IL-6 inhibition in the treatment of COVID-19: A meta-analysis and meta-regression

Nebulized Furosemide for Pulmonary Inflammation in Intubated Patients With COVID-19: A Phase 2 Randomized Controlled Double-Blind Study

OBJECTIVES

Respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 is associated with morbidity and mortality. Current anti-inflammatory therapies are effective but are given systemically and have significant side effects. Furosemide has anti-inflammatory properties, can be administered by inhalation, and is inexpensive. We investigated the efficacy of nebulized furosemide as an adjunctive therapy for COVID-19 respiratory failure.

DESIGN

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

SETTING

Multicenter ICU study.

PATIENTS

Adults requiring invasive mechanical ventilation secondary to COVID-19.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomized within 48 hours of intubation to receive inhaled furosemide or placebo until day 28, death, or liberation from mechanical ventilation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The study was stopped early due to waning incidence of COVID-19; 39 patients were available for analysis with mean ± sd age of 70.5 (10.8) years, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II 26.1 (7.8) and Fio2 60.0% (21.9). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. For the primary outcome of change in Pao2/Fio2 ratio between day 1 and day 6, it was +31.4 (83.5) in the furosemide arm versus +20.1 (92.8) in the control (p = 0.58). For secondary outcomes, furosemide versus control: 60-day mortality was 48% versus 71% (p = 0.20), hospital stay was 25.6 (21.9) versus 27.4 (25.0) days, p = 0.94 and VFD was 6.0 (9.1) versus 3.1 (7.1), p value of equals to 0.28. A post hoc analysis of the hierarchical composite outcome, alive and ventilator-free favored furosemide. There were no adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial of inhaled furosemide for COVID-19 respiratory failure, differences in Pao2/Fio2 ratio to day 6 and other clinical outcomes were not significantly different, although the trial was underpowered due to early termination. Given the favorable profile of inhaled furosemide, further study is warranted in disease states where acute pulmonary inflammation contributes to the underlying pathophysiology.

Clinical features of omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants infection associated with co-infection and ICU-acquired infection in ICU patients

Background

Although the decreasing rate of hospital admission in the omicron wave has led countries to loosen control, still the patients requires ICU admission. It is common for viral respiratory infections to be co-infected with bacteria. However, the difference between co-infection and ICU-acquired infection on their clinical characteristics and outcomes during the Omicron wave was little reported.

Methods

Clinical and microbiological data were collected from ICU patients with omicron infection between April 1st, 2022, and May 31th, 2022 and a comprehensive comparative study of the clinical characteristics and endpoint were conducted.

Results

The Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants-infected patients requiring intensive care had high rates of co-infection (42.55%). Additionally, the ICU COVID-19 patients with co-infection showed more severe clinical features compared to those with ICU-acquired infection. Furthermore, Multivariate Cox analysis demonstrated that co-infection (hazard ratio: 4.670, p = 0.018) was a significant risk factor for poor outcomes in ICU patients with COVID-19. Besides, Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis revealed that COVID-19 patients with co-infection had a significantly shorter 28-Day survival time compared to those with ICU-acquired infection (p < 0.001). Finally, our investigation identified a significant association between the presence of Candida app. in the broncho-alveolar lavage and an elevated risk of mortality (OR: 13.80, p = 0.002) and invasive ventilation (OR: 5.63, p = 0.01).

Conclusion

Co-infection is prevalent among patients requiring intensive care and is linked to unfavorable outcomes in the Omicron wave. Consequently, more attention may be needed for the empirical antibacterial treatment in ICU patients within the COVID-19 Omicron variant, especially anti-fungi.

Unveiling COVID-19 Secrets: Harnessing Cytokines as Powerful Biomarkers for Diagnosis and Predicting Severity

Introduction

In coronavirus disease (COVID-19), inflammation takes center stage, with a cascade of cytokines released, contributing to both inflammation and lung damage. The objective of this study is to identify biomarkers for diagnosing and predicting the severity of COVID-19.

Materials and Methods

Cytokine levels were determined in the serum from venous blood samples collected from 100 patients with COVID-19 and 50 healthy controls. COVID-19 patients classified based on the Modified Early Warning (MEWS) score. Cytokine concentrations were determined with a multiplex ELISA kit (Bio-Plex Pro™ Human Cytokine Screening Panel).

Results

The concentrations of all analyzed cytokines were elevated in the serum of COVID-19 patients relative to the control group, but no significant differences were observed in interleukin-9 (IL-9) and IL-12 p70 levels. In addition, the concentrations of IL-1α, IL-1β, IL-1ra, IL-2Rα, IL-6, IL-12 p40, IL-18, and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) were significantly higher in symptomatic patients with accompanying pneumonia without respiratory failure (stage 2) than in asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic patients (stage 1).

