Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 21
Filter
2.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 3(11): e743-e744, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1447255
3.
Curr Pharm Des ; 27(41): 4245-4252, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1394670

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Covid-19 pandemic may have a deleterious impact on patients with autoimmune systemic diseases (ASD) due to their deep immune-system alterations. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the prevalence of symptomatic Covid-19 and its correlations with both organ involvement and ongoing treatments in a large series of Italian ASD patients during the first wave of pandemic. METHODS: Our multicenter telephone 6-week survey included 3,029 unselected ASD patients enrolled at 36 tertiary referral centers of northern, central, and southern Italian macro-areas with different diffusion of the pandemic. Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was classified as definite Covid-19 (presence of symptoms plus positive oral/nasopharyngeal swabs) or highly suspected Covid-19 (highly suggestive symptoms, in the absence of a swab testing). RESULTS: A significantly higher prevalence of definite plus highly suspected Covid-19 compared to the Italian general population was detected in the whole ASD series (p=.000), as well as in patients from the three macro-areas (p=.000 in all). Statistically higher prevalence of Covid-19 was also found in connective tissue diseases compared to chronic arthritis subgroup (p=.000) and in ASD patients with pre-existing interstitial lung involvement (p=.000). Patients treated with either conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and/or biological DMARDs showed a significantly lower prevalence of Covid-19 (p=.000 in both). Finally, scleroderma patients undergoing low-dose aspirin showed a significantly lower rate of Covid-19 compared to those without (p=0.003). CONCLUSION: The higher prevalence of Covid-19 in ASD patients, along with the significant correlations with important clinical features and therapeutic regimens, suggests the need to develop targeted prevention/management strategies during the current pandemic wave.


Subject(s)
Autoimmune Diseases , COVID-19 , Rheumatic Diseases , Autoimmune Diseases/drug therapy , Autoimmune Diseases/epidemiology , Humans , Lung , Pandemics , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Rheumatic Diseases/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 2021 Jul 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1328934

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To identify the main computed tomography (CT) features that may help distinguishing a progression of interstitial lung disease (ILD) secondary to Systemic sclerosis (SSc) from COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: This multicentric study included 22 international readers divided in the radiologist group (RAD) and non-radiologist group (nRAD). A total of 99 patients, 52 with COVID-19 and 47 with SSc-ILD, were included in the study. RESULTS: Fibrosis inside focal ground glass opacities (GGO) in the upper lobes; fibrosis in the lower lobe GGO; reticulations in lower lobes (especially if bilateral and symmetrical or associated with signs of fibrosis) were the CT features most frequently associated with SSc-ILD. The CT features most frequently associated with COVID- 19 pneumonia were: consolidation (CONS) in the lower lobes, CONS with peripheral (both central/peripheral or patchy distributions), anterior and posterior CONS and rounded-shaped GGOs in the lower lobes. After multivariate analysis, the presence of CONS in the lower lobes (p < 0.0001) and signs of fibrosis in GGO in the lower lobes (p < 0.0001) remained independently associated with COVID-19 pneumonia or SSc-ILD, respectively. A predictive score was created which resulted positively associated with the COVID-19 diagnosis (96.1% sensitivity and 83.3% specificity). CONCLUSION: The CT differential diagnosis between COVID-19 pneumonia and SSc-ILD is possible through the combination the proposed score and the radiologic expertise. The presence of consolidation in the lower lobes may suggest a COVID-19 pneumonia while the presence of fibrosis inside GGO may indicate a SSc-ILD.

5.
Front Immunol ; 12: 675678, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1231339

ABSTRACT

Background: Restraining maladaptive inflammation is considered a rationale strategy to treat severe coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) but available studies with selective inhibitors of pro-inflammatory cytokines have not provided unequivocal evidence of survival advantage. Late administration is commonly regarded as a major cause of treatment failure but the optimal timing for anti-cytokine therapy initiation in COVID-19 patients has never been clearly established. Objectives: To identify a window of therapeutic opportunity for maximizing the efficacy of interleukin (IL)-1 and IL-6 blockade in COVID-19. Methods: Survival at the longest available follow-up was assessed in severe hyper-inflamed COVID-19 patients treated with anakinra, tocilizumab, sarilumab, or standard of care, stratified according to respiratory impairment at the time of treatment initiation. Results: 107 patients treated with biologics and 103 contemporary patients treated with standard of care were studied. After a median of 106 days of follow-up (range 3-186), treatment with biologics was associated with a significantly higher survival rate compared to standard therapy when initiated in patients with a PaO2/FiO2 ≥ 100 mmHg (p < 0.001). Anakinra reduced mortality also in patients with PaO2/FiO2 < 100 mmHg (p = 0.04). Conclusions: IL-1 and IL-6 blocking therapies are more likely to provide survival advantage in hyper-inflamed COVID-19 patients when initiated before the establishment of severe respiratory failure.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , COVID-19 , Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein/administration & dosage , Interleukin-1/antagonists & inhibitors , Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Aged , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/mortality , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Interleukin-1/immunology , Interleukin-6/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Severity of Illness Index , Survival Rate
6.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 3(4): e253-e261, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1228198

