Mucous membrane pemphigoid and COVID-19 treated with high-dose intravenous immunoglobulins: a case report

IgG response to spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 in healthy individuals and potential of intravenous IgG as treatment for COVID-19

Background

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is currently a worldwide pandemic. There are limited available treatments for severe COVID-19 patients. However, some evidence suggests that intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) provides clinical benefits for these patients.

Methods

We administered IVIg to 23 severe COVID-19 patients, and all of them survived. Four related coronaviruses can cause the common cold. We speculated that cross-reactivity of SARS-CoV-2 and other common coronaviruses might partially explain the clinical efficacy of IVIg therapy. Thus, we performed multiple alignment analysis of the spike (S), membrane (M), and nucleotide (N) proteins from SARS-CoV-2 and the common coronaviruses to identify conserved regions. Next, we synthesized 25 peptides that were conserved regions and tested their IVIg seropositivity.

Results

The results indicated four peptides had significant or nearly significant seropositivity, and all of them were associated with the S and M proteins. Examination of the immune responses of healthy volunteers to each synthetic peptide indicated high seropositivity to the two peptides from S protein. Blood samples from healthy individuals may have pre-existing anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgGs, and IVIg is a potentially effective therapy for severe COVID-19.

Conclusion

In conclusion, blood samples from many healthy individuals have pre-existing anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgGs, and IVIg may be an effective therapy for severe COVID-19.

Abrogation of neutrophil inflammatory pathways and potential reduction of neutrophil-related factors in COVID-19 by intravenous immunoglobulin

Pathogenesis of lung injury in COVID-19 is not completely understood, leaving gaps in understanding how current treatments modulate the course of COVID-19. Neutrophil numbers and activation state in circulation have been found to correlate with COVID-19 severity, and neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) have been found in the lung parenchyma of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in COVID-19. Targeting the pro-inflammatory functions of neutrophils may diminish lung injury in COVID-19 and ARDS. Neutrophils were isolated from peripheral blood of healthy donors, treated ex vivo with dexamethasone, tocilizumab and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and NET formation, oxidative burst, and phagocytosis were assessed. Plasma from critically ill COVID-19 patients before and after clinical treatment with IVIG and from healthy donors was assessed for neutrophil activation-related proteins. While dexamethasone and tocilizumab did not affect PMA- and nigericin-induced NET production ex vivo, IVIG induced a dose-dependent abrogation of NET production in both activation models. IVIG also reduced PMA-elicited reactive oxygen species production, but did not alter phagocytosis. COVID-19 patients were found to have elevated levels of cell-free DNA, neutrophil elastase and IL-8 as compared to healthy controls. Levels of both cell-free DNA and neutrophil elastase were lower 5 days after 4 days of daily treatment with IVIG. The lack of impact of dexamethasone or tocilizumab on these neutrophil functions suggests that these therapeutic agents may not act through suppression of neutrophil functions, indicating that the door might still be open for the addition of a neutrophil modulator to the COVID-19 therapeutic repertoire.

Use of rituximab in the treatment of mucous membrane pemphigoid: An analytic review

Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid (MMP) is a potentially fatal mucocutaneous autoimmune blistering disease. Autoantibodies are produced against various components of the dermo-epidermal or mucosal-submucosal junction are referred to as basement membrane zone (BMZ). The hallmark is deposition of of Ig and C3 on the perilesional tissues and in some patients detection of anti-BMZ autoantibodies. A unique characteristic of MMP is that as the blisters or erosions heal, they leave irreversible scarring. This scarring results in serious and catastrophic sequelae that affect the quality of life. Conventional therapy consists of anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive agents (ISA). In patients who fail conventional therapy or develop significant side effects to them, rituximab (RTX) has been used off label. In this review, the clinical outcomes of patients with MMP treated with RTX were studied. 124 patients were identified, 47.58% being male. 72 patients were treated by the Lymphoma Protocol and 51 by Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) protocol. Follow up for the entire cohort was 36 months (range 0.5-72). On follow-up 64 patients (51.61%) achieved complete clinical remission (CR) off therapy, 25 patients (20.16%) were in CR on therapy, 5 patients (4.03%) were non-responders, and 9 patients (7.25%) were failures. 52 patients (41.93%) experienced a relapse, after 36 months follow-up. Duration between last RTX infusion and relapse was 10.5 months (range 1-30). Most patients with relapses were treated with additional RTX. A statistically significant better outcome was observed in patients treated with RTX as monotherapy compared to those who received RTX with ISA. Clinical outcomes in patients treated with Lymphoma protocol were better than RA protocol at a statistically significant level. Data on CD20+ B cell depletion and repopulation was limited. Interestingly relapses were seen in patients with CD20+ B cell depletion and after repopulation. In the final analysis, 89 patients (71.77%) were in complete remission. Data in this review indicated that RTX was a useful agent to treat MMP. While a randomized control trial may not be practically possible, better and disease specific protocols need to be developed. When publishing, authors should attempt to provide complete and detailed information. In doing so, they will benefit their colleagues and the patients with MMP they treat with RTX.

The Outcome of COVID-19 in Patients with a History of Taking Rituximab: A Narrative Review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a recently emerging disease caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Notably, the safety of immunosuppressive medications is a major concern during an infectious disease pandemic. Rituximab (RTX), as a monoclonal antibody against CD20 molecule, is widely used for the treatment of various diseases, mostly autoimmune diseases and some malignancies. Previous studies indicated that RTX, as an immunosuppressive medication, may be associated with the increased risk of infections. Moreover, given the wide use of RTX, a necessity of determining the different aspects of RTX use in the COVID-19 era is strongly felt. We reviewed current studies on the clinical courses of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. It appears that the use of RTX does not increase morbidity and mortality in most patients. However, underlying diseases and other concomitant medications may play a role in the disease course, while the concerns of vaccine efficacy in patients receiving RTX still need to be addressed. Therefore, more controlled studies are needed for a better conclusion.

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.

Impact of COVID-19 on autoimmune blistering diseases

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, attention has gradually moved from the respiratory manifestations of the disease toward its dermatologic aspects. The need for wearing personal protective measures and their cutaneous side effects, detection of related or specific COVID-19 skin eruptions, and the evaluation of certain risk groups of immunosuppressed dermatologic patients have initiated significant discussions about various therapeutic interventions and, in particular, about biologic therapy for psoriasis and for autoinflammatory, orphan, or malignant cutaneous disorders. Autoimmune bullous dermatoses have been of concern due to their chronic course, at times life-threatening prognosis, and the need for prolonged and often aggressive immunomodulatory therapy. We have summarized the current knowledge regarding the impact of COVID-19 infection on autoimmune bullous dermatoses, including recommendations for the main treatment strategies, available patient information, and the registries organized for documentation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical Dermatology and COVID-19 Pandemic: Narrative Review

The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has radical repercussions on every aspect of medical science, including dermatology. The magnitude of the impact on clinical dermatology cannot be overemphasized. Dermatologists have been forced to modify and reconsider the way they consult patients. Teledermatology has come up in a big way, with most of the clinicians resorting to technology and software-based consultations. Management of different dermatological conditions like papulosquamous disorders, vesiculobullous disorders, malignancies, etc., needs to be modified as per the different recommendations proposed by expert panels. This review is an attempt to highlight the impact of this destructive pandemic on various aspects of clinical dermatology.

Efficacy of IVIG (intravenous immunoglobulin) for corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A meta-analysis

Background

The benefit of IVIG (Intravenous Immunoglobulin) therapy for COVID-19 remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of IVIG treatment in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We searched articles from Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, MedRxiv between 1 January 2020 and February 17, 2021. We selected randomized clinical trials and observational studies with a control group to assess the efficiency of IVIG in treating patients with COVID-19. Subjects were divided into ‘non-severe’, ‘severe’ and ‘critical’ three subgroups based on the information of the study and the World Health Organization (WHO) definition of severity. We pooled the data of mortality and other outcomes using either a fixed-effect model or a random-effects model.

Results

Our meta-analysis retrieved 4 clinical trials and 3 cohort studies including 825 hospitalized patients. The severity of COVID-19 is associated with the efficiency of IVIG. In critical subgroup, IVIG could reduce the mortality compared with the control group [RR = 0.57 (0.42–0.79, I² = 025%). But there was no significant difference in the severe or non-severe subgroups.

Conclusion

IVIG has demonstrated clinical efficacy on critical ill patients with COVID-19. There may be a relationship between the efficacy of IVIG and the COVID-19 disease severity. Well-designed clinical trials to identify the clinical and biochemical characteristics in COVID-19 patients’ population that could benefit from IVIG are warranted in the future.

Intravenous Immunoglobulins at the Crossroad of Autoimmunity and Viral Infections

Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) are blood preparations pooled from the plasma of donors that have been first employed as replacement therapy in immunodeficiency. IVIG interact at multiple levels with the different components of the immune system and exert their activity against infections. Passive immunotherapy includes convalescent plasma from subjects who have recovered from infection, hyperimmune globulin formulations with a high titer of neutralizing antibodies, and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). IVIG are used for the prevention and treatment of several infections, especially in immunocompromised patients, or in case of a poorly responsive immune system. The evolution of IVIG from a source of passive immunity to a powerful immunomodulatory/anti-inflammatory agent results in extensive applications in autoimmune diseases. IVIG composition depends on the antibodies of the donor population and the alterations of protein structure due to the processing of plasma. The anti-viral and anti-inflammatory activity of IVIG has led us to think that they may represent a useful therapeutic tool even in COVID-19. The human origin of IVIG carries specific criticalities including risks of blood products, supply, and elevated costs. IVIG can be useful in critically ill patients, as well as early empirical treatment. To date, the need for further well-designed studies stating protocols and the efficacy/tolerability profile of IVIG and convalescent plasma in selected situations are awaited.

COVID-19: The experience from Iran

The first cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Iran were detected on February 19, 2020. Soon the entire country was hit with the virus. Although dermatologists were not immediately the frontline health care workers, all aspects of their practice were drastically affected. Adapting to this unprecedented crisis required urgent appropriate responses. With preventive measures and conserving health care resources being the most essential priorities, dermatologists, as an integral part of the health system, needed to adapt their practices according to the latest guidelines. The spectrum of the challenges encompassed education, teledermatology, lasers, and other dermatologic procedures, as well as management of patients who were immunosuppressed or developed drug reactions and, most importantly, the newly revealed cutaneous signs of COVID-19. These challenges have paved the way for new horizons in dermatology.

Patients with specific skin disorders who are affected by COVID-19: What do experiences say about management strategies? A systematic review

In patients with specific dermatologic disorders who are affected by new corona virus, we know little about disease course (underlying disease and new onset infection), and the most proper management strategies include both issues that are what this systematic review targets. Databases of PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Medscape, and Centre of Evidence-Based Dermatology, coronavirus dermatology resource of Nottingham University searched completely up to May 15, 2020, and initial 237 articles were selected to further review and finally 9 articles (including 12 patients) entered to this study. From 12 patients with chronic underlying dermatologic disease treated with systemic therapies, only 1 patient required Intensive Care Unit admission, the others have been treated for mild-moderate symptoms with conventional therapies. The biologic or immunosuppressive/immunomodulator agents have been ceased during the course of disease. The course of coronovirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) and its management was as similar as normal populations. Their underlying dermatologic disease were exacerbating from mild to moderate. Their treatment has been continued as before, after the symptoms improved. Exacerbation of patients underlying dermatologic disease was mild to moderate. Discontinuing the treatment in the acute period of COVID and the restart after recovery may prevent severe recurrence and disturbing cytokine storms in these patients.

The efficacy of rituximab in patients with mucous membrane pemphigoid

OBJECTIVE

Mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is an autoimmune blistering disorder with tendency to scarring. Long term immunosuppressive treatment may be required to minimize the consequences of the disease.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we investigated the efficacy of rituximab (RTX) in MMP patients and compare the beneficial effects of early versus late administration of RTX. Medical records of 24 MMP patients who were treated with 500 mg RTX on day 1, then weekly for 4 consecutive weeks were reviewed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients (87.5%) reached disease control (DC) at the mean interval of 4.95 months (SD: 5.15; range: 1-24) after RTX. Complete remission (CR) with scarring was achieved in 45.8% (n = 11) and 33.3% (n = 8) attained CR without any residual scar (total CR with or without scar 79.1%). Two patients (8.3%) reached partial remission including persistent gingivitis. Only one patient progressed from non-cicatricial to cicatricial MMP despite receiving RTX. 47.6% (n = 10) of patients experienced relapse after achieving DC at a mean interval of 15.2 months (range: 6-30, SD: 7.0). Considerably, earlier the RTX was administered, sooner the DC was obtained (Pearson r = 0.742, p-value < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that RTX may prevent further scarring and progression in MMP patients especially if administered early.

Antibody-based immunotherapeutics and use of convalescent plasma to counter COVID-19: advances and prospects

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread to several countries globally. Currently, there is no specific drug or vaccine available for managing COVID-19. Antibody-based immunotherapeutic strategies using convalescent plasma, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), neutralizing antibodies (NAbs), and intravenous immunoglobulins have therapeutic potential.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides the current status of the development of various antibody-based immunotherapeutics such as convalescent plasma, mAbs, NAbs, and intravenous immunoglobulins against COVID-19. The review also highlights their advantages, disadvantages, and clinical utility for the treatment of COVID-19 patients.

EXPERT OPINION

In a pandemic situation such as COVID-19, the development of new drugs should focus on and expedite the strategies where safety and efficacy are proven. Antibody-based immunotherapeutic approaches such as convalescent plasma, intravenous immunoglobulins, and mAbs have a proven record of safety and efficacy and are in use for decades. Some of them are already being used to manage COVID-19 patients and found to be useful. However, the mAbs with virus neutralization potential is the need of the hour during this COVID-19 pandemic to be more specific and virus targeted. The research and investment need to be accelerated to bring them into clinical use for prophylactic and therapeutic purposes against COVID-19.