Conclusion

The study revealed that IL-1ra, IL-2Rα, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12 p40, IL-16, and IL-18 levels serve as potential diagnostic biomarkers in COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, elevated IL-1α levels proved to be valuable in assessing the severity of COVID-19.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma (CCP) During the Pandemic Era: A Literature Review

Worldwide pandemic with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) was caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). As November 2, 2022, World Health Organization (WHO) received 628,035,553 reported incidents on COVID-19, with 6,572,800 mortalities and, with a total 12,850,970,971 vaccine doses have been delivered as of October 31, 2022. The infection can cause mild or self-limiting symptoms of pulmonary and severe infections or death may be caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Simultaneously, antivirals, corticosteroids, immunological treatments, antibiotics, and anticoagulants have been proposed as potential medicines to cure COVID-19 affected patients. Among these initial treatments, COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP), which was retrieved from COVID-19 recovered patients to be used as passive immune therapy, in which antibodies from cured patients were given to infected patients to prevent illness. Such treatment has yielded the best results in earlier with preventative or early stages of illness. Convalescent plasma (CP) is the first treatment available when infectious disease initially appears, although few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted to evaluate its effectiveness. The historical record suggests with potential benefit for other respiratory infections, as coronaviruses like Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-CoV-I (SARS-CoV-I) and Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), though the analysis of such research is constrained by some non-randomized experiments (NREs). Rigorous studies on CP are made more demanding by the following with the immediacy of the epidemics, CP use may restrict the ability to utilize it for clinical testing, non-homogenous nature of product, highly decentralized manufacturing process; constraints with capacity to measure biologic function, ultimate availability of substitute therapies, as antivirals, purified immune globulins, or monoclonal antibodies. Though, it is still not clear how effectively CCP works among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The current review tries to focus on its efficiency and usage in clinical scenarios and identifying existing benefits of implementation during pandemic or how it may assist with future pandemic preventions.

Should We Interfere with the Interleukin-6 Receptor During COVID-19: What Do We Know So Far?

Severe manifestations of COVID-19 consist of acute respiratory distress syndrome due to an initially local reaction leading to a systemic inflammatory response that results in hypoxia. Many therapeutic approaches have been attempted to reduce the clinical consequences of an excessive immune response to viral infection. To date, systemic corticosteroid therapy is still the most effective intervention. More recently, new hope has emerged with the use of interleukin (IL)-6 receptor inhibitors (tocilizumab and sarilumab). However, the great heterogeneity of the methodology and results of published studies obfuscate the true value of this treatment, leading to a confusing synthesis in recent meta-analyses, and the persistence of doubts in terms of patient groups and the appropriate time to treat. Moreover, their effects on the anti-infectious or pro-healing response are still poorly studied. This review aims to clarify the potential role of IL-6 receptor inhibitors in the treatment of severe forms of COVID-19.

Identification of Parameters Representative of Immune Dysfunction in Patients with Severe and Fatal COVID-19 Infection: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Abnormal immunological indicators associated with disease severity and mortality in patients with COVID-19 have been reported in several observational studies. However, there are marked heterogeneities in patient characteristics and research methodologies in these studies. We aimed to provide an updated synthesis of the association between immune-related indicators and COVID-19 prognosis. We conducted an electronic search of PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, Willey, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and CNKI for studies reporting immunological and/or immune-related parameters, including hematological, inflammatory, coagulation, and biochemical variables, tested on hospital admission of COVID-19 patients with different severities and outcomes. A total of 145 studies were included in the current meta-analysis, with 26 immunological, 11 hematological, 5 inflammatory, 4 coagulation, and 10 biochemical variables reported. Of them, levels of cytokines, including IL-1β, IL-1Ra, IL-2R, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-18, TNF-α, IFN-γ, IgA, IgG, and CD4⁺ T/CD8⁺ T cell ratio, WBC, neutrophil, platelet, ESR, CRP, ferritin, SAA, D-dimer, FIB, and LDH were significantly increased in severely ill patients or non-survivors. Moreover, non-severely ill patients or survivors presented significantly higher counts of lymphocytes, monocytes, lymphocyte/monocyte ratio, eosinophils, CD3⁺ T,CD4⁺T and CD8⁺T cells, B cells, and NK cells. The currently updated meta-analysis primarily identified a hypercytokinemia profile with the severity and mortality of COVID-19 containing IL-1β, IL-1Ra, IL-2R, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-18, TNF-α, and IFN-γ. Impaired innate and adaptive immune responses, reflected by decreased eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, B cells, NK cells, T cells, and their subtype CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells, and augmented inflammation, coagulation dysfunction, and nonpulmonary organ injury, were marked features of patients with poor prognosis. Therefore, parameters of immune response dysfunction combined with inflammatory, coagulated, or nonpulmonary organ injury indicators may be more sensitive to predict severe patients and those non-survivors.

Mechanical ventilation for COVID-19: Outcomes following discharge from inpatient treatment

Though mechanical ventilation (MV) is used to treat patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), little is known about the long-term health implications of this treatment. Our objective was to determine the association between MV for treatment of COVID-19 and likelihood of hospital readmission, all-cause mortality, and reason for readmission. This study was a longitudinal observational design with electronic health record (EHR) data collected between 3/1/2020 and 1/31/2021. Participants included 17,652 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during this period who were followed through 6/30/2021. The primary outcome was readmission to inpatient care following discharge. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and reason for readmission. Rates of readmission and mortality were compared between ventilated and non-ventilated patients using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Differences in reasons for readmission by MV status were compared using multinomial logistic regression. Patient characteristics and measures of illness severity were balanced between those who were mechanically ventilated and those who were not utilizing 1-to-1 propensity score matching. The sample had a median age of 63 and was 47.1% female. There were 1,131 (6.4%) patients who required MV during their initial hospitalization. Rates (32.1% versus 9.9%) and hazard of readmission were greater for patients requiring MV in the propensity score-matched samples [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) = 3.34 (2.72-4.10)]. Rates (15.3% versus 3.4%) and hazard [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) = 3.12 (2.32-4.20)] of all-cause mortality were also associated with MV status. Ventilated patients were more likely to be readmitted for reasons which were classified as COVID-19, infectious diseases, and respiratory diagnoses compared to non-ventilated patients. Mechanical ventilation is a necessary treatment for severely ill patients. However, it may be associated with adverse outcomes including hospital readmission and death. More intense post-discharge monitoring may be warranted to decrease this associational finding.

Severity predictors of COVID-19 in SARS-CoV-2 variant, delta and omicron period; single center study

Background

The outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment have improved due to vaccination and the establishment of better treatment regimens. However, the emergence of variants of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes COVID-19, and the corresponding changes in the characteristics of the disease present new challenges in patient management. This study aimed to analyze predictors of COVID-19 severity caused by the delta and omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who were admitted for COVID-19 at Yokohama City University Hospital from August 2021 to March 2022.

Results

A total of 141 patients were included in this study. Of these, 91 had moderate COVID-19, whereas 50 had severe COVID-19. There were significant differences in sex, vaccination status, dyspnea, sore throat symptoms, and body mass index (BMI) (p <0.0001, p <0.001, p <0.001, p = 0.02, p< 0.0001, respectively) between the moderate and severe COVID-19 groups. Regarding comorbidities, smoking habit and renal dysfunction were significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.007 and p = 0.01, respectively). Regarding laboratory data, only LDH level on the first day of hospitalization was significantly different between the two groups (p<0.001). Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that time from the onset of COVID-19 to hospitalization, BMI, smoking habit, and LDH level were significantly different between the two groups (p<0.03, p = 0.039, p = 0.008, p<0.001, respectively). The cut-off value for the time from onset of COVID-19 to hospitalization was four days (sensitivity, 0.73; specificity, 0.70).

Conclusions

Time from the onset of COVID-19 to hospitalization is the most important factor in the prevention of the aggravation of COVID-19 caused by the delta and omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants. Appropriate medical management within four days after the onset of COVID-19 is essential for preventing the progression of COVID-19, especially in patients with smoking habits.

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

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

Efficacy of umbilical cord mesenchymal stromal cells for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

A major challenge for COVID-19 therapy is dysregulated immune response associated with the disease. Umbilical cord mesenchymal stromal cells (UC-MSCs) may be a promising candidate for COVID-19 treatment owing to their immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory functions. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of UC-MSCs inpatients with COVID-19.

Method

Medline, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched to collect clinical trials concerning UC-MSCs for the treatment of COVID-19. After literature screening, quality assessment, and data extraction, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the included study were performed.

Results

This systematic review and meta-analysis were prospectively registered on PROSPERO, and the registration number is CRD42022304061. After screening, 10 studies involving 293 patients with COVID-19 were eventually included. Our meta-analysis results showed that UC-MSCs can reduce mortality (relative risk [RR] =0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.38, 0.95], P=0.03) in COVID-19 patients. No significant correlation was observed between adverse events and UC-MSC treatment (RR=0.85, 95% CI: [0.65, 1.10], P=0.22; RR=1.00, 95%CI: [0.64, 1.58], P=1.00). In addition, treatment with UC-MSCs was found to suppress inflammation and improve pulmonary symptoms.

Conclusions

UC-MSCs hold promise as a safe and effective treatment for COVID-19.

Systematic Review Registartion

PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022304061.

