Corticosteroid therapy for coronavirus disease 2019-related acute respiratory distress syndrome: a cohort study with propensity score analysis

Clinical usefulness of the serum levels of neuroinflammatory and lung fibrosis biomarkers in the assessment of cognitive dysfunction in post-COVID19 patients

A growing body of evidence indicates there is an increasing incidence of cognitive dysfunction in patients after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. However, still lack diagnostic tools, which allow us to predict prognosis in such cases and improve the stratification of the disease. This study aims to evaluate the usefulness of the biomarkers that could allow to predict the severity and progression of COVID-19 in patients with post-COVID syndrome and cognitive problems. Data regarding clinical history, pre-existing conditions, chest CT scan, and therapy (remdesivir, steroids) were acquired. A total of 44 patients with hospitalized COVID-19, and healthy controls were enrolled in the investigation, and serum blood was obtained. After 6 months of observations, patients with COVID-19 were divided into two groups: first - without post-COVID syndrome and memory complaints, and second - with post-COVID and cognitive problems. Measurements of YKL-40 and MR-pro-ADM were taken in the serum with enzyme immunoassay kits at the time of admission (visit 1) and 6 months after discharge from the hospital (visit 2). Significantly higher concentrations of YKL-40 were found in patients with COVID-19 as compared to healthy individuals (p = 0.016). Moreover, YKL-40 ratio allowed to differentiate patients with and without post-COVID syndrome (median: 0.94 vs. 1.55, p = 0.004). Additionally, COVID-19 patients with dyspnea presented significantly elevated levels of MR-pro-ADM as compared to the group of COVID-19 survivors without dyspnea (p = 0.015). In the group of patients without post-COVID syndrome, the concentrations of YKL-40 and MR-pro-ADM decreased after treatment as compared to levels before therapy (77 vs. 36 ng/ml and 607 vs. 456 pmol/L). However, in patients with post-COVID syndrome and cognitive problems, the levels of both markers did not alter 6 months after hospital discharge in comparison to basal levels. Furthermore, after dexamethasone treatment the YKL-40 concentrations declined significantly (p = 0.003) in patients with COVID-19. This study demonstrated the predictive usefulness of YKL-40 as an indicator of successful treatment in patients with COVID-19 infection allowing risk stratification of hospitalized patients. It seems that indicators of neuroinflammation might have the potential to track development of cognitive complaints, however, it requires further investigations.

Efficacy and Safety of Glucocorticoid in the Treatment of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome caused by Covid-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Glucocorticoids are often used to treat acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the efficacy and safety of glucocorticoids in the treatment of ARDS caused by COVID-19 are still controversial; therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis of the literature on this topic.

METHODS

Four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched from the establishment of the databases to August 16, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared glucocorticoid versus standard treatment for ARDS caused by COVID-19 were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) checklist and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions were used to evaluate the risk of bias. Review Manager 5.4 software and STATA 17.0 were used for meta-analy-sis, and the relative risk (RR), mean difference, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were then determined. Results: A total of 17 studies involving 8592 patients were evaluated, including 14 retrospective studies and 3 RCTs. Sixteen studies reported data on all-cause mortality. The results of the meta-analysis showed that glucocorticoids did not reduce all-cause (RR, 0.96; 95% CI 0.82-1.13, P = .62) or 28-day (RR, 1.01; 95% CI 0.78-1.32, P = .93) mortality. Subgroup analysis showed that only methylprednisolone reduced all-cause mortality. No matter whether glucocorticoid use was early or delayed, high-dose or low-dose, long-term or short-term, no regimen reduced all-cause mortality. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, length of hospital stay, hyperglycemia, and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP); how-ever, glucocorticoids increased the number of ventilator-free days.

CONCLUSIONS

Although methylprednisolone may reduce all-cause mortality from ARDS caused by COVID-19, this effect was not found with other types of glucocorticoids. At the same time, glucocorticoid use was associ-ated with more ventilator-free days, without increasing the incidence of hyperglycemic events or VAP. Con-sidering that almost all of the included studies were retrospective cohort studies, more RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

Xuebijing alleviates LPS-induced acute lung injury by downregulating pro-inflammatory cytokine production and inhibiting gasdermin-E-mediated pyroptosis of alveolar epithelial cells

Acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS) is characterized by diffuse alveolar injury primarily caused by an excessive inflammatory response. Regrettably, the lack of effective pharmacotherapy currently available contributes to the high mortality rate in patients with this condition. Xuebijing (XBJ), a traditional Chinese medicine recognized for its potent anti-inflammatory properties, exhibits promise as a potential therapeutic agent for ALI/ARDS. This study aimed to explore the preventive effects of XBJ on ALI and its underlying mechanism. To this end, we established an LPS-induced ALI model and treated ALI mice with XBJ. Our results demonstrated that pre-treatment with XBJ significantly alleviated lung inflammation and increased the survival rate of ALI mice by 37.5%. Moreover, XBJ substantially suppressed the production of TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β in the lung tissue. Subsequently, we performed a network pharmacology analysis and identified identified 109 potential target genes of XBJ that were mainly involved in multiple signaling pathways related to programmed cell death and anti-inflammatory responses. Furthermore, we found that XBJ exerted its inhibitory effect on gasdermin-E-mediated pyroptosis of lung cells by suppressing TNF-α production. Therefore, this study not only establishes the preventive efficacy of XBJ in ALI but also reveals its role in protecting alveolar epithelial cells against gasdermin-E-mediated pyroptosis by reducing TNF-α release.

Epidemiology and Outcome of Early-Onset Acute Kidney Injury and Recovery in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Analysis

Background: The clinical significance of early-onset acute kidney injury (EO-AKI) and recovery in severe COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) patients is poorly documented. Objective: The aim of the study was to assess the epidemiology and outcome of EO-AKI and recovery in ICU patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Design: This was a retrospective single-centre study. Setting: The study was carried out at the medical ICU of the university hospital of Clermont-Ferrand, France. Patients: All consecutive adult patients aged ≥18 years admitted between 20 March 2020 and 31 August 2021 for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia were enrolled. Patients with chronic kidney disease, referred from another ICU, and with an ICU length of stay (LOS) ≤72 h were excluded. Interventions: EO-AKI was defined on the basis of serum creatinine levels according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria, developing ≤7 days. Depending on renal recovery, defined by the normalization of serum creatinine levels, EO-AKI was transient (recovery within 48 h), persistent (recovery between 3 and 7 days) or AKD (no recovery within 7 days after EO-AKI onset). Measurements: Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to determine factors associated with EO-AKI and EO-AKI recovery. Main Results: EO-AKI occurred in 84/266 (31.5%) study patients, of whom 42 (50%), 17 (20.2%) and 25 (29.7%) had EO-AKI stages 1, 2 and 3, respectively. EO-AKI was classified as transient, persistent and AKD in 40 (47.6%), 15 (17.8%) and 29 (34.6%) patients, respectively. The 90-day mortality was 87/244 (35.6%) and increased with EO-AKI occurrence and severity: no EO-AKI, 38/168 (22.6%); EO-AKI stage 1, 22/39 (56.4%); stage 2, 9/15 (60%); and stage 3, 18/22 (81.8%) (p < 0.01). The 90-day mortality in patients with transient or persistent AKI and AKD was 20/36 (55.6%), 8/14 (57.1%) and 21/26 (80.8%), respectively (p < 0.01). MAKE-90 occurred in 42.6% of all patients. Conclusions: In ICU patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, the development of EO-AKI and time to recovery beyond day 7 of onset were associated with poor outcome.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection Presenting as Acute Chest Syndrome in a Child With Hemoglobin SD-Los Angeles Disease: A Case Report and Review of Literature

Hemoglobin D-Los Angeles is a variant of hemoglobin that can polymerize in the deoxygenated state. When co-inherited with Hemoglobin S (HbSD-Los Angeles disease) a severe sickling syndrome similar to HbSS can result. Corona virus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus-2. It has been associated with acute chest syndrome (ACS) in individuals with sickle cell disease (SCD), but this complication has not previously been reported in patients with HbSD-Los Angeles. Dexamethasone has been shown to improve outcomes in non-SCD patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus-2 pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome; however, its use in SCD patients with ACS is controversial due to a reported increased risk of complications including vaso-occlusive painful episodes. Herein, we reported a patient with HbSD-Los Angeles and COVID-19-associated ACS whom we treated with dexamethasone without transfusion. The patient experienced a rapid recovery without sequelae from steroid use. To further evaluate the use of steroids, we conducted a literature review focusing on the management of pediatric SCD patients with COVID-19-associated ACS. We identified a total of 39 pediatric patients with SCD and COVID-19, of whom 21 (54%) had ACS. Packed red blood cell transfusion (n=11), exchange transfusion (n=4), or a combination of exchange transfusion and packed red blood cell transfusion (n=4) were the most frequently reported treatment, with hydroxychloroquine (n=5), remdesivir (n=1), and tocilizumab (n=1) also being reported. Three patients were treated with dexamethasone. All patients recovered and no adverse outcomes from steroid use were reported. Even though transfusion is considered the standard of care for children with ACS and steroids are not routinely recommended, our experience suggested that COVID-19-associated ACS may be an important exception, especially for patients who refuse transfusion or are in resource-poor nations where blood transfusions may not be readily available. Further studies are warranted to confirm these observations.

A differential therapeutic consideration for use of corticosteroids according to established COVID-19 clinical phenotypes in critically ill patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the use of corticosteroids was associated with Intensive Care Unit (ICU) mortality among whole population and pre-specified clinical phenotypes.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis derived from multicenter, observational study.

SETTING

Critical Care Units.

PATIENTS

Adult critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 disease admitted to 63 ICUs in Spain.

INTERVENTIONS

Corticosteroids vs. no corticosteroids.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

Three phenotypes were derived by non-supervised clustering analysis from whole population and classified as (A: severe, B: critical and C: life-threatening). We performed a multivariate analysis after propensity optimal full matching (PS) for whole population and weighted Cox regression (HR) and Fine-Gray analysis (sHR) to assess the impact of corticosteroids on ICU mortality according to the whole population and distinctive patient clinical phenotypes.

RESULTS

A total of 2017 patients were analyzed, 1171 (58%) with corticosteroids. After PS, corticosteroids were shown not to be associated with ICU mortality (OR: 1.0; 95% CI: 0.98-1.15). Corticosteroids were administered in 298/537 (55.5%) patients of "A" phenotype and their use was not associated with ICU mortality (HR=0.85 [0.55-1.33]). A total of 338/623 (54.2%) patients in "B" phenotype received corticosteroids. No effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality was observed when HR was performed (0.72 [0.49-1.05]). Finally, 535/857 (62.4%) patients in "C" phenotype received corticosteroids. In this phenotype HR (0.75 [0.58-0.98]) and sHR (0.79 [0.63-0.98]) suggest a protective effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality.

CONCLUSION

Our finding warns against the widespread use of corticosteroids in all critically ill patients with COVID-19 at moderate dose. Only patients with the highest inflammatory levels could benefit from steroid treatment.

A differential therapeutic consideration for use of corticosteroids according to established COVID-19 clinical phenotypes in critically ill patients

Objective

To determine if the use of corticosteroids was associated with Intensive Care Unit (ICU) mortality among whole population and pre-specified clinical phenotypes.

Design

A secondary analysis derived from multicenter, observational study.

Setting

Critical Care Units.

Patients

Adult critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 disease admitted to 63 ICUs in Spain.

Interventions

Corticosteroids vs. no corticosteroids.

Main variables of interest

Three phenotypes were derived by non-supervised clustering analysis from whole population and classified as (A: severe, B: critical and C: life-threatening). We performed a multivariate analysis after propensity optimal full matching (PS) for whole population and weighted Cox regression (HR) and Fine-Gray analysis (sHR) to assess the impact of corticosteroids on ICU mortality according to the whole population and distinctive patient clinical phenotypes.

Results

A total of 2017 patients were analyzed, 1171 (58%) with corticosteroids. After PS, corticosteroids were shown not to be associated with ICU mortality (OR: 1.0; 95% CI: 0.98-1.15). Corticosteroids were administered in 298/537 (55.5%) patients of "A" phenotype and their use was not associated with ICU mortality (HR = 0.85 [0.55-1.33]). A total of 338/623 (54.2%) patients in "B" phenotype received corticosteroids. No effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality was observed when HR was performed (0.72 [0.49-1.05]). Finally, 535/857 (62.4%) patients in "C" phenotype received corticosteroids. In this phenotype HR (0.75 [0.58-0.98]) and sHR (0.79 [0.63-0.98]) suggest a protective effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality.

Conclusion

Our finding warns against the widespread use of corticosteroids in all critically ill patients with COVID-19 at moderate dose. Only patients with the highest inflammatory levels could benefit from steroid treatment.

A narrative review of COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS): "typical" or "atypical" ARDS?

Background and Objective

The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) is highly infectious and mainly involves the respiratory system, with some patients rapidly progress to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which is the leading cause of death in COVID-19 patients. Hence, fully understanding the features of COVID-19-related ARDS (CARDS) and early management of this disease would improve the prognosis and reduce the mortality of severe COVID-19. With the development of recent studies which have focused on CARDS, whether CARDS is "typical" or "atypical" ARDS has become a hotly debated topic.

Methods

We searched for relevant literature from 1999 to 2021 published in PubMed by using the following keywords and their combinations: "COVID-19", "CARDS", "ARDS", "pathophysiological mechanism", "clinical manifestations", "prognosis", and "clinical trials". Then, we analyzed, compared and highlighted the differences between classic ARDS and CARDS from all of the aspects above.

