Effectiveness of Tocilizumab in hospitalized moderate-to-severe COVID-19 patients: a real life study.

BACKGROUND: To assess the clinical effectiveness of Tocilizumab (TCZ) in moderate-to-severe hospitalized COVID-19 patients and factors associated with clinical response. METHODS: 508 inpatients with moderate-to-severe SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled. TCZ effect in addition to standard medical therapy was evaluated in terms of death during hospital stay. Unadjusted and adjusted risk of mortality for TCZ treated patients versus TCZ untreated ones was estimated using robust Cox regression model. We considered the combination of TCZ and ICU as time-dependent exposure and created a model using duplication method to assess the TCZ effect in very severe COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: TCZ REDUCED DEATH DURING HOSPITAL STAY IN THE UNADJUSTED MODEL (HR 0.54, 95%CI 0.33- 0.88) and also in the adjusted model, although with loss of statistical significance (HR 0.72, 0.43- 1.20). Better effectiveness was observed in patients with low SpO2/FiO2 ratio (HR 0.35, 0.21-0.61 vs 1.61, 0.54-4.82, p<0.05), and, without statistical significance, in patients with high CRP (HR 0.51, 0.30-0.87 vs 0.41, 0.12-1.37, p =NS) and high IL-6 (HR 0.49, 0.29-0.82 vs 1.00, 0.28-3.55, p=NS). TCZ was effective in patients not admitted to ICU, both in the unadjusted (HR 0.33, 0.14-0.74) and in the adjusted (HR 0.39, 0.17-0.91) model but no benefit was observed in critical ICU-admitted patients both in the unadjusted (HR 0.66, 0.37-1.15) and in the adjusted model (HR 0.95, 0.54-1.68). CONCLUSIONS: our real-life study suggests clinical efficacy of TCZ in moderate-to-severe COVID-19 patients but not in end-stage disease. Thus, to enhance TCZ effectiveness, patients should be selected before grave compromise of clinical conditions.

Can SSRI/SNRI antidepressants decrease the 'cytokine storm' in the course of COVID-19 pneumonia?

BACKGROUND: Lots of research has been conducted to fight COVID-19 since the outbreak of the pandemic in 2020. The role of 'cytokine storm' in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 pneumonia is well known. Relationship between interleukins and depression is still subject matter of the research, but a correlation between interleukin-6 and depressive disorders is proven by now. The aim of this study is to verify differences among interleukin-6 blood levels of inpatients treated with SSRI and/or SNRI before and during hospitalization and of inpatients not treated with these drugs. METHODS: This is an observational study performed during the first wave of SARS Cov-2 pandemic in Italy for three months. The hospitalized patients of Internal Medicine wards and Infectious and Tropical Diseases ward of Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi of Florence for COVID-19 pneumonia have been divided into two subgroups (treated / not treated with antidepressants). Patients admitted to Intensive Care Unit previously have been excluded. Each patient has been evaluated concerning demographic, clinical and therapeutic features. The first dosage of interleukin-6 detected during hospitalization has been noticed. RESULTS: 8,5% (n=34 patients) of the entire sample (n=402) had been treated with an antidepressant of the two considered categories before admission until discharge from hospital. Significant lower levels of interleukin-6 of recovered patients of the treated subgroup have been highlighted as compared to recovered patients of not-treated subgroup (12,1 vs 25,4 p<0,001). These results have been pointed out in spite of higher mean age and more serious comorbidities of the treated subgroup. Nevertheless the incidence of severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome is significantly lower in the subgroup of patients with antidepressant treatment (20,6% vs 43,2% p<0,02) as well as endotracheal intubation employment (0,0% vs 11,7% p<0,04). The rate of deceased patients of treated-subgroup is not significant lower than the rate of not-treated subgroup (23,5% vs 26,4% p=0,13). CONCLUSIONS: During COVID-19 pneumonia, the production of interleukin-6 seems to be modulated in presence of antidepressant therapy. Further proofs and broader surveys are necessary.

COVID-19: general overview, pharmacological options and ventilatory support strategies.

The novel coronavirus called "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2" (SARS-CoV-2) caused an outbreak in December 2019, starting from the Chinese city of Wuhan, in the Hubei province, and rapidly spreading to the rest of the world. Consequently, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) can be characterized as a pandemic. During COVID-19 several immunological alterations have been observed: in plasma of severe patients, inflammatory cytokines are at a much higher concentration ("cytokine storm"). These aspects are associated with pulmonary inflammation and parenchymal infiltrates with an extensive lung tissue damage in COVID-19 patients. To date, clinical evidence and guidelines based on reliable data and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for the treatment of COVID-19 are lacking. In the absence of definitive management protocols, many treatments are currently being evaluated worldwide. Some of these options were soon abandoned due to ineffectiveness, while others showed promising results. As for ventilatory strategies, at the moment there are still no consistent data published about the different approaches and how they may influence disease progression. What will probably represent the real solution to this pandemic is the identification of a safe and effective vaccine, for which enormous efforts and investments are being put in place. This review will summarize the state-of-the-art of COVID-19 current treatment options and those potentially available in the future, as well as high flow oxygen therapy and non-invasive mechanical ventilation approaches.

Asthma in a large COVID-19 cohort: Prevalence, features, and determinants of COVID-19 disease severity.

BACKGROUND: Asthma prevalence among COVID-19 patients seems to be surprisingly low. However the clinical profile of COVID-19 asthmatic patients and potential determinants of higher susceptibility/worse outcome have been scarcely investigated. We aimed to describe the prevalence and features of asthmatic patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and to explore the association between their clinical asthma profile and COVID-19 severity. METHODS: Medical records of patients admitted to COVID-Units of six Italian cities major hospitals were reviewed. Demographic and clinical data were analyzed and compared according to the COVID-19 outcome (death/need for ventilation vs discharge at home without requiring invasive procedures). RESULTS: Within the COVID-Units population (n = 2000) asthma prevalence was 2.1%. Among the asthmatics the mean age was 61.1 years and 60% were females. Around half of patients were atopic, blood eosinophilia was normal in most of patients. An asthma exacerbation in the 6 months before the Covid-Unit admittance was reported by 18% of patients. 24% suffered from GINA step 4-5 asthma, and 5% were under biologic treatment. 31% of patients were not on regular treatment and a negligible use of oral steroid was recorded. Within the worse outcome group, a prevalence of males was detected (64 vs 29%, p = 0.026); they suffered from more severe asthma (43 vs 14%, p = 0.040) and were more frequently current or former smokers (62 vs 25%, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Our report, the first including a large COVID-19 hospitalized Italian population, confirms the low prevalence of asthma. On the other side patients with GINA 4/5 asthma, and those not adequately treated, should be considered at higher risk.

Use of biologicals in allergic and type-2 inflammatory diseases during the current COVID-19 pandemic: Position paper of Ärzteverband Deutscher Allergologen (AeDA)A, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Klinische Immunologie (DGAKI)B, Gesellschaft für Pädiatrische Allergologie und Umweltmedizin (GPA)C, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (ÖGAI)D, Luxemburgische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (LGAI)E, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Pneumologie (ÖGP)F in co-operation with the German, Austrian, and Swiss ARIA groupsG, and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)H.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases has faced major challenges. Recommendations for "social distancing" and the fear of patients becoming infected during a visit to a medical facility have led to a drastic decrease in personal doctor-patient contacts. This affects both acute care and treatment of the chronically ill. The immune response after SARS-CoV-2 infection is so far only insufficiently understood and could be altered in a favorable or unfavorable way by therapy with monoclonal antibodies. There is currently no evidence for an increased risk of a severe COVID-19 course in allergic patients. Many patients are under ongoing therapy with biologicals that inhibit type 2 immune responses via various mechanisms. There is uncertainty about possible immunological interactions and potential risks of these biologicals in the case of an infection with SARS-CoV-2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A selective literature search was carried out in PubMed, Livivo, and the internet to cover the past 10 years (May 2010 - April 2020). Additionally, the current German-language publications were analyzed. Based on these data, the present position paper provides recommendations for the biological treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: In order to maintain in-office consultation services, a safe treatment environment must be created that is adapted to the pandemic situation. To date, there is a lack of reliable study data on the care for patients with complex respiratory, atopic, and allergic diseases in times of an imminent infection risk from SARS-CoV-2. Type-2-dominant immune reactions, as they are frequently seen in allergic patients, could influence various phases of COVID-19, e.g., by slowing down the immune reactions. Theoretically, this could have an unfavorable effect in the early phase of a SARS-Cov-2 infection, but also a positive effect during a cytokine storm in the later phase of severe courses. However, since there is currently no evidence for this, all data from patients treated with a biological directed against type 2 immune reactions who develop COVID-19 should be collected in registries, and their disease courses documented in order to be able to provide experience-based instructions in the future. CONCLUSION: The use of biologicals for the treatment of bronchial asthma, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and spontaneous urticaria should be continued as usual in patients without suspected infection or proven SARS-CoV-2 infection. If available, it is recommended to prefer a formulation for self-application and to offer telemedical monitoring. Treatment should aim at the best possible control of difficult-to-control allergic and atopic diseases using adequate rescue and add-on therapy and should avoid the need for systemic glucocorticosteroids. If SARS-CoV-2 infection is proven or reasonably suspected, the therapy should be determined by weighing the benefits and risks individually for the patient in question, and the patient should be involved in the decision-making. It should be kept in mind that the potential effects of biologicals on the immune response in COVID-19 are currently not known. Telemedical offers are particularly desirable for the acute consultation needs of suitable patients.

