Hyperglycemia in COVID-19 infection without diabetes mellitus: Association with inflammatory markers.

BACKGROUND: New onset hyperglycemia is common in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Cytokine storm due to COVID-19 infection is an essential etiology for new-onset hyperglycemia, but factors like direct severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-induced pancreatic ß-cell failure have also been postulated to play a role. AIM: We plan to investigate further the mechanisms underlying SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced hyperglycemia, particularly the rationale of the cytokine-induced hyperglycemia hypothesis, by evaluating the association between inflammatory markers and new onset hyperglycemia in non-diabetic patients with COVID-19 infection. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case-control study on adults without diabetes mellitus hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. The serum levels of glucose and inflammatory markers at presentation before initiation of corticosteroid were collected. Hyperglycemia was defined as glucose levels ≥ 140 mg/dL. C-Reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 100 mg/L, ferritin ≥ 530 ng/mL, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) ≥ 590 U/L, and D-dimer ≥ 0.5 mg/L were considered elevated. We used the χ 2 test for categorical variables and the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and calculated the logistic regression for hyperglycemia. RESULTS: Of the 520 patients screened, 248 met the inclusion criteria. Baseline demographics were equally distributed between patients with hyperglycemia and those who were normoglycemic. Serum inflammatory markers in patients with or without new-onset hyperglycemia were elevated as follows: CRP (58.1% vs 65.6%, P = 0.29), ferritin (48.4% vs 34.9%, P = 0.14), D-dimer (37.1% vs 37.1%, P = 0.76) and LDH (19.4% vs 11.8%, P = 0.02). Logistic regression analysis showed LDH odds ratio (OR) = 1.623 (P = 0.256). We observed significantly higher mortality (24.2% vs 9.1%, P = 0.001; OR = 2.528, P = 0.024) and length of stay (8.89 vs 6.69, P = 0.026) in patients with hyperglycemia. CONCLUSION: Our study showed no association between CRP, ferritin, LDH, D-dimer levels, and new-onset hyperglycemia in non-diabetic patients with COVID-19 infection. It also shows an increased mortality risk and length of stay in patients with hyperglycemia. With new-onset hyperglycemia being closely associated with poor prognostic indices, it becomes pivotal to understand the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms behind the SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced hyperglycemia. We conclude that the stress hyperglycemia hypothesis is not the only mechanism of SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced hyperglycemia but rather a multicausal pathogenesis leading to hyperglycemia that requires further research and understanding. This would help us improve not only the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 disease and inpatient hyperglycemia management but also understand the long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection and further management.

Oral Nirmatrelvir and Ritonavir in Non-hospitalized Vaccinated Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of coronavirus disease-2019 (Covid-19) with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir (NMV-r) in high-risk non-hospitalized unvaccinated patients reduced the risk of progression to severe disease. However, the potential benefits of NMV-r among vaccinated patients are unclear. METHODS: We conducted a comparative retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX research network. Patients ≥18 years of age who were vaccinated and subsequently developed Covid-19 between December 1, 2021, and April 18, 2022, were included. Cohorts were developed based on the use of NMV-r within five days of diagnosis. The primary composite outcome was all-cause emergency room (ER) visit, hospitalization, or death at a 30-days follow-up. Secondary outcomes included individual components of primary outcomes, multisystem symptoms, Covid-19 associated complications, and diagnostic test utilization. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 1,130 patients remained in each cohort. A primary composite outcome of all-cause ER visits, hospitalization, or death in 30 days occurred in 89 (7.87%) patients in the NMV-r cohort as compared to 163 (14.4%) patients in the non-NMV-r cohort (OR 0.5, CI 0.39-0.67; p<0.005) consistent with 45% relative risk reduction. A significant reduction in multisystem symptom burden and subsequent complications such as lower respiratory tract infection, cardiac arrhythmia, and diagnostic radiology testing were noted in NMV-r treated patients. There was no apparent increase serious complications between days 10 to 30. CONCLUSION: Treatment with NMV-r in non-hospitalized vaccinated patients with Covid-19 was associated with a reduced likelihood of emergency room visits, hospitalization, or death. Complications and overall resource utilization were also decreased.

Outpatient Treatment of Confirmed COVID-19: Living, Rapid Practice Points From the American College of Physicians (Version 1).

Description: Strategies to manage COVID-19 in the outpatient setting continue to evolve as new data emerge on SARS-CoV-2 variants and the availability of newer treatments. The Scientific Medical Policy Committee (SMPC) of the American College of Physicians (ACP) developed these living, rapid practice points to summarize the best available evidence on the treatment of adults with confirmed COVID-19 in an outpatient setting. These practice points do not evaluate COVID-19 treatments in the inpatient setting or adjunctive COVID-19 treatments in the outpatient setting. Methods: The SMPC developed these living, rapid practice points on the basis of a living, rapid review done by the ACP Center for Evidence Reviews at Cochrane Austria at the University for Continuing Education Krems (Danube University Krems). The SMPC will maintain these practice points as living by monitoring and assessing the impact of new evidence. Practice Point 1: Consider molnupiravir to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting who are within 5 to 7 days of the onset of symptoms and at high risk for progressing to severe disease. Practice Point 2: Consider nirmatrelvir-ritonavir combination therapy to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting who are within 5 days of the onset of symptoms and at high risk for progressing to severe disease. Practice Point 3: Consider remdesivir to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting who are within 7 days of the onset of symptoms and at high risk for progressing to severe disease. Practice Point 4: Do not use azithromycin to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Practice Point 5: Do not use chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Practice Point 6: Do not use ivermectin to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Practice Point 7: Do not use nitazoxanide to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Practice Point 8: Do not use lopinavir-ritonavir combination therapy to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Practice Point 9: Do not use casirivimab-imdevimab combination therapy to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting unless it is considered effective against a SARS-CoV-2 variant or subvariant locally in circulation. Practice Point 10: Do not use regdanvimab to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting unless it is considered effective against a SARS-CoV-2 variant or subvariant locally in circulation. Practice Point 11: Do not use sotrovimab to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting unless it is considered effective against a SARS-CoV-2 variant or subvariant locally in circulation. Practice Point 12: Do not use convalescent plasma to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Practice Point 13: Do not use ciclesonide to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Practice Point 14: Do not use fluvoxamine to treat patients with confirmed mild to moderate COVID-19 in the outpatient setting.

A Case-Control Study of Distinguishing Between Stroke Mimics and True Strokes.

This study was conducted with the primary aim to distinguish patients with a true stroke versus a stroke mimic based on clinical features and imaging. We conducted a retrospective case-control study on 116 adult patients who received alteplase (tPA) to treat acute stroke at our hospital. We further analyzed 79 patients with a normal computed tomography angiography (CTA). Based on their magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain, they were divided into cases (stroke mimics) and controls (true strokes). Data were collected retrospectively by reviewing individual medical charts on the electronic medical record (EMR), including age, gender, history of stroke, seizure, hypertension, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, hyperlipidemia, presenting NIH Stroke Scale/Score, hemorrhagic conversion, history of migraine, history of depression, sidedness of symptoms and aphasia. Data were categorized to separate those who were later diagnosed to be stroke mimics by being-postictal, encephalopathic, in acute migraine, suffered post-stroke recrudescence (PSR) due to metabolic insult, or had conversion disorder when symptoms could not be attributed to any medical condition or mental illness. Of the 79 study subjects, 48 (60%) were stroke mimics. The mean age of the cohort was 68.67 years, and 46.8% of the study subjects were females. Based on the multivariate logistic regression analysis, factors associated with being a stroke mimic were older age, history of migraine, and a history of prior stroke. In conclusion, increased attention to history and clinical examination as the first step can aid in the proper diagnosis of strokes versus stroke mimics. Identifying stroke mimics early could help expedite hospital workup and prevent inadvertent investigations, reducing hospital occupancy during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We could potentially avoid the administration of tPA to such patients, reducing both the cost and adverse effects of it. Every stroke can cause neurological deficits, but every deficit need not be a stroke.

Cardiovascular Drug Interactions With Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir in Patients With COVID-19: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (NMVr) is used to treat symptomatic, nonhospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) who are at high risk of progression to severe disease. Patients with cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular disease are at a high risk of developing adverse events from COVID-19 and as a result have a higher likelihood of receiving NMVr. Ritonavir, the pharmaceutical enhancer used in NMVr, is an inhibitor of the enzymes of CYP450 pathway, particularly CYP3A4 and to a lesser degree CYP2D6, and affects the P-glycoprotein pump. Co-administration of NMVr with medications commonly used to manage cardiovascular conditions can potentially cause significant drug-drug interactions and may lead to severe adverse effects. It is crucial to be aware of such interactions and take appropriate measures to avoid them. In this review, we discuss potential drug-drug interactions between NMVr and commonly used cardiovascular medications based on their pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic properties.

What Is the Antibody Response and Role in Conferring Natural Immunity After SARS-CoV-2 Infection? Rapid, Living Practice Points From the American College of Physicians (Version 2).

DESCRIPTION: The Scientific Medical Policy Committee (SMPC) of the American College of Physicians (ACP) developed these living, rapid practice points to summarize the current best available evidence on the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and protection against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2. This is version 2 of the ACP practice points, which serves to update version 1, published on 16 March 2021. These practice points do not evaluate vaccine-acquired immunity or cellular immunity. METHODS: The SMPC developed this version of the living, rapid practice points based on an updated living, rapid, systematic review conducted by the Portland VA Research Foundation and funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. PRACTICE POINT 1: Do not use SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. PRACTICE POINT 2: Do not use SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests to predict the degree or duration of natural immunity conferred by antibodies against reinfection, including natural immunity against different variants. RETIREMENT FROM LIVING STATUS: Although natural immunity remains a topic of scientific interest, this topic is being retired from living status given the availability of effective vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 and widespread recommendations for and prevalence of their use. Currently, vaccination is the best clinical recommendation for preventing infection, reinfection, and serious illness from SARS-CoV-2 and its variants.

What Is the Antibody Response and Role in Conferring Natural Immunity After SARS-CoV-2 Infection? Rapid, Living Practice Points From the American College of Physicians (Version 1).

DESCRIPTION: The widespread availability of SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests raises important questions for clinicians, patients, and public health professionals related to the appropriate use and interpretation of these tests. The Scientific Medical Policy Committee (SMPC) of the American College of Physicians developed these rapid, living practice points to summarize the current and best available evidence on the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection, antibody durability after initial infection with SARS-CoV-2, and antibody protection against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: The SMPC developed these rapid, living practice points based on a rapid and living systematic evidence review done by the Portland VA Research Foundation and funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Ongoing literature surveillance is planned through December 2021. When new studies are identified and a full update of the evidence review is published, the SMPC will assess the new evidence and any effect on the practice points. PRACTICE POINT 1: Do not use SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. PRACTICE POINT 2: Antibody tests can be useful for the purpose of estimating community prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. PRACTICE POINT 3: Current evidence is uncertain to predict presence, level, or durability of natural immunity conferred by SARS-CoV-2 antibodies against reinfection (after SARS-CoV-2 infection).

In the Eye of the Storm: The Role of the Pharmacist in Medication Safety during the COVID-19 Pandemic at an Urban Teaching Hospital.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, has challenged practitioners with complex clinical scenarios as well as conflicting and scarce data to support treatment strategies. The pandemic has also placed strains on institutions due to drug shortages, alterations in medication use processes, economic losses, and staff exposure to the virus. This article provides pharmacist-led suggestions and strategies to various case questions, describing some of the challenges faced by practitioners at an urban teaching hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. The strategies suggested can be explored at other institutions.