Intravenous methylprednisolone pulses in hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

RATIONALE: Pulse glucocorticoid therapy is used in hyperinflammation related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of pulse intravenous methylprednisolone in addition to standard treatment in COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 304 hospitalised patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were randomised to receive 1 g of methylprednisolone intravenously for three consecutive days or placebo in addition to standard dexamethasone. The primary outcome was the duration of patient hospitalisation, calculated as the time interval between randomisation and hospital discharge without the need for supplementary oxygen. The key secondary outcomes were survival free from invasive ventilation with orotracheal intubation and overall survival. RESULTS: Overall, 112 (75.4%) out of 151 patients in the pulse methylprednisolone arm and 111 (75.2%) of 150 in the placebo arm were discharged from hospital without oxygen within 30 days from randomisation. Median time to discharge was similar in both groups (15 days, 95% CI 13.0-17.0 days and 16 days, 95% CI 13.8-18.2 days, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 0.92, 95% CI 0.71-1.20; p=0.528). No significant differences between pulse methylprednisolone and placebo arms were observed in terms of admission to intensive care unit with orotracheal intubation or death (20.0% versus 16.1%; HR 1.26, 95% CI 0.74-2.16; p=0.176) or overall mortality (10.0% versus 12.2%; HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.42-1.64; p=0.584). Serious adverse events occurred with similar frequency in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Methylprenisolone pulse therapy added to dexamethasone was not of benefit in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Management of Systemic Sclerosis Patients in the COVID-19 Era: The Experience of an Expert Specialist Reference Center.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 pandemic represents a serious health emergency that severely compromised our Public Health system, resulting in a rapid and forced reorganization and involved the management of chronic diseases too. The Scleroderma Unit of Modena and Reggio Emilia follows more than 600 patients suffering from systemic sclerosis (SSc) and recently became the referral center (HUB) in Emilia-Romagna for this rare connective tissue disease. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the extent by which the lockdown and the pandemic has impacted the activity of admissions to Scleroderma Unit of Modena and Reggio Emilia. METHODS: Our daily clinical activity is characterized by outpatient visits, videocapillaroscopy exam, ulcers treatment, therapeutic infusions in day hospital regimen, multidisciplinary visits following our dedicated SSc care pathway, and clinical trials. Our activity has been quickly rescheduled to ensure the proper assistance to our SSc patients during the COVID-19 pressure. RESULTS: The use of telemedicine has certainly assured a robust continuity of health care. Furthermore, telephone pre-triage, nurse/medical triage, proper physical distancing and use of PPE/DPI allowed us to re-organize and continue SSc daily activity. Specifically, therapeutic infusions in day hospital regimen and outpatient visits, including ulcers treatment, was guaranteed and maximized. CONCLUSION: The management of scleroderma patients by an expert specialist reference center is crucial in order to ensure continuity of care and pursue the best SSc practice.

Acute-phase reactants during tocilizumab therapy for severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of clinical improvement and intubation/death in tocilizumab-treated severe COVID19, focusing on IL6 and CRP longitudinal monitoring. METHODS: 173 consecutive patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia receiving tocilizumab in Reggio Emilia province Hospitals between 11 March and 3 June 2020 were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Clinical improvement was defined as status improvement on a six-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. A composite outcome of intubation/death was also evaluated. CRP and IL-6 levels were determined before TCZ administration (T0) and after 3 (T3), and 7 (T7) days. RESULTS: At multivariate analysis T0 and T3 CRP levels were negatively associated with clinical improvement (OR 0.13, CI 0.03-0.55 and OR 0.11, CI 0.0-0.46) (p=0.006 and p=0.003) and positively associated with intubation/death (OR 17.66, CI 2.47-126.14 and OR 5.34, CI: 1.49-19.12) (p=0.01 and p=0.004). No significant associations with IL-6 values were observed. General linear model analyses for repeated measures showed significantly different trends for CRP from day 3 to day 7 between patients who improved and those who did not, and between patients who were intubated or died and those who were not (p<0.0001 for both). ROC analysis identified a baseline CRP level of 15.8 mg/dl as the best cut-off to predict intubation/death (AUC = 0.711, sensitivity = 0.67, specificity = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: CRP serial measurements in the first week of TCZ therapy are useful in identifying patients developing poor outcomes.

Susceptibility to COVID-19 in Patients Treated With Antimalarials: A Population-Based Study in Emilia-Romagna, Northern Italy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the susceptibility to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with autoimmune conditions treated with antimalarials in a population-based study. METHODS: All residents treated with chloroquine (CQ)/hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) from July through December 2019 and living in 3 provinces of Regione Emilia-Romagna were identified by drug prescription registries and matched with the registry containing all residents living in the same areas who have had swabs and tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 4,408 patients were identified. The prevalence of patients receiving antimalarials was 0.85 per 1,000 men and 3.3 per 1,000 women. The cumulative incidence of testing during the study period was 2.7% in the general population and 3.8% among those receiving CQ or HCQ, while the cumulative incidence of testing positive was 0.55% in the general population and 0.70% among those receiving CQ/HCQ. Multivariate models showed that those receiving CQ/HCQ had a slightly higher probability of being tested compared to the general population (OR 1.09 [95% CI 0.94-1.28]), the same probability of being diagnosed as having COVID-19 (OR 0.94 [95% CI 0.66-1.34]), and a slightly lower probability of being positive once tested (OR 0.83 [95% CI 0.56-1.23]). None of the differences were significant. CONCLUSION: Our findings do not support the use of antimalarials as a prophylactic treatment of COVID-19.