Comprehensive Cytokine Profiling of Patients with COVID-19 Receiving Tocilizumab Therapy

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by immune activation in response to viral spread, in severe cases leading to the development of cytokine storm syndrome (CSS) and increased mortality. Despite its importance in prognosis, the pathophysiological mechanisms of CSS in COVID-19 remain to be defined. Towards this goal, we analyzed cytokine profiles and their interrelation in regard to anti-cytokine treatment with tocilizumab in 98 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We performed a multiplex measurement of 41 circulating cytokines in the plasma of patients on admission and 3–5 days after, during the follow-up. Then we analyzed the patient groups separated in two ways: according to the clusterization of their blood cytokines and based on the administration of tocilizumab therapy. Patients with and without CSS formed distinct clusters according to their cytokine concentration changes. However, the tocilizumab therapy, administered based on the standard clinical and laboratory criteria, did not fully correspond to those clusters of CSS. Furthermore, among all cytokines, IL-6, IL-1RA, IL-10, and G-CSF demonstrated the most prominent differences between patients with and without clinical endpoints, while only IL-1RA was prognostically significant in both groups of patients with and without tocilizumab therapy, decreasing in the former and increasing in the latter during the follow-up period. Thus, CSS in COVID-19, characterized by a correlated release of multiple cytokines, does not fully correspond to the standard parameters of disease severity. Analysis of the cytokine signature, including the IL-1RA level in addition to standard clinical and laboratory parameters may be useful to define the onset of a cytokine storm in COVID-19 as well as the indications for anti-cytokine therapy.

Chasing the Ghost: Hyperinflammation Does Not Cause Sepsis

Sepsis is infection sufficient to cause illness in the infected host, and more severe forms of sepsis can result in organ malfunction or death. Severe forms of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), or disease following infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are examples of sepsis. Following infection, sepsis is thought to result from excessive inflammation generated in the infected host, also referred to as a cytokine storm. Sepsis can result in organ malfunction or death. Since COVID-19 is an example of sepsis, the hyperinflammation concept has influenced scientific investigation and treatment approaches to COVID-19. However, decades of laboratory study and more than 100 clinical trials designed to quell inflammation have failed to reduce sepsis mortality. We examine theoretical support underlying widespread belief that hyperinflammation or cytokine storm causes sepsis. Our analysis shows substantial weakness of the hyperinflammation approach to sepsis that includes conceptual confusion and failure to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between hyperinflammation and sepsis. We conclude that anti-inflammation approaches to sepsis therapy have little chance of future success. Therefore, anti-inflammation approaches to treat COVID-19 are likewise at high risk for failure. We find persistence of the cytokine storm concept in sepsis perplexing. Although treatment approaches based on the hyperinflammation concept of pathogenesis have failed, the concept has shown remarkable resilience and appears to be unfalsifiable. An approach to understanding this resilience is to consider the hyperinflammation or cytokine storm concept an example of a scientific paradigm. Thomas Kuhn developed the idea that paradigms generate rules of investigation that both shape and restrict scientific progress. Intrinsic features of scientific paradigms include resistance to falsification in the face of contradictory data and inability of experimentation to generate alternatives to a failing paradigm. We call for rejection of the concept that hyperinflammation or cytokine storm causes sepsis. Using the hyperinflammation or cytokine storm paradigm to guide COVID-19 treatments is likewise unlikely to provide progress. Resources should be redirected to more promising avenues of investigation and treatment.

Roles of the ACE/Ang II/AT1R pathway, cytokine release, and alteration of tight junctions in COVID-19 pathogenesis

This paper shows how SARS-CoV-2 alters tight junctions (TJs) in human organs. The effect of SARS-CoV-2 on the ACE/Ang II/AT1R pathway and immune cells culminates in the release of numerous pro-inflammatory mediators, leading to the presence of certain symptoms in COVID-19, such as acute lung injury (ALI), pulmonary hypertension, and pulmonary fibrosis. Furthermore, the cytokines released alter different TJs components. The study shows how the irregular release of pro-inflammatory cytokines leads to claudin disruption in various tissues of the body, resulting in different symptoms, such as alveolar fibrosis, pulmonary edema, conjunctivitis, altered fertility in males, gastrointestinal symptoms, Covid toes, and others. SARS-CoV-2 also alters occludin expression in the endothelial and blood-testis barriers (BTB) resulting in edema and altered fertility. Viral disruption of JAM-A leads to activation of the RhoA GTPase, which leads to ALI. Taken together, these results define ACE/Ang II/AT1R pathway receptors and tight junctional components as potential therapeutic targets in COVID-19.

Application of Monoclonal Antibody Drugs in Treatment of COVID-19: a Review

Coronavirus infection can have various degrees of severity and outcomes. In some cases, it causes excessive production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, a so-called cytokine storm, leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome. Unfortunately, the exact pathophysiology and treatment, especially for severe cases of COVID-19, are still uncertain. Results of preliminary studies showed that immunosuppressive therapy, such as interleukin (IL)-6, IL-1, and TNF-α antagonists commonly used in rheumatology, can be considered as treatment options for COVID-19, especially in severe cases. The review focused on the most common and currently studied monoclonal antibody drugs, as well as up-to-date data on the pathogenesis of COVID-19, host immune response against SARS-CoV-2 and its association with cytokine storm. It also covered effects of interleukin (IL)-6, IL-1, and TNF-α blockers on the course of coronavirus infection and outcome in patients treated for the main autoimmune disease and subsequently infected with COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 and Multiple Sclerosis: Potential for Disease Exacerbation

While the respiratory tract is the primary route of entry for SARS-CoV-2, evidence shows that the virus also impacts the central nervous system. Intriguingly, case reports have documented SARS-CoV-2 patients presenting with demyelinating lesions in the brain, spinal cord, and optic nerve, suggesting possible implications in neuroimmune disorders such as multiple sclerosis (MS) and other related neuroimmune disorders. However, the cellular mechanisms underpinning these observations remain poorly defined. The goal of this paper was to review the literature to date regarding possible links between SARS-CoV-2 infection and neuroimmune demyelinating diseases such as MS and its related disorders, with the aim of positing a hypothesis for disease exacerbation. The literature suggests that SARS-CoV, SARS-CoV-2, and orthologous murine coronaviruses invade the CNS via the olfactory bulb, spreading to connected structures via retrograde transport. We hypothesize that a glial inflammatory response may contribute to damaged oligodendrocytes and blood brain barrier (BBB) breakdown, allowing a second route for CNS invasion and lymphocyte infiltration. Potential for molecular mimicry and the stimulation of autoreactive T cells against myelin is also described. It is imperative that further studies on SARS-CoV-2 neuroinvasion address the adverse effects of the virus on myelin and exacerbation of MS symptoms, as nearly 3 million people suffer from MS worldwide.

Comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions on mortality and the average length of hospital stay of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Up to now, numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined various drugs as possible treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the results were diverse and occasionally even inconsistent with each other. To this point,we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological agents in published RCTs.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search was performed using PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases. RCTs evaluating mortality and the average length of hospital stay to standard of care (SOC)/placebo/control were included. RCTs mainly were classified into five categories of drugs, including anti-inflammatory, antiviral, antiparasitic, antibody and antibiotics. Meta-analysis was done on 5 drugs classes and sub-group meta-analysis was done on single drugs and moderate or severe stage of disease.

EXPERT OPINION

Mortality and the average length of hospital stay of COVID-19 patients were significantly reduced with anti-inflammatory drugs (odds ratio [OR]: 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69 to 0.85, P<0.00001, and mean difference [MD]: -1.41, CI:-1.75 to -1.07, P<0.00001, respectively) compared to SOC/control/placebo. Furthermore, antiparasitic was associated with reduced length of hospital stay (MD: -0.65, CI: -1.26 to -0.03, P<0.05) in comparison to SOC/placebo/control. However, no effectiveness was found in other pharmacological interventions.

Role of therapeutic plasma exchange in the management of COVID-19-induced cytokine storm syndrome

The risk of mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is largely related to an excessive immune response, resulting in a hyperinflammatory and hypercoagulable condition collectively referred to as cytokine storm syndrome (CSS). Management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 has included attempts to abate this process, prevent disease progression, and reduce mortality. In this context, therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) offers an approach to eliminate inflammatory factors and cytokines, offset the pathologic coagulopathy, and reduce the CSS effects. The aim of this review is to analyze available data on the use of TPE for the treatment of CSS in patients with COVID-19. Systematic searches of PubMed, Scopus and COVID-19 Research were conducted to identify articles published between March 1, 2020 and May 26, 2021 reporting the use of TPE for the treatment of COVID-19-induced CSS. A total of 34 peer-reviewed articles (1 randomized controlled trial, 4 matched case-control series, 15 single-group case series, and 14 case reports), including 267 patients, were selected. Despite the low evidence level of the available data, TPE appeared to be a safe intervention for critically ill patients with COVID-19-induced CSS. Although inconsistencies exist between studies, they showed a general trend for decreased interleukin-6, C-reactive protein, ferritin, D-dimer, and fibrinogen levels and increased lymphocyte counts following TPE, supporting the immunomodulatory effect of this treatment. Moreover, TPE was associated with improvements in clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with COVID-19. While TPE may offer a valuable option to treat patients with COVID-19-induced CSS, high-quality randomized controlled clinical trials are needed to confirm its potential clinical benefits, feasibility, and safety. Moreover, clear criteria should be established to identify patients with CSS who might benefit from TPE.

Delayed inflammation decrease is associated with mortality in Tocilizumab-treated critically ill SARS-CoV-2 patients: A retrospective matched-cohort analysis

Little is known about the immuno-inflammatory response to Tocilizumab and its association with outcome in critically-ill SARS-CoV2 pneumonia. In this multicenter retrospective cohort of SARS-CoV-2 patients admitted to three intensive care units between March and April 2020, we matched on gender and SAPS II 21 Tocilizumab-treated patients to 42 non-treated patients. Need for mechanical ventilation was 76% versus 79%. IL-6, C-reactive protein, and fibrinogen had been collected within the first days of admission (T1), 3 d (T2) and 7 d (T3) later. Tocilizumab-treated patients had persistently higher IL-6 plasma levels and persistently lower C-Reactive protein and fibrinogen levels. Among Tocilizumab-treated patients, baseline levels of inflammatory biomarkers were not different according to outcome. Conversely, C-reactive protein and fibrinogen decrease was delayed in non-survivors. C-Reactive protein decreased at T1 in survivors (45 [30–98] vs 170 [69–204] mg/l, P < 0.001) but only at T2 in non-survivors (37 [13–74] vs 277 [235–288], P = 0.03). Fibrinogen decreased at T2 in survivors (4.11 [3.58–4.69] vs 614 [5.61–7.85] g/l, P = 0.005) but not in non-survivors (4.79 [4.12–7.58] vs 7.24 [6.22–9.24] g/l, P = 0.125). Tocilizumab treatment was thus associated with a persistent both increase in plasma IL-6, and decrease in C-reactive protein and fibrinogen. Among Tocilizumab-treated patients, the decrease in inflammatory biomarkers was delayed in non-survivors.

Longitudinal Cytokine Profile in Patients With Mild to Critical COVID-19

The cytokine release syndrome has been proposed as the driver of inflammation in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, studies on longitudinal cytokine profiles in patients across the whole severity spectrum of COVID-19 are lacking. In this prospective observational study on adult COVID-19 patients admitted to two Hong Kong public hospitals, cytokine profiling was performed on blood samples taken during early phase (within 7 days of symptom onset) and late phase (8 to 12 days of symptom onset). The primary objective was to evaluate the difference in early and late cytokine profiles among patient groups with different disease severity. The secondary objective was to assess the associations between cytokines and clinical endpoints in critically ill patients. A total of 40 adult patients (mild = 8, moderate = 15, severe/critical = 17) hospitalized with COVID-19 were included in this study. We found 22 cytokines which were correlated with disease severity, as proinflammatory Th1-related cytokines (interleukin (IL)-18, interferon-induced protein-10 (IP-10), monokine-induced by gamma interferon (MIG), and IL-10) and ARDS-associated cytokines (IL-6, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA), and IL-8) were progressively elevated with increasing disease severity. Furthermore, 11 cytokines were consistently different in both early and late phases, including seven (growth-regulated oncogene-alpha (GRO-α), IL-1RA, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IP-10, and MIG) that increased and four (FGF-2, IL-5, macrophage-derived chemokine (MDC), and MIP-1α) that decreased from mild to severe/critical patients. IL-8, followed by IP-10 and MDC were the best performing early biomarkers to predict disease severity. Among critically ill patients, MCP-1 predicted the duration of mechanical ventilation, highest norepinephrine dose administered, and length of intensive care stay.

Interleukin-18 and COVID-19

Vulnerability to coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 varies due to differences in interferon gamma (IFNγ) immunity. We investigated whether a key modifiable interferon precursor, interleukin-18, was related to COVID-19, overall and by severity, using Mendelian randomisation. We used four established genome-wide significant genetic predictors of interleukin-18 applied to the most recent genome-wide association study of COVID-19 (June 2021) to obtain Mendelian randomisation inverse variance weighted estimates by severity, i.e. any (cases = 112 612, non-cases = 2 474 079), hospitalised (cases = 24 274, non-cases = 2 061 529) and very severe (cases = 8779, non-cases = 1 001 875) COVID-19. To be comprehensive, we also conducted an exploratory analysis for IFNγ and two related cytokines with less well-established genetic predictors, i.e. interleukin-12 and interleukin-23. Genetically predicted interleukin-18 was associated with lower risk of any COVID-19 (odds ratio (OR) 0.96 per standard deviation, 95% confidence interval (0.94–0.99, P-value 0.004)) and of very severe COVID-19 (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78–0.999, P-value 0.048). Sensitivity analysis and a more liberal genetic instrument selection gave largely similar results. Few genome-wide significant genetic predictors were available for IFNγ, interleukin-12 or interleukin-23, and no associations with COVID-19 were evident. Interleukin-18 could be a modifiable target to prevent COVID-19 and should be further explored in an experimental design.

Plasma Proteome Fingerprints Reveal Distinctiveness and Clinical Outcome of SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Background: We evaluated how plasma proteomic signatures in patients with suspected COVID-19 can unravel the pathophysiology, and determine kinetics and clinical outcome of the infection. Methods: Plasma samples from patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with symptoms of COVID-19 were stratified into: (1) patients with suspected COVID-19 that was not confirmed (n = 44); (2) non-hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 (n = 44); (3) hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 (n = 53) with variable outcome; and (4) patients presenting to the ED with minor diseases unrelated to SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 20). Besides standard of care diagnostics, 177 circulating proteins related to inflammation and cardiovascular disease were analyzed using proximity extension assay (PEA, Olink) technology. Results: Comparative proteome analysis revealed 14 distinct proteins as highly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and 12 proteins with subsequent hospitalization (p < 0.001). ADM, IL-6, MCP-3, TRAIL-R2, and PD-L1 were each predictive for death (AUROC curve 0.80–0.87). The consistent increase of these markers, from hospital admission to intensive care and fatality, supported the concept that these proteins are of major clinical relevance. Conclusions: We identified distinct plasma proteins linked to the presence and course of COVID-19. These plasma proteomic findings may translate to a protein fingerprint, helping to assist clinical management decisions.

Effective chimeric antigen receptor T cells against SARS-CoV-2

Current therapies to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) involve vaccines against the spike protein S1 of SARS-CoV-2. Here, we outline an alternative approach involving chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) in T cells (CAR-Ts). CAR-T recognition of the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) peptide induced ribosomal protein S6 phosphorylation, the increased expression of activation antigen, CD69 and effectors, interferon-γ, granzyme B, perforin, and Fas-ligand on overlapping subsets of CAR-Ts. CAR-Ts further showed potent in vitro killing of target cells loaded with RBD, S1 peptide, or expressing the S1 protein. The efficacy of killing varied with different sized hinge regions, whereas time-lapse microscopy showed CAR-T cluster formation around RBD-expressing targets. Cytolysis of targets was mediated primarily by the GZMB/perforin pathway. Lastly, we showed in vivo killing of S1-expressing cells by our SARS-CoV-2 CAR-Ts in mice. The successful generation of SARS-CoV-2 CAR-Ts represents a living vaccine approach for the treatment of COVID-19.

•

Cytolytic CAR-Ts can be successfully developed against SARS-CoV-2

•

CAR-Ts binding to RBD peptide induced effectors IFN-γ, GZMB, Perforin and FasL

•

CAR-Ts with different hinge regions showed differences in target killing

•

SARS-CoV-2 CAR-Ts show successful in vivo killing of S1-expressing cells in mice

Criteria for the optimal use of interleukin-6 receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19

Aim. To determine the criteria for the optimal use of IL-6 receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19 community-acquired pneumonia based on predictors of adverse outcomes. Materials and methods. The single-center, non-randomized prospective study included 190 patients with community-acquired pneumonia caused by coronavirus 2 between the beginning of March and the end of May 2020. Of these, 89 patients received tocilizumab and 101 patients received sarilumab. The study inclusion criterion for the patient was indications for initiating therapy with one of the inhibitors of IL-6 receptors (anti-IL-6R) according to the Interim guidelines (versions 4 and 5). The exclusion criterion was the need to re-prescribe genetically engineered biological therapy (GEBT). The severity of the patient's condition was assessed according to the early warning score (NEWS2), the volume of lung tissue lesions was assessed according to computed tomography (CT). Laboratory monitoring included counting the absolute (abs) number of lymphocytes, serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6), D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, fibrinogen. Statistical data processing was conducted by nonparametric methods using the IBM SPSS Statistics V-22 software. Results. The phenotype of a patient with a negative outcome prognosis was described: a male patient over 50 years of age with aggravated premorbid background (with cardiovascular diseases, obesity and/or chronic renal disease), lung lesion CT 34, saturation less than 93% upon inhalation of atmospheric air, persisting for 2448 hours after GEBT. According to the blood test, lymphopenia was below 1000 U/L and CRP levels were above 50 mg/L. The laboratory parameters and clinical picture of the patient progressively worsened after 911 days of illness, regardless of the use of Anti-IL-6R. The features of patients monitoring when administering IL-6 receptor blockers have been determined. Conclusion. IL-6 receptor blockers should be administered to patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 before the development of hyperinflammatory reactions. The optimal "therapeutic window" is 78 days of illness.

Efficacy and Safety of Immunomodulators in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Introduction

Many immunomodulators have been studied in clinical trials for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, data identifying the most effective and safest treatment are lacking. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to rank immunomodulators in the treatment of COVID-19 according to their efficacy and safety.

Methods

Published and peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of immunomodulators in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were searched up to June 30, 2021. Direct and network meta-analyses were applied to assess the outcomes. The probability of efficacy and safety was estimated, and the drugs were awarded a numerical ranking.

Results

Twenty-six studies were eligible. Compared with standard of care, dexamethasone and tocilizumab had significantly lower mortality rates with pooled risk ratios (RRs) of 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.99) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.82–0.96), respectively. Meanwhile, the most effective corticosteroid, interleukin-6 antagonist, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor were hydrocortisone, sarilumab, and ruxolitinib, respectively. However, when superimposed infection was considered, ruxolitinib was the best treatment followed by baricitinib. Moreover, methylprednisolone had the worst combined efficacy and safety among the examined treatments.

Conclusions

Overall, immunomodulators were more effective than standard of care. Important differences exist among immunomodulators regarding both efficacy and safety in favor of ruxolitinib and baricitinib. Further well-conducted randomized controlled trials should focus on JAK inhibitors. Methylprednisolone use should be discouraged because of its poor efficacy and high risk of superimposed infection.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO registration identifier CRD 42021257421.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-021-00545-0.

The Use of Tocilizumab in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies

Background: Among the several therapeutic options assessed for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), tocilizumab (TCZ), an antagonist of the interleukine-6 receptor, has emerged as a promising therapeutic choice, especially for the severe form of the disease. Proper synthesis of the available randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is needed to inform clinical practice. Methods: A systematic review with a meta-analysis of RCTs investigating the efficacy of TCZ in COVID-19 patients was conducted. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register were searched up until 30 April 2021. Results: The database search yielded 2885 records; 11 studies were considered eligible for full-text review, and nine met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 3358 patients composed the TCZ arm, and 3131 the comparator group. The main outcome was all-cause mortality at 28–30 days. Subgroup analyses according to trials’ and patients’ features were performed. A trial sequential analysis (TSA) was also carried out to minimize type I and type II errors. According to the fixed-effect model approach, TCZ was associated with a better survival odds ratio (OR) (0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75–0.94; I²: 24% (low heterogeneity)). The result was consistent in the subgroup of severe disease (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.74–0.93; I²: 53% (moderate heterogeneity)). However, the TSA illustrated that the required information size was not met unless the study that was the major source of heterogeneity was omitted. Conclusions: TCZ may represent an important weapon against severe COVID-19. Further studies are needed to consolidate this finding.

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

Introduction

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Systematic Review and Subgroup Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials to Determine Tocilizumab's Place in COVID-19 Pneumonia

Introduction

Tocilizumab randomized clinical trial results are heterogeneous because of the heterogenous population included in them.

Methods

We conducted a meta-analysis with subgroup meta-analysis (PRISMA guidelines) between severe and non-severe COVID-19.

Results

We included nine trials. Overall, the mortality rate was 24.5% (821/3357) in the tocilizumab group and 29.1% (908/3125) in the control group at day 28–30 (pooled OR, 0.85; 95% CI 0.76–0.96; p = 0.006). Considering the subgroup analysis, this benefit on mortality was confirmed and amplified in the severe COVID-19 group (pooled OR, 0.82; 95% CI 0.73–0.93; p = 0.001) but not in the non-severe COVID-19 group (pooled OR, 1.46; 95% CI 0.91–2.34; p = 0.12). For patients who were not mechanically ventilated at baseline (5523/6482), the pooled OR (0.74; 95% CI 0.64–0.85; p < 0.0001) for mechanical ventilation incidence at day 28–30 was in favor of tocilizumab (cumulative incidence of 14.8% versus 19.4% in tocilizumab and control arm, respectively). This benefit was confirmed in both subgroups, i.e., severe and non-severe COVID-19.

Conclusion

Tocilizumab is an effective treatment in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and hypoxemia by improving survival and decreasing mechanical ventilation requirement. The greatest benefit is observed in severe COVID-19.

Beyond Lipoprotein(a) plasma measurements: Lipoprotein(a) and inflammation

Genome wide association, epidemiological, and clinical studies have established high lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] as a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Lp(a) is an apoB100 containing lipoprotein covalently bound to apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)], a glycoprotein. Plasma Lp(a) levels are to a large extent determined by genetics. Its link to cardiovascular disease (CVD) may be driven by its pro-inflammatory effects, of which its association with oxidized phospholipids (oxPL) bound to Lp(a) is the most studied. Various inflammatory conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, and chronic renal failure are associated with high Lp(a) levels. In cases of RA, high Lp(a) levels are reversed by interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6R) blockade by tocilizumab, suggesting a potential role for IL-6 in regulating Lp(a) plasma levels. Elevated levels of IL-6 and IL-6R polymorphisms are associated with CVD. Therapies aimed at lowering apo(a) and thereby reducing plasma Lp(a) levels are in clinical trials. Their results will determine if reductions in apo(a) and Lp(a) decrease cardiovascular outcomes. As we enter this new arena of available treatments, there is a need to improve our understanding of mechanisms. This review will focus on the role of Lp(a) in inflammation and CVD.