Efficacy and Safety of Corticosteroid Treatment in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Systemic immunostimulation induces glucocorticoid-mediated thymic involution succeeded by rebound hyperplasia which is impaired in aged recipients

The thymus is the central organ involved with T-cell development and the production of naïve T cells. During normal aging, the thymus undergoes marked involution, reducing naïve T-cell output and resulting in a predominance of long-lived memory T cells in the periphery. Outside of aging, systemic stress responses that induce corticosteroids (CS), or other insults such as radiation exposure, induce thymocyte apoptosis, resulting in a transient acute thymic involution with subsequent recovery occurring after cessation of the stimulus. Despite the increasing utilization of immunostimulatory regimens in cancer, effects on the thymus and naïve T cell output have not been well characterized. Using both mouse and human systems, the thymic effects of systemic immunostimulatory regimens, such as high dose IL-2 (HD IL-2) with or without agonistic anti-CD40 mAbs and acute primary viral infection, were investigated. These regimens produced a marked acute thymic involution in mice, which correlated with elevated serum glucocorticoid levels and a diminishment of naïve T cells in the periphery. This effect was transient and followed with a rapid thymic "rebound" effect, in which an even greater quantity of thymocytes was observed compared to controls. Similar results were observed in humans, as patients receiving HD IL-2 treatment for cancer demonstrated significantly increased cortisol levels, accompanied by decreased peripheral blood naïve T cells and reduced T-cell receptor excision circles (TRECs), a marker indicative of recent thymic emigrants. Mice adrenalectomized prior to receiving immunotherapy or viral infection demonstrated protection from this glucocorticoid-mediated thymic involution, despite experiencing a substantially higher inflammatory cytokine response and increased immunopathology. Investigation into the effects of immunostimulation on middle aged (7-12 months) and advance aged (22-24 months) mice, which had already undergone significant thymic involution and had a diminished naïve T cell population in the periphery at baseline, revealed that even further involution was incurred. Thymic rebound hyperplasia, however, only occurred in young and middle-aged recipients, while advance aged not only lacked this rebound hyperplasia, but were entirely absent of any indication of thymic restoration. This coincided with prolonged deficits in naïve T cell numbers in advanced aged recipients, further skewing the already memory dominant T cell pool. These results demonstrate that, in both mice and humans, systemic immunostimulatory cancer therapies, as well as immune challenges like subacute viral infections, have the potential to induce profound, but transient, glucocorticoid-mediated thymic involution and substantially reduced thymic output, resulting in the reduction of peripheral naive T cells. This can then be followed by a marked rebound effect with naïve T cell restoration, events that were shown not to occur in advanced-aged mice.

Cognitive dysfunction in post-COVID-19 condition: Mechanisms, management, and rehabilitation

The long-term effects of COVID-19 on cognitive function have become an area of increasing concern. This paper provides an overview of characteristics, risk factors, possible mechanisms, and management strategies for cognitive dysfunction in post-COVID-19 condition (PCC). Prolonged cognitive dysfunction is one of the most common impairments in PCC, affecting between 17% and 28% of the individuals more than 12 weeks after the infection and persisting in some cases for several years. Cognitive dysfunctions can be manifested as a wide range of symptoms including memory impairment, attention deficit, executive dysfunction, and reduced processing speed. Risk factors for developing PCC, with or without cognitive impairments, include advanced age, preexisting medical conditions, and the severity of acute illness. The underlying mechanisms remain unclear, but proposed contributors include neuroinflammation, hypoxia, vascular damage, and latent virus reactivation not excluding the possibility of direct viral invasion of the central nervous system, illustrating complex viral pathology. As the individual variation of the cognitive impairments is large, a neuropsychological examination and a person-centered multidimensional approach are required. According to the World Health Organization, limited evidence on COVID-19-related cognitive impairments necessitates implementing rehabilitation interventions from established practices of similar conditions. Psychoeducation and compensatory skills training are recommended. Assistive products and environmental modifications adapted to individual needs might be helpful. In specific attention- and working memory dysfunctions, cognitive training-carefully monitored for intensity-might be effective for people who do not suffer from post-exertional malaise. Further research is crucial for evidence-based interventions specific to COVID-19-related cognitive impairments.

Cardiorespiratory dysautonomia in post-COVID-19 condition: Manifestations, mechanisms and management

A significant proportion of COVID-19 patients experience debilitating symptoms for months after the acute infection. According to recent estimates, approximately 1 out of 10 COVID-19 convalescents reports persistent health issues more than 3 months after initial recovery. This 'post-COVID-19 condition' may include a large variety of symptoms from almost all domains and organs, and for some patients it may mean prolonged sick-leave, homestay and strongly limited activities of daily life. In this narrative review, we focus on the symptoms and signs of post-COVID-19 condition in adults - particularly those associated with cardiovascular and respiratory systems, such as postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome or airway disorders - and explore the evidence for chronic autonomic dysfunction as a potential underlying mechanism. The most plausible hypotheses regarding cellular and molecular mechanisms behind the wide spectrum of observed symptoms - such as lingering viruses, persistent inflammation, impairment in oxygen sensing systems and circulating antibodies directed to blood pressure regulatory components - are discussed. In addition, an overview of currently available pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment options is presented.

Safety and efficacy of glucocorticoids in the treatment of COVID-19: A meta-analysis of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

It is unclear the efficacy and safety of glucocorticoids compared with placebo or usual care for treatment of COVID-19.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of corticosteroids in COVID-19 patients from 1 December 2019, to 30 June 2022, were assessed using Cochrane bias risk assessment method and improved Jadad score scale. GRADEpro was used to rate the quality of evidence for outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs were included, including 10,620 patients. Glucocorticoid treatment for severe and critical COVID-19 showed lesser all-cause mortality (OR = 0.85, 95% CI [0.76, 0.94], P = 0.002) than conventional treatment. However, for mildly ill patients, neither inhaled drugs nor intravenous drugs reduced mortality (OR = 0.64, 95% CI [0.24, 1.76], P = 0.39). Glucocorticoids had no significant effect on the adverse reactions of patients (OR = 1.18, 95% CI [0.77, 1.80], P = 0.44) compared with usual care/placebo. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that dexamethasone significantly reduced the mortality of COVID-19 patients. Low-dose glucocorticoids were also associated with lower all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

Glucocorticoids (especially dexamethasone) reduce mortality of patients with severe and critical COVID-19 with no significant effect on the incidence of adverse reactions (moderate quality). In contrast, glucocorticoids do not benefit patients with mild symptoms (low quality).

Corticosteroids use for COVID-19: an overview of systematic reviews

PURPOSE

A reappraisal of the validity of the conclusions of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses related to corticosteroids use for the treatment of COVID-19.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An overview of SRs (umbrella review). The methodological quality of the SRs was assessed using tha AMSTAR-2 checklist; quality of the evidence was appraised following the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

35 SRs were included in this overview. Data were from 307 overlapping reports, based on 121 individual primary studies (25 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 96 non-RCTs. In critically ill patients the use of steroids significantly reduced mortality compared to standard of care in 80% of the SRs, more often with moderate/high level of certainty; however, in patients not requiring oxygen supplementation the use of steroids increased the overall mortality in 2/3 of the comparisons. Clinical progression of diseases (need for mechanical ventilation, or for intensive care admission) was more commonly observed among controls compared to steroids recipients (in 9 out of 14 comparisons; certainty of evidence from very-low to moderate). The occurrence of adverse events was similar among steroids recipients and controls. Other outcomes (i.e., viral clearance, length of hospital stay) or issue related to optimal dose and type of steroids were addressed in a minority of SRs, with a high level of uncertainty, so that no definitive conclusions can be drawn.

CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate certainty of evidence that corticosteroids reduce mortality and progression of disease in critically ill COVID-19 patients compared to standard of care, without increasing the occurrence of adverse events.

Clinical course of Covid-19 in a cohort of patients with Behçet disease

Objective

The implications of Covid-19 in patients with Behçet's disease (BD) are unknown. Patients with BD usually take long-term therapy with therapeutic agents that have been tested in Covid-19 patients. We aimed to assess the prevalence of Covid-19 in a cohort of patients with BD and investigate whether those patients with a long-term treatment with colchicine, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or glucocorticoids are at reduced or increased prevalence of Covid-19 related clinical outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted among 244 patients with BD (86.1% females; mean age 43.95 ± 11.11 years). Each participant completed an online questionnaire regarding demographics, medical conditions, dispensed colchicine, TNFi or oral glucocorticoids, Covid-19 infection, clinical symptoms and recovery.

Results

The prevalence of Covid-19 infection was 14.75%. Regarding dose of colchicine, the presence of ageusia was lower in patients taking 0.5 mg/day of colchicine compared to those taking 1.5 mg/day (p = 0.021). The prevalence of dyspnea was significantly higher in patients taking TNFi compared with those without therapy (p = 0.032). With regards to oral glucocorticoids, no significant differences were found.

Conclusions

The prevalence of Covid-19 among patients with BD seems to be higher than that among the general population in Spain. Continuous TNFi therapy might increase the prevalence of worse clinical outcomes such as dyspnea; oral glucocorticoids and colchicine apparently provided no protection against the Covid-19 related clinical outcomes of patients with BD.

Clinical course of Covid-19 in a cohort of patients with Behçet disease

OBJECTIVE

The implications of Covid-19 in patients with Behçet's disease (BD) are unknown. Patients with BD usually take long-term therapy with therapeutic agents that have been tested in Covid-19 patients. We aimed to assess the prevalence of Covid-19 in a cohort of patients with BD and investigate whether those patients with a long-term treatment with colchicine, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or glucocorticoids are at reduced or increased prevalence of Covid-19 related clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted among 244 patients with BD (86.1% females; mean age 43.95±11.11 years). Each participant completed an online questionnaire regarding demographics, medical conditions, dispensed colchicine, TNFi or oral glucocorticoids, Covid-19 infection, clinical symptoms and recovery.

RESULTS

The prevalence of Covid-19 infection was 14.75%. Regarding dose of colchicine, the presence of ageusia was lower in patients taking 0.5mg/day of colchicine compared to those taking 1.5mg/day (p=0.021). The prevalence of dyspnea was significantly higher in patients taking TNFi compared with those without therapy (p=0.032). With regards to oral glucocorticoids, no significant differences were found.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of Covid-19 among patients with BD seems to be higher than that among the general population in Spain. Continuous TNFi therapy might increase the prevalence of worse clinical outcomes such as dyspnea; oral glucocorticoids and colchicine apparently provided no protection against the Covid-19 related clinical outcomes of patients with BD.

Factores relacionados con la neumonía bacteriana en pacientes con COVID-19 en una unidad de cuidados intensivos de Barranquilla, Colombia

Objetivo

Determinar los factores relacionados con la neumonía bacteriana en pacientes con COVID-19 en una unidad de cuidados intensivos de Barranquilla, Colombia.

Diseño

Estudio de casos y controles anidado, unicéntrico, realizado entre marzo y agosto del 2020.

Pacientes

Pacientes mayores de 18 años, con una estancia hospitalaria mayor de 72 h y soporte de ventilación mecánica invasiva, admitidos en la unidad de cuidados intensivos.

Intervenciones

Ninguna.

Mediciones

Se agruparon variables clínicas para casos y controles. Se calcularon medias y desviación estándar en variables cuantitativas y proporciones en variables categóricas. Para evaluar las diferencias entre proporciones se usó la prueba exacta de Fisher y para las diferencias de medias se usó la prueba U de Mann-Whitney. Las variables con diferencia estadísticamente significativa se corrieron en un modelo explicativo basado en regresión logística binaria.

Resultados

La frecuencia de neumonía bacteriana fue del 10,07%, encontrando un elevado consumo de terapia antibiótica empírica. Se encontró asociación estadística entre el tiempo de uso de dexametasona (OR 1,520; IC 95% 1,131-2,042) y el desarrollo de neumonía bacteriana. El resto de las variables no resultaron estadísticamente significativas tras ajustar el modelo con regresión logística.

Conclusión

Se encontraron tasas bajas de neumonía bacteriana, predominando la Klebsiella pneumoniae como la bacteria más frecuente. El uso excesivo de dexametasona en pacientes con COVID-19 en la unidad de cuidados intensivos podría aumentar el riesgo de neumonía bacteriana. Por este motivo, debe evaluarse con mayor profundidad para explicar causalidad y efecto.

Effects of different corticosteroid therapy on severe COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in COVID-19 patients compared with standard care or placebo.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify relevant studies. The mortality, adverse events, and other data from studies were pooled for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Ten randomized clinical trials were eligible for inclusion. Corticosteroid treatment in COVID-19 patients did not significantly reduce the risk of death (RR: 0.93; CI: 0.82, 1.05) and the need for mechanical ventilation (RR: 0.82; CI: 0.62, 1.08). No mortality reduction was also observed in the subgroup of patients requiring mechanical ventilation (RR: 0.90; CI: 0.79-1.03). The use of corticosteroids increased mortality in the subgroup of patients not requiring oxygen support (RR: 1.24; CI: 1.00-1.55). The survival benefit was observed in a low dosage of corticosteroids (RR: 0.90; CI: 0.84-0.97) and dexamethasone (RR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.79-1.04). There was no difference in the rates of adverse events (RR: 1.13; CI: 0.58, 2.20) and secondary infections (RR: 0.87; CI: 0.66, 1.15).

CONCLUSION

Corticosteroid treatment did not convincingly improve survival in severe COVID-19 patients. Low-dose dexamethasone could be considered as a drug for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. More high-quality trials are needed to further verify this conclusion.Expert Opinion: The effect of corticosteroids on patient survival highly depended on the selection of the right dosage and type and in a specific subgroup of patients. This meta-analysis, which included more RCTs, evaluated the safety and efficacy in severe COVID-19 patients and analyzed the effects of different types of corticosteroid treatments. Corticosteroid treatment did not convincingly improve survival in severe COVID-19 patients. But the low dose dexamethasone appear to have a role in the management of severe COVID-19 patients.

Comparative Effectiveness of Dexamethasone in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in the United States

INTRODUCTION

To compare the mortality of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 between those that required supplemental oxygen and received dexamethasone with a comparable set of patients who did not receive dexamethasone.

METHODS

We utilized the Premier Health Database to identify hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 from July 1, 2020-January 31, 2021. Index date was when patients first initiated oxygen therapy. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality for patients receiving dexamethasone versus those not receiving dexamethasone 1-day pre- to 1-day post-index period. Secondary endpoints included 28-day mortality, time to in-hospital mortality, progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death, time to discharge, and proportion discharged alive by day 28. Twenty-three models using weighting, matching, stratification, and regression were deployed through the concept of frequentist model average (FMA) to estimate the effect of dexamethasone on all-cause mortality up to the 28-day hospitalization period.

RESULTS

A total of 1,208,881 patients with COVID-19 were screened; as an inpatient 255,216 used oxygen, and 251,536 were included in the analysis. In the dexamethasone group, odds of in-hospital mortality were higher than those of the comparator (FMA: odds ratio [OR] 1.15, 95% CI 1.08, 1.22). Using a best fit model, OR for in-hospital mortality was non-significant for the dexamethasone group compared with the comparator (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.92, 1.14). Dexamethasone treatment was associated with poorer outcomes versus the comparator group across the majority of secondary endpoints, except for number of days in hospital, which was lower in the dexamethasone group versus the comparator group (mean difference - 2.14, 95% CI - 2.43, - 1.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 who required supplemental oxygen and received dexamethasone did not have a survival benefit versus similar patients not receiving dexamethasone. The dexamethasone group was not associated with favorable responses for outcomes such as progression to death or mechanical ventilation and time to in-hospital death.

Effectiveness of corticosteroids to treat severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of corticosteroid therapy for patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

We comprehensively searched articles published in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, China Biology Medicine (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP databases from January 1, 2019, to March 20, 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 6771 patients from eight prospective studies were included in our meta-analysis. The results showed that corticosteroid therapy was associated with lower mortality in severe COVID-19 (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54-0.92, P = 0.009; I² = 54.5%). Since the proportion of the RECOVERY (Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) trial included in the meta-analysis was as high as 71.88%, we removed it and recalculated the pooled OR. The results of the remaining seven studies still suggested such a survival benefit (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.44-0.96, P = 0.030; I² = 59.8%). Furthermore, subgroup analysis suggested that the pooled OR of three studies using corticosteroids in the early stages of treatment was much lower (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.25-0.57, P < 0.001; I² = 47.8%). However, after excluding the RECOVERY trial, the pooled OR of the remaining four studies with unspecific administration timing of corticosteroid therapy no longer supported this result (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.69-1.17, P = 0.415; I² = 0.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this meta-analysis, evidence based on seven randomized controlled trials and one prospective cohort study indicates that corticosteroid therapy was associated with a reduction in the mortality of severe COVID-19, especially when administered at an earlier time.

The potential protective role of corticosteroid therapy in patients with asthma and COPD against COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The observation of patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) led us to note a lower prevalence of patients affected by chronic respiratory disease, in particular asthmatic patients, compared to the general population. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to evaluate the possible protective role of corticosteroid therapy in patients with chronic lung disease, regarding the risk of contracting severe COVID-19.

MAIN BODY

SARS-CoV-2 uses angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors to enter the cells. Considering the high number of these receptors in patients affected by asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the evidence that these patients do not have a high risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 needs further study to understand what the possible protective "factors" are in these patients. In particular, the finding in some studies of reduced coronavirus replication in cell lines treated with steroids, molecules commonly used for treating chronic lung diseases, needs further attention.

SHORT CONCLUSION

The hypothesis that corticosteroids, commonly used in treating airways diseases, might modify the severity of SARS-CoV-2 disease has become a key point and a possible predictive factor of a positive outcome of COVID-19 in patients treated everyday with these molecules.

Early Surgical Intervention Followed by Antifungals in Rhino-Orbital Mucormycosis in Patients With COVID-19 Favors Clinical Outcome: A Case Series

Mucormycosis is an invasive fungal infection occurring in patients with or without preexisting medical illnesses. During the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there have been increasing reports of bacterial and fungal coinfections among some COVID-19 patients with preexisting comorbid illnesses such as diabetes and hypertension, with mucormycosis being one of them. The management of this dreaded fungal infection demands early and prompt surgical intervention to thoroughly remove the infected tissue and necrotic material to reduce the tissue burden of this invasive organism. This should be accompanied by expeditious initiation of amphotericin B along with supportive therapy. Here we present five cases of rhino-orbital mucormycosis in patients with COVID-19, all of whom presented with orbital and facial swelling (three had symptoms of impending blindness) under the backdrop of COVID-19 symptoms in the form of intermittent fever and slight dyspnea. Our treatment strategy comprised an expeditious use of early surgical intervention and amphotericin B along with the control of cytokine storm and hyperglycemia. This treatment strategy eventually resulted in an improved clinical outcome.

Effectiveness of corticosteroids to treat severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

Objectives

To assess the effects of corticosteroid therapy for patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods

We comprehensively searched articles published in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, China Biology Medicine (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP databases from January 1, 2019, to March 20, 2021.

Results

A total of 6771 patients from eight prospective studies were included in our meta-analysis. The results showed that corticosteroid therapy was associated with lower mortality in severe COVID-19 (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54–0.92, P = 0.009; I² = 54.5%). Since the proportion of the RECOVERY (Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) trial included in the meta-analysis was as high as 71.88%, we removed it and recalculated the pooled OR. The results of the remaining seven studies still suggested such a survival benefit (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.44–0.96, P = 0.030; I² = 59.8%). Furthermore, subgroup analysis suggested that the pooled OR of three studies using corticosteroids in the early stages of treatment was much lower (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.25–0.57, P < 0.001; I² = 47.8%). However, after excluding the RECOVERY trial, the pooled OR of the remaining four studies with unspecific administration timing of corticosteroid therapy no longer supported this result (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.69–1.17, P = 0.415; I² = 0.0%).

Conclusions

In this meta-analysis, evidence based on seven randomized controlled trials and one prospective cohort study indicates that corticosteroid therapy was associated with a reduction in the mortality of severe COVID-19, especially when administered at an earlier time.

Association between pre-existing respiratory disease and its treatment, and severe COVID-19: a population cohort study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies suggested that the prevalence of chronic respiratory disease in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 was lower than its prevalence in the general population. The aim of this study was to assess whether chronic lung disease or use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) affects the risk of contracting severe COVID-19.

METHODS

In this population cohort study, records from 1205 general practices in England that contribute to the QResearch database were linked to Public Health England's database of SARS-CoV-2 testing and English hospital admissions, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and deaths for COVID-19. All patients aged 20 years and older who were registered with one of the 1205 general practices on Jan 24, 2020, were included in this study. With Cox regression, we examined the risks of COVID-19-related hospitalisation, admission to ICU, and death in relation to respiratory disease and use of ICS, adjusting for demographic and socioeconomic status and comorbidities associated with severe COVID-19.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 24 and April 30, 2020, 8 256 161 people were included in the cohort and observed, of whom 14 479 (0·2%) were admitted to hospital with COVID-19, 1542 (<0·1%) were admitted to ICU, and 5956 (0·1%) died. People with some respiratory diseases were at an increased risk of hospitalisation (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] hazard ratio [HR] 1·54 [95% CI 1·45-1·63], asthma 1·18 [1·13-1·24], severe asthma 1·29 [1·22-1·37; people on three or more current asthma medications], bronchiectasis 1·34 [1·20-1·50], sarcoidosis 1·36 [1·10-1·68], extrinsic allergic alveolitis 1·35 [0·82-2·21], idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis 1·59 [1·30-1·95], other interstitial lung disease 1·66 [1·30-2·12], and lung cancer 2·24 [1·89-2·65]) and death (COPD 1·54 [1·42-1·67], asthma 0·99 [0·91-1·07], severe asthma 1·08 [0·98-1·19], bronchiectasis 1·12 [0·94-1·33], sarcoidosis 1·41 [0·99-1·99), extrinsic allergic alveolitis 1·56 [0·78-3·13], idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis 1·47 [1·12-1·92], other interstitial lung disease 2·05 [1·49-2·81], and lung cancer 1·77 [1·37-2·29]) due to COVID-19 compared with those without these diseases. Admission to ICU was rare, but the HR for people with asthma was 1·08 (0·93-1·25) and severe asthma was 1·30 (1·08-1·58). In a post-hoc analysis, relative risks of severe COVID-19 in people with respiratory disease were similar before and after shielding was introduced on March 23, 2020. In another post-hoc analysis, people with two or more prescriptions for ICS in the 150 days before study start were at a slightly higher risk of severe COVID-19 compared with all other individuals (ie, no or one ICS prescription): HR 1·13 (1·03-1·23) for hospitalisation, 1·63 (1·18-2·24) for ICU admission, and 1·15 (1·01-1·31) for death.

INTERPRETATION

The risk of severe COVID-19 in people with asthma is relatively small. People with COPD and interstitial lung disease appear to have a modestly increased risk of severe disease, but their risk of death from COVID-19 at the height of the epidemic was mostly far lower than the ordinary risk of death from any cause. Use of inhaled steroids might be associated with a modestly increased risk of severe COVID-19.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre and the Wellcome Trust.

Corticosteroids for COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is placing a major burden on healthcare, economy and social systems worldwide owing to its fast spread and unacceptably high death toll. The unprecedented research effort has established the role of a deregulated immune response to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, resulting in systemic inflammation. After that, the immunomodulatory approach has been placed in the top list of the research agenda for COVID-19. Corticosteroids have been used for more than 70 years to modulate the immune response in a broad variety of diseases. These drugs have been shown to prevent and attenuate inflammation both in tissues and in circulation via non-genomic and genomic effects. At the bedside, numerous observational cohorts have been published in the past months and have been inconclusive. Randomized controlled trials with subsequent high quality meta-analyses have provided moderate to strong certainty for an increased chance of survival and relief from life supportive therapy with corticosteroids given at a dose of 6 mg per day dexamethasone or equivalent doses of hydrocortisone or methylprednisolone. The corticotherapy was not associated with an increased risk of bacterial infection or of delayed viral clearance. In daily practice, physicians may be encouraged to use corticosteroids when managing patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen supplementation.

Taskforce report on the diagnosis and clinical management of COVID-19 associated pulmonary aspergillosis

Purpose

Invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) is increasingly reported in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Diagnosis and management of COVID-19 associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) are challenging and our aim was to develop practical guidance.

Methods

A group of 28 international experts reviewed current insights in the epidemiology, diagnosis and management of CAPA and developed recommendations using GRADE methodology.

Results

The prevalence of CAPA varied between 0 and 33%, which may be partly due to variable case definitions, but likely represents true variation. Bronchoscopy and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) remain the cornerstone of CAPA diagnosis, allowing for diagnosis of invasive Aspergillus tracheobronchitis and collection of the best validated specimen for Aspergillus diagnostics. Most patients diagnosed with CAPA lack traditional host factors, but pre-existing structural lung disease and immunomodulating therapy may predispose to CAPA risk. Computed tomography seems to be of limited value to rule CAPA in or out, and serum biomarkers are negative in 85% of patients. As the mortality of CAPA is around 50%, antifungal therapy is recommended for BAL positive patients, but the decision to treat depends on the patients’ clinical condition and the institutional incidence of CAPA. We recommend against routinely stopping concomitant corticosteroid or IL-6 blocking therapy in CAPA patients.

Conclusion

CAPA is a complex disease involving a continuum of respiratory colonization, tissue invasion and angioinvasive disease. Knowledge gaps including true epidemiology, optimal diagnostic work-up, management strategies and role of host-directed therapy require further study.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-021-06449-4.

Systemic Corticosteroid Administration in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outcomes: An Umbrella Meta-Analysis Incorporating Both Mild and Pulmonary Fibrosis-Manifested Severe Disease

Background: Effective treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are urgently needed. The real role of corticosteroid use in COVID-19 has long been of interest and is disputable.

Methods: We aimed to quantitatively reevaluate the efficacy of corticosteroids on COVID-19. Databases were searched for eligible meta-analyses/systematic reviews with available outcome data. For each association, we estimated the summary effect size with fixed- and random-effects models, 95% confidence intervals, and 95% prediction intervals. Heterogeneity, Egger’s test, evidence of small-study effects and excess significance bias, and subgroup analyses were rigorously evaluated.

Results: Intended outcomes of 12 eligible studies were mortality, clinical improvement, hospitalization, mechanical ventilation (MV), adverse events (AEs), intensive care unit (ICU) stay, hospital stay, virus clearance time (VCT), and negative conversion. Corticosteroid administration was associated with a 27% risk reduction in MV [hazard ratio (HR): 0.73 (0.64–0.83)] and a 20% reduction in mortality of critically ill/severe COVID-19 patients [HR: 0.80 (0.65–0.98)]. Interestingly, shorter ICU stays and, conversely, potentially longer hospital stays, a longer VCT, and a longer time to negative conversion were associated with corticosteroid use. There was no significant impact of different corticosteroid doses on mortality. Only one study showed slightly excess significant bias. Caution should be applied given the weak nature of the evidence, and it has been confirmed by sensitivity analyses too.

Conclusion: This umbrella study found benefits from corticosteroids on MV and especially the mortality of critically ill/severe patients with shorter ICU stays but prolonged hospital stays and VCT. The benefits and harms should be reevaluated and balanced before corticosteroids are cautiously prescribed in clinical practice.

Comparison of clinical manifestations, pre-existing comorbidities, complications and treatment modalities in severe and non-severe COVID-19 patients: A systemic review and meta-analysis

The global pandemic of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become an emergency of major international concern. We aim to assess the prevalence of clinical manifestations, pre-existing comorbidities, complications and treatment modalities in COVID-19 patients and compare incidence of these clinical data of severe patients with non-severe patients. An electronic search was performed in four databases to identify studies reporting clinical data of severe and non-severe COVID-19 patients. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) using fixed or random effect model. The analysis included 41 studies with 16,495 patients. The most prevalent clinical manifestations were fever 78.1%, cough 64.6%, fatigue 40.8%, and dyspnea 38.6%. Dyspnea (OR: 4.20, 95% CI: 3.09–5.72), cough (OR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.18–1.78), and fatigue (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.14–1.72) were found to be statistically significant higher in severe COVID-19 patients. We found that the most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension 32.2%, diabetes 17.1%, and cardiovascular disease 15.3%. Compared with non-severe group, proportion of hypertension (OR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.62–2.42), diabetes (OR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.67–2.50), cardiovascular disease (OR: 2.78, 95% CI: 2.00–3.86), and cancer (OR: 1.75, 95% CI: 1.40–2.18) were statistically significant higher in severe group. 24.7% patients presented with ARDS. The pooled effect of ARDS in severe and non-severe cases was 42.69 (OR: 42.69, 95% CI: 21.62–84.31). There was significant higher incidence of antiviral drugs, antibiotics, and glucocorticoids use in severe patients. Compared with non-severe patients, symptoms such as fever, cough, dyspnea, existing comorbidities, and complications are prevalent in severe COVID-19 patients.

Efficacy and safety of systematic corticosteroids among severe COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The benefits and harms of corticosteroids for patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain unclear. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from December 31, 2019 to October 1, 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated corticosteroids in severe COVID-19 patients. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at the longest follow-up. Secondary outcomes included a composite disease progression (progression to intubation, ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, ICU transfer, or death among those not ventilated at enrollment) and incidence of serious adverse events. A random-effects model was applied to calculate risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Seven RCTs involving 6250 patients were included, of which the Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy (RECOVERY) trial comprised nearly 78% of all included subjects. Results showed that corticosteroids were associated with a decreased all-cause mortality (27.3 vs. 31.1%; RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.73–0.99; P = 0.04; low-certainty evidence). Trial sequential analysis suggested that more trials were still required to confirm the results. However, such survival benefit was absent if RECOVERY trial was excluded (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.65–1.06; P = 0.13). Furthermore, corticosteroids decreased the occurrence of composite disease progression (30.6 vs. 33.3%; RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64–0.92; P = 0.005), but not increased the incidence of serious adverse events (3.5 vs. 3.4%; RR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.39–3.43; P = 0.79).

COVID-19: biologic and immunosuppressive therapy in gastroenterology and hepatology

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an ongoing global health crisis causing major challenges for clinical care in patients with gastrointestinal diseases. Although triggering of anti-viral immune responses is essential for clearance of infection, some patients have severe lung inflammation and multiorgan failure due to marked immune cell dysregulation and cytokine storm syndrome. Importantly, the activation of cytotoxic follicular helper T cells and a reduction of regulatory T cells have a crucial, negative prognostic role. These findings lead to the question of whether immunosuppressive and biologic therapies for gastrointestinal diseases affect the incidence or prognosis of COVID-19 and, thus, whether they should be adjusted to prevent or affect the course of the disease. In this Review, data on the use of such therapies are discussed with a primary focus on inflammatory bowel disease, autoimmune hepatitis and liver transplantation. In particular, the roles of corticosteroids, classic immunosuppressive agents (such as thiopurines and mycophenolate mofetil), small molecules (such as Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors), and biologic agents (such as tumour necrosis factor (TNF) blockers, vedolizumab and ustekinumab) are reviewed. Finally, the use of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines for the prevention of infection in patients with gastrointestinal diseases and concomitant immunosuppressive or biologic therapy will be discussed.

A retrospective comparison of drugs against COVID-19

•

Hydroxychloroquine is an efficient candidate drug against COVID-19.

•

Oseltamivir can be prudently considered in combination therapy.

•

Drug repurposing is a promising way to combat SARS-CoV-2 infection.

•

Comparison of drug effects against COVID-19 is instructive in the pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) has posed serious threats to the general population. To relieve the crisis, a comparison of drug effects against COVID-19 is instructive. Between January 27, 2020 and March 21, 2020, a total of 333 patients treated with arbidol, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, or oseltamivir monotherapy, having definite outcomes and serological antibody detection results, were retrospectively analyzed. The hydroxychloroquine group had a significantly reduced duration of hospital stay than the arbidol and corticosteroids groups. The oseltamivir group had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay than the arbidol, corticosteroids, and lopinavir/ritonavir groups. The hydroxychloroquine group had a significantly higher IgM titer than the other four groups and exhibited significantly higher IgG levels than the arbidol, lopinavir/ritonavir, and oseltamivir groups. Our findings indicated that hydroxychloroquine might have the potential for efficient COVID-19 management, while oseltamivir should be prudently considered in combination therapy.

Challenges and Opportunities from Targeting Inflammatory Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Narrative Review

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic that continues to sweep across the world, posing an urgent need for effective therapies and prevention of the spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome related to coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). A major hypothesis that is currently guiding research and clinical care posits that an excessive and uncontrolled surge of pro-inflammatory cytokines (the so-called "cytokine storm") drives morbidity and mortality in the most severe cases. In the overall efforts made to develop effective and safe therapies (including vaccines) for COVID-19, clinicians are thus repurposing ready-to-use drugs with direct or indirect anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory activities. Speculatively, there are many opportunities and challenges in targeting immune/inflammatory processes in the evolving settings of COVID-19 disease because of the need to safely balance the fight against virus and aggressive inflammation versus the suppression of host immune defenses and the risk of additional harms in already compromised patients. To this end, many studies are globally underway to weigh the pros and cons of tailoring drugs used for inflammatory-driven conditions to COVID-19 patient care, and the next step will be to summarize the growing clinical trial experience into clean clinical practice. Based on the current evidence, anti-inflammatory drugs should be considered as complementary approaches to anti-viral drugs that need to be timely introduced in the management of COVID-19 according to disease severity. While drugs that target SARS-CoV-2 entry or replication are expected to confer the greatest benefits at the early stage of the infection, anti-inflammatory drugs would be more effective in limiting the inflammatory processes that drive the worsening of the disease.