The Role of Inhaled Corticosteroids (ICS) in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Multicenter, Cohort Study

Can the ADO Index Be Used as a Predictor of Mortality from COVID-19 in Patients with COPD?

Background

Several studies have shown that the risk of mortality due to COVID-19 is high in patients with COPD. However, evidence on factors predicting mortality is limited.

Research Question

Are there any useful markers to predict mortality in COVID-19 patients with COPD?.

Study Design and Methods

A total of 689 patients were included in this study from the COPET study, a national multicenter observational study investigating COPD phenotypes consisting of patients who were followed up with a spirometry-confirmed COPD diagnosis. Patients were also retrospectively examined in terms of COVID-19 and their outcomes.

Results

Among the study patients, 105 were diagnosed with PCR-positive COVID-19, and 19 of them died. Body mass index (p= 0.01) and ADO (age, dyspnoea, airflow obstruction) index (p= 0.01) were higher, whereas predicted FEV1 (p< 0.001) and eosinophil count (p= 0.003) were lower in patients who died of COVID-19. Each 0.755 unit increase in the ADO index increased the risk of death by 2.12 times, and each 0.007 unit increase in the eosinophil count decreased the risk of death by 1.007 times. The optimum cut-off ADO score of 3.5 was diagnostic with 94% sensitivity and 40% specificity in predicting mortality.

Interpretation

Our study suggested that the ADO index recorded in the stable period in patients with COPD makes a modest contribution to the prediction of mortality due to COVID-19. Further studies are needed to validate the use of the ADO index in estimating mortality in both COVID-19 and other viral respiratory infections in patients with COPD.

After the Hurricane: Anti-COVID-19 Drugs Development, Molecular Mechanisms of Action and Future Perspectives

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a new coronavirus in the Coronaviridae family. The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has undoubtedly been the largest crisis of the twenty-first century, resulting in over 6.8 million deaths and 686 million confirmed cases, creating a global public health issue. Hundreds of notable articles have been published since the onset of this pandemic to justify the cause of viral spread, viable preventive measures, and future therapeutic approaches. As a result, this review was developed to provide a summary of the current anti-COVID-19 drugs, as well as their timeline, molecular mode of action, and efficacy. It also sheds light on potential future treatment options. Several medications, notably hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir, were initially claimed to be effective in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 but eventually demonstrated inadequate activity, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) withdrew hydroxychloroquine. Clinical trials and investigations, on the other hand, have demonstrated the efficacy of remdesivir, convalescent plasma, and monoclonal antibodies, 6-Thioguanine, hepatitis C protease inhibitors, and molnupiravir. Other therapeutics, including inhaled medicines, flavonoids, and aptamers, could pave the way for the creation of novel anti-COVID-19 therapies. As future pandemics are unavoidable, this article urges immediate action and extensive research efforts to develop potent specialized anti-COVID-19 medications.

Evaluation of the use of methylprednisolone and dexamethasone in asthma critically ill patients with COVID-19: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown mortality benefits with corticosteroids in Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). However, there is inconsistency regarding the use of methylprednisolone over dexamethasone in COVID-19, and this has not been extensively evaluated in patients with a history of asthma. This study aims to investigate and compare the effectiveness and safety of methylprednisolone and dexamethasone in critically ill patients with asthma and COVID-19.

METHODS

The primary endpoint was the in-hospital mortality. Other endpoints include 30-day mortality, respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation (MV), acute kidney injury (AKI), acute liver injury, length of stay (LOS), ventilator-free days (VFDs), and hospital-acquired infections. Propensity score (PS) matching, and regression analyses were used.

RESULTS

A total of one hundred-five patients were included. Thirty patients received methylprednisolone, whereas seventy-five patients received dexamethasone. After PS matching (1:1 ratio), patients who received methylprednisolone had higher but insignificant in-hospital mortality in both crude and logistic regression analysis, [(35.0% vs. 18.2%, P = 0.22) and (OR 2.31; CI: 0.56 - 9.59; P = 0.25), respectively]. There were no statistically significant differences in the 30-day mortality, respiratory failure requiring MV, AKI, acute liver injury, ICU LOS, hospital LOS, and hospital-acquired infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Methylprednisolone in COVID-19 patients with asthma may lead to increased in-hospital mortality and shorter VFDs compared to dexamethasone; however, it failed to reach statistical significance. Therefore, it is necessary to interpret these data cautiously, and further large-scale randomized clinical trials are needed to establish more conclusive evidence and support these conclusions.

Clinical benefits of inhaled ciclesonide for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection: a retrospective study

Background

The successful management of patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with inhaled ciclesonide has been reported, however few studies have investigated its application among hospitalized patients.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study enrolled all adult patients admitted to our hospital with confirmed COVID-19 infection from May to June 2021. Critical patients who received mechanical ventilation within 24 h after admission and those who started ciclesonide more than 14 days after symptom onset were excluded. The in-hospital mortality rate was compared between those who did and did not receive inhaled ciclesonide.

Results

A total of 269 patients were enrolled, of whom 184 received inhaled ciclesonide and 85 did not. The use of ciclesonide was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (7.6% vs. 23.5%, p = 0.0003) and a trend of shorter hospital stay (12.0 (10.0–18.0) days vs. 13.0 (10.0–25.3) days, p = 0.0577). In subgroup analysis, the use of inhaled ciclesonide significantly reduced mortality in the patients with severe COVID-19 infection (6.8% vs. 50.0%, p < 0.0001) and in those with a high risk of mortality (16.4% vs. 43.2%, p = 0.0037). The use of inhaled ciclesonide also reduced the likelihood of receiving mechanical ventilation in the patients with severe COVID-19 infection. After multivariate analysis, inhaled ciclesonide remained positively correlated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio: 0.2724, 95% confidence interval: 0.087–0.8763, p = 0.0291).

Conclusions

The use of inhaled ciclesonide in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection can reduce in-hospital mortality. Further randomized studies in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 infection are urgently needed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12890-022-02168-8.

Inhaled therapy for COVID-19: Considerations of drugs, formulations and devices

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiological agent responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, has outspread at full tilt across the world. Although several effective vaccines continue to be deployed, reliable antiviral treatments have yet to be developed against this disease. Currently, available therapeutics for COVID-19 include repurposed, and a few novel drugs. Many drugs have been promising in preclinical studies, but a majority of these drugs have shown little or no efficacy in clinical studies. One of the major reasons is the insufficient drug concentration in the lung, the primary target site of infection for SARS-CoV-2, from the administration of drugs through oral or intravenous routes. Higher effective doses administered through these routes could also lead to adverse side effects. For this reason, inhaled treatments are being tested as an efficient approach for COVID-19, allowing lower doses of drugs ensuring higher concentrations of the drug(s) in the lung. The inhaled treatment combining two or more antiviral drugs will increase potency and reduce the possibility of selecting for SARS-CoV-2 variants with reduced drug susceptibility. Finally, the appropriate drug combination needs to be delivered using a suitable system. Here, we review the current treatment for COVID-19 and their limitations, discussing the advantages of mono and combinational inhaled therapy with a brief outline of the recently reformulated anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents as inhaled formulations. The selection of appropriate delivery devices for inhalation and associated key considerations including the formulation challenges are also discussed.