Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and the Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection or Hospitalization With COVID-19 Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infects its target cells via angiotensin converting enzyme 2 receptor, a membrane-bound protein found on the surface of many human cells. Treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptors blockers (ARB) has been shown to increase angiotensin converting enzyme 2 expression by up to 5-fold. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: These findings coupled with observations of the high prevalence and mortality among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with underlying cardiovascular disease have led to a speculation that ACEIs/ARBs may predispose to higher risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature and performed a meta-analysis of the association between prior use of ACEIs and ARBs and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or hospitalization due to COVID-19 disease. DATA SOURCES: We searched Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, Scopus, and Medrxiv.org preprint server until June 18, 2020. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES: Ten studies (6 cohorts and 4 case control) that enrolled a total of 23,892 patients and 853,369 controls were eligible for inclusion in our meta-analysis. One study was excluded from the analysis because of high risk of bias. Prior use of ACEIs was not associated with an increased risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 or hospitalization due to COVID-19 disease, odds ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval (0.91-1.05), I2 = 15%. Similarly, prior use of ARBs was not associated with an increased risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2, odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval (0.98-1.10), I2 = 0%. CONCLUSION: Cumulative evidence suggests that prior use of ACEIs or ARBs is not associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 or hospitalization due to COVID-19 disease. Our results provide a reassurance to the public not to discontinue prescribed ACEIs/ARBs because of fear of COVID-19.

COVID-19-Associated cardiac pathology at the postmortem evaluation: a collaborative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Many postmortem studies address the cardiovascular effects of COVID-19 and provide valuable information, but are limited by their small sample size. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review is to better understand the various aspects of the cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 by pooling data from a large number of autopsy studies. DATA SOURCES: We searched the online databases Ovid EBM Reviews, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science for concepts of autopsy or histopathology combined with COVID-19, published between database inception and February 2021. We also searched for unpublished manuscripts using the medRxiv services operated by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles were considered eligible for inclusion if they reported human postmortem cardiovascular findings among individuals with a confirmed SARS coronavirus type 2 (CoV-2) infection. PARTICIPANTS: Confirmed COVID-19 patients with post-mortem cardiovascular findings. INTERVENTIONS: None. METHODS: Studies were individually assessed for risk of selection, detection, and reporting biases. The median prevalence of different autopsy findings with associated interquartile ranges (IQRs). RESULTS: This review cohort contained 50 studies including 548 hearts. The median age of the deceased was 69 years. The most prevalent acute cardiovascular findings were myocardial necrosis (median: 100.0%; IQR, 20%-100%; number of studies = 9; number of patients = 64) and myocardial oedema (median: 55.5%; IQR, 19.5%-92.5%; number of studies = 4; number of patients = 46). The median reported prevalence of extensive, focal active, and multifocal myocarditis were all 0.0%. The most prevalent chronic changes were myocyte hypertrophy (median: 69.0%; IQR, 46.8%-92.1%) and fibrosis (median: 35.0%; IQR, 35.0%-90.5%). SARS-CoV-2 was detected in the myocardium with median prevalence of 60.8% (IQR 40.4-95.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review confirmed the high prevalence of acute and chronic cardiac pathologies in COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 cardiac tropism, as well as the low prevalence of myocarditis in COVID-19.

Persistent COVID-19 symptoms at least one month after diagnosis: A national survey.

BACKGROUND: Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS) is an important healthcare burden. We examined persistent symptoms in COVID-19 patients at least four weeks after the onset of infection, participants' return to pre-COVID-19 health status and associated risk factors. METHODS: Cross-sectional study was conducted (December 2020 to January 2021). A validated online questionnaire was sent to randomly selected individuals aged more than 14 years from a total of 1397,386 people confirmed to have COVID-19 at least 4 weeks prior to the start of this survey. This sample was drawn from the Saudi ministry of health COVID-19 testing registry system. RESULTS: Out of the 9507 COVID-19 patients who responded to the survey, 5946 (62.5%) of them adequately completed it. 2895 patients (48.7%) were aged 35-44 years, 64.4% were males, and 91.5% were Middle Eastern or North African. 79.4% experienced unresolved symptoms for at least 4 weeks after the disease onset. 9.3% were hospitalized with 42.7% visiting healthcare facility after discharge and 14.3% requiring readmission. The rates of main reported persistent symptoms in descending order were fatigue 53.5%, muscle and body ache 38.2%, loss of smell 35.0%, joint pain 30.5%, and loss of taste 29.1%. There was moderate correlation between the number of symptoms at the onset and post-four weeks of COVID-19 infection. Female sex, pre-existing comorbidities, increased number of baseline symptoms, longer hospital-stay, and hospital readmission were predictors of delayed return to baseline health state (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The symptoms of PACS are prevalent after contracting COVID-19 disease. Several risk factors could predict delayed return to baseline health state.

Prevalence of post-acute COVID-19 syndrome symptoms at different follow-up periods: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Post-acute coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) syndrome is now recognized as a complex systemic disease that is associated with substantial morbidity. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of persistent symptoms and signs at least 12 weeks after acute COVID-19 at different follow-up periods. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted up to October 2021 in Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, and PubMed. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Articles in English that reported the prevalence of persistent symptoms among individuals with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and included at least 50 patients with a follow-up of at least 12 weeks after acute illness. METHODS: Random-effect meta-analysis was performed to produce a pooled prevalence for each symptom at four different follow-up time intervals. Between-study heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic and was explored via meta-regression, considering several a priori study-level variables. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for prevalence studies and comparative studies, respectively. RESULTS: After screening 3209 studies, a total of 63 studies were eligible, with a total COVID-19 population of 257 348. The most commonly reported symptoms were fatigue, dyspnea, sleep disorder, and difficulty concentrating (32%, 25%, 24%, and 22%, respectively, at 3- to <6-month follow-up); effort intolerance, fatigue, sleep disorder, and dyspnea (45%, 36%, 29%, and 25%, respectively, at 6- to <9-month follow-up); fatigue (37%) and dyspnea (21%) at 9 to <12 months; and fatigue, dyspnea, sleep disorder, and myalgia (41%, 31%, 30%, and 22%, respectively, at >12-month follow-up). There was substantial between-study heterogeneity for all reported symptom prevalences. Meta-regressions identified statistically significant effect modifiers: world region, male sex, diabetes mellitus, disease severity, and overall study quality score. Five of six studies including a comparator group consisting of COVID-19-negative cases observed significant adjusted associations between COVID-19 and several long-term symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review found that a large proportion of patients experience post-acute COVID-19 syndrome 3 to 12 months after recovery from the acute phase of COVID-19. However, available studies of post-acute COVID-19 syndrome are highly heterogeneous. Future studies need to have appropriate comparator groups, standardized symptom definitions and measurements, and longer follow-up.

Overlooked Shortcomings of Observational Studies of Interventions in Coronavirus Disease 2019: An Illustrated Review for the Clinician.

The rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection across the globe triggered an unprecedented increase in research activities that resulted in an astronomical publication output of observational studies. However, most studies failed to apply fully the necessary methodological techniques that systematically deal with different biases and confounding, which not only limits their scientific merit but may result in harm through misleading information. In this article, we address a few important biases that can seriously threaten the validity of observational studies of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We focus on treatment selection bias due to patients' preference on goals of care, medical futility and disability bias, survivor bias, competing risks, and the misuse of propensity score analysis. We attempt to raise awareness and to help readers assess shortcomings of observational studies of interventions in COVID-19.

Anti-Diabetic Drugs GLP-1 Agonists and DPP-4 Inhibitors may Represent Potential Therapeutic Approaches for COVID-19.

The fast spread of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) calls for immediate action to counter the associated significant loss of human life and deep economic impact. Certain patient populations like those with obesity and diabetes are at higher risk for acquiring severe COVID-19 disease and have a higher risk of COVID-19 associated mortality. In the absence of an effective and safe vaccine, the only immediate promising approach is to repurpose an existing approved drug. Several drugs have been proposed and tested as adjunctive therapy for COVID-19. Among these drugs are the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) 2 agonists and the dipeptidylpeptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors. Beyond their glucose-lowering effects, these drugs have several pleiotropic protective properties, which include cardioprotective effects, anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory activities, antifibrotic effects, antithrombotic effects, and vascular endothelial protective properties. This narrative review discusses these protective properties and addresses their scientific plausibility for their potential use as adjunctive therapy for COVID-19 disease.

Unraveling the Mystery Surrounding Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19.

More than one year since its emergence, corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still looming large with a paucity of treatment options. To add to this burden, a sizeable subset of patients who have recovered from acute COVID-19 infection have reported lingering symptoms, leading to significant disability and impairment of their daily life activities. These patients are considered to suffer from what has been termed as "chronic" or "long" COVID-19 or a form of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19, and patients experiencing this syndrome have been termed COVID-19 long-haulers. Despite recovery from infection, the persistence of atypical chronic symptoms, including extreme fatigue, shortness of breath, joint pains, brain fogs, anxiety and depression, that could last for months implies an underlying disease pathology that persist beyond the acute presentation of the disease. As opposed to the direct effects of the virus itself, the immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is believed to be largely responsible for the appearance of these lasting symptoms, possibly through facilitating an ongoing inflammatory process. In this review, we hypothesize potential immunological mechanisms underlying these persistent and prolonged effects, and describe the multi-organ long-term manifestations of COVID-19.

Prior Statin Use and Risk of Mortality and Severe Disease From Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Statins up-regulate angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, the receptor of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), while also exhibiting pleiotropic antiviral, antithrombotic, and anti-inflammatory properties. Uncertainties exist about their effect on the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We sought to systematically review the literature and perform a meta-analysis to examine the association between prior statin use and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We searched Ovid Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and the preprint server medRxiv from inception to December 2020. We assessed the quality of eligible studies with the Newcastle-Ottawa quality scale. We pooled adjusted relative risk (aRRs) of the association between prior statin use and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model and assessed heterogeneity using the I 2 index. RESULTS: Overall, 19 (16 cohorts and 3 case-control) studies were eligible, with a total of 395 513 patients. Sixteen of 19 studies had low or moderate risk of bias. Among 109 080 patients enrolled in 13 separate studies, prior statin use was associated with a lower risk of mortality (pooled aRR, 0.65 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .56-.77], I 2 = 84.1%) and a reduced risk of severe COVID-19 was also observed in 48 110 patients enrolled in 9 studies (pooled aRR, 0.73 [95% CI, .57-.94], I 2 = 82.8%), with no evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Cumulative evidence suggests that prior statin use is associated with lower risks of mortality or severe disease in patients with COVID-19. These data support the continued use of statins medications in patients with an indication for lipid-lowering therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients: a living systematic review and meta-analysis, first update.

OBJECTIVES: Cytokine release syndrome with elevated interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels is associated with multiorgan damage and death in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our objective was to update the data in a living systematic review of the literature concerning the efficacy and toxicity of the IL-6 receptor antagonist tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Data sources were Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, Scopus up, preprint servers and Google from 8th October 2020 till 24th February 2021. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies at low or moderate risk of bias. The participants were hospitalized COVID-19 patients, and intervention was tocilizumab versus placebo or standard of care. We pooled crude risk ratios (RRs) of RCTs with a random effects model and evaluated inconsistency between studies with I2. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Of 1600 citations, eight RCTs and 28 cohorts were eligible. The eight RCTs had low risk of bias, and with 6311 patients they examined the effect of tocilizumab on short-term mortality; pooled RR was 0.91 (95%CI 0.78-1.07, I2 25%). Only the REMAP-CAP and RECOVERY trials, with the majority of their patients on concomitant corticosteroids, showed lower 30-day mortality with tocilizumab use: RR 0.74 (95%CI 0.59-0.93) and 0.89 (95%CI 0.81-0.97), respectively. Seven RCTs, with 5391 patients, examined the effect of tocilizumab on risk of mechanical ventilation; pooled RR was 0.84 (95%CI 0.76-0.93), I2 0%, with a corresponding number needed to treat of 20 (95%CI 14.3-33.3). Eight RCTs, with 5340 patients, examined the effect of tocilizumab on a composite of poor outcome; pooled RR was 0.82 (95%CI 0.76-0.90, I2 3%). Data from the RCTs showed a lower risk of infections and no higher risk of serious adverse events with tocilizumab: pooled RR 0.67 (95%CI 0.45-0.99, eight RCTs) and 0.85 (95%CI 0.63-1.16, seven RCTs), respectively. Among 28 cohorts with 15 484 patients, the pooled adjusted RR for mortality was 0.53 (95%CI 0.43-0.67, I2 76%). CONCLUSIONS: Cumulative high-certainty evidence shows that tocilizumab reduces the risk of mechanical ventilation in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that tocilizumab reduces the risk of poor outcome and the risk of secondary infections in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This review will continuously evaluate the role of tocilizumab in COVID-19 treatment.

Mortality, viral clearance, and other clinical outcomes of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Many meta-analyses have been published about the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Most of them included observational studies, and few have assessed HCQ as a prophylaxis or evaluated its safety profile. We searched multiple databases and preprint servers for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed HCQ for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19. We summarized the effect of HCQ on mortality, viral clearance, and other clinical outcomes. Out of 768 papers screened, 21 RCTs with a total of 14,138 patients were included. A total of 9 inpatient and 3 outpatient RCTs assessed mortality in 8596 patients with a pooled risk difference of 0.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00-0.03, I2  = 1%, p = 0.07). Six studies assessed viral clearance at 7 days with a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.11 (95% CI 0.86-1.42, I2  = 61%, p = 0.44) and 5 studies at 14 days with a pooled RR of 0.96 (95% CI 0.89-1.04, I2  = 0%, p = 0.34). Several trials showed no significant effect of HCQ on other clinical outcomes and. Five prevention RCTs with 5012 patients found no effect of HCQ on the risk of acquiring COVID-19. Thirteen trials showed that HCQ was associated with increased risk of adverse events. We observed, with high level of certainty of evidence, that HCQ is not effective in reducing mortality in patients with COVID-19. Lower certainty evidence also suggests that HCQ neither improves viral clearance and other clinical outcomes, nor prevents COVID-19 infection in patients with high-risk exposure. HCQ is associated with an increased rate of adverse events.

Statins as an adjunctive therapy for COVID-19: the biological and clinical plausibility.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected millions of individuals and has claimed hundreds of thousands of human lives worldwide. Patients with underlying cardiovascular conditions are at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 patients have high incidence of cardiovascular complications such as acute cardiac injury, arrhythmias, heart failure, and thromboembolism. The disease has no approved proven effective therapy and hence repurposing of existing approved drugs has been considered as the fastest treatment approach. Statins have been shown to exhibit lipid lowering dependent and independent cardiovascular protective effects as well as favorable effects in various other pathophysiological states. These beneficial properties of statins are a result of their multiple pleotropic effects that include, anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antithrombotic and antimicrobial properties. In this review, we provide a comprehensive description of the mechanisms of the pleotropic effects of statins, the relevant pre-clinical and clinical data pertinent to their role in infections and acute lung injury, the possible cardiovascular benefits of statins in COVID-19, and the implications of the therapeutic potential of statins in COVID-19 disease. We conclude with the rationale for conducting randomized controlled trials of statins in COVID-19 disease.

Efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients: a living systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Cytokine release syndrome with elevated interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels is associated with multiorgan damage and death in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our objective was to perform a living systematic review of the literature concerning the efficacy and toxicity of the IL-6 receptor antagonist tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Data sources were Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, Scopus up, preprint servers and Google up to October 8, 2020. Study eligibility criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies at low or moderate risk of bias. Participants were hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Interventions included tocilizumab versus placebo or standard of care. We pooled crude risk ratios (RRs) of RCTs and adjusted RRs from cohorts, separately. We evaluated inconsistency between studies with I2. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Of 1156 citations, 24 studies were eligible (five RCTs and 19 cohorts). Five RCTs at low risk of bias, with 1325 patients, examined the effect of tocilizumab on short-term mortality; pooled RR was 1.09 (95%CI 0.80-1.49, I2 = 0%). Four RCTs with 771 patients examined the effect of tocilizumab on risk of mechanical ventilation; pooled RR was 0.71 (95%CI 0.52-0.96, I2 = 0%), with a corresponding number needed to treat of 17 (95%CI 9-100). Among 18 cohorts at moderate risk of bias with 9850 patients, the pooled adjusted RR for mortality was 0.58 (95%CI 0.51-0.66, I2 = 2.5%). This association was observed over all degrees of COVID-19 severity. Data from the RCTs did not show a higher risk of infections or adverse events with tocilizumab: pooled RR 0.63 (95%CI 0.38-1.06, five RCTs) and 0.83 (95%CI 0.55-1.24, five RCTs), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cumulative moderate-certainty evidence shows that tocilizumab reduces the risk of mechanical ventilation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. While RCTs showed that tocilizumab did not reduce short-term mortality, low-certainty evidence from cohort studies suggests an association between tocilizumab and lower mortality. We did not observe a higher risk of infections or adverse events with tocilizumab use. This review will continuously evaluate the role of tocilizumab in COVID-19 treatment.

Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Mortality Among COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are known to increase the expression of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 receptor, which has been shown to be the receptor for the acute severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: Based on these observations, speculations raised the concerns that ACEIs/ARBs users would be more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and would be at higher risk for severe COVID-19 disease and death. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature and performed a meta-analysis of the association between prior use of ACEIs and ARBs and mortality due to COVID-19 disease. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search of several databases from November 2019 to June 18, 2020 was conducted. The databases included Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and Scopus. Medrxiv.org was also searched for unpublished data. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES: Nine studies with a total of 18,833 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 met our eligibility criteria. Prior use of ACEIs and/or ARBs was associated with reduced mortality among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, with a pooled adjusted relative risk (aRR) from 6 studies of 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.42-0.94) (I = 65%). Three studies reported separately on ACEIs or ARBs and their association with survival among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, with a pooled adjusted relative risk of 0.78, 95% CI (0.58-1.04) (I = 0%) and 0.97, 95% CI (0.73-1.30) (I = 0%) respectively. The results of sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main analysis. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis suggests that use of ACEIs/ARBs is associated with a decreased risk of death among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. This finding provides a reassurance to the public not to stop prescribed ACEIs/ARBs because of fear of severe COVID-19.

Cardiac Toxicity of Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-regression Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature and to estimate the risk of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) cardiac toxicity in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We searched multiple data sources including PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid EBM Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science and medrxiv.org from November 2019 through May 27, 2020. We included studies that enrolled patients with COVID-19 treated with CQ or HCQ, with or without azithromycin, and reported on cardiac toxic effects. We performed a meta-analysis using the arcsine transformation of the different incidences. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies with a total of 5652 patients were included. The pooled incidence of torsades de pointes arrhythmia, ventricular tachycardia, or cardiac arrest was 3 per 1000 (95% CI, 0-21; I 2 =96%) in 18 studies with 3725 patients. Among 13 studies of 4334 patients, the pooled incidence of discontinuation of CQ or HCQ due to prolonged QTc or arrhythmias was 5% (95% CI, 1-11; I 2 =98%). The pooled incidence of change in QTc from baseline of 60 milliseconds or more or QTc of 500 milliseconds or more was 9% (95% CI, 3-17; I 2 =97%). Mean or median age, coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes, concomitant QT-prolonging medications, intensive care unit admission, and severity of illness in the study populations explained between-studies heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients with COVID-19 with CQ or HCQ is associated with an important risk of drug-induced QT prolongation and relatively higher incidence of torsades de pointes, ventricular tachycardia, or cardiac arrest. Therefore, these agents should not be used routinely in the management of COVID-19 disease. Patients with COVID-19 who are treated with antimalarials for other indications should be adequately monitored.

Efficacy of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical studies of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in COVID-19 disease reported conflicting results. We sought to systematically evaluate the effect of CQ and HCQ with or without azithromycin on outcomes of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We searched multiple databases, preprints and grey literature up to 17 July 2020. We pooled only adjusted-effect estimates of mortality using a random-effect model. We summarized the effect of CQ or HCQ on viral clearance, ICU admission/mechanical ventilation and hospitalization. RESULTS: Seven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 14 cohort studies were included (20 979 patients). Thirteen studies (1 RCT and 12 cohort studies) with 15 938 hospitalized patients examined the effect of HCQ on short-term mortality. The pooled adjusted OR was 1.05 (95% CI 0.96-1.15, I2 = 0%). Six cohort studies examined the effect of the HCQ+azithromycin combination with a pooled adjusted OR of 1.32 (95% CI 1.00-1.75, I2 = 68.1%). Two cohort studies and four RCTs found no effect of HCQ on viral clearance. One small RCT demonstrated improved viral clearance with CQ and HCQ. Three cohort studies found that HCQ had no significant effect on mechanical ventilation/ICU admission. Two RCTs found no effect for HCQ on hospitalization risk in outpatients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate certainty evidence suggests that HCQ, with or without azithromycin, lacks efficacy in reducing short-term mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 or risk of hospitalization in outpatients with COVID-19.

Association of corticosteroids use and outcomes in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To systematically review the literature about the association between systemic corticosteroid therapy (CST) and outcomes of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, EBM Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, and preprints up to July 20, 2020. We included observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCT) that assessed COVID-19 patients treated with CST. We pooled adjusted effect estimates of mortality and other outcomes using a random effect model, among studies at low or moderate risk for bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Out of 1067 citations screened for eligibility, one RCT and 19 cohort studies were included (16,977 hospitalized patients). Ten studies (1 RCT and 9 cohorts) with 10,278 patients examined the effect of CST on short term mortality. The pooled adjusted RR was 0.92 (95% CI 0.69-1.22, I2 = 81.94%). This effect was observed across all stages of disease severity. Four cohort studies examined the effect of CST on composite outcome of death, ICU admission and mechanical ventilation need. The pooled adjusted RR was 0.41(0.23-0.73, I2 = 78.69%). Six cohort studies examined the effect of CST on delayed viral clearance. The pooled adjusted RR was 1.47(95% CI 1.11-1.93, I2 = 43.38%). CONCLUSION: In this systematic review, as of July 2020, heterogeneous and low certainty cumulative evidence based on observational studies and one RCT suggests that CST was not associated with reduction in short-term mortality but possibly with a delay in viral clearance in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 of different severities. However, the discordant results between the single RCT and observational studies as well as the heterogeneity observed across observational studies, call for caution in using observational data and suggests the need for more RCTs to identify the clinical and biochemical characteristics of patients' population that could benefit from CST.

It is time to drop hydroxychloroquine from our COVID-19 armamentarium.

Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) were among the first drugs repurposed for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. A few in vitro studies confirmed that both drugs exhibited dose dependent anti-SARS-CoV-2 activities. These observations and the encouraging results from early poorly conducted observational studies created a major hype about the therapeutic potential of these drugs in the treatment of COVID-19 disease. This was further catalyzed by media and political influences leading to a widespread use of these agents. Subsequent randomized trials revealed lack of efficacy of these agents in improving the outcomes of COVID-19 or in preventing infection in post-exposure prophylaxis studies. Nevertheless, many ongoing trials continue to actively recruit tens of thousands of patients to receive HCQ worldwide. In this perspective, we address the possible mechanisms behind the lack of efficacy and the increased risk of cardiac toxicity of HCQ in COVID-19 disease. For the lack of efficacy, we discuss the fundamental differences of treatment initiation between in vitro and in vivo studies, the pitfalls of the pharmacological calculations of effective blood drug concentrations and related dosing regimens, and the possible negative effect of HCQ on the antiviral type-I interferon response. Although it has been repeatedly claimed that HCQ has a longstanding safety track record for many decades in use, we present counterarguments for this contention due to disease-drug and drug-drug interactions. We discuss the molecular mechanisms and the cumulative epidemiological evidence of HCQ cardiac toxicity.

Effect of common medications on the expression of SARS-CoV-2 entry receptors in liver tissue.

Besides lung drastic involvement, SARS-CoV-2 severely affected other systems including liver. Emerging epidemiological studies brought the attentions towards liver injury and impairment as a potential outcome of COVID19. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and Transmembrane serine protease (TMPRSS2) are the main cell entry receptors of SARS-CoV-2. We have tested the ability of medications to regulate expression of SARS-CoV-2 receptors. Understanding that may reflect how such medications may affect the level of infectivity and permissibility of the liver following COVID-19. Using transcriptomic datasets, Toxicogenomic Project-Genomics Assisted Toxicity Evaluation System (Open TG-GATEs) and GSE30351, we have tested the ability of ninety common medications to regulate COVID-19 receptors expression in human primary hepatocytes. Most medications displayed a dose-dependent change in expression of receptors which could hint at a potentially more pronounced change with chronic use. The expression level of TMPRSS2 was increased noticeably with a number of medications such as metformin. Within the analgesics, acetaminophen revealed a dose-dependent reduction in expression of ACE2, while non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs had mixed effect on receptors expression. To confirm the observed effects on primary human hepatocytes, rat hepatocyte treatments data was obtained from DrugMatrix toxicogenomic database (GSE57805), which showed a similar ACE2 and TMPRSS2 expression pattern. Treatment of common co-morbidities often require chronic use of multiple medications, which may result in an additive increase in the expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2. More research is needed to determine the effect of different medications on COVID-19 receptors.