Prompt Predicting of Early Clinical Deterioration of Moderate-to-Severe COVID-19 Patients: Usefulness of a Combined Score Using IL-6 in a Preliminary Study.

BACKGROUND: The early identification of patients at risk of clinical deterioration is of interest considering the timeline of COVID-19 after the onset of symptoms. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to evaluate the usefulness of testing serum IL-6 and other serological and clinical biomarkers, to predict a short-term negative clinical course of patients with noncritical COVID-19. METHODS: A total of 208 patients with noncritical COVID-19 pneumonia at admission were consecutively enrolled. Clinical and laboratory findings obtained on admission were analyzed by using survival analysis and stepwise logistic regression for variable selection. Three-day worsening as outcome in a logistic model to generate a prognostic score was used. RESULTS: Clinical worsening occurred in 63 patients (16 = died; 39 = transferred to intensive care unit; 8 worsening of respiratory failure). Forty-five of them worsened within 3 days after admission. The risk of clinical worsening was progressively enhanced along with increasing quartiles of IL-6 levels. Multivariate analysis showed that IL-6 (P = .005), C-reactive protein (CRP) (P = .003), and SaO2/FiO2 (P = .014) were the best predictors for clinical deterioration in the first 3 days after admission. The combined score yielded an area under the curve = 0.88 (95% confidence interval: 0.83-0.93). A nomogram predicting the probability of 3-day worsening was generated. The score also showed good performance for 7-day and 14- or 21-day worsening and in predicting death occurring during all the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Combining IL-6, CRP, and SaO2/FiO2 in a score may help clinicians to identify on admission those patients with COVID-19 who are at high risk for a further 3-day clinical deterioration.

Considerations on biologicals for patients with allergic disease in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: An EAACI statement.

The outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2-induced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic re-shaped doctor-patient interaction and challenged capacities of healthcare systems. It created many issues around the optimal and safest way to treat complex patients with severe allergic disease. A significant number of the patients are on treatment with biologicals, and clinicians face the challenge to provide optimal care during the pandemic. Uncertainty of the potential risks for these patients is related to the fact that the exact sequence of immunological events during SARS-CoV-2 is not known. Severe COVID-19 patients may experience a "cytokine storm" and associated organ damage characterized by an exaggerated release of pro-inflammatory type 1 and type 3 cytokines. These inflammatory responses are potentially counteracted by anti-inflammatory cytokines and type 2 responses. This expert-based EAACI statement aims to provide guidance on the application of biologicals targeting type 2 inflammation in patients with allergic disease. Currently, there is very little evidence for an enhanced risk of patients with allergic diseases to develop severe COVID-19. Studies focusing on severe allergic phenotypes are lacking. At present, noninfected patients on biologicals for the treatment of asthma, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, or chronic spontaneous urticaria should continue their biologicals targeting type 2 inflammation via self-application. In case of an active SARS-CoV-2 infection, biological treatment needs to be stopped until clinical recovery and SARS-CoV-2 negativity is established and treatment with biologicals should be re-initiated. Maintenance of add-on therapy and a constant assessment of disease control, apart from acute management, are demanded.

Impaired immune cell cytotoxicity in severe COVID-19 is IL-6 dependent.

BACKGROUNDCoronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is an emerging infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. Antiviral immune response is crucial to achieve pathogen clearance; however, in some patients an excessive and aberrant host immune response can lead to an acute respiratory distress syndrome. The comprehension of the mechanisms that regulate pathogen elimination, immunity, and pathology is essential to better characterize disease progression and widen the spectrum of therapeutic options.METHODSWe performed a flow cytometric characterization of immune cell subsets from 30 patients with COVID-19 and correlated these data with clinical outcomes.RESULTSPatients with COVID-19 showed decreased numbers of circulating T, B, and NK cells and exhibited a skewing of CD8+ T cells toward a terminally differentiated/senescent phenotype. In agreement, CD4+ T and CD8+ T, but also NK cells, displayed reduced antiviral cytokine production capability. Moreover, a reduced cytotoxic potential was identified in patients with COVID-19, particularly in those who required intensive care. The latter group of patients also showed increased serum IL-6 levels that inversely correlated to the frequency of granzyme A-expressing NK cells. Off-label treatment with tocilizumab restored the cytotoxic potential of NK cells.CONCLUSIONThe association between IL-6 serum levels and the impairment of cytotoxic activity suggests the possibility that targeting this cytokine may restore antiviral mechanisms.FUNDINGThis study was supported by funds from the Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine of University of Florence (the ex-60% fund and the "Excellence Departments 2018-2022 Project") derived from Ministero dell'Istruzione, dell'Università e della Ricerca (Italy).