Key Content and Findings

Classical ARDS commonly occurs within 1 week after a predisposing cause, yet the median time from symptoms onset to CARDS is longer than that of classical ARDS, manifesting within a period of 9.0-12.0 days. Although the lung mechanics exhibited in CARDS grossly match those of classical ARDS, there are some atypical manifestations of CARDS: the severity of hypoxemia seemed not to be proportional to injury of lung mechanics and an increase of thrombogenic processes. Meanwhile, some patients' symptoms do not correspond with the extent of the organic injury: a chest computed tomography (CT) will reveal the severe and diffuse lung injuries, yet the clinical presentations of patients can be mild.

Conclusions

Despite the differences between the CARDS and ARDS, in addition to the treatment of antivirals, clinicians should continue to follow the accepted evidence-based framework for managing all ARDS cases, including CARDS.

Efficacy and safety of corticosteroid regimens for the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis

Aim

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids for treating hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Materials & methods

Efficacy outcomes included time to negative SARS-CoV-2 tests, length of stay, duration and incidence of intensive unit care stay, incidence of mortality and duration and incidence of mechanical ventilation. Safety outcomes included the incidence of adverse events and severe adverse events, incidence of hyperglycemia and incidence of nosocomial infections.

Results

Ninety-five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (n = 42,205) were included. Corticosteroids were associated with increased length of stay (based on RCT only), increased time to negative tests, decreased length of mechanical ventilation and increased odds of hyperglycemia.

Conclusion

Corticosteroids should be considered in patients requiring mechanical ventilation, and glycemic monitoring may be needed when administering corticosteroids.

Duration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity from various specimens and clinical characteristics in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The duration of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA positivity will be important to prevent the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA to determine the duration from several parts of the body and clinical characteristics affecting it.

MAIN TEXT

PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and CENTRAL were searched for original studies reporting the duration from COVID-19 onset to the disappearance of viral RNA. Of the 1682 studies identified, 100 met the selection criteria and 13,431 patients were included in this study. The duration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity was 18.29 [95% confidence interval: 17.00-19.89] days in the upper respiratory tract samples, 23.79 [20.43-27.16] days in the sputum, 14.60 [12.16-17.05] days in the blood, and 22.38 [18.40-26.35] days in the stool. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the duration was positively correlated with age, comorbidities, severity, and usage of glucocorticoid. Subgroup analysis indicated that the presence or absence of complications had the greatest impact on the difference in DSRP.

CONCLUSIONS

The duration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity was 18.29 days in the upper respiratory tract samples. The duration in the sputum and the stool was longer, while that in the blood was shorter. The duration in the upper respiratory tract samples was longer in older, with any comorbidities, severer, and treated with glucocorticoid. These results provide the basic data for the duration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity, and in the future, the effect of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and the SARS-CoV-2 variants on the duration of RNA positivity should be assessed.

Time to active sitting position: One-year findings from a temporary COVID-19 intensive care unit

Objective

To investigate the association between time to active sitting position and clinical features in people with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) and referred to physiotherapists.

Method

Prospective study conducted in the largest temporary ICU in Lombardy (Italy) between April 2020 and June 2021. All individuals with COVID-19 who received physiotherapy were included. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard model was fitted to explore the statistical association between active sitting position and characteristics of patients referred to physiotherapists, also accounting for the different multidisciplinary teams responsible for patients.

Results

284 individuals over 478 (59.4%) had access to physiotherapy, which was performed for a median of 8 days, without difference between multidisciplinary teams (P = 0.446). The active sitting position was reached after a median of 18 (IQR: 10.0–32.0) days. Sex was the only characteristic associated with the time to active sitting position, with males showing a reduced hazard by a factor of 0.65 (95% CI: 0.48–0.87; P = 0.0042) compared to females. At ICU discharge, nearly 50% individuals increased Manchester Mobility Score by 3 points. During physiotherapy no major adverse event was recorded.

Conclusion

Individuals with COVID-19 take long time to reach active sitting position in ICU, with males requiring longer rehabilitation than females.

Possible harm from glucocorticoid drugs misuse in the early phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection: a narrative review of the evidence

Since the publication of the RECOVERY trial, the use of glucocorticoid drugs (GC) has spread for the treatment of severe COVID-19 worldwide. However, the benefit of dexamethasone was largest in patients who received mechanical ventilation or supplemental oxygen therapy, while no benefit was found among patients without hypoxemia. In addition, a positive outcome was found in patients who received dexamethasone after several days of symptoms, while possible harm could exist if administered early. The right time interval for GC administration is still a matter of debate. Previous studies showed that an early GC use during the first phase of the disease, when viral replication peaks, may negatively affect the innate immune response through several mechanisms, such as the inhibition of pro-inflammatory and antiviral cytokine production and signaling pathway, including type I interferon, that is fundamental to counteract the virus and that was found to be impaired in several patients with life-threatening COVID-19. The GC misuse can lead to a more severe disease even in patients who do not have the established risk factors, such as obesity and cardiovascular diseases. In our focused review, we describe the role of immune response in viral infections, especially SARS-CoV-2, and discuss the potential harms of GC misuse in COVID-19.

Development of a repeated-measures predictive model and clinical risk score for mortality in ventilated COVID-19 patients

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused intensive care units (ICUs) to reach capacities requiring triage. A tool to predict mortality risk in ventilated patients with COVID-19 could inform decision-making and resource allocation, and allow population-level comparisons across institutions.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included all mechanically ventilated adults with COVID-19 admitted to three tertiary care ICUs in Toronto, Ontario, between 1 March 2020 and 15 December 2020. Generalized estimating equations were used to identify variables predictive of mortality. The primary outcome was the probability of death at three-day intervals from the time of ICU admission (day 0), with risk re-calculation every three days to day 15; the final risk calculation estimated the probability of death at day 15 and beyond. A numerical algorithm was developed from the final model coefficients.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-seven patients were eligible for inclusion. Median ICU length of stay was 26.9 (interquartile range, 15.4-52.0) days. Overall mortality was 42%. From day 0 to 15, the variables age, temperature, lactate level, ventilation tidal volume, and vasopressor use significantly predicted mortality. Our final clinical risk score had an area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve of 0.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 0.9). For every ten-point increase in risk score, the relative increase in the odds of death was approximately 4, with an odds ratio of 4.1 (95% CI, 2.9 to 5.9).

CONCLUSION

Our dynamic prediction tool for mortality in ventilated patients with COVID-19 has excellent diagnostic properties. Notwithstanding, external validation is required before widespread implementation.

