-19 patients; however, not all the physicians came into a consensus about the prognostic value of these cells. The current review aims to unravel the contributory role of PLTs s in COVID-19; and alsoto summarize the original data obtained from international research laboratories on the association between COVID-19 and PLT production, activation, and clearance. In addition, we provide a special focus on the prognostic value of PLTs and their related parameters in COVID-19. Questions on how SARS-CoV-2 induces thrombocytopenia are also responded to. The last section provides a general overview of the most recent PLT- or thrombocytopenia-related therapeutic approaches. In conclusion, since SARS-CoV-2 reduces the number of PLTs by eliciting different mechanisms, treatment of thrombocytopenia in COVID-19 patients is not as simple as it appears and serious cautions should be considered to deal with the problem through scrutiny awareness of the causal mechanisms.