Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-304820

ABSTRACT

Background: The antiviral efficacy of remdesivir is still controversial. We aimed at evaluating its clinical effectiveness in patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen and/or ventilator support.Methods: In this European multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, controlled trial in adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (DisCoVeRy, NCT04315948;EudraCT2020-000936-23), participants were randomly allocated to receive usual standard of care alone or in combination with intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1, then 100 mg once-daily for 9 days or until discharge). Treatment assignation was performed via web-based randomisation stratified on illness severity and administrative European region. The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15 measured by the WHO 7-point ordinal scale, assessed in the intention-to-treat population.Findings: Between March 22nd, 2020 and January 21st, 2021, 857 participants were randomised to one of the two arms in 5 European countries and 832 participants were included for the evaluation of remdesivir (control, n=418;remdesivir, n=414). There was no difference in the clinical status neither at day 15 between treatment groups (OR for remdesivir, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.25, P=0.85) nor at day 29. The proportion of deaths at day 28 was not significantly different between control (8.9%) and remdesivir (8.2%) treatment groups (OR for remdesivir, 0.93 95%CI 0.57 to 1.52, P=0.77). There was also no difference on SARS-CoV-2 viral kinetics (effect of remdesivir on viral load slope, -0.004 log10 cp/10,000 cells/day, 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.02, P=0.75). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of Serious Adverse Events between treatment groups.Interpretation: The use of remdesivir for the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was not associated with clinical improvement at day 15 or day 29, nor with a reduction in mortality, nor with a reduction in SARS-CoV-2 RNA.Trial Registration: DisCoVeRy, NCT04315948;EudraCT2020-000936-23Funding: European Union Commission, French Ministry of Health, DIM One Health Île-de-France, REACTing, Fonds Erasme-COVID-ULB;Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE)Declaration of Interests: Dr. Costagliola reports grants and personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Gilead, outside the submitted work. Dr. Mentré reports grants from INSERM Reacting (French Government), grants from Ministry of Health (French Government), grants from European Commission, during the conduct of the study;grants from Sanofi, grants from Roche, outside the submitted work. Dr. Hites reports grants from The Belgian Center for Knowledge (KCE), grants from Fonds Erasme-COVID-ULB, during the conduct of the study;personal fees from Gilead, outside the submitted work. Dr. Mootien reports non-financial support from GILEAD, outside the submitted work. Dr. Gaborit reports non-financial support from Gilead, non- financial support from MSD, outside the submitted work. Dr. Botelho-Nevers reports other from Pfizer, other from Janssen, outside the submitted work. Dr. Lacombe reports personal fees and non-financial support from Gilead, personal fees and non-financial support from Janssen, personal fees and non-financial support from MSD, personal fees and non-financial support from ViiV Healthcare, personal fees and non-financial support from Abbvie, during the conduct of the study. Dr. Wallet reports personal fees and non-financial support from Jazz pharmaceuticals, personal fees and non-financial support from Novartis, personal fees and nonPage financial support from Kite-Gilead, outside the submitted work. Dr. Kimmoun reports personal fees from Aguettan, personal fees from Aspen, outside the submitted work. Dr. Thiery reports personal fees from AMGEN, outside the submitted work. Dr. Burdet reports personal fees from Da Volterra, personal fees from Mylan Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Dr. Poissy reports personal fees from Gilead for lectures, outside the submitted work. Dr. Goehringer reports personal fees from G lead Sciences, non-financial support from Gilead Sciences, grants from Biomerieux, non-financial support from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. Dr. Peytavin reports personal fees from Gilead Sciences, personal fees from Merck France, personal fees from ViiV Healthcare, personal fees from TheraTechnologies, outside the submitted work. Dr. Danion reports personal fees from Gilead, outside the submitted work. Dr. Raffi reports personal fees from Gilead, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Abbvie, personal fees from ViiV Healthcare, personal fees from Theratechnologies, personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. Dr. Gallien reports personal fees from Gilead, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from ViiV, personal fees from MSD, outside the submitted work;and has received consulting fee from Gilead in August 2020 to check the registration file of remdesivir for the French administration. Dr. Nseir reports personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Gilead, personal fees from Biomérieux, personal fees from BioRad, outside the submitted work. Dr. Lefèvre reports personal fees from Mylan, personal fees from Gilead, outside the submitted work. Dr. Guedj reports personal fees from Roche, outside the submitted work. Other authors have nothing to disclose.Ethics Approval Statement: The trial was approved by the Ethics Committee (CPP Ile-de-France-III, approval #20.03.06.51744), and is sponsored by the Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm, France);it was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from all included participants (or their legal representatives if unable to consent). The present analysis is based on the protocol v11.0 of December 12th, 2020.

2.
EXCLI J ; 21: 93-103, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1667813

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to investigate the COVID-19 vaccination acceptance rate and its determinants among healthcare workers in a multicenter study. This was a cross-sectional multi-center survey conducted from February 5 to April 29, 2021. The questionnaire consisted of 26 items in 6 subscales. The English version of the questionnaire was translated into seven languages and distributed through Google Forms using snowball sampling; a colleague in each country was responsible for the forward and backward translation, and also the distribution of the questionnaire. A forward stepwise logistic regression was utilized to explore the variables and questionnaire factors tied to the intention to COVID-19 vaccination. 4630 participants from 91 countries completed the questionnaire. According to the United Nations Development Program 2020, 43.6 % of participants were from low Human Development Index (HDI) regions, 48.3 % high and very high, and 8.1 % from medium. The overall vaccination hesitancy rate was 37 %. Three out of six factors of the questionnaire were significantly related to intention to the vaccination. While 'Perceived benefits of the COVID-19 vaccination' (OR: 3.82, p-value<0.001) and 'Prosocial norms' (OR: 5.18, p-value<0.001) were associated with vaccination acceptance, 'The vaccine safety/cost concerns' with OR: 3.52, p-value<0.001 was tied to vaccination hesitancy. Medical doctors and pharmacists were more willing to take the vaccine in comparison to others. Importantly, HDI with OR: 12.28, 95 % CI: 6.10-24.72 was a strong positive determinant of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. This study highlighted the vaccination hesitancy rate of 37 % in our sample among HCWs. Increasing awareness regarding vaccination benefits, confronting the misinformation, and strengthening the prosocial norms would be the primary domains for maximizing the vaccination coverage. The study also showed that the HDI is strongly associated with the vaccination acceptance/hesitancy, in a way that those living in low HDI contexts are more hesitant to receive the vaccine.

3.
Sci Transl Med ; 14(628): eabj7521, 2022 Jan 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1483988

ABSTRACT

The drivers of critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain unknown. Given major confounding factors such as age and comorbidities, true mediators of this condition have remained elusive. We used a multi-omics analysis combined with artificial intelligence in a young patient cohort where major comorbidities were excluded at the onset. The cohort included 47 "critical" (in the intensive care unit under mechanical ventilation) and 25 "non-critical" (in a non-critical care ward) patients with COVID-19 and 22 healthy individuals. The analyses included whole-genome sequencing, whole-blood RNA sequencing, plasma and blood mononuclear cell proteomics, cytokine profiling, and high-throughput immunophenotyping. An ensemble of machine learning, deep learning, quantum annealing, and structural causal modeling were used. Patients with critical COVID-19 were characterized by exacerbated inflammation, perturbed lymphoid and myeloid compartments, increased coagulation, and viral cell biology. Among differentially expressed genes, we observed up-regulation of the metalloprotease ADAM9. This gene signature was validated in a second independent cohort of 81 critical and 73 recovered patients with COVID-19 and was further confirmed at the transcriptional and protein level and by proteolytic activity. Ex vivo ADAM9 inhibition decreased severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) uptake and replication in human lung epithelial cells. In conclusion, within a young, otherwise healthy, cohort of individuals with COVID-19, we provide the landscape of biological perturbations in vivo where a unique gene signature differentiated critical from non-critical patients. We further identified ADAM9 as a driver of disease severity and a candidate therapeutic target.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , ADAM Proteins , Artificial Intelligence , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Membrane Proteins , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2
5.
J Clin Med ; 10(16)2021 Aug 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341697

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Correct and timely identification of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients is critical in the emergency department (ED) prior to admission to medical wards. Antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) are a rapid alternative to Reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for the diagnosis of COVID-19 but have lower sensitivity. METHODS: We evaluated the performance in real-life conditions of a strategy combining Ag-RDT and chest computed tomography (CT) to rule out COVID-19 infection in 1015 patients presenting in the ED between 16 November 2020 and 18 January 2021 in order to allow non-COVID-19 patients to be hospitalized in dedicated units directly. The combined strategy performed in the ED for patients with COVID-19 symptoms was assessed and compared with RT-PCR. RESULTS: Compared with RT-PCR, the negative predictive value was 96.7% for Ag-RDT alone, 98.5% for Ag-RDT/CT combined, and increased to 100% for patients with low viral load. CONCLUSION: A strategy combining Ag-RDT and chest CT is effective in ruling out COVID-19 in ED patients with high precision.

6.
J Fungi (Basel) ; 7(8)2021 Jul 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1325719

ABSTRACT

Cases of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) in patients suffering from COVID-19 were described in patients with various comorbidities and outcomes. The diagnosis of PCP in these patients is difficult due to clinical and radiological similarities. We carried out this study in order to better describe potentially at-risk patients and their outcomes. We retrospectively analyzed all patients with a P. jirovecii PCR performed in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, tracheal aspirate, or sputum within a month after the COVID-19 diagnosis. Fifty-seven patients with COVID-19 infection were tested for P. jirovecii. Among 57 patients with COVID-19, four patients had a concomitant positive P. jirovecii PCR. These four patients were elderly with a mean age of 78. Two patients were immunocompromised, and the two others presented only diabetes mellitus. Three patients presented an ARDS requiring transfer to the ICU and mechanical ventilation. All patients presented lymphocytopenia. Three patients had probable PCP, and one had proven PCP. All patients died within two months after hospital admission. These co-infections are rare but severe, therefore, PCP should be considered in case of worsening of the condition of patients with severe COVID-19.

8.
Acad Emerg Med ; 28(3): 306-313, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1066580

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has led to devastating repercussions on health care systems worldwide. This viral infection has a broad clinical spectrum (ranging from influenza-like disease, viral pneumonia, and hypoxemia to acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring prolonged intensive care unit stays). The prognostic impact of measuring viral load on nasopharyngeal swab specimens (by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction [RT-PCR]) is yet to be elucidated. METHODS: Between March 3 and April 5, 2020, we conducted a retrospective study on a cohort of COVID-19 patients (mild or severe disease) who were hospitalized after presenting to the emergency department (ED) and had at least one positive nasopharyngeal swab during their hospital stay. We led our study at the University Hospitals of Strasbourg in the Greater East region of France, one of the pandemic's epicenters in Europe. RESULTS: We have collected samples from a cohort of 287 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 who were included in our study. Nearly half of them (50.5%) presented a mild form of the disease, while the other half (49.5%) presented a severe form, requiring mechanical ventilation. Median (interquartile range) viral load on the initial upper respiratory swab at admission was 4.76 (3.29-6.06) log10 copies/reaction. When comparing survivors and nonsurvivors, this viral load measurement did not differ according to subgroups (p = 0.332). Additionally, we have found that respiratory viral load measurement was predictive of neither in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.85 to 1.31, p = 0.637) nor disease severity (AOR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.73 to 1.06, p = 0.167). CONCLUSION: Respiratory viral load measurement on the first nasopharyngeal swab (by RT-PCR) during initial ED management is neither a predictor of severity nor a predictor of mortality in SARS-CoV-2 infection. Host response to this viral infection along with the extent of preexisting comorbidities might be more foretelling of disease severity than the virus itself.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Emergency Service, Hospital , Europe , France , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , Viral Load
9.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 7(10): ofaa405, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1003713

ABSTRACT

We developed a score, with easily accessible data (age, sex, body mass index, dyspnea, inflammatory parameters), to predict the risk of rapid progression to severe coronavirus disease 2019. Using a cutoff of >6 points, the negative predictive value was 87%.

10.
Am J Transplant ; 21(3): 1295-1303, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-950808

ABSTRACT

There are no studies which have compared the risk of severe COVID-19 and related mortality between transplant recipients and nontransplant patients. We enrolled two groups of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, that is, kidney transplant recipients (KTR) from the French Registry of Solid Organ Transplant (n = 306) and a single-center cohort of nontransplant patients (n = 795). An analysis was performed among subgroups matched for age and risk factors for severe COVID-19 or mortality. Severe COVID-19 was defined as admission (or transfer) to an intensive care unit, need for mechanical ventilation, or death. Transplant recipients were younger and had more comorbidities compared to nontransplant patients. They presented with higher creatinine levels and developed more episodes of acute kidney injury. After matching, the 30-day cumulative incidence of severe COVID-19 did not differ between KTR and nontransplant patients; however, 30-day COVID-19-related mortality was significantly higher in KTR (17.9% vs 11.4%, respectively, p = .038). Age >60 years, cardiovascular disease, dyspnea, fever, lymphopenia, and C-reactive protein (CRP) were associated with severe COVID-19 in univariate analysis, whereas transplant status and serum creatinine levels were not. Age >60 years, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, CRP >60 mg/L, lymphopenia, kidney transplant status (HR = 1.55), and creatinine level >115 µmol/L (HR = 2.32) were associated with COVID-19-related mortality in univariate analysis. In multivariable analysis, cardiovascular disease, dyspnea, and fever were associated with severe disease, whereas age >60 years, cardiovascular disease, dyspnea, fever, and creatinine level>115 µmol/L retained their independent associations with mortality. KTR had a higher COVID-19-related mortality compared to nontransplant hospitalized patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Graft Rejection/epidemiology , Kidney Transplantation , Pandemics , Propensity Score , Registries , Transplant Recipients/statistics & numerical data , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Female , France/epidemiology , Graft Rejection/prevention & control , Humans , Immunosuppression Therapy/methods , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Incidence , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
11.
Eur J Hosp Pharm ; 28(5): 242-247, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-947837

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to describe prescribing practices of lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin during the COVID-19 epidemic crisis (primary endpoint), then to characterise pharmaceutical interventions (PIs) targeted to these medications and evaluate the impact of these PIs on prescribers' practices (secondary end-points). METHODS: This retrospective observational study was carried out at the University Hospital of Strasbourg (France) from March to April 2020. The analysed population excluded patients from intensive care units but included all other adult patients with COVID-19 who received at least one dose of lopinavir/ritonavir combination, hydroxychloroquine or azithromycin, while inpatients. Analyses were performed by using data extracted from electronic medical records. RESULT: During the study period, 278 patients were included. A rapid decrease in lopinavir/ritonavir prescriptions was observed. This was accompanied by an increase in hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin prescriptions until the end of March, followed by a decrease leading to the disappearance of these two medications in April. The pharmaceutical analysis of the prescriptions resulted in 59 PIs of which 21 were associated with lopinavir/ritonavir, 32 with hydroxychloroquine and 6 with azithromycin. Regarding the medication-related problems, the most frequent ones were incorrect treatment durations (n=32 (54.2%)), drug interactions with potential torsadogenic reactions (n=14 (23.7%)) and incorrect dosing (n=6 (10.2%)). From the 59 PIs, 48 (81.4%) were accepted and physicians adjusted the medication regimens in a timely manner. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the value-even more meaningful in a crisis situation-of a strong synergy between physicians and pharmacists for patient-safety focused practices.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Pandemics , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Azithromycin/adverse effects , Drug Combinations , Female , France , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Safety , Pharmacists , Physicians , Retrospective Studies , Ritonavir/adverse effects
13.
SSRN; 2020.
Preprint | SSRN | ID: ppcovidwho-1039

ABSTRACT

Background: Previous retrospective case series with small sample sizes have reported reassuring maternal outcomes for pregnant women with COVID-19 infection. Ne

14.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 223(6): 914.e1-914.e15, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-683535

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite the mainly reassuring outcomes for pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019 reported by previous case series with small sample sizes, some recent reports of severe maternal morbidity requiring intubation and of maternal deaths show the need for additional data about the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on pregnancy outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to report the maternal characteristics and clinical outcomes of pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective, single-center study includes all consecutive pregnant women with confirmed (laboratory-confirmed) or suspected (according to the Chinese management guideline [version 7.0]) coronavirus disease 2019, regardless of gestational age at diagnosis, admitted to the Strasbourg University Hospital (France) from March 1, 2020, to April 3, 2020. Maternal characteristics, laboratory and imaging findings, and maternal and neonatal outcomes were extracted from medical records. RESULTS: The study includes 54 pregnant women with confirmed (n=38) and suspected (n=16) coronavirus disease 2019. Of these, 32 had an ongoing pregnancy, 1 had a miscarriage, and 21 had live births: 12 vaginal and 9 cesarean deliveries. Among the women who gave birth, preterm deliveries were medically indicated for their coronavirus disease 2019-related condition for 5 of 21 women (23.8%): 3 (14.3%) before 32 weeks' gestation and 2 (9.5%) before 28 weeks' gestation. Oxygen support was required for 13 of 54 women (24.1%), including high-flow oxygen (n=2), noninvasive (n=1) and invasive (n=3) mechanical ventilation, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n=1). Of these, 3, aged 35 years or older with positive test result for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, had respiratory failure requiring indicated delivery before 29 weeks' gestation. All 3 women were overweight or obese, and 2 had an additional comorbidity. CONCLUSION: Coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy was associated with maternal morbidity and preterm birth. Its association with other well-known risk factors for severe maternal morbidity in pregnant women with no infection, including maternal age above 35 years, overweight, and obesity, suggests further studies are required to determine whether these risk factors are also associated with poorer maternal outcome in these women.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Premature Birth/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , Adult , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Cesarean Section/statistics & numerical data , Comorbidity , Female , France/epidemiology , Hospitals, University , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Morbidity , Obesity/epidemiology , Oxygen/administration & dosage , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications/epidemiology , Pregnancy Outcome , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies
15.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 26(10): 1417.e5-1417.e8, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-671474

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of early systematic chest computed tomography (CT) with quantification of lung lesions in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. METHODS: We studied 572 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (confirmed using polymerase chain reaction) for whom a chest CT was performed at hospital admission. Visual quantification was used to classify patients as per the percentage of lung parenchyma affected by COVID-19 lesions: normal CT, 0-10%, 11-25%, 26-50%, 51-75% and >75%. The primary endpoint was severe disease, defined by death or admission to the intensive care unit in the 7 days following first admission. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 66.0 ± 16.0 years, and 343/572 (60.0%) were men. The primary endpoint occurred in 206/572 patients (36.0%). The extent of lesions on initial CT was independently associated with prognosis (odds ratio = 2.35, 95% confidence interval 1.24-4.46; p < 0.01). Most patients with lung involvement >50% (66/95, 69.5%) developed severe disease compared to patients with lung involvement of 26-50% (70/171, 40.9%) and ≤25% (70/306, 22.9%) (p < 0.01 and p < 0.01, respectively). None of the patients with normal CT (0/14) had severe disease. CONCLUSION: Chest CT findings at admission are associated with outcome in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Coronavirus Infections/diagnostic imaging , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus/genetics , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Lung/physiopathology , Lung/virology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Survival Analysis , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
16.
Eur J Case Rep Intern Med ; 7(7): 001822, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-646899

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In June 2020, a large randomised controlled clinical trial in the UK found that dexamethasone was effective in reducing the number of deaths in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). CASE DESCRIPTION: We describe a patient with rapid worsening of COVID-19 pneumonia and its dramatic improvement under corticosteroids. DISCUSSION: Corticosteroids could be useful in patients with an inflammatory profile, considering that acute respiratory distress syndrome may be the consequence of cytokine storm syndrome. LEARNING POINTS: One of the main pathophysiological hypotheses for severe COVID-19 pneumonia is inappropriate immunological hyperactivation.Corticosteroid therapy may be useful in these patients.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL