An artificial intelligence system to predict the optimal timing for mechanical ventilation weaning for intensive care unit patients: A two-stage prediction approach.

Background: For the intensivists, accurate assessment of the ideal timing for successful weaning from the mechanical ventilation (MV) in the intensive care unit (ICU) is very challenging. Purpose: Using artificial intelligence (AI) approach to build two-stage predictive models, namely, the try-weaning stage and weaning MV stage to determine the optimal timing of weaning from MV for ICU intubated patients, and implement into practice for assisting clinical decision making. Methods: AI and machine learning (ML) technologies were used to establish the predictive models in the stages. Each stage comprised 11 prediction time points with 11 prediction models. Twenty-five features were used for the first-stage models while 20 features were used for the second-stage models. The optimal models for each time point were selected for further practical implementation in a digital dashboard style. Seven machine learning algorithms including Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machines (SVM), K Nearest Neighbor (KNN), lightGBM, XGBoost, and Multilayer Perception (MLP) were used. The electronic medical records of the intubated ICU patients of Chi Mei Medical Center (CMMC) from 2016 to 2019 were included for modeling. Models with the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were regarded as optimal models and used to develop the prediction system accordingly. Results: A total of 5,873 cases were included in machine learning modeling for Stage 1 with the AUCs of optimal models ranging from 0.843 to 0.953. Further, 4,172 cases were included for Stage 2 with the AUCs of optimal models ranging from 0.889 to 0.944. A prediction system (dashboard) with the optimal models of the two stages was developed and deployed in the ICU setting. Respiratory care members expressed high recognition of the AI dashboard assisting ventilator weaning decisions. Also, the impact analysis of with- and without-AI assistance revealed that our AI models could shorten the patients' intubation time by 21 hours, besides gaining the benefit of substantial consistency between these two decision-making strategies. Conclusion: We noticed that the two-stage AI prediction models could effectively and precisely predict the optimal timing to wean intubated patients in the ICU from ventilator use. This could reduce patient discomfort, improve medical quality, and lower medical costs. This AI-assisted prediction system is beneficial for clinicians to cope with a high demand for ventilators during the COVID-19 pandemic.

An artificial intelligence system to predict the optimal timing for mechanical ventilation weaning for intensive care unit patients: A two-stage prediction approach

Background For the intensivists, accurate assessment of the ideal timing for successful weaning from the mechanical ventilation (MV) in the intensive care unit (ICU) is very challenging. Purpose Using artificial intelligence (AI) approach to build two-stage predictive models, namely, the try-weaning stage and weaning MV stage to determine the optimal timing of weaning from MV for ICU intubated patients, and implement into practice for assisting clinical decision making. Methods AI and machine learning (ML) technologies were used to establish the predictive models in the stages. Each stage comprised 11 prediction time points with 11 prediction models. Twenty-five features were used for the first-stage models while 20 features were used for the second-stage models. The optimal models for each time point were selected for further practical implementation in a digital dashboard style. Seven machine learning algorithms including Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machines (SVM), K Nearest Neighbor (KNN), lightGBM, XGBoost, and Multilayer Perception (MLP) were used. The electronic medical records of the intubated ICU patients of Chi Mei Medical Center (CMMC) from 2016 to 2019 were included for modeling. Models with the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were regarded as optimal models and used to develop the prediction system accordingly. Results A total of 5,873 cases were included in machine learning modeling for Stage 1 with the AUCs of optimal models ranging from 0.843 to 0.953. Further, 4,172 cases were included for Stage 2 with the AUCs of optimal models ranging from 0.889 to 0.944. A prediction system (dashboard) with the optimal models of the two stages was developed and deployed in the ICU setting. Respiratory care members expressed high recognition of the AI dashboard assisting ventilator weaning decisions. Also, the impact analysis of with- and without-AI assistance revealed that our AI models could shorten the patients’ intubation time by 21 hours, besides gaining the benefit of substantial consistency between these two decision-making strategies. Conclusion We noticed that the two-stage AI prediction models could effectively and precisely predict the optimal timing to wean intubated patients in the ICU from ventilator use. This could reduce patient discomfort, improve medical quality, and lower medical costs. This AI-assisted prediction system is beneficial for clinicians to cope with a high demand for ventilators during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical outcomes, virological efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the clinical outcomes, virological efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before August 23, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the usefulness and safety of nitazoxanide in patients with COVID-19 were included. RESULTS: Five RCTs were included. The overall mortality of COVID-19 patients receiving nitazoxanide (study group) was 1.3% (9/670), which was lower than the control group (1.8%, 12/681), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (risk difference [RD], 0.00; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.01; P =0.97). However, nitazoxanide was associated with a higher virological eradication rate than placebo or standard care (RD, 0.09; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.17; P = 0.03). Compared with the placebo or standard care, nitazoxanide were associated with a similar risk of any adverse event (RD, -0.02; 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.03; P = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Although nitazoxanide can help virological eradication and is also tolerable, it does not provide additional clinical benefits. Based on these evidences, the use of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 is not recommended.

COVID-19 Associated with Cryptococcosis: A New Challenge during the Pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a great threat to global health. In addition to SARS-CoV-2 itself, clinicians should be alert to the possible occurrence of co-infection or secondary infection among patients with COVID-19. The possible co-pathogens include bacteria, viruses, and fungi, but COVID-19-associated cryptococcosis is rarely reported. This review provided updated and comprehensive information about this rare clinical entity of COVID-19-associated cryptococcosis. Through an updated literature search till 23 August 2022, we identified a total of 18 culture-confirmed case reports with detailed information. Half (n = 9) of them were elderly. Fifteen (83.3%) of them had severe COVID-19 and ever received systemic corticosteroid. Disseminated infection with cryptococcemia was the most common type of cryptococcosis, followed by pulmonary and meningitis. Except one case of C. laurentii, all other cases are by C. neoformans. Liposomal amphotericin B and fluconazole were the most commonly used antifungal agents. The overall mortality was 61.1% (11/18) and four of them did not receive antifungal agents before death. Improving the poor outcome requires a physician's high suspicion, early diagnosis, and prompt treatment.

Effect of fluvoxamine on outcomes of nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis investigated the use of fluvoxamine for the treatment of nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library databases, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies published before June 25, 2022. Only clinical studies that compared the efficacy and safety of fluvoxamine with other alternatives or placebos in the treatment of nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 were included. RESULTS: Four studies with 1814 patients, of whom 912 received fluvoxamine, were included in this study. Compared with the control group receiving placebo or no therapy, the study group receiving fluvoxamine demonstrated a lower risk of hospitalization and emergency department (ED) visits (odds ratio [OR], 0.59; 95 % CI, 0.44-0.79; I2 = 26 %). In addition, the rate of hospitalization remained significantly lower in patients who received fluvoxamine than in the control group (OR, 0.69; 95 % CI, 0.51-0.94; I2 = 36 %). Although the study group demonstrated a lower risk of requirement of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit admission, and mortality than the control group, these differences were nonsignificant. Finally, fluvoxamine use was associated with a similar risk of adverse events as that observed in the control group. CONCLUSION: Fluvoxamine can be safely used in nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 and can reduce the hospitalization rate or ED visits in these patients.

Oral Janus kinase inhibitors for treating hospitalized patients with COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the clinical efficacy and safety of oral Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before January 29, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the clinical efficacy and safety of oral JAKis in patients with COVID-19 were included. RESULTS: In the pooled analysis of the 7 RCTs, the all-cause 28-day mortality rate in the study group receiving JAKis was significantly lower than that in the control group (9.4% [183/1941] vs. 10.9% [184/1687], risk ratio [RR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.81, I2 = 0%). In addition, the risk of 14-day mortality was in the study group was lower than that in the control group (RR = 0.65, 95% CI, 0.46-0.92, I2 = 0%). Finally, the study group and the control group exhibited similar risks of any adverse events (RR = 0.96, 95% CI, 0.89-1.04, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Oral JAKis can significantly reduce the risk of death among patients with COVID-19. In addition, JAKis are tolerable for hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

The clinical efficacy and safety of mesenchymal stromal cells for patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigated the usefulness of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) to treat patients with COVID-19. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for RCTs published before November 7, 2021. Only RCTs that compared the clinical efficacy and safety of MSCs with other alternative treatments or placebos in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 were included. RESULTS: Six RCTs were included, in which the MSC and control groups consisted of 158 and 135 patients, respectively. The patients who received MSCs had a significantly lower 28-day mortality rate (7.6% vs 21.5%; OR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.52; I2 = 0%) and significantly higher clinical improvement rate (OR, 6.05; 95% CI, 2.31-15.83; I2 = 0%) than the controls. The patients who received MSCs were associated with a similar risk of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs to the control group (AEs: OR, 33; 95% CI, 0.09-1.18; I2 = 59%; serious AEs: OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.02-4.41; I2 = 53%). CONCLUSIONS: MSC treatment may help to improve the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19. In addition, MSC treatment appears to be a safe therapeutic option for patients with COVID-19.

Clinical efficacy of sofosbuvir/daclatasvir in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the clinical efficacy sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (SOF-DCV) in patients with COVID-19. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before January 6, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical efficacy of SOF-DCV (study group) with alternative treatments (control group) in patients with COVID-19 were included. RESULTS: A total of 9 RCTs were included. The all-cause mortality rate in the study group was 10.7% (96/898), which was lower than that in the control group (12.3%, 108/871). However, this difference was not statistically significant (odds ratio [OR] = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.62-1.12; I2 = 49%). The overall clinical recovery rate was significantly higher in the study group than in the control group (OR = 2.34; 95% CI, 1.47-3.72; I2 = 20%). Furthermore, the average length of hospital stay was shorter in the study group than in the control group (mean deviation = -1.84; 95% CI, -3.42 to -0.26, I2 = 68%). CONCLUSIONS: Although SOF-DCV did not confer a survival benefit in patients with COVID-19, it may increase a patient's odds of clinical recovery, and shorten the length of their hospital stay.

COVID-19 associated mucormycosis - An emerging threat.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) rapidly become a global threaten since its emergence in the end of 2019. Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 infection could also present with co-infection or secondary infection by other virus, bacteria, or fungi. Among them, mucormycosis is a rare but aggressive fungal disease and it mainly affects patients particularly with poorly controlled diabetes mellitus with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). We here did a comprehensive review of literature reporting COVID-19 associated with mucormycosis (CAM) cases, which have been reported worldwide. The prevalence is higher in India, Iran, and Egypt than other countries, particularly highest in the states of Gujarat and Maharashtra in India. Poor diabetic control and the administration of systemic corticosteroids are the common precipitating factors causing mucormycosis in the severe and critical COVID-19 patients. In addition, COVID-19 itself may affect the immune system resulting in vulnerability of the patients to mucormycosis. Appropriate treatments of CAM include strict glycemic control, extensive surgical debridement, and antifungal therapy with amphotericin B formulations.

Efficacy of melatonin in the treatment of patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

This study investigated the effect of melatonin on clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We searched PubMed, the Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, and Clinicaltrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before September 11, 2021. Only RCTs that compared the clinical efficacy of melatonin with a placebo in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 were included. The primary outcome measure was the clinical recovery rate. We included three RCTs in this meta-analysis. Melatonin 3 mg three times daily was administered in one RCT, and 3 or 6 mg daily before bedtime in the other two trials. Treatment duration was 14 days in two RCTs and 7 days in one trial. The clinical recovery rates were 94.2% (81/86) and 82.4% (70/85) in the melatonin and control groups, respectively. Overall, patients receiving melatonin had a higher clinical recovery rate than did the controls (odds ratio [OR]: 3.67; 95% CI: 1.21-11.12; I2 = 0%, p = 0.02). The risk of intensive care unit admission was numerically lower in the melatonin group than in the control group (8.3% [6/72] vs. 17.6% [12/68], OR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.16-1.25; I2 = 0%, p = 0.13), and the risk of mortality was numerically lower in the melatonin group than in the control group (1.4% [1/72] vs. 4.4% [3/68], OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.03-3.18; I2 = 0%, p = 0.33). In conclusion, melatonin may help improve the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19.

The Collateral Effect of COVID-19 on the Epidemiology of Airborne/Droplet-Transmitted Notifiable Infectious Diseases in Taiwan.

This study was conducted to compare the number of cases of airborne/droplet-transmitted notifiable infectious disease (NID) between the pandemic period (defined as from January 2020 to December 2021) and the pre-pandemic period (defined as the period from January 2018 to December 2019). The annual case numbers of airborne/droplet-transmitted NIDs from 2018 to 2021 were collected for comparison. Fourteen airborne/droplet-transmitted NIDs including measles, rubella, pertussis, influenza with severe complications, invasive pneumococcal diseases (IPD), Q fever, mumps, meningococcal meningitis, varicella, legionellosis, invasive Haemophilus influenzae type b infection, hantavirus syndrome, TB, and multidrug-resistant TB (MDRTB), were included for the analysis. Overall, the annual case number of these 14 airborne/droplet-transmitted NID was 11,930, 12,747, 9477, and 8268 in 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively, and the overall incidence was 50.3, 53.6, 39.8, 34.6 per 100,000 populations in in 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021. The case number of influenza with severe complications had the largest reduction from the pre-pandemic period to the pandemic period, with a reduction of 3076 cases, followed by TB (-2904), IPD (-490), mumps (-292), measles (-292), pertussis (-57), MDRTB (-43), rubella (-35), Q fever (-20), varicella (-12), meningococcal meningitis (-5), invasive H. influenzae type B (-4). In contrast, the case number of legionellosis increased from 492 during the pre-pandemic period to 676 during the pandemic period. In addition, hantavirus syndrome also increased from zero cases during the pre-pandemic period to three during the pandemic period. In conclusion, the occurrence of most airborne/droplet-transmitted NIDs, including both domestic and imported cases in Taiwan, was lower during the pandemic period than during the pre-pandemic period.

Changing Epidemiology of Respiratory Tract Infection during COVID-19 Pandemic.

The outbreak of COVID-19 has significantly changed the epidemiology of respiratory tract infection in several ways. The implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) including universal masking, hand hygiene, and social distancing not only resulted in a decline in reported SARS-CoV-2 cases but also contributed to the decline in the non-COVID-19 respiratory tract infection-related hospital utilization. Moreover, it also led to the decreased incidence of previous commonly encountered respiratory pathogens, such as influenza and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Although antimicrobial agents are essential for treating patients with COVID-19 co-infection, the prescribing of antibiotics was significantly higher than the estimated prevalence of bacterial co-infection, which indicated the overuse of antibiotics or unnecessary antibiotic use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, inappropriate antimicrobial exposure may drive the selection of drug-resistant microorganisms, and the disruption of infection control in COVID-19 setting measures may result in the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). In conclusion, NPIs could be effective in preventing respiratory tract infection and changing the microbiologic distribution of respiratory pathogens; however, we should continue with epidemiological surveillance to establish updated information, antimicrobial stewardship programs for appropriate use of antibiotic, and infection control prevention interventions to prevent the spread of MDROs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical efficacy and safety of Janus kinase inhibitors for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors for COVID-19 patients. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to July 12, 2021. RCTs comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors with a placebo or standard care in treating COVID-19 patients were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality rate at day 28. RESULTS: Three RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. The all-cause mortality rate at day 28 was lower among the patients receiving JAK inhibitors than among the controls (4.1% [28/647] versus 7.0% [48/684], OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.36-0.92, I2 = 0). The clinical recovery rate was higher among the patients receiving JAK inhibitors than among the controls (85.1% (579/680) versus 80.0% [547/684], OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.09-1.93, I2 = 0). Additionally, the use of JAK inhibitors was associated with a shorter time to recovery than among the controls (MD, -2.84; 95% CI, -5.56 to -0.12; I2 = 50%). The rate of invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) was lower in the patients who used JAK inhibitors than among the controls. Finally, no significant difference was observed between the patients who used JAK inhibitors and the controls in the risk of any adverse events (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.64-1.34; I2 = 33%) and serious adverse events (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.45-1.44; I2 = 46%). CONCLUSIONS: JAK inhibitors can lead to a better clinical outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients, and they are a safe agent in the treatment of COVID-19.

COVID-19 vaccines: concerns beyond protective efficacy and safety.

INTRODUCTION: Several vaccine candidates have been developed using different platforms, including nucleic acids (DNA and RNA), viral vectors (replicating and non-replicating), virus-like particles, peptide-based, recombinant proteins, live attenuated, and inactivated virus modalities. Although many of these vaccines are undergoing pre-clinical trials, several large clinical trials investigating the clinical efficacy and safety of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have produced promising findings. AREAS COVERED: In this review, we provide a status update on COVID-19 vaccines currently undergoing clinical trials and discuss issues of concern beyond vaccine efficacy and safety, including dosing regimens, the mixed vaccine strategy, prior severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection, antibody levels, cellular immunity and protection, variants of concern, COVID-19 vaccine distribution, vaccination willingness, herd immunity, immunity passports, and vaccine indications. EXPERT OPINION: Four vaccines have obtained emergency use authorization, 87 are at the clinical development stage, and 186 are in pre-clinical development. While the knowledge and development of COVID-19 vaccines is rapidly expanding, the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines must outweigh the potential risks of adverse events. To combat the COVID-19 pandemic, clinicians should consistently update COVID-19-associated information, and healthcare authorities and manufacturers should work together to provide adequate and appropriate vaccinations for the prevention of COVID-19. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: What is the context?Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused a global pandemic: the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. The development and implementation of the COVID-19 vaccine could be an important measure to control the COVID-19 pandemic.What is new?Several phase 3 clinical trials have demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Several COVID-19 vaccines have obtained emergency use authorization and been implemented in many countries. Although concerns regarding unusual blood clots and low platelet counts have been raised, the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines outweigh the potential risks of adverse events.What is the impact?Except for children, the COVID-19 vaccine is recommended for all people, including those pregnant or immunocompromised. Healthcare authorities should advise people receiving the vaccine that they must seek medical attention if they have associated thromboembolism and thrombocytopenia symptoms. More studies are necessary to determine the appropriate vaccine dose and regimen strategy, as well as the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against variants of concerns. A global effort must be made to achieve widespread vaccination and herd immunity.

Clinical efficacy of antiviral agents against coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Despite aggressive efforts on containment measures for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic around the world, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is continuously spreading. Therefore, there is an urgent need for an effective antiviral agent. To date, considerable research has been conducted to develop different approaches to COVID-19 therapy. In addition to early observational studies, which could be limited by study design, small sample size, non-randomized design, or different timings of treatment, an increasing number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the clinical efficacy and safety of antiviral agents are being carried out. This study reviews the updated findings of RCTs regarding the clinical efficacy of eight antiviral agents against COVID-19, including remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, favipiravir, sofosbuvir/daclatasvir, sofosbuvir/ledipasvir, baloxavir, umifenovir, darunavir/cobicistat, and their combinations. Treatment with remdesivir could accelerate clinical improvement; however, it lacked additional survival benefits. Moreover, 5-day regimen of remdesivir might show adequate effectiveness in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Favipiravir was only marginally effective regarding clinical improvement and virological assessment based on the results of small RCTs. The present evidence suggests that sofosbuvir/daclatasvir may improve survival and clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, the sample sizes for analysis were relatively small, and all studies were exclusively conducted in Iran. Further larger RCTs in other countries are warranted to support these findings. In contrast, the present findings of limited RCTs did not indicate the use of lopinavir/ritonavir, sofosbuvir/ledipasvir, baloxavir, umifenovir, and darunavir/cobicistat in the treatment of patients hospitalized for COVID-19.