"MATH+" Multi-Modal Hospital Treatment Protocol for COVID-19 Infection: Clinical and Scientific Rationale

In December 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a severe respiratory illness caused by the new coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, China. The greatest impact that COVID-19 had was on intensive care units (ICUs), given that approximately 20% of hospitalized cases developed acute respiratory failure (ARF) requiring ICU admission. Based on the assumption that COVID-19 represented a viral pneumonia and no anti-coronaviral therapy existed, nearly all national and international health care societies recommended "supportive care only" avoiding other therapies outside of randomized controlled trials, with a specific prohibition against the use of corticosteroids in treatment. However, early studies of COVID-19-associated ARF reported inexplicably high mortality rates, with frequent prolonged durations of mechanical ventilation (MV), even from centers expert in such supportive care strategies. These reports led the authors to form a clinical expert panel called the Front-Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (www.flccc.net). The panel collaboratively reviewed the emerging clinical, radiographic, and pathological reports of COVID-19 while initiating multiple discussions among a wide clinical network of front-line clinical ICU experts from initial outbreak areas in China, Italy, and New York. Based on the shared early impressions of "what was working and what wasn't working", the increasing medical journal publications and the rapidly accumulating personal clinical experiences with COVID-19 patients, a treatment protocol was created for the hospitalized patients based on the core therapies of methylprednisolone, ascorbic acid, thiamine, heparin and non-antiviral co-interventions (MATH+). This manuscript reviews the scientific and clinical rationale behind MATH+ based on published in-vitro, pre-clinical, and clinical data in support of each medicine, with a special emphasis of studies supporting their use in the treatment of patients with viral syndromes and COVID-19 specifically.

Challenges for the practice of evidence-based medicine during COVID-19 pandemic (practice of evidence-based medicine in the new normal)

The forces which had kept the evidence-based medicine (EBM) movement alive and ongoing have altered significantly during this coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic. There has been discrepancy in the demand and availability of scientific evidence. Deaths of thousands of people including physicians and other health-care workers (while offering COVID-19 care) across the globe have shaken the confidence of the physicians towards the practice of EBM. Journals started publishing in a hurry, incomplete and at times misleading scientific articles, about COVID-19, leaving the physicians in a dilemma about the evidence. The practitioner of EBM has had to turn helplessly to non-documentary evidences to treat COVID-19 patients. Apart from the evidence becoming hyperdynamic and volatile along with a reduction in its quality, the environment got polluted by political interference. In a nutshell, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the practice of EBM and its acceptance in multiple ways.

COVID-19 and the liver: A brief and core review

Coronavirus disease 2019 has a wide range of clinical spectrum from asymptomatic infection to severe infection resulting in death within a short time. Currently, it is known that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) does not only cause a respiratory tract infection but a more complicated disease that can lead to multiple system involvement including the liver. Herein, we evaluate the epidemiology, the impact of liver injury/ dysfunction on disease prognosis, the pathophysiological mechanisms and management of liver injury. More than one-fourth of the patients have abnormal liver function tests, mostly a mild-to-moderate liver dysfunction. Liver injury is significantly associated with a poor clinical outcome. Direct cytotoxic effect of SARS-CoV-2, the immune response ("cytokine storm"), the complications related to the disease, and drugs used in the treatments are the pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for liver injury. However, the exact mechanism is not yet clearly explained. The binding of SARS-CoV-2 to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors and entering the hepatocyte and cholangiocytes can cause cytotoxic effects on the liver. Excessive immune response has an important role in disease progression and causes acute respiratory distress syndrome and multi-organ failures accompanied by liver injury. Treatment drugs, particularly lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir and antibiotics are a frequent reason for liver injury. The possible reasons should be meticulously investigated and resolved.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and COVID-19: A Literature Review

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is an overwhelming inflammatory disorder of the lung due to direct and indirect insults to the lungs. ARDS is characterized by increased vascular permeability, protein-rich edema, diffuse alveolar infiltrate, and loss of aerated lung tissue, leading to decreased lung compliance, tachypnea, and severe hypoxemia. COVID-19 is generally associated with ARDS, and it has gained prime importance since it started. The mortality rate is alarmingly high in COVID-19-related ARDS patients regardless of advances in mechanical ventilation. Several pharmacological agents, including corticosteroids, nitric oxide, neuromuscular blocker, anti-TNF, statins, and exogenous surfactant, have been studied and some are under investigation, like ketoconazole, lisofylline, N-acetylcysteine, prostaglandins, prostacyclin, and fish oil. The purpose of this review is to appraise the understanding of the pathophysiology of ARDS, biomarkers, and clinical trials of pharmacological therapies of ARDS and COVID-19-related ARDS.

Effects of corticosteroids on Covid-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis on clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Covid-19 disease is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Although corticosteroids have shown some promising results in Covid-19 patients, their effectiveness remains controversial. In this systematic review, we evaluated the effect of corticosteroids in mortality, Hospitalization, ICU admission, intubation, and mechanical ventilation in Covid-19 patients.

METHODS

We searched major databases from March-2020 to Jan-2021. Twenty-nine studies were included after evaluating the eligibility of the literature. The extracted data for mortality, hospitalization, admission to the ICU, intubation, and mechanical ventilation were analyzed with RevMan® 5.4. Categorical variables are presented with odds ratios (OR), and numerical variables are shown with the mean difference.

RESULT

Corticosteroid treatment had no impact on mortality in 18,190 covid patients with OR = 1.12[0.83-1.50]. When we include the randomized controlled trials, corticosteroids reduced the mortality by 20% (OR = 0.80 [0.73, 0.88]; P < 0.001). Additionally, the risk of admission to the ICU, the need for endotracheal intubation, and mechanical ventilation were comparable between patients receiving corticosteroids and controls. The duration of hospitalization was also similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Corticosteroid therapy may not be effective for reducing mortality, length of hospitalization, the likelihood of intubation and mechanical ventilation, and ICU admission in patients suffering from Covid-19 pneumonia.

Unraveling the Relationship of Asthma and COVID-19

Viral infections are one of the main causes of asthma exacerbations. During the COVID-19 era, concerns regarding the relationship of SARS-CoV2 with asthma have been raised. The concerns are both for COVID severity and asthma exacerbations. Many studies on COVID-19 epidemiology and comorbidities have assessed whether asthma represents a risk factor for SARS-CoV2 infection and/or more severe course of the disease. This review covers the current evidence on the prevalence of asthma in COVID-19 and its association with susceptibility to and severity of SARS-CoV2 infection. It will examine the possible role of underlying asthma severity in COVID-19 related outcomes as well as the molecular mechanisms involved in the co-existence of these entities. The possible role of asthma inflammatory phenotypes will also be evaluated. Finally, the impact of asthma comorbidities and the implications of asthma medication on COVID-19 will be addressed.

Efficacy and Safety of Corticosteroid Use in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

We conducted a comprehensive literature review to synthesize evidence for the relationship between corticosteroid use and mortality in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

The PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to March 13, 2021. We searched and analyzed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OSs) that examined corticosteroid use in patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, while the secondary outcome was the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 11 RCTs and 44 OSs involving 7893 and 41,164 patients with COVID-19 were included in the study. Corticosteroid use was associated with lower COVID-19 mortality in RCTs, but was not statistically significant (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77-1.07; I2 = 63.4%). The subgroup analysis of pulse dose corticosteroid showed survival benefit statistically (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.15-0.56). Moreover, the corticosteroid use may reduce the need for MV (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51-0.90; I2 = 7.5%) with no significant increase in serious adverse reactions (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.30-2.37; I2 = 33.3%). In addition, the included OSs showed that the pulse dose (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45-0.95; I2 = 30.8%) might lower the mortality in patients with COVID-19. The pulse dose of methylprednisolone (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45-0.80; I2 = 0%) had a beneficial effect on survival. It was especially significant when the duration of pulse methylprednisolone use was less than 7 days (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.80; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis indicated that corticosteroid use might cause a slight reduction in COVID-19 mortality. However, it could significantly reduce the MV requirement in patients with COVID-19 and restrict serious adverse events. Additionally, the pulse dose of methylprednisolone for less than 7 days may be a good treatment choice for patients with COVID-19.

Dynamic Changes in Central and Peripheral Neuro-Injury vs. Neuroprotective Serum Markers in COVID-19 Are Modulated by Different Types of Anti-Viral Treatments but Do Not Affect the Incidence of Late and Early Strokes

The balance between neurodegeneration, neuroinflammation, neuroprotection, and COVID-19-directed therapy may underly the heterogeneity of SARS-CoV-2's neurological outcomes. A total of 105 patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19 had serum collected over a 6 month period to assess neuroinflammatory (MIF, CCL23, MCP-1), neuro-injury (NFL, NCAM-1), neurodegenerative (KLK6, τ, phospho τ, amyloids, TDP43, YKL40), and neuroprotective (clusterin, fetuin, TREM-2) proteins. These were compared to markers of nonspecific inflammatory responses (IL-6, D-dimer, CRP) and of the overall viral burden (spike protein). Data regarding treatment (steroids, convalescent plasma, remdasavir), pre-existing conditions, and incidences of strokes were collected. Amyloid β42, TDP43, NF-L, and KLK6 serum levels declined 2-3 days post-admission, yet recovered to admission baseline levels by 7 days. YKL-40 and NCAM-1 levels remained elevated over time, with clusters of differential responses identified among TREM-2, TDP43, and YKL40. Fetuin was elevated after the onset of COVID-19 while TREM-2 initially declined before significantly increasing over time. MIF serum level was increased 3-7 days after admission. Ferritin correlated with TDP-43 and KLK6. No treatment with remdesivir coincided with elevations in Amyloid-β40. A lack of convalescent plasma resulted in increased NCAM-1 and total tau, and steroidal treatments did not significantly affect any markers. A total of 11 incidences of stroke were registered up to six months after initial admission for COVID-19. Elevated D-dimer, platelet counts, IL-6, and leukopenia were observed. Variable MIF serum levels differentiated patients with CVA from those who did not have a stroke during the acute phase of COVID-19. This study demonstrated concomitant and opposite changes in neurodegenerative and neuroprotective markers persisting well into recovery.

Corticosteroid treatment and mortality in mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients: a multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Some unanswered questions persist regarding the effectiveness of corticosteroids for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We aimed to assess the clinical effect of corticosteroids on intensive care unit (ICU) mortality among mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of prospectively collected data conducted in 70 ICUs (68 Spanish, one Andorran, one Irish), including mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated ARDS patients admitted between February 6 and September 20, 2020. Individuals who received corticosteroids for refractory shock were excluded. Patients exposed to corticosteroids at admission were matched with patients without corticosteroids through propensity score matching. Primary outcome was all-cause ICU mortality. Secondary outcomes were to compare in-hospital mortality, ventilator-free days at 28 days, respiratory superinfection and length of stay between patients with corticosteroids and those without corticosteroids. We performed survival analysis accounting for competing risks and subgroup sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

We included 1835 mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated ARDS, of whom 1117 (60.9%) received corticosteroids. After propensity score matching, ICU mortality did not differ between patients treated with corticosteroids and untreated patients (33.8% vs. 30.9%; p = 0.28). In survival analysis, corticosteroid treatment at ICU admission was associated with short-term survival benefit (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.39-0.72), although beyond the 17th day of admission, this effect switched and there was an increased ICU mortality (long-term HR 1.68; 95% CI 1.16-2.45). The sensitivity analysis reinforced the results. Subgroups of age < 60 years, severe ARDS and corticosteroids plus tocilizumab could have greatest benefit from corticosteroids as short-term decreased ICU mortality without long-term negative effects were observed. Larger length of stay was observed with corticosteroids among non-survivors both in the ICU and in hospital. There were no significant differences for the remaining secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that corticosteroid treatment for mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated ARDS had a biphasic time-dependent effect on ICU mortality. Specific subgroups showed clear effect on improving survival with corticosteroid use. Therefore, further research is required to identify treatment-responsive subgroups among the mechanically ventilated COVID-19-associated ARDS patients.

Effectiveness of methylprednisolone therapy in patients with a high-risk common type of COVID-19 pneumonia: a retrospective cohort study

The optimal timing of glucocorticoid treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia is uncertain. We evaluated the clinical outcomes of methylprednisolone therapy (MPT) for patients with a high-risk common type (HRCT) COVID-19 pneumonia. We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study in Northeast China. A comparison was performed between the standard treatment (SDT) group and the SDT + MPT group to determine the efficacy of methylprednisolone in treating HRCT COVID-19 pneumonia. We collected the medical records of 403 patients with HRCT COVID-19 pneumonia (127 in the SDT + MPT group and 276 in the SDT group). None of the patients had received mechanical ventilation or died. Furthermore, there were no side effects associated with MPT. Patients in the SDT + MPT group treated with methylprednisolone received an intravenous injection for a median interval of five days (interquartile range of 3 to 7 days). The trends in lymphocyte count, C-reactive protein, interleukin 6, lactic acid dehydrogenase, respiratory rate, SpO2, PaO2, D-dimer and body temperature were similar between the SDT + MPT and SDT groups. The results for the SDT + MPT group seemed to improve faster than those for the SDT group; however, the results were not statistically significant. Clinical outcomes revealed that the average hospitalized days and the rate of progression to severe type COVID-19 pneumonia in both the SDT + MPT group and the SDT group were 14.56 ± 0.57 days versus 16.55 ± 0.3 days (p = 0.0009) and 21.26% (27/127) versus 32.4% (89/276) (p = 0.0247), respectively. The 16-day nucleic acid negative rate was higher in the SDT + MPT group than in the SDT group, 81.73% (104/127) versus 65.27% (180/276) (p = 0.0006). MPT effectively prevents patients with HRCT COVID-19 pneumonia from progressing to the severe stage.

Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio is a powerful predictor of adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome who might benefit from corticosteroid therapy

BACKGROUND

There is no convincing pharmacological treatment for patients withacute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The efficacy of corticosteroids in ARDS patients remains controversial. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) has displayed as a good biomarker for inflammation and immune status, and thus a prognostic marker in some critical patients of ARDS. In this study, we hypothesized that NLR could also serve as an indicator for the efficacy of corticosteroid therapy in ARDS patients.

METHODS

Subjects included in this retrospective cohort study with ARDS patients who were admitted to an academic hospital in Wuhan, China, from May 1st, 2020 to April 20th, 2021. Multivariable logisitic regression model was used to evaluate risk factors of 30-day in-hospital mortality and ventilator-free days. Multi-Cox regression model was used to assess the efficacy of corticosteroid treatment in terms of NLR cutoff value.

RESULTS

Among the 357 patients in our study, 89 (24.9%) had NLR≥14.35 and 268 (75.1%) had NLR<14.35. Among them, 53 patients with NLR≥14.35 (58.9%) received corticosteroids and 99 patients with NLR<14.35 (37.1%) received corticosteroids. Post-adjustment analysis (by APACHE II score and age) revealed that corticosteroid treatment was associated with a decreased risk of 30-day mortality in the NLR≥14.35 group but with an increased risk of death in the NLR<14.35 group. Use of corticosteroid in NLR≥14.35 group significantly increased ventilator-free days (7.0 vs. 13.0, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

NLR may be used to help identify ARDS patients who may benefit from corticosteroid treatment. Large-sized randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine the optimal cutoff value of NLR.

Association between glucocorticoids treatment and viral clearance delay in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence of glucocorticoids on viral clearance delay of COVID-19 patients is not clear.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched for studies on Medline, Embase, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2019 to April 20, 2021. We mainly pooled the risk ratios (RRs) and mean difference (MD) for viral clearance delay and did subgroup analyses by the severity of illness and doses of glucocorticoids.

RESULTS

38 studies with a total of 9572 patients were identified. Glucocorticoids treatment was associated with delayed viral clearance in COVID-19 patients (adjusted RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.80, I2 = 52%), based on moderate-quality evidence. In subgroup analyses, risk of viral clearance delay was significant both for COVID-19 patients being mild or moderate ill (adjusted RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.57, I2 = 48%), and for patients of being severe or critical ill (adjusted RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.07, I2 = 0%); however, this risk significantly increased for patients taking high doses (unadjusted RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.08 to 3.18; MD 7.19, 95% CI 2.78 to 11.61) or medium doses (adjusted RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.62, I2 = 45%; MD 3.98, 95% CI 3.07 to 4.88, I2 = 4%), rather those taking low doses (adjusted RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.02, I2 = 59%; MD 1.46, 95% CI -0.79 to 3.70, I2 = 82%).

CONCLUSIONS

Glucocorticoids treatment delayed viral clearance in COVID-19 patients of taking high doses or medium doses, rather in those of taking low doses of glucocorticoids.

The effect of glucocorticoids on mortality in severe COVID-19 patients: Evidence from 13 studies involving 6612 cases

BACKGROUND

Since the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there is an urgent need for effective therapies for patients with COVID-19. In this study, we aimed to assess the therapeutic efficacy of glucocorticoids in severe COVID-19.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed across PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (up to June 26, 2021). The literature investigated the outcomes of interest were mortality and invasive mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

The search identified 13 studies with 6612 confirmed severe COVID-19 patients. Our meta-analysis found that using glucocorticoids could significantly decrease COVID-19 mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.79, P < .001), relative to non-use of glucocorticoids. Meanwhile, using glucocorticoids also could significantly decrease the risk of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation for severe COVID-19 patients (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.83, P < .001). Compared with using dexamethasone (HR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.92, P = .012), methylprednisolone use had a better therapeutic effect for reducing the mortality of patients (HR = 0.35, 95% CI 0.19-0.64, P = .001).

CONCLUSION

The result of this meta-analysis showed that using glucocorticoids could reduce mortality and risk of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation in severe COVID-19 patients.

Longitudinal urinary biomarkers of immunological activation in covid-19 patients without clinically apparent kidney disease versus acute and chronic failure

Kidney function is affected in COVID-19, while kidney itself modulates the immune response. Here, hypothesize if COVID-19 urine biomarkers level can assess immune activation vs. clinical trajectory. Considering the kidney's critical role in modulating the immune response, we sought to analyze activation markers in patients with pre-existing dysfunction. This was a cross-sectional study of 68 patients. Blood and urine were collected within 48 h of hospital admission (H1), followed by 96 h (H2), seven days (H3), and up to 25 days (H4) from admission. Serum level ferritin, procalcitonin, IL-6 assessed immune activation overall, while the response to viral burden was gauged with serum level of spike protein and αspike IgM and IgG. 39 markers correlated highly between urine and blood. Age and race, and to a lesser extend gender, differentiated several urine markers. The burden of pre-existing conditions correlated with urine DCN, CAIX and PTN, but inversely with IL-5 or MCP-4. Higher urinary IL-12 and lower CAIX, CCL23, IL-15, IL-18, MCP-1, MCP-3, MUC-16, PD-L1, TNFRS12A, and TNFRS21 signified non-survivors. APACHE correlated with urine TNFRS12, PGF, CAIX, DCN, CXCL6, and EGF. Admission urine LAG-3 and IL-2 predicted death. Pre-existing kidney disease had a unique pattern of urinary inflammatory markers. Acute kidney injury was associated, and to a certain degree, predicted by IFNg, TWEAK, MMP7, and MUC-16. Remdesavir had a more profound effect on the urine biomarkers than steroids. Urinary biomarkers correlated with clinical status, kidney function, markers of the immune system activation, and probability of demise in COVID-19.

Retrospective analysis of anti-inflammatory therapies during the first wave of COVID-19 at a community hospital

BACKGROUND

Our understanding of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has evolved since the first reported cases in December 2019, and a greater emphasis has been placed on the hyper-inflammatory response in severely ill patients. The purpose of this study was to determine risk factors for mortality and the impact of anti-inflammatory therapies on survival.

AIM

To determine the impact of various therapies on outcomes in severe coronavirus disease 2019 patients with a focus on anti-inflammatory and immune-modulating agents.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 261 patients admitted or transferred to the intensive care unit in two community hospitals between March 12, 2020 and June 17, 2020. Totally 167 patients received glucocorticoid (GC) therapy. Seventy-three patients received GC alone, 94 received GC and tocilizumab, 28 received tocilizumab monotherapy, and 66 received no anti-inflammatory therapy.

RESULTS

Patient survival was associated with GC use, either alone or with tocilizumab, and decreased vasopressor requirements. Delayed administration of GC was found to decrease the survival benefit of GC therapy. No difference in survival was found with varying anticoagulant doses, convalescent plasma, tocilizumab monotherapy; prone ventilation, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or intravenous ascorbic acid use.

CONCLUSION

This analysis demonstrated the survival benefit associated with anti-inflammatory therapy of GC, with or without tocilizumab, with the combination providing the most benefit. More studies are needed to assess the optimal timing of anti-inflammatory therapy initiation.

Sex-tailored pharmacology and COVID-19: Next steps towards appropriateness and health equity

Making gender bias visible allows to fill the gaps in knowledge and understand health records and risks of women and men. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has shown a clear gender difference in health outcomes. The more severe symptoms and higher mortality in men as compared to women are likely due to sex and age differences in immune responses. Age-associated decline in sex steroid hormone levels may mediate proinflammatory reactions in older adults, thereby increasing their risk of adverse outcomes, whereas sex hormones and/or sex hormone receptor modulators may attenuate the inflammatory response and provide benefit to COVID-19 patients. While multiple pharmacological options including anticoagulants, glucocorticoids, antivirals, anti-inflammatory agents and traditional Chinese medicine preparations have been tested to treat COVID-19 patients with varied levels of evidence in terms of efficacy and safety, information on sex-targeted treatment strategies is currently limited. Women may have more benefit from COVID-19 vaccines than men, despite the occurrence of more frequent adverse effects, and long-term safety data with newly developed vectors are eagerly awaited. The prevalent inclusion of men in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with subsequent extrapolation of results to women needs to be addressed, as reinforcing sex-neutral claims into COVID-19 research may insidiously lead to increased inequities in health care. The huge worldwide effort with over 3000 ongoing RCTs of pharmacological agents should focus on improving knowledge on sex, gender and age as pillars of individual variation in drug responses and enforce appropriateness.

Trichrome-positive intrahepatic cytoplasmic globules are potential histopathological clue for COVID-19-induced hepatitis: a case report

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection mainly affects respiratory system. Later, liver affection has also been reported in the form of marked elevated liver enzymes. However, the association of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) and autoimmune diseases is not clear.

CASE PRESENTATION

A female patient with a known history of autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHH) for which she was treated with prednisolone was admitted for uncontrolled anemia followed by fever and elevated liver enzymes. All the laboratory and radiological investigations were not typical for COVID-19 or any other etiology. Liver biopsy revealed numerous pale eosinophilic trichrome-positive intracytoplasmic globules. The pathology raised the suspicion for SARS-CoV-2-associated hepatitis, which was confirmed by a positive IgG titer. The patient showed a dramatic improvement on the maintenance dose of prednisolone.

CONCLUSIONS

AIHA patients co-infected with SARS-CoV-2 may be at risk of uncontrolled disease and should continue their treatment regimen. Histopathology has a role in the diagnosis of liver affection due to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and glucocorticoids in COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is characterized by a wide spectrum of symptom severity, which is manifested at different phases of infection and demands different levels of care. Viral load, host innate-immune response to SARS-CoV-2, and comorbidities have a direct impact on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients and determine the diverse disease trajectories. The initial SARS-CoV-2 penetrance and replication in the host causes death of infected cells, determining the viral response. SARS-CoV-2 replication in the host triggers the activation of host antiviral immune mechanisms, determining the inflammatory response. While a healthy immune response is essential to eliminate infected cells and prevent spread of the virus, a dysfunctional immune response can result in a cytokine storm and hyperinflammation, contributing to disease progression. Current therapies for COVID-19 target the virus and/or the host immune system and may be complicated in their efficacy by comorbidities. Here we review the evidence for use of two classes of anti-inflammatory drugs, glucocorticoids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the treatment of COVID-19. We consider the clinical evidence regarding the timing and efficacy of their use, their potential limitations, current recommendations and the prospect of future studies by these and related therapies.

Characteristics, outcomes and global trends of respiratory support in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

To date, a shared international consensus on treatment of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with invasive or non-invasive respiratory support is lacking. Patients' management and outcomes, especially in severe and critical cases, can vary depending on regional standard operating procedures and local guidance.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Rapid review methodology was applied to include all the studies published on PubMed and Embase between December 15th, 2019 and February 28th, 2021, reporting in-hospital and respiratory support-related mortality in adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 that underwent either continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), non-invasive ventilation (NIV) or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Only English language studies with ≥100 patients and reporting data on respiratory failure were included. Data on comorbidities, ventilatory parameters and hospital-related complications were registered.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Fifty-two studies (287,359 patients; 57.5% males, mean age 64 years, range 24-98 years) from 17 different countries were included in the final analysis. 33.3% of patients were hospitalized in intensive care units. 44.2% had hypertension, 26.1% had diabetes, and 7.1% a chronic respiratory disease. 55% of patients underwent respiratory support (36% IMV, 62% NIV and 2% CPAP). Without considering a study with the highest number of patients treated with NIV (N.=96,729), prevalence of NIV and CPAP use was 12.5% and 13.5% respectively. Globally, invasive and non-invasive approaches were heterogeneously applied. In-hospital mortality was 33.7%, and IMV-related mortality was 72.6% (range: 4.3-99%). Specific mortality in patients treated with CPAP or NIV was available for 53% of studies, and was 29% (range: 7.2-100%). The median length of hospital stay was 13 days (range: 6-63). The most frequent hospital-related complication was acute kidney injury being reported in up to 55.7% of enrolled patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Global employment of respiratory supports and related outcomes are very heterogeneous. The most frequent respiratory support in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia is IMV, while NIV and CPAP are less frequently and equally applied, the latter especially in Europe, while data on NIV/CPAP-related mortality is often under-reported. Integrated and comprehensive reporting is desirable and needed to construct evidence-based recommendations.

COVID-19 pneumonia in Galicia (Spain): Impact of prognostic factors and therapies on mortality and need for mechanical ventilation

INTRODUCTION

This study was aimed to identify risk factors associated with unfavorable outcomes (composite outcome variable: mortality and need for mechanical ventilation) in patients hospitalized in Galicia with COVID-19 pneumonia.

METHODS

Retrospective, multicenter, observational study carried out in the 8 Galician tertiary hospitals. All Patients admitted with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia from 1st of March to April 24th, 2020 were included. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed in order to identify the relationship between risk factors, therapeutic interventions and the composite outcome variable.

RESULTS

A total of 1292 patients (56.1% male) were included. Two hundred and twenty-five (17.4%) died and 327 (25.3%) reached the main outcome variable. Age [odds ratio (OR) = 1.03 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01-1.04)], CRP quartiles 3 and 4 [OR = 2.24 (95% CI: 1.39-3.63)] and [OR = 3.04 (95% CI: 1.88-4.92)], respectively, Charlson index [OR = 1.16 (95%CI: 1.06-1.26)], SaO2 upon admission [OR = 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91-0.95)], hydroxychloroquine prescription [OR = 0.22 (95%CI: 0.12-0.37)], systemic corticosteroids prescription [OR = 1.99 (95%CI: 1.45-2.75)], and tocilizumab prescription [OR = 3.39 (95%CI: 2.15-5.36)], significantly impacted the outcome. Sensitivity analysis using different alternative logistic regression models identified consistently the ratio admissions/hospital beds as a predictor of the outcome [OR = 1.06 (95% CI: 1.02-1.11)].

CONCLUSION

These findings may help to identify patients at hospital admission with a higher risk of death and may urge healthcare authorities to implement policies aimed at reducing deaths by increasing the availability of hospital beds.

Dexamethasone in the Treatment of COVID-19: Primus Inter Pares?

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has rapidly spread globally, becoming a huge public health challenge. Even though the vast majority of patients are asymptomatic, some patients present with pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), septic shock, and death. It has been shown in several studies that the severity and clinical outcomes are related to dysregulated antiviral immunity and enhanced and persistent systemic inflammation. Corticosteroids have been used for the treatment of COVID-19 patients, as they are reported to elicit benefits by reducing lung inflammation and inflammation-induced lung injury. Dexamethasone has gained a major role in the therapeutic algorithm of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring supplemental oxygen or on mechanical ventilation. Its wide anti-inflammatory action seems to form the basis for its beneficial action, taming the overwhelming "cytokine storm". Amid a plethora of scientific research on therapeutic options for COVID-19, there are still unanswered questions about the right timing, right dosing, and right duration of the corticosteroid treatment. The aim of this review article was to summarize the data on the dexamethasone treatment in COVID-19 and outline the clinical considerations of corticosteroid therapy in these patients.

Corticosteroids for COVID-19 Therapy: Potential Implications on Tuberculosis

On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization announced the Corona Virus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) as a global pandemic, which originated in China. At the host level, COVID-19, caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), affects the respiratory system, with the clinical symptoms ranging from mild to severe or critical illness that often requires hospitalization and oxygen support. There is no specific therapy for COVID-19, as is the case for any common viral disease except drugs to reduce the viral load and alleviate the inflammatory symptoms. Tuberculosis (TB), an infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb), also primarily affects the lungs and has clinical signs similar to pulmonary SARS-CoV-2 infection. Active TB is a leading killer among infectious diseases and adds to the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide. In immunocompetent individuals, primary Mtb infection can also lead to a non-progressive, asymptomatic latency. However, latent Mtb infection (LTBI) can reactivate symptomatic TB disease upon host immune-suppressing conditions. Importantly, the diagnosis and treatment of TB are hampered and admixed with COVID-19 control measures. The US-Center for Disease Control (US-CDC) recommends using antiviral drugs, Remdesivir or corticosteroid (CST), such as dexamethasone either alone or in-combination with specific recommendations for COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization or oxygen support. However, CSTs can cause immunosuppression, besides their anti-inflammatory properties. The altered host immunity during COVID-19, combined with CST therapy, poses a significant risk for new secondary infections and/or reactivation of existing quiescent infections, such as LTBI. This review highlights CST therapy recommendations for COVID-19, various types and mechanisms of action of CSTs, the deadly combination of two respiratory infectious diseases COVID-19 and TB. It also discusses the importance of screening for LTBI to prevent TB reactivation during corticosteroid therapy for COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and autoimmunity

The coronavirus 2019 pandemic (coronavirus disease, COVID-19), etiologically related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2), has once again reawakened healthcare professionals’ interest towards new clinical and conceptual issues of human immunology and immunopathology. An unprecedented number of clinical trials and fundamental studies of epidemiology, virology, immunology and molecular biology, of the COVID-19 clinical course polymorphism and pharmacotherapy have been conducted within one year since the outbreak of 2019 pandemic, bringing together scientists of almost all biological and physicians of almost all medical specialties. Their joint efforts have resulted in elaboration of several types of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and, in general, fashioning of more rational approaches to patient management. Also important for COVID-19 management were all clinical trials of biologics and “targeted” anti-inflammatory drugs modulating intracellular cytokine signaling, which have been specifically developed for treatment immune-mediated inflammatory rheumatic disease (IMIRDs) over the past 20 years. It became obvious after a comprehensive analysis of the entire spectrum of clinical manifestations and immunopathological disorders in COVID-19 is accompanied by a wide range of extrapulmonary clinical and laboratory disorders, some of which are characteristic of IMIRDs and other autoimmune and auto-in-flammatory human diseases. All these phenomena substantiated the practice of anti-inflammatory drugs repurposing with off-label use of specific antirheumatic agents for treatment of COVID-19. This paper discusses potential use of glucocorticoids, biologics, JAK inhibitors, etc., blocking the effects of pro-inflammatory cytokines for treatment of COVID-19.

Effects of Methylprednisolone on Ventilator-Free Days in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and COVID-19: A Retrospective Study

Objectives: There are limited data regarding the efficacy of methylprednisolone in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. We aimed to determine whether methylprednisolone is associated with increases in the number of ventilator-free days (VFDs) among these patients. Design: Retrospective single-center study. Setting: Intensive care unit. Patients: All patients with ARDS due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation between 1 March and 29 May 2020 were included. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was ventilator-free days (VFDs) for the first 28 days. Defined as being alive and free from mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was analyzed with competing-risks regression based on Fine and Gray's proportional sub hazards model. Death before day 28 was considered to be the competing event. A total of 77 patients met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-two patients (41.6%) received methylprednisolone. The median dose was 1 mg·kg-1 (IQR: 1-1.3 mg·kg-1) and median duration for 5 days (IQR: 5-7 days). Patients who received methylprednisolone had a mean 18.8 VFDs (95% CI, 16.6-20.9) during the first 28 days vs. 14.2 VFDs (95% CI, 12.6-16.7) in patients who did not receive methylprednisolone (difference, 4.61, 95% CI, 1.10-8.12, p = 0.001). In the multivariable competing-risks regression analysis and after adjusting for potential confounders (ventilator settings, prone position, organ failure support, severity of the disease, tocilizumab, and inflammatory markers), methylprednisolone was independently associated with a higher number of VFDs (subhazards ratio: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.02-0.45, p = 0.003). Hospital mortality did not differ between the two groups (31.2% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.82). Hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the methylprednisolone group (24 days [IQR: 15-41 days] vs. 37 days [IQR: 23-52 days], p = 0.046). The incidence of positive blood cultures was higher in patients who received methylprednisolone (37.5% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.052). However, 81% of patients who received methylprednisolone also received tocilizumab. The number of days with hyperglycemia was similar in the two groups. Conclusions: Methylprednisolone was independently associated with increased VFDs and shortened hospital length of stay. The combination of methylprednisolone and tocilizumab was associated with a higher rate of positive blood cultures. Further trials are needed to evaluate the benefits and safety of methylprednisolone in moderate or severe COVID-19 ARDS.