ABSTRACT

Background: Patients with severe COVID-19 develop a life-threatening hyperinflammatory response to the virus. Interleukin (IL)-1 or IL-6 inhibitors have been used to treat this patient population, but the comparative effectiveness of these different strategies remains undetermined. We aimed to compare IL-1 and IL-6 inhibition in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, respiratory insufficiency, and hyperinflammation. Methods: This cohort study included patients admitted to San Raffaele Hospital (Milan, Italy) with COVID-19, respiratory insufficiency, defined as a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and hyperinflammation, defined as serum C-reactive protein concentration of 100 mg/L or more or ferritin concentration of 900 ng/mL or more. The primary endpoint was survival, and the secondary endpoint was a composite of death or mechanical ventilation (adverse clinical outcome). Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to compare clinical outcomes of patients receiving IL-1 inhibition (anakinra) or IL-6 inhibition (tocilizumab or sarilumab) with those of patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors, after accounting for baseline differences. All patients received standard care. Interaction tests were used to assess the probability of survival according to C-reactive protein or lactate dehydrogenase concentrations. Findings: Of 392 patients included between Feb 25 and May 20, 2020, 275 did not receive interleukin inhibitors, 62 received the IL-1 inhibitor anakinra, and 55 received an IL-6 inhibitor (29 received tocilizumab and 26 received sarilumab). In the multivariable analysis, compared with patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors, patients treated with IL-1 inhibition had a significantly reduced mortality risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0·450, 95% CI 0·204-0·990, p=0·047), but those treated with IL-6 inhibition did not (0·900, 0·412-1·966; p=0·79). In the multivariable analysis, there was no difference in adverse clinical outcome risk in patients treated with IL-1 inhibition (HR 0·866, 95% CI 0·482-1·553; p=0·63) or IL-6 inhibition (0·882, 0·452-1·722; p=0·71) relative to patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors. For increasing C-reactive protein concentrations, patients treated with IL-6 inhibition had a significantly reduced risk of mortality (HR 0·990, 95% CI 0·981-0·999; p=0·031) and adverse clinical outcome (0·987, 0·979-0·995; p=0·0021) compared with patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors. For decreasing concentrations of serum lactate dehydrogenase, patients treated with an IL-1 inhibitor and patients treated with IL-6 inhibitors had a reduced risk of mortality; increasing concentrations of lactate dehydrogenase in patients receiving either interleukin inhibitor were associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR 1·009, 95% CI 1·003-1·014, p=0·0011 for IL-1 inhibitors and 1·006, 1·001-1·011, p=0·028 for IL-6 inhibitors) and adverse clinical outcome (1·006, 1·002-1·010, p=0·0031 for IL-1 inhibitors and 1·005, 1·001-1·010, p=0·016 for IL-6 inhibitors) compared with patients who did not receive interleukin inhibitors. Interpretation: IL-1 inhibition, but not IL-6 inhibition, was associated with a significant reduction of mortality in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, respiratory insufficiency, and hyperinflammation. IL-6 inhibition was effective in a subgroup of patients with markedly high C-reactive protein concentrations, whereas both IL-1 and IL-6 inhibition were effective in patients with low lactate dehydrogenase concentrations. Funding: None.

7.
J Clin Med ; 10(9)2021 May 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1224042

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Myocarditis lacks systematic characterization in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We enrolled consecutive patients with newly diagnosed myocarditis in the context of COVID-19 infection. Diagnostic and treatment strategies were driven by a dedicated multidisciplinary disease unit for myocarditis. Multimodal outcomes were assessed during prospective follow-up. RESULTS: Seven consecutive patients (57% males, age 51 ± 9 y) with acute COVID-19 infection received a de novo diagnosis of myocarditis. Endomyocardial biopsy was of choice in hemodynamically unstable patients (n = 4, mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 25 ± 9%), whereas cardiac magnetic resonance constituted the first exam in stable patients (n = 3, mean LVEF 48 ± 10%). Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis revealed an intra-myocardial SARS-CoV-2 genome in one of the six cases undergoing biopsy: in the remaining patients, myocarditis was either due to other viruses (n = 2) or virus-negative (n = 3). Hemodynamic support was needed for four unstable patients (57%), whereas a cardiac device implant was chosen in two of four cases showing ventricular arrhythmias. Medical treatment included immunosuppression (43%) and biological therapy (29%). By the 6-month median follow-up, no patient died or experienced malignant arrhythmias. However, two cases (29%) were screened for heart transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Myocarditis associated with acute COVID-19 infection is a spectrum of clinical manifestations and underlying etiologies. A multidisciplinary approach is the cornerstone for tailored management.

10.
Front Pharmacol ; 11: 598308, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1028187

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a condition caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Severe cases of COVID-19 result in acute respiratory distress syndrome and death. A detrimental, hyper-inflammatory immune response with excess release of cytokines is the main driver of disease development and of tissue damage in these patients. Thus, repurposing of biologic agents and other pharmacological inhibitors of cytokines used for the treatment of various inflammatory conditions emerged as a logical therapeutic strategy to quench inflammation and improve the clinical outcome of COVID-19 patients. Evaluated agents include the interleukin one receptor blocker anakinra, monoclonal antibodies inhibiting IL-6 tocilizumab and sarilumab, monoclonal antibodies inhibiting granulocyte-monocyte colony stimulating factor and tumor necrosis factor, and Janus kinase inhibitors. In this review, we discuss the efficacy and safety of these therapeutic options based on direct personal experience and on published evidence from observational studies and randomized clinical trials.

11.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 27(3): 451-457, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-938846

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to describe the incidence and predictive factors of secondary infections in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This was a cohort study of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital between 25th February and 6th April 2020 (NCT04318366). We considered secondary bloodstream infections (BSIs) or possible lower respiratory tract infections (pLRTIs) occurring 48 hours after hospital admission until death or discharge. We calculated multivariable Fine-Gray models to assess factors associated with risk of secondary infections. RESULTS: Among 731 patients, a secondary infection was diagnosed in 68 patients (9.3%); 58/731 patients (7.9%) had at least one BSI and 22/731 patients (3.0%) at least one pLRTI. The overall 28-day cumulative incidence was 16.4% (95%CI 12.4-21.0%). Most of the BSIs were due to Gram-positive pathogens (76/106 isolates, 71.7%), specifically coagulase-negative staphylococci (53/76, 69.7%), while among Gram-negatives (23/106, 21.7%) Acinetobacter baumanii (7/23, 30.4%) and Escherichia coli (5/23, 21.7%) predominated. pLRTIs were caused mainly by Gram-negative pathogens (14/26, 53.8%). Eleven patients were diagnosed with putative invasive aspergillosis. At multivariable analysis, factors associated with secondary infections were low baseline lymphocyte count (≤0.7 versus >0.7 per 109/L, subdistribution hazard ratios (sdHRs) 1.93, 95%CI 1.11-3.35), baseline PaO2/FiO2 (per 100 points lower: sdHRs 1.56, 95%CI 1.21-2.04), and intensive-care unit (ICU) admission in the first 48 hours (sdHR 2.51, 95%CI 1.04-6.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 had a high incidence of secondary infections. At multivariable analysis, early need for ICU, respiratory failure, and severe lymphopenia were identified as risk factors for secondary infections.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Coinfection/epidemiology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Cohort Studies , Coinfection/microbiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/microbiology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Sepsis/epidemiology , Sepsis/etiology , Sepsis/microbiology
13.
Microvasc Res ; 133: 104071, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-850352

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Increasing evidence points to endothelial dysfunction as a key pathophysiological factor in coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). No specific methods have been identified to predict, detect and quantify the microvascular alterations during COVID-19. Our aim was to assess microvasculature through nailfold videocapillaroscopy (NVC) in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We performed NVC in patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia. Elementary alterations were reported for each finger according to a semi-quantitative score. Capillary density, number of enlarged and giant capillaries, number of micro-hemorrhages and micro-thrombosis (NEMO score) were registered. RESULTS: We enrolled 82 patients (mean age 58.8 ± 13.2 years, male 68.3%) of whom 28 during the hospitalization and 54 after recovery and hospital discharge. At NVC examination we found abnormalities classifiable as non-specific pattern in 53 patients (64.6%). Common abnormalities were pericapillary edema (80.5%), enlarged capillaries (61.0%), sludge flow (53.7%), meandering capillaries and reduced capillary density (50.0%). No pictures suggestive of scleroderma pattern have been observed. Acute COVID-19 patients, compared to recovered patients, showed a higher prevalence of hemosiderin deposits as a result of micro-hemorrhages (P = .027) and micro-thrombosis (P < .016), sludge flow (P = .001), and pericapillary edema (P < .001), while recovered patients showed a higher prevalence of enlarged capillaries (P < .001), loss of capillaries (P = .002), meandering capillaries (P < .001), and empty dermal papillae (P = .006). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients present microvascular abnormalities at NVC. Currently ill and recovered subjects are characterized by a different distribution of elementary capillaroscopic alterations, resembling acute and post-acute microvascular damage. Further studies are needed to assess the clinical relevance of NVC in COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Capillaries/pathology , Microscopic Angioscopy , Nails/blood supply , Vascular Diseases/pathology , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Vascular Diseases/etiology
14.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 2(11): e662-e663, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-748133
15.
Am Heart J ; 229: 121-126, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-710488

ABSTRACT

Myocarditis Disease Unit (MDU) is a functional multidisciplinary network designed to offer multidisciplinary assistance to patients with myocarditis. More than 300 patients coming from the whole Country are currently followed up at a specialized multidisciplinary outpatient clinic. Following the pandemic outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in Italy, we present how the MDU rapidly evolved to a "tele-MDU", via a dedicated multitasking digital health platform.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Hospital Units/organization & administration , Interdisciplinary Communication , Myocarditis/therapy , Patient Care Team/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Adult , Ambulatory Care/organization & administration , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/therapy , COVID-19 , Female , Hospital Information Systems , Humans , Inpatients , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Web Browser
17.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 79(10): 1277-1285, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-634384

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and efficacy of interleukin (IL)-6 blockade with sarilumab in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation. METHODS: We conducted an open-label study of sarilumab in severe COVID-19 pneumonia (PaO2/FiO2 <300 mm Hg) with hyperinflammation (elevated inflammatory markers and serum IL-6 levels). Sarilumab 400 mg was administered intravenously in addition to standard of care and results were compared with contemporary matched patients treated with standard of care alone. Clinical improvement, mortality, safety and predictors of response were assessed at 28 days. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were treated with sarilumab and 28 contemporary patients receiving standard of care alone were used as controls. At day 28 of follow-up, 61% of patients treated with sarilumab experienced clinical improvement and 7% died. These findings were not significantly different from the comparison group (clinical improvement 64%, mortality 18%; p=NS). Baseline PaO2/FiO2 ratio >100 mm Hg and lung consolidation <17% at CT scan predicted clinical improvement in patients treated with sarilumab. Median time to clinical improvement in patients with lung consolidation <17% was shorter after sarilumab (10 days) than after standard treatment (24 days; p=0.01). The rate of infection and pulmonary thrombosis was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: At day 28, overall clinical improvement and mortality in patients with severe COVID-19 were not significantly different between sarilumab and standard of care. Sarilumab was associated with faster recovery in a subset of patients showing minor lung consolidation at baseline.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , C-Reactive Protein/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Inflammation/immunology , Interleukin-6/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Administration, Intravenous , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Bacteremia/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Coinfection/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/diagnostic imaging , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Drug Combinations , Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Italy , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Noninvasive Ventilation , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Proportional Hazards Models , Receptors, Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Time Factors , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Treatment Outcome
18.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol ; 43(8): 891-893, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-599443

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: No studies investigated the prevalence of arrhythmias among clinically-stable patients affected by COVID-19 infection. METHODS: We assessed prevalence, type, and burden of arrhythmias, by a single-day snapshot in seven non-intensive COVID Units at a third-level center. RESULTS: We enrolled 132 inhospital patients (mean age 65±14y; 66% males) newly diagnosed with COVID-19 infection. Arrhythmic episodes were detected in 12 patients (9%). In detail, 8 had atrial fibrillation, and 4 self-limiting supraventricular tachyarrhythmias. There were no cases of ventricular arrhythmias or new-onset atrioventricular blocks. In addition, we report no patients with QTc interval >450 ms. CONCLUSIONS: Our single-day snapshot survey suggests that the prevalence of arrhythmias among clinically stable COVID-19 patients is low. In particular, no life-threatening arrhythmic events occurred.


Subject(s)
Arrhythmias, Cardiac/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Pandemics , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2
19.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 2(8): e465-e473, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-599198

ABSTRACT

Background: Mortality in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation is high. We aimed to examine whether mavrilimumab, an anti-granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor-α monoclonal antibody, added to standard management, improves clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation. Methods: This single-centre prospective cohort study included patients aged 18 years or older who were admitted to San Raffaele Hospital (Milan, Italy) with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, hypoxia, and systemic hyperinflammation. Patients received a single intravenous dose (6 mg/kg) of mavrilimumab added to standard care given by the hospital at the time. The control group consisted of contemporaneous patients with similar baseline characteristics who received standard care at the same hospital. The main outcome was time to clinical improvement (defined as improvement of two or more points on the seven-point ordinal scale of clinical status). Other outcomes included proportion of patients achieving clinical improvement, survival, mechanical ventilation-free survival, and time to fever resolution. Adverse events were monitored daily. Findings: Between March 17 and April 15, 2020, 13 non-mechanically ventilated patients (median age 57 years [IQR 52-58], 12 [92%] men) received mavrilimumab and 26 patients (median age 60 [IQR 53-67], 17 [65%] men) in the control group received standard care. During the 28-day follow-up, no patients in the mavrilimumab group died, and seven (27%) patients in the control group died (p=0·086). At day 28, all patients in the mavrilimumab group and 17 (65%) patients in the control group showed clinical improvement (p=0·030), with earlier improvement in the mavrilimumab than in the control group (mean time to improvement 8 days [IQR 5 to 11] vs 19 days [11 to >28], p=0·0001). By day 28, one (8%) patient in the mavrilimumab group progressed to mechanical ventilation compared with nine (35%) patients in the control group who progressed to mechanical ventilation or died (p=0·14). By day 14, fever resolved in ten (91%) of 11 febrile patients in the mavrilimumab group, compared with 11 (61%) of 18 febrile patients in the control group (p=0·18); fever resolution was faster in mavrilimumab recipients versus controls (median time to resolution 1 day [IQR 1 to 2] vs 7 days [3 to >14], p=0·0093). Mavrilimumab was well tolerated, with no infusion reactions. Three (12%) patients in the control group developed infectious complications. Interpretation: Mavrilimumab treatment was associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with standard care in non-mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation. Treatment was well tolerated. Confirmation of efficacy requires controlled testing. Funding: IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute.

20.
Eur J Intern Med ; 76: 43-49, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-483014

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Tocilizumab (TCZ), a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting the interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor, has been proposed for the treatment of COVID-19 patients; however, limited data are available on the safety and efficacy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study on severe COVID-19 patients with hyper-inflammatory features admitted outside intensive care units (ICUs). Patients treated with intravenous TCZ in addition to standard of care were compared to patients treated with standard of care alone. Safety and efficacy were assessed over a 28-day follow-up. RESULTS: 65 patients were included. Among them, 32 were treated with TCZ. At baseline, all patients were on high-flow supplemental oxygen and most (78% of TCZ patients and 61% of standard treatment patients) were on non-invasive ventilation. During the 28-day follow-up, 69% of TCZ patients experienced a clinical improvement compared to 61% of standard treatment patients (p = 0.61). Mortality was 15% in the tocilizumab group and 33% in standard treatment group (p = 0.15). In TCZ group, at multivariate analysis, older age was a predictor of death, whereas higher baseline PaO2:FiO2 was a predictor of clinical improvement at day 28. The rate of infection and pulmonary thrombosis was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: At day 28, clinical improvement and mortality were not statistically different between tocilizumab and standard treatment patients in our cohort. Bacterial or fungal infections were recorded in 13% of tocilizumab patients and in 12% of standard treatment patients. Confirmation of efficacy and safety will require ongoing controlled trials.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Coronavirus Infections , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Receptors, Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Respiratory Insufficiency , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus/drug effects , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/etiology , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...