Cenicriviroc for the treatment of COVID-19: first interim results of a randomised, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated, double-blind phase II trial.

OBJECTIVES: C-C-chemokine receptors (CCRs) are expressed on a variety of immune cells and play an important role in many immune processes, particularly leukocyte migration. Comprehensive preclinical research demonstrated CCR2/CCR5-dependent pathways as pivotal for the pathophysiology of severe COVID-19. Here we report human data on use of a chemokine receptor inhibitor in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Interim results of a 2:1 randomised, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated trial on the CCR2/CCR5-inhibitor Cenicriviroc (CVC) 150 mg BID orally for 28 d in hospitalised patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 are reported. The primary endpoint is the subject's responder status defined by achieving grade 1 or 2 on the 7-point ordinal scale of clinical improvement on day 15. RESULTS: Of the 30 patients randomised, 18 were assigned to receive CVC and 12 to placebo. Efficient CCR2- and CCR5 inhibition was demonstrated through CCL2 and CCL4 elevation in CVC-treated patients (485% and 80% increase on day 3 compared to the baseline, respectively). In the modified intention-to-treat population, 82.4% of patients (14/17) in the CVC group met the primary endpoint, as did 91.7% (11/12) in the placebo group (OR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.04-3.41). One patient treated with CVC died of progressive acute respiratory distress syndrome, and the remaining had a favourable outcome. Overall, treatment with CVC was well tolerated, with most adverse events being grade I or II and resolving spontaneously. CONCLUSIONS: Our interim analysis provides proof-of-concept data on CVC for COVID-19 patients as an intervention to inhibit CCR2/CCR5. Further studies are warranted to assess its clinical efficacy.

Statistical biases due to anonymization evaluated in an open clinical dataset from COVID-19 patients.

Anonymization has the potential to foster the sharing of medical data. State-of-the-art methods use mathematical models to modify data to reduce privacy risks. However, the degree of protection must be balanced against the impact on statistical properties. We studied an extreme case of this trade-off: the statistical validity of an open medical dataset based on the German National Pandemic Cohort Network (NAPKON), which was prepared for publication using a strong anonymization procedure. Descriptive statistics and results of regression analyses were compared before and after anonymization of multiple variants of the original dataset. Despite significant differences in value distributions, the statistical bias was found to be small in all cases. In the regression analyses, the median absolute deviations of the estimated adjusted odds ratios for different sample sizes ranged from 0.01 [minimum = 0, maximum = 0.58] to 0.52 [minimum = 0.25, maximum = 0.91]. Disproportionate impact on the statistical properties of data is a common argument against the use of anonymization. Our analysis demonstrates that anonymization can actually preserve validity of statistical results in relatively low-dimensional data.

Early and Rapid Identification of COVID-19 Patients with Neutralizