Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(9): e3009-e3012, 2021 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501016
2.
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
3.
J Immigr Minor Health ; 23(6): 1343-1347, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1279474

ABSTRACT

Immunomodulating therapies for COVID-19 may carry risks of reactivating latent infections in foreign-born people. We conducted a rapid review of infection-related complications of immunomodulatory therapies for COVID-19. We convened a committee of specialists to formulate a screening and management strategy for latent infections in our setting. Dexamethasone, used in severe COVID-19, is associated with reactivation of latent tuberculosis, hepatitis B, and dissemination/hyperinfection of Strongyloides species and should prompt screening and/ or empiric treatment in appropriate epidemiologic contexts. Other immunomodulators used in COVID-19 may also increase risk, including interleukin-6 receptor antagonist (e.g., tocilizumab) and kinase inhibitors. People with specific risk factors should also be screened for HIV, Chagas disease, and endemic mycoses. Racial and ethnic minorities in North America, including foreign-born persons, who receive immunomodulating agents for COVID-19 may be at risk for reactivation of latent infections. We develop a screening and management pathway for such patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Latent Tuberculosis , Humans , Immunomodulation , Mass Screening , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(12): e1130-e1143, 2021 06 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1269559

ABSTRACT

In severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, viral load peaks early and declines quickly after symptom onset. Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is marked by aberrant innate and adaptive immune responses with an abnormal cytokine profile and multiorgan system dysfunction that persists well after viral clearance. A purely antiviral treatment strategy may therefore be insufficient, and antiviral agents have not shown a benefit later in the illness course. A number of immunomodulatory strategies are being tested, including corticosteroids, cytokine and anticytokine therapies, small molecule inhibitors, and cellular therapeutics. To date, the only drug to show a mortality benefit for COVID-19 in a randomized, controlled trial is dexamethasone. However, there remains uncertainty about which patients may benefit most and about longer-term complications, including secondary infections. Here, we review the immune dysregulation of severe COVID-19 and the existing data behind various immunomodulatory strategies, and we consider future directions of study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Humans , Immunity, Humoral , Immunomodulation , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
6.
N Engl J Med ; 383(24): 2333-2344, 2020 12 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1023985

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor blockade in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) who are not receiving mechanical ventilation is unclear. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, hyperinflammatory states, and at least two of the following signs: fever (body temperature >38°C), pulmonary infiltrates, or the need for supplemental oxygen in order to maintain an oxygen saturation greater than 92%. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive standard care plus a single dose of either tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo. The primary outcome was intubation or death, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The secondary efficacy outcomes were clinical worsening and discontinuation of supplemental oxygen among patients who had been receiving it at baseline, both assessed in time-to-event analyses. RESULTS: We enrolled 243 patients; 141 (58%) were men, and 102 (42%) were women. The median age was 59.8 years (range, 21.7 to 85.4), and 45% of the patients were Hispanic or Latino. The hazard ratio for intubation or death in the tocilizumab group as compared with the placebo group was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 1.81; P = 0.64), and the hazard ratio for disease worsening was 1.11 (95% CI, 0.59 to 2.10; P = 0.73). At 14 days, 18.0% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 14.9% of the patients in the placebo group had had worsening of disease. The median time to discontinuation of supplemental oxygen was 5.0 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.6) in the tocilizumab group and 4.9 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.8) in the placebo group (P = 0.69). At 14 days, 24.6% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 21.2% of the patients in the placebo group were still receiving supplemental oxygen. Patients who received tocilizumab had fewer serious infections than patients who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab was not effective for preventing intubation or death in moderately ill hospitalized patients with Covid-19. Some benefit or harm cannot be ruled out, however, because the confidence intervals for efficacy comparisons were wide. (Funded by Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04356937.).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Receptors, Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Boston , COVID-19/mortality , Disease Progression , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Intubation/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Respiratory Therapy , Treatment Failure , Young Adult
7.
Nat Commun ; 11(1): 6319, 2020 12 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-966313

ABSTRACT

The relationship of SARS-CoV-2 pulmonary infection and severity of disease is not fully understood. Here we show analysis of autopsy specimens from 24 patients who succumbed to SARS-CoV-2 infection using a combination of different RNA and protein analytical platforms to characterize inter-patient and intra-patient heterogeneity of pulmonary virus infection. There is a spectrum of high and low virus cases associated with duration of disease. High viral cases have high activation of interferon pathway genes and a predominant M1-like macrophage infiltrate. Low viral cases are more heterogeneous likely reflecting inherent patient differences in the evolution of host response, but there is consistent indication of pulmonary epithelial cell recovery based on napsin A immunohistochemistry and RNA expression of surfactant and mucin genes. Using a digital spatial profiling platform, we find the virus corresponds to distinct spatial expression of interferon response genes demonstrating the intra-pulmonary heterogeneity of SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Host Microbial Interactions , Interferons/metabolism , Lung , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aspartic Acid Endopeptidases/metabolism , Autopsy , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/metabolism , Epithelial Cells/metabolism , Epithelial Cells/pathology , Epithelial Cells/virology , Female , Humans , Immunity , Immunohistochemistry , In Situ Hybridization , Interferons/genetics , Lung/pathology , Lung/virology , Macrophages/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Mucins/genetics , Mucins/metabolism , Surface-Active Agents/metabolism , Transcriptome , Viral Load
9.
AIDS ; 34(12): 1781-1787, 2020 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-772526

