Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(9): 1311-1312, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1527000
3.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(8): 1151-1158, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1481184

ABSTRACT

The development of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines began in March 2020 in response to a request from the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Within 4 days of the request, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel was established and the first meeting took place (virtually-as did subsequent meetings). The Panel comprises 57 individuals representing 6 governmental agencies, 11 professional societies, and 33 medical centers, plus 2 community members, who have worked together to create and frequently update the guidelines on the basis of evidence from the most recent clinical studies available. The initial version of the guidelines was completed within 2 weeks and posted online on 21 April 2020. Initially, sparse evidence was available to guide COVID-19 treatment recommendations. However, treatment data rapidly accrued based on results from clinical studies that used various study designs and evaluated different therapeutic agents and approaches. Data have continued to evolve at a rapid pace, leading to 24 revisions and updates of the guidelines in the first year. This process has provided important lessons for responding to an unprecedented public health emergency: Providers and stakeholders are eager to access credible, current treatment guidelines; governmental agencies, professional societies, and health care leaders can work together effectively and expeditiously; panelists from various disciplines, including biostatistics, are important for quickly developing well-informed recommendations; well-powered randomized clinical trials continue to provide the most compelling evidence to guide treatment recommendations; treatment recommendations need to be developed in a confidential setting free from external pressures; development of a user-friendly, web-based format for communicating with health care providers requires substantial administrative support; and frequent updates are necessary as clinical evidence rapidly emerges.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Pandemics , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Advisory Committees , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Data Interpretation, Statistical , Drug Approval , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Humans , Interprofessional Relations , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2 , Stakeholder Participation , United States
4.
J Biomol Struct Dyn ; : 1-14, 2021 Mar 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1139803

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 is the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 which has led to 2,643,000 deaths worldwide, a number which is rapidly increasing. Urgent studies to identify new antiviral drugs, repurpose existing drugs, or identify drugs that can target the overactive immune response are ongoing. Antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) have been tested in past human coronavirus infections, and also against SARS-CoV-2, but a trial of lopinavir and ritonavir failed to show any clinical benefit in COVID-19. However, there is limited data as to the course of COVID-19 in people living with HIV, with some studies showing a decreased mortality for those taking certain ARV regimens. We hypothesized that ARVs other than lopinavir and ritonavir might be responsible for some protection against the progression of COVID-19. Here, we used chemoinformatic analyses to predict which ARVs would bind and potentially inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 main protease (Mpro) or RNA-dependent-RNA-polymerase (RdRp) enzymes in silico. The drugs predicted to bind the SARS-CoV-2 Mpro included the protease inhibitors atazanavir and indinavir. The ARVs predicted to bind the catalytic site of the RdRp included Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors, abacavir, emtricitabine, zidovudine, and tenofovir. Existing or new combinations of antiretroviral drugs could potentially prevent or ameliorate the course of COVID-19 if shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and in clinical trials. Further studies are needed to establish the activity of ARVs for treatment or prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection .Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma.

5.
Rheumatol Adv Pract ; 5(1): rkab014, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1123362

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare baseline characteristics, clinical presentations and outcomes of patients with rheumatic conditions requiring hospitalization for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who received chronic HCQ with those who did not receive chronic HCQ. METHODS: We identified all patients with a rheumatologic disease who were admitted with COVID-19 to two hospitals in New York City between 3 March 3 and 30 April 2020. Patients who received chronic HCQ prior to admission were matched 1:2 (±10 years of age) with patients who did not receive chronic HCQ. We compared demographics, comorbidities, HCQ dosages, concurrent medications, presentations and outcomes between the groups. RESULTS: There were 14 patients receiving HCQ and 28 matched control subjects. The median age of cases was 63 years [interquartile range (IQR) 43-73) and 60 years (IQR 41-75) for controls. Control subjects had a higher prevalence of pulmonary diseases (42.8%), diabetes (35.7%) and obesity (35.7%) than their case counterparts (28.6%, 14.3% and 7.1%, respectively). A higher proportion of cases than control subjects (50% vs 25%) reported the use of prednisone for their rheumatic conditions prior to admission. Despite these differences in baseline characteristics, univariate logistic regression revealed no statistically significant differences in the need for mechanical ventilation [OR 1.5 (95% CI 0.34, 6.38)] or in-hospital mortality [OR 0.77 (95% CI 0.13, 4.56)]. CONCLUSION: HCQ therapy in individuals with rheumatic conditions was not associated with less severe presentations of COVID-19 among hospitalized patients compared with individuals with rheumatic conditions not receiving HCQ.

