Leflunomide treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19: DEFEAT-COVID randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of leflunomide (L) added to the standard-of-care (SOC) treatment in COVID-19 patients hospitalised with moderate/critical clinical symptoms. DESIGN: Prospective, open-label, multicentre, stratified, randomised clinical trial. SETTING: Five hospitals in UK and India, from September 2020 to May 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with PCR confirmed COVID-19 infection with moderate/critical symptoms within 15 days of onset. INTERVENTION: Leflunomide 100 mg/day (3 days) followed by 10-20 mg/day (7 days) added to standard care. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: The time to clinical improvement (TTCI) defined as two-point reduction on a clinical status scale or live discharge prior to 28 days; safety profile measured by the incidence of adverse events (AEs) within 28 days. RESULTS: Eligible patients (n=214; age 56.3±14.9 years; 33% female) were randomised to SOC+L (n=104) and SOC group (n=110), stratified according to their clinical risk profile. TTCI was 7 vs 8 days in SOC+L vs SOC group (HR 1.317; 95% CI 0.980 to 1.768; p=0.070). Incidence of serious AEs was similar between the groups and none was attributed to leflunomide. In sensitivity analyses, excluding 10 patients not fulfilling the inclusion criteria and 3 who withdrew consent before leflunomide treatment, TTCI was 7 vs 8 days (HR 1.416, 95% CI 1.041 to 1.935; p=0.028), indicating a trend in favour of the intervention group. All-cause mortality rate was similar between groups, 9/104 vs 10/110. Duration of oxygen dependence was shorter in the SOC+L group being a median 6 days (IQR 4-8) compared with 7 days (IQR 5-10) in SOC group (p=0.047). CONCLUSION: Leflunomide, added to the SOC treatment for COVID-19, was safe and well tolerated but had no major impact on clinical outcomes. It may shorten the time of oxygen dependence by 1 day and thereby improve TTCI/hospital discharge in moderately affected COVID-19 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EudraCT Number: 2020-002952-18, NCT05007678.

Secondary infections modify the overall course of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a retrospective study from a network of hospitals across North India.

Objective: To gain better insight into the extent of secondary bacterial and fungal infections in hospitalized patients in India, and to assess how these alter the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) so that control measures can be suggested. Methods: In this retrospective, multicentre study, the data of all patients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), admitted to hospital between March 2020 and July 2021, were accessed from the electronic health records of a network of 10 hospitals across five states in North India. Results: Of 19,852 patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 on RT-PCR and admitted to the study hospitals during the study period, 1940 (9.8%) patients developed secondary infections (SIs). Patients with SIs were, on average, 8 years older than patients without SIs (median age 62.6 vs 54.3 years; P<0.001). The risk of SIs was significantly (P<0.001) associated with age, severity of disease at admission, diabetes, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and ventilator use. The most common site of infection was urine (41.7%), followed by blood (30.8%) and sputum/bronchoalveolar lavage/endotracheal fluid (24.8%); the least common was pus/wound discharge (2.6%). Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) were the most common organisms (63.2%), followed by Gram-positive cocci (GPC) (19.6%) and fungi (17.3%). Most patients with SIs were on multiple antimicrobials. The most commonly used antibiotics against GNB were beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors (76.9%), carbapenems (57.7%), cephalosporins (53.9%), and antibiotics against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (47.1%). Empirical use of antibiotics against GPC was seen in 58.9% of patients with SIs, and empirical use of antifungals was observed in 56.9% of patients with SIs. The average length of hospital stay for patients with SIs was almost twice as long as that of patients without SIs (median 13 vs 7 days). Overall mortality among patients with SIs (40.3%) was more than eight times higher than that among patients without SIs (4.6%). Only 1.2% of patients with SIs with mild COVID-19 at admission died, compared with 17.5% of those with moderate COVID-19 at admission and 58.5% of those with severe COVID-19 at admission (P<0.001). The mortality rate was highest in patients with bloodstream infections (49.8%), followed by those with hospital-acquired pneumonia (47.9%), urinary tract infections (29.4%), and skin and soft tissue infections (29.4%). The mortality rate in patients with diabetes with SIs was 45.2%, compared with 34.3% in those without diabetes (P<0.001). Conclusions: SIs complicate the course of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. These patients tend to have a much longer hospital stay, a higher requirement for oxygen and ICU care, and a significantly higher mortality rate compared with those without SIs. The groups most vulnerable to SIs are patients with more severe COVID-19, elderly patients and patients with diabetes. Judicious empirical use of combination antimicrobials in these groups of vulnerable patients can save lives. It is desirable to have region- or country-specific guidelines for appropriate use of antibiotics and antifungals to prevent their overuse.

Efficacy of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin in severe and critical COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Various immunomodulatory therapies have been explored to manage the dysregulated immune response seen in severe COVID-19 infection. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in severe and critical COVID-19 disease. METHODS: This retrospective study included 535 patients with severe and critical COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary care hospital, from May 2020 to December 2020. Primary outcome was the percentage of patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were a) in-hospital mortality, b) 28-day mortality, c) ICU-length of stay (ICU-LOS), d) days to discontinuation of supplemental oxygen, and e) days to COVID-PCR negativity. Logistic regression and linear regression were performed using the adjusted and unadjusted analyses. RESULTS: We analyzed a total of 535 patients out of which 255 (47.7%) received IVIG along with standard treatment and 280 (52.3%) received only standard treatment. Two groups were similar in terms of COVID-19 severity, APACHE II score, oxygen requirements, and initial management. The requirement of invasive ventilation was significantly less in the IVIG group compared to the Non-IVIG group (32.2% vs 40.4%, p < 0.05). In-hospital mortality, 28-day mortality, and ICU-LOS were also significantly less in the IVIG group (all p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis within the IVIG group showed that early administration of IVIG (≤7 days from ICU admission), old age (≥65 years), and obesity were associated with better outcomes (need for mechanical ventilation and in-hospital mortality) (all p < 0.05). IVIG administration in patients with chronic respiratory disease was associated with a reduced requirement for mechanical ventilation (p < 0.05), but there was an insignificant improvement in mortality. CONCLUSION: High-dose IVIG improves outcomes in severe and critical COVID-19 patients. The study also underscores the importance of timing and patient selection when administering IVIG.

Effectiveness of convalescent plasma in Indian patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma (CP) is being used as a treatment option in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Till date, there is conflicting evidence on efficacy of CP in reducing COVID-19 related mortality. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of CP on 28-day mortality reduction in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We did a multi-centre, retrospective case control observational study from 1st May 2020 to 31st August 2020. A total of 1079 adult patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 requiring oxygen, were reviewed. Of these, 694 patients were admitted to ICU. Out of these, 333 were given CP along with best supportive care and remaining 361 received best supportive care only. RESULTS: In the overall group of 1079 patients, mortality in plasma vs no plasma group was statistically not significant (22.4% vs 18.5%; p = 0.125; OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 0.94--1.72). However, in patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICU, mortality was significantly lower in plasma group (25.5% vs 33.2%; p = 0.026; OR = 0.69, 95%CI: 0.50-0.96). This benefit of reduced mortality was most seen in age group 60 to 74 years (26.7% vs 43.0%; p = 0.004; OR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29-0.80), driven mostly by females of this age group (23.1% vs 53.5%; p = 0.013; OR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.09-0.78). Significant difference in mortality was observed in patients with one comorbidity (22.3% vs 36.5%; p = 0.004; OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.31-0.80). Moreover, patients on ventilator had significantly lower mortality in the plasma arm (37.2% vs 49.3%; p = 0.009; OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.42-0.89); particularly so for patients on invasive mechanical ventilation (63.9% vs 82.9%; p = 0.014; OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.16-0.83). CONCLUSION: The use of CP was associated with reduced mortality in COVID-19 elderly patients admitted in ICU, above 60 years of age, particularly females, those with comorbidities and especially those who required some form of ventilation.