The use of biological agents in pregnant women affected by autoimmune disorders: Why we need more research of this neglected area.

Women of childbearing age are largely affected by several autoimmune disorders (the estimates range between 1.5 and 10 per 10,000). The increasing number of effective biological agents has dramatically revolutionized the treatment of these clinical conditions, ameliorating the patient's quality of life. The use of these agents by women during pregnancy is growing to ensure the disease activity control and avoid adverse health outcomes. However, for many newer biological agents, the degree of information concerning their use in pregnancy is often incomplete to perform a conclusive risk assessment on fetal and maternal health given the exclusion of this specific population from pharmacological clinical trials. More recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has confirmed the unacceptable inequities of pharmacological research and medical treatment for pregnant and lactating women, exacerbating the need for filling the gaps of quantitative and qualitative pharmacology data in this sensitive population. ere we summarize (i) what is already known about safety and effectiveness of biological agents in this understudied population (with specific focus on pregnancy-related health outcomes), and what we are going to learn from the on-going studies among pregnant women treated with biological agents; (ii) the methodological and ethical considerations that characterize the pharmacological research in pregnancy, also discussing emerging evidence on the use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in this clinical setting.

Preventing COVID-19 in assisted living facilities: An impossible task pending vaccination roll out.

Here, we aimed to describe the clinical outcomes of the residents of a long-term care facility during its closure to visitors and suppliers in response to the first COVID-19 pandemic from February 23 to June 22, 2020, and the results of the facility-wide SARS-CoV-2 testing of residents and staff in June 2020 before its partially reopening. Seventy-four residents and 53 members of staff were included in the present study. The staff underwent nasopharyngeal swab tests for SARS-CoV-2, and both the staff and residents underwent serological tests to detect IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. The results of all of the tests were negative. Conversely, 94% of residents and 38% members of the staff were tested positive to the nasopharyngeal swab tests during the second COVID-19 pandemic wave (data collected from November 1 to November 30, 2020). Our experience suggests that, in the presence of a life-threatening pandemic such as SARS-CoV-2 infection, the prompt use of restrictive procedures can prevent the spread and progression of disease in assisted living facilities in the short term but may fail in the long term, especially when the prevalence of the COVID-19 greatly increased outside the facility enhancing the risk of import the disease from outside. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of residents and staff members would contribute to control/limit the prevalence and the spread of the virus.

Early administration of lopinavir/ritonavir plus hydroxychloroquine does not alter the clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection: A retrospective cohort study.

As it has been shown that lopinavir (LPV) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have in vitro activity against coronaviruses, they were used to treat COVID-19 during the first wave of the epidemic in Lombardy, Italy. To compare the rate of clinical improvement between those who started LPV/ritonavir (LPV/r)+HCQ within 5 days of symptom onset (early treatment, ET) and those who started later (delayed treatment, DT). This was a retrospective intent-to-treat analysis of the hospitalized patients who started LPV/r + HCQ between 21 February and 20 March 2020. The association between the timing of treatment and the probability of 30-day mortality was assessed using univariable and multivariable logistic models. The study involved 172 patients: 43 (25%) in the ET and 129 (75%) in the DT group. The rate of clinical improvement increased over time to 73.3% on day 30, without any significant difference between the two groups (Gray's test P = .213). After adjusting for potentially relevant clinical variables, there was no significant association between the timing of the start of treatment and the probability of 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] ET vs DT = 1.45, 95% confidence interval 0.50-4.19). Eight percent of the patients discontinued the treatment becausebecause of severe gastrointestinal disorders attributable to LPV/r. The timing of the start of LPV/r + HCQ treatment does not seem to affect the clinical course of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Together with the severe adverse events attributable to LPV/r, this raises concerns about the benefit of using this combination to treat COVID-19.

Drug-Drug Interactions and Prescription Appropriateness at Hospital Discharge: Experience with COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are often elderly, with comorbidities, and receiving polypharmacy, all of which are known factors for potentially severe drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the risk of DDIs and PIMs in COVID-19 patients at hospital discharge. METHOD: Patients with a proven diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection who were hospitalized between 21 February and 30 April 2020, treated with at least two drugs, and with available information regarding pharmacological treatments upon admission and at discharge were considered. The appropriateness of drug prescriptions was assessed using INTERcheck®. RESULTS: A significant increase in the prescription of proton pump inhibitors and heparins was found when comparing admission with hospital discharge (from 24 to 33% [p < 0.05] and from 1 to 17% [p < 0.01], respectively). The increased prescription of heparins at discharge resulted in a highly significant increase in the potentially severe DDIs mediated by this class of drugs. 51% of COVID-19 patients aged > 65 years had at least one PIM upon admission, with an insignificant increment at discharge (58%). CONCLUSION: An increased number of prescribed drugs was observed in COVID-19 patients discharged from our hospital. The addition of heparins is appropriate according to the current literature, while the use of proton pump inhibitors is more controversial. Particular attention should be paid to the risk of bleeding complications linked to heparin-based DDIs.

Immune deficiency is a risk factor for severe COVID-19 in people living with HIV.

OBJECTIVES: A prior T cell depletion induced by HIV infection may carry deleterious consequences in the current COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical data on patients co-infected with HIV and SARS-CoV-2 are still scarce. METHODS: This multicentre cohort study evaluated risk factors for morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 in people living with HIV (PLWH), infected with SARS-CoV-2 in three countries in different clinical settings. COVID-19 was clinically classified as to be mild-to-moderate or severe. RESULTS: Of 175 patients, 49 (28%) had severe COVID-19 and 7 (4%) patients died. Almost all patients were on antiretroviral therapy (ART) and in 94%, HIV RNA was below 50 copies/mL prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. In the univariate analysis, an age 50 years or older, a CD4+ T cell nadir of < 200/µl, current CD4+ T cells < 350/µl and the presence of at least one comorbidity were significantly associated with severity of COVID-19. No significant association was found for gender, ethnicity, obesity, a detectable HIV RNA, a prior AIDS-defining illness, or tenofovir (which was mainly given as alafenamide) or protease inhibitor use in the current ART. In a multivariate analysis, the only factor associated with risk for severe COVID-19 was a current CD4+ T cell count of < 350/µl (adjusted odds ratio 2.85, 95% confidence interval 1.26-6.44, p=0.01). The only factor associated with mortality was a low CD4 T cell nadir. CONCLUSIONS: In PLWH, immune deficiency is a possible risk factor for severe COVID-19, even in the setting of virological suppression. There is no evidence for a protective effect of PIs or tenofovir alafenamide.

Toward Consensus on Correct Interpretation of Protein Binding in Plasma and Other Biological Matrices for COVID-19 Therapeutic Development.

The urgent global public health need presented by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has brought scientists from diverse backgrounds together in an unprecedented international effort to rapidly identify interventions. There is a pressing need to apply clinical pharmacology principles and this has already been recognized by several other groups. However, one area that warrants additional specific consideration relates to plasma and tissue protein binding that broadly influences pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. The principles of free drug theory have been forged and applied across drug development but are not currently being routinely applied for SARS-CoV-2 antiviral drugs. Consideration of protein binding is of critical importance to candidate selection but requires correct interpretation, in a drug-specific manner, to avoid either underinterpretation or overinterpretation of its consequences. This paper represents a consensus from international researchers seeking to apply historical knowledge, which has underpinned highly successful antiviral drug development for other viruses, such as HIV and hepatitis C virus for decades.

Drug-Drug Interactions and Prescription Appropriateness in Patients with COVID-19: A Retrospective Analysis from a Reference Hospital in Northern Italy.

BACKGROUND: Patients hospitalised with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2; coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19)] infection are frequently older with co-morbidities and receiving polypharmacy, all of which are known risk factors for drug-drug interactions (DDIs). The pharmacological burden may be further aggravated by the addition of treatments for COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the risk of potential DDIs upon admission and during hospitalisation in patients with COVID-19 treated at our hospital. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 502 patients with COVID-19 (mean age 61 ± 16 years, range 15-99) treated at our hospital with a proven diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection hospitalised between 21 February and 30 April 2020 and treated with at least two drugs. RESULTS: Overall, 68% of our patients with COVID-19 were exposed to at least one potential DDI, and 55% were exposed to at least one potentially severe DDI. The proportion of patients experiencing potentially severe DDIs increased from 22% upon admission to 80% during hospitalisation. Furosemide, amiodarone and quetiapine were the main drivers of potentially severe DDIs upon admission, and hydroxychloroquine and particularly lopinavir/ritonavir were the main drivers during hospitalisation. The majority of potentially severe DDIs carried an increased risk of cardiotoxicity. No potentially severe DDIs were identified in relation to tocilizumab and remdesivir. CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalised patients with COVID-19, concomitant treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine led to a dramatic increase in the number of potentially severe DDIs. Given the high risk of cardiotoxicity and the scant and conflicting data concerning their efficacy in treating SARS-CoV-2 infection, the use of lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19 with polypharmacy needs to be carefully considered.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Dalbavancin Treatment in Severe Necrotizing Fasciitis in 3 Critically Ill Patients: A Grand Round.

BACKGROUND: Dalbavancin, albeit indicated for the treatment of skin structure infections, is used for a much wider range of infections. This drug is characterized by a long half-life (more than 200 hours), a favorable safety profile, and an activity against a wide array of gram-positive organisms, including several strains of Staphylococci and Enterococci. METHODS: In this study, we presented 3 cases of critically ill patients treated with dalbavancin. All patients were therapeutically monitored for plasma dalbavancin concentrations; ultrafiltrate dalbavancin concentrations were assessed in a patient undergoing continuous renal-replacement therapy. Dalbavancin concentrations were measured using a validated liquid chromatographic method coupled with mass spectrometry. RESULTS: All 3 severely ill patients experiencing necrotizing fasciitis were successfully treated during the acute phase with dalbavancin. Dalbavancin clearance in patient 3 (0.334 L/h) was considerably increased compared with values measured in the other 2 patients (0.054 and 0.075 L/h) and with data reported in the literature (0.04-0.06 L/h). CONCLUSIONS: Our case reports presented preliminary evidence that dalbavancin can be considered a therapeutic option for necrotizing fasciitis in intensive care unit patients. The role of hypoalbuminemia during dalbavancin exposure merits further investigation.