Remdesivir for the Treatment of Severe COVID-19: A Community Hospital's Experience

Liver dysfunction-related COVID-19: A narrative review

The coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) is caused by a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. This disease was designated by the World Health Organization as a pandemic on March 11, 2020, which is not seen before. There are no classical features among the cases of the disease owing to the involvement of nearly all body tissues by the virus. Hepatic involvement is one of the characteristics of the COVID-19 course. There are six possible mechanisms of such involvement: Direct virus injury, drug-induced effect, inflammatory cytokine storm, hypoxia-ischemic destruction, abnormalities in liver function tests, and pre-existing chronic liver diseases. Liver abnormalities are seen commonly in the severe or critical stage of COVID-19. Therefore, these abnormalities determine the COVID-19 severity and carry a high rate of morbidity and mortality. The elderly and patients with comorbidities like diabetes mellitus and hypertension are more vulnerable to liver involvement. Another issue that needs to be disclosed is the liver manifestations following the COVID-19 vaccination, such as autoimmune hepatitis. Of note, complete vaccination with third and fourth booster doses is necessary for patients with previous chronic liver diseases or those who have been subjected to liver transplantation. This review aims to explore the various aspects of liver dysfunction during the COVID-19 course regarding the epidemiological features, predisposing factors, pathophysiological mechanisms, hepatic manifestations due to COVID-19 or following vaccination, role of liver function tests in the assessment of COVID-19 severity, adverse effects of the therapeutic agents for the disease, and prognosis.

Real-life use of remdesivir-containing regimens in COVID-19: a retrospective case-control study

BACKGROUND

Remdesivir (REM) has shown potent antiviral activity in vitro and efficacy in animal models of COVID-19; nevertheless, clinical trials and real-life reports have shown conflicting data on its effectiveness. Aims of the study were to evaluate the impact of remdesivir on I) Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, II) need for orotracheal intubation (OTI) and III) in-hospital mortality. Furthermore, we estimated the kinetics of laboratory parameters and assessed the risk factors for in-hospital mortality in the remdesivir population.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, single-center, case-control (1:1) study including hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Cases were patients treated with remdesivir for 5 days, controls were patients not receiving remdesivir.

RESULTS

A total of 192 patients (96 cases and 96 controls) were included in the study. Patients receiving remdesivir had a lower rate of ICU admission and need for OTI than controls, whereas no difference between cases and controls were observed as for mortality rate. However, at multivariable analysis remdesivir was not associated with ICU admission neither with OTI. Instead, presence of haematological malignancies, lower duration of symptoms, higher severity of infection and low lymphocytes count at admission were independently associated with in-hospital mortality. In patients treated with remdesivir a low albumin value and duration of lymphopenia were significantly associated with mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our real-life study showed that therapy with remdesivir did not have impact on either ICU admission, need for OTI or in-hospital mortality.

Study of Clinical Outcome and Healthcare Modalities of COVID-19 Patients Treated With Remdesivir at a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital

Background

Effective treatment for COVID-19 infection is still under evaluation. Remdesivir is an approved drug for COVID-19 treatment and major countries have released guidelines on the use of remdesivir. Still, many factors are under evaluation which can determine the future use of remdesivir.

Aim

To study the clinical outcome and healthcare modalities of COVID-19 patients treated with remdesivir.

Materials and methods

A retrospective study was conducted through the clinical records of patients admitted to the tertiary care hospital between August 2020 and December 2020. All the patients who were administered remdesivir intravenously as per standard protocol were included in the study. Data were analyzed for statistical association between health care modalities and patient characteristics.

Results

Among 166 patients included, the mean age of patient who received remdesivir was 57.51 ± 12.98 years (95% confidence interval (CI), 30-84). The mean duration of stay and duration of oxygen requirement were 12.80 ± 5.99 (95% CI, 5-30) and 9.41 ± 7.47 (95% CI, 0-39) days, respectively. A total of 12 (7.23%) required assisted ventilation and the cure rate was 89.76% (149/166). Out of 166 patients, 105 (63.25%) had comorbidities, among which hypertension and diabetes were the most common. Significantly >60 year age group had a higher duration of oxygen requirement (u=2,639.5, p=0.01), while ≤60 year age group had a higher cure rate (X²=4.23, p=0.03) and a higher requirement for assisted ventilation (X²=4.77, p=0.02). Differences and associations in the above-mentioned health care modalities were not statistically significant for gender and comorbidity except that non-comorbid had a higher cure rate (X²=3.97, p=0.04). The odds ratio of comorbidity and cure rate was 1.07, while the association of the number of comorbidities with the duration of stay (p=0.62) and duration of oxygen requirement (p=0.35) was not statistically significant.

Conclusion

In remdesivir-treated patients, age affects utilization of health care modalities. Female, non-comorbid, and younger patients have better clinical outcomes.

Real World Utilization of Bamlanivimab at a Rural Community Hospital

Introduction

Although there were several proposed treatments for patients that were hospitalized with COVID-19, outpatient treatments for those with mild to moderate illness were limited prior to the emergency use authorization (EUA) of virus-neutralizing monoclonal antibodies. To assess the efficacy of outpatient monoclonal therapy, the investigators assessed the seven, 14, and 28-day emergency department and hospitalization rates of adult patients given bamlanivimab for the treatment of COVID-19 at a community hospital.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed of all adult patients given bamlanivimab within the emergency department or an outpatient infusion center from December 2, 2020 through January 8, 2021 for the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19. Patients were compared to a set of controls who would have qualified for bamlanivimab treatment prior to its authorization in reverse temporal order from November 30, 2020 through August 1, 2020. Abstracted data included patient demographics, allergic reactions, emergency department presentations, and hospitalizations at seven, 14, and 28 days post-infusion due to COVID-19 and any in-hospital mortality in those admitted with a COVID-19 complication. 

Results

A total of 136 patients received bamlanivimab during the study period with none having an allergic reaction during infusion. In those who received bamlanivimab, 84 (61.8%) patients included were aged 65 years or older. At 28 days, there was a statistically significant reduction in emergency department visits in those who received bamlanivimab (20 vs 36 patients; p = 0.03) but not at seven days (12 vs 20 patients; p = 0.18) or 14 days (17 vs 28 patients; p = 0.11). No statistically significant difference in emergency department returns was noted in those aged 65 years or older at seven (eight vs eight patients; p = 0.70), 14 (11 vs 10 patients; p = 0.83), or 28 days (13 vs 14 patients, p = 0.46). A total of six (4.4%) patients were hospitalized at 28 days following the bamlanivimab infusion with five (83.3%) being aged 65 or older. No statistical difference was noted for decreased hospitalizations at seven (four vs five patients; p = 0.79), 14 (five vs nine patients; p = 0.32), or 28 days (six vs nine patients; p = 0.49) post-infusion. No patients suffered from in-hospital mortality after infusion with bamlanivimab.

Conclusion

Outpatient infusion of bamlanivimab reduced the incidence of those with mild to moderate COVID-19 requiring subsequent care through the emergency department at 28 days but not hospitalizations within this time frame. No statistical difference was noted in either emergency department visits or hospitalizations in those aged 65 or greater who were treated as an outpatient with bamlanivimab for mild to moderate COVID-19. 

Evaluation of the Treatment Efficacy and Safety of Remdesivir for COVID-19: a Meta-analysis

Remdesivir is one of few FDA-approved treatments for severe cases of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). To better assess its efficacy and safety, we conducted a meta-analysis to systematically identify and synthesize existing findings. We conducted a comprehensive literature search among six electronic databases and unpublished studies. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to summarize the risk ratio (RR) and rate estimates from eligible studies. Funnel plots, the Egger test, and the trim and fill analysis were used to detect publication bias. Thirteen eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis, giving a pooled sample size of 10,002 COVID-19 hospitalized patients (5068 administered remdesivir; 4934 control). Among patients on remdesivir, we synthesized mortality (15%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 9%, 22%), clinical improvement (64%, 95% CI: 51%, 78%), recovery (70%, 95% CI: 57%, 83%), hospital discharge (74%, 95% CI: 60%, 87%), serious adverse effect (SAE) (21%, 95% CI:13%, 29%), and Grade 3 or 4 adverse effect (AE) (30%, 95% CI: 12%, 48%). Patients on remdesivir were 17% (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65, 1.06) less likely to die than those within the control group. Additionally, remdesivir had favorable outcomes in terms of clinical improvement, recovery, and hospital discharge. Lastly, non-mechanically ventilated patients had better overall clinical outcomes than mechanically ventilated patients. Remdesivir shows a moderate-favorable treatment efficacy among hospitalized COVID-19 patients with disproportionate impact among non-mechanically ventilated patients; however, a substantial proportion of COVID-19 patients may suffer from SAE or Grade 3 or 4 AE during the treatment course.

Abnormal Liver Biochemistry Tests and Acute Liver Injury in COVID-19 Patients: Current Evidence and Potential Pathogenesis

Globally, millions of persons have contracted the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) over the past several months, resulting in significant mortality. Health care systems are negatively impacted including the care of individuals with cancers and other chronic diseases such as chronic active hepatitis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. There are various probable pathogenic mechanisms that have been presented to account for liver injury in COVID-19 patients such as hepatotoxicity cause by therapeutic drugs, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection of the bile duct cells and hepatocytes, hypoxia and systemic inflammatory response. Liver biochemistry tests such as aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) are deranged in COVID-19 patients with liver injury. Hepatocellular damage results in the elevation of serum AST and ALT levels in early onset disease while a cholestatic pattern that develops as the disease progress causes higher levels of ALP, GGT, direct and total bilirubin. These liver biochemistry tests are prognostic markers of disease severity and should be carefully monitored in COVID-19 patients. We conducted a systematic review of abnormal liver biochemistry tests in COVID-19 and the possible pathogenesis involved. Significant findings regarding the severity, hepatocellular pattern, incidence and related clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients are highlighted.