8.
Transfusion ; 61(3): 692-698, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-936858

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Blood suppliers and transfusion services have worked diligently to maintain an adequate blood supply during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our experience has shown that some COVID-19 inpatients require transfusion support; understanding this need is critical to blood product inventory management. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Hospital-wide and COVID-19 specific inpatient blood product utilization data were collected retrospectively for our network's two tertiary academic medical centers over a 9-week period (March 1, 2020-May 2, 2020), when most inpatients had COVID-19. Utilization data were merged with a COVID-19 patient database to investigate clinical demographic characteristics of transfused COVID-19 inpatients relative to non-transfused ones. RESULTS: Overall, 11 041 COVID-19 patients were admitted and 364 received blood product transfusions for an overall transfusion rate of 3.3%. COVID-19 patients received 1746 blood components in total, the majority of which were red blood cells. COVID-19 patients' weekly transfusion rate increased as the pandemic progressed, possibly reflecting their increased severity of illness. Transfusion was significantly associated with several indicators of severe disease, including mortality, intubation, thrombosis, longer hospital admission, lower hemoglobin and platelet nadirs, and longer prothrombin and activated partial thromboplastin times. As the pandemic progressed, institutional adherence to transfusion guidelines improved for RBC transfusions compared to prior year trends but did not improve for platelets or plasma. CONCLUSION: There is a need to closely monitor the blood product inventory and demand throughout the COVID-19 pandemic as patients' transfusion needs may increase over time. Daily or weekly trending of patients' clinical status and laboratory values may assist blood banks in inventory management.


Subject(s)
Blood Component Transfusion/trends , COVID-19/therapy , Facilities and Services Utilization/trends , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Critical Illness , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Linear Models , Male , Middle Aged , Needs Assessment , New York City/epidemiology , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index
9.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 7(8): ofaa327, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-851854

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The spread of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic have caused significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. The clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 and HIV co-infection remain uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a matched retrospective cohort study of adults hospitalized with a COVID-19 illness in New York City between March 3, 2020, and May 15, 2020. We matched 30 people with HIV (PWH) with 90 control group patients without HIV based on age, sex, and race/ethnicity. Using electronic health record data, we compared demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and clinical outcomes between PWH and control patients. RESULTS: In our study, the median age (interquartile range) was 60.5 (56.6-70.0) years, 20% were female, 30% were black, 27% were white, and 24% were of Hispanic/Latino/ethnicity. There were no significant differences between PWH and control patients in presenting symptoms, duration of symptoms before hospitalization, laboratory markers, or radiographic findings on chest x-ray. More patients without HIV required a higher level of supplemental oxygen on presentation than PWH. There were no differences in the need for invasive mechanical ventilation during hospitalization, length of stay, or in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical manifestations and outcomes of COVID-19 among patients with SARS-CoV-2 and HIV co-infection were not significantly different than patients without HIV co-infection. However, PWH were hospitalized with less severe hypoxemia, a finding that warrants further investigation.

11.
PLoS One ; 15(7): e0236778, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-671516

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused a devastating worldwide pandemic. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, but clinical data supporting HCQ for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are limited. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received ≥1 dose of HCQ at two New York City hospitals. We measured incident Grade 3 or 4 blood count and liver test abnormalities, ventricular arrhythmias, and vomiting and diarrhea within 10 days after HCQ initiation, and the proportion of patients who completed HCQ therapy. We also describe changes in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment hypoxia scores between baseline and day 10 after HCQ initiation and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: None of the 153 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received HCQ developed a sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia. Incident blood count and liver test abnormalities occurred in <15% of patients and incident vomiting or diarrhea was rare. Eighty-nine percent of patients completed their HCQ course and three patients discontinued therapy because of QT prolongation. Fifty-two percent of patients had improved hypoxia scores 10 days after starting HCQ. Thirty-one percent of patients who were receiving mechanical ventilation at the time of HCQ initiation died during their hospitalization, compared to 18% of patients who were receiving supplemental oxygen but not requiring mechanical ventilation, and 8% of patients who were not requiring supplemental oxygen. Co-administration of azithromycin was not associated with improved outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: HCQ appears to be reasonably safe and tolerable in most hospitalized patients with COVID-19. However, nearly one-half of patients did not improve with this treatment, highlighting the need to evaluate HCQ and alternate therapies in randomized trials.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , New York City , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL