Pre-morbid use of proton pump inhibitors has no effect on the risk of death or hospitalization in COVID-19 patients: a matched cohort study (preprint)

Background. Several studies assessed the effect of pre-morbid exposure to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on disease course in adult COVID-19 patients with somewhat inconsistent results. Methods. This population-based matched cohort study embraced first COVID-19 episodes in adults diagnosed up to August 15 2021 in Croatia. Considering over-the-counter (OTC) availability of PPIs, patients were classified based on exposure to PPIs and burden of PPI-requiring conditions as "non-users" (no issued prescriptions, no recorded treatment-requiring conditions between January 1 2019 and COVID-19 diagnosis), "possible users" (no issued prescriptions, recorded treatment-requiring conditions; OTC use possible) and "users" (different intensity of issued prescriptions over 12 months prior to diagnosis, at least one within 3 months). Subsets were mutually exactly matched in respect to a range of pre-COVID-19 characteristics. The contrast between "users" and "possible users" was considered the most informative for the effect of PPIs that is separate of the effect of PPI-requiring conditions. Results. Among 433609 COVID-19 patients, 332389 were PPI "non-users", 18170 were "possible users", and 55098 were "users". Users and possible users were matched 41195 to 17334 and 33272 to 16434 in the primary and sensitivity analyses. There was no relevant difference between "users" and "possible users" regarding COVID-19-related mortality [RR=0.93 (95%CI 0.85-1.02; RD= -0.34% (-0.73, 0.03) in primary and RR=0.88 (0.78-0.98); RD=-0.45 (-0.80, -0.11) in sensitivity analysis] or COVID-19-related hospitalizations [RR=1.04 (0.97-1.13); RD=0.29% (-0.16, 0.73) in primary and RR=1.05 (0.97-1.15); RD=0.32% (-0.12, 0.75) in sensitivity analysis]. Conclusions. Pre-morbid exposure to PPIs does not affect the risk of death or hospitalization in adult COVID-19 patients.

Publishing of COVID-19 Preprints in Peer-reviewed Journals, Preprinting Trends, Public Discussion and Quality Issues (preprint)

IntroductionCOVID-19-related (vs. non-related) articles appear to be more expeditiously processed and published in peer-reviewed journals. We aimed to evaluate: (i) whether COVID-19-related preprints were favoured for publication, (ii) preprinting trends and public discussion of the preprints and (iii) relationship between the publication topic (COVID-19-related or not) and quality issues. MethodsManuscripts deposited at bioRxiv and medRxiv between January 1 and October 21 were assessed for the probability of publishing in peer-reviewed journals, and those published were evaluated for submission-to-acceptance time. The extent of public discussion was assessed based on Altmetric and Disqus data. The Retraction Watch database and PubMed were used to explore the retraction of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 articles and preprints. ResultsWith adjustment for the preprinting server and number of deposited versions, COVID-19-related preprints were more likely to be published within 120 days since the deposition of the first version (OR=1.99, 95%CI 1.76-2.25) as well as over the entire observed period (OR=1.49, 95%CI 1.36-1.62). Submission-to-acceptance was by 41.69 days (95%CI 46.56-36.80) shorter for COVID-19 articles. Public discussion of preprints was modest and COVID-19 articles were overrepresented in the pool of retracted articles in 2020. ConclusionCurrent data suggest a preference for publication of COVID-19-related preprints over the observed period.

World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Database: Who Needs It? (preprint)

Introduction: A large number of COVID-19 publications has created a need to collect all research-related material in practical and reliable centralized databases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the functionality and quality of the compiled World Health Organisation COVID-19 database and compare it to Pubmed and Scopus. Methods: Article metadata for COVID-19 articles and articles on 8 specific topics related to COVID-19 was exported from the WHO global research database, Scopus and Pubmed. The analysis was conducted in R to investigate the number and overlapping of the articles between the databases and the missingness of values in the metadata. Results: The WHO database contains the largest number of COVID-19 related articles overall but retrieved the same number of articles on 8 specific topics as Scopus and Pubmed. Despite having the smallest number of exclusive articles overall, the highest number of exclusive articles on specific COVID-19 related topics was retrieved from the Scopus database. Further investigation revealed that PubMed and Scopus have more comprehensive structure than the WHO database, and less missing values in the categories searched by the information retrieval systems. Discussion: This study suggests that the WHO COVID-19 database, even though it is compiled from multiple databases, has a very simple and limited structure, and significant problems with data quality. As a consequence, relying on this database as a source of articles for systematic reviews or bibliometric analyses is undesirable.

Preliminary Analysis of COVID-19 Academic Information Patterns: A Call for Open Science in the Times of Closed Borders (preprint)

Introduction: The Pandemic of COVID-19, an infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 motivated the scientific community to work together in order to gather, organize, process and distribute data on the novel biomedical hazard. Here, we analyzed how the scientific community responded to this challenge by quantifying distribution and availability patterns of the academic information related to COVID-19. The aim of our study was to assess the quality of the information flow and scientific collaboration, two factors we believe to be critical for finding new solutions for the ongoing pandemic. Materials and methods: The RISmed R package, and a custom Python script were used to fetch metadata on articles indexed in PubMed and published on Rxiv preprint server. Scopus was manually searched and the metadata was exported in BibTex file. Publication rate and publication status, affiliation and author count per article, and submission-to-publication time were analysed in R. Biblioshiny application was used to create a world collaboration map. Results: Our preliminary data suggest that COVID-19 pandemic resulted in generation of a large amount of scientific data, and demonstrates potential problems regarding the information velocity, availability, and scientific collaboration in the early stages of the pandemic. More specifically, our results indicate precarious overload of the standard publication systems, significant problems with data availability and apparent deficient collaboration. Conclusion: In conclusion, we believe the scientific community could have used the data more efficiently in order to create proper foundations for finding new solutions for the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, we believe we can learn from this on the go and adopt open science principles and a more mindful approach to COVID-19-related data to accelerate the discovery of more efficient solutions. We take this opportunity to invite our colleagues to contribute to this global scientific collaboration by publishing their findings with maximal transparency.

Widely Available Lysosome Targeting Agents Should Be Considered as a Potential Therapy for COVID-19 (preprint)

While the COVID-19 pandemic advances, the scientific community struggles in the search for treatments. Several improvements have been made, including the discovery of clinical efficacy of chloroquine (CQ) in COVID-19 patients, but the effective treatment protocols are still missing. In order to find novel treatment options many scientists utilize the in silico approach to identify compounds that could interfere with the key molecules involved in entrance, replication, or dissemination of the SARS-CoV-2. However, most of the identified molecules are currently not available as pharmacological agents, and assessing their safety and efficacy could take many months. Here, we took a different approach based on the proposed pharmacodynamic model of CQ in COVID-19. The main mechanism of action responsible for the favourable outcome of COVID-19 patients treated with CQ seems to be related to pH modulation-mediated effect on the endolysosomal trafficking, a characteristic of chemical compounds often called lysosomotropic agents because of the physico-chemical properties that enable them to passively diffuse through the endosomal membrane and undergo protonation-based trapping in the lumen of the acidic vesicles. In this review, we discuss lysosomotropic and lysosome targeting drugs that are already in clinical use and are characterized by good safety profiles, low cost, and wide availability. We emphasize that some of these drugs, in particular azithromycin and other macrolide antibiotics, indomethacin and some other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, proton pump inhibitors, and fluoxetine could provide additional therapeutic benefits in addition to the potential antiviral effect that still has to be confirmed by well-controlled clinical trials. As some of these drugs, mostly antibiotics, were already empirically used in the treatment of COVID-19, we encourage our colleagues all over the world to publish patient data so potential efficacy of these agents can be evaluated in the clinical context and rapidly implemented in the therapeutic protocols if the beneficial effect on clinical outcome is observed.