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many people living with HIV (PLWH) have comorbidities which are risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) or have exposures that may lead to acquisition of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus 2. There are few studies, however, on the demographics, comorbidities, clinical presentation, or outcomes of COVID-19 in people with HIV. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate risk factors, clinical manifestations, and outcomes in a large cohort of PLWH with COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically identified all PLWH who were diagnosed with COVID-19 at a large hospital from 3 March to 26 April 2020 during an outbreak in Massachusetts. We analyzed each of the cases to extract information including demographics, medical comorbidities, clinical presentation, and illness course after COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS: We describe a cohort of 36 PLWH with confirmed COVID-19 and another 11 patients with probable COVID-19. Almost 85% of PLWH with confirmed COVID-19 had a comorbidity associated with severe disease, including obesity, cardiovascular disease, or hypertension. Approximately 77% of PLWH with COVID-19 were non-Hispanic Black or Latinx whereas only 40% of the PLWH in our clinic were Black or Latinx. Nearly half of PLWH with COVID-19 had exposure to congregate settings. In addition to people with confirmed COVID-19, we identified another 11 individuals with probable COVID-19, almost all of whom had negative PCR testing. CONCLUSION: In the largest cohort to date of PLWH and confirmed COVID-19, almost all had a comorbidity associated with severe disease, highlighting the importance of non-HIV risk factors in this population. The racial disparities and frequent link to congregate settings in PLWH and COVID-19 need to be explored urgently.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adult , African Americans/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/ethnology , Cost of Illness , Female , HIV Infections/ethnology , Humans , Male , Massachusetts/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/ethnology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Hepatology ; 73(3): 890-900, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-273691

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) leads to elevated liver biochemistries in approximately half of patients on presentation. To date, data are limited regarding the trend of liver biochemistries over the course of illness. We aimed to evaluate the trend, etiology, and outcomes associated with liver biochemistries in COVID-19. APPROACH AND RESULTS: A total of 60 patients with COVID-19 were admitted between March 21 and March 28, 2020. The mean age was 57 years, 65% were male, and 28% were Hispanic. At the study conclusion, 6 patients were deceased, 28 were discharged, and 26 remained admitted. Patients who remained admitted were followed for a median of 12 days. Of 60 patients, 41 (69%) had at least one abnormal liver biochemistry on admission. Median aspartate aminotransferase (AST) was higher than alanine aminotransferase (ALT) at admission (46 vs. 30 U/L) and during the hospital course. Aminotransferases rose above normal in 54 (93%) patients, whereas alkaline phosphatase and total bilirubin elevations were rare. Ten (17%) patients developed aminotransferases more than 5 times the upper limit of normal. AST highly correlated with ALT throughout the illness course (r = 0.97; P < 0.0001), whereas correlations with markers of muscle injury and inflammation were weak. Statin use was common before (40%) and during admission (80%) at our center, with no difference in peak liver biochemistries between users and nonusers. No demographic or comorbid illness was associated with liver injury. Admission AST (69 vs. 49; P < 0.05), peak AST (364 vs. 77; P = 0.003), and peak ALT (220 vs. 52; P = 0.002) were higher in intubated patients. CONCLUSIONS: AST-dominant aminotransferase elevation is common in COVID-19, mirrors disease severity, and appears to reflect true hepatic injury.


Subject(s)
Aspartate Aminotransferases/blood , COVID-19/complications , Liver Diseases/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , Alanine Transaminase/blood , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/blood , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Inflammation/blood , Intensive Care Units , Length of Stay , Liver/enzymology , Liver/virology , Liver Diseases/blood , Liver Diseases/enzymology , Liver Function Tests , Male , Middle Aged , Severity of Illness Index
12.
FASEB J ; 34(5): 6027-6037, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-143943

ABSTRACT

There are currently no proven or approved treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Early anecdotal reports and limited in vitro data led to the significant uptake of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), and to lesser extent chloroquine (CQ), for many patients with this disease. As an increasing number of patients with COVID-19 are treated with these agents and more evidence accumulates, there continues to be no high-quality clinical data showing a clear benefit of these agents for this disease. Moreover, these agents have the potential to cause harm, including a broad range of adverse events including serious cardiac side effects when combined with other agents. In addition, the known and potent immunomodulatory effects of these agents which support their use in the treatment of auto-immune conditions, and provided a component in the original rationale for their use in patients with COVID-19, may, in fact, undermine their utility in the context of the treatment of this respiratory viral infection. Specifically, the impact of HCQ on cytokine production and suppression of antigen presentation may have immunologic consequences that hamper innate and adaptive antiviral immune responses for patients with COVID-19. Similarly, the reported in vitro inhibition of viral proliferation is largely derived from the blockade of viral fusion that initiates infection rather than the direct inhibition of viral replication as seen with nucleoside/tide analogs in other viral infections. Given these facts and the growing uncertainty about these agents for the treatment of COVID-19, it is clear that at the very least thoughtful planning and data collection from randomized clinical trials are needed to understand what if any role these agents may have in this disease. In this article, we review the datasets that support or detract from the use of these agents for the treatment of COVID-19 and render a data informed opinion that they should only be used with caution and in the context of carefully thought out clinical trials, or on a case-by-case basis after rigorous consideration of the risks and benefits of this therapeutic approach.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , COVID-19 , Datasets as Topic/standards , Heart/drug effects , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/pharmacology , Immunity, Innate/drug effects , Pandemics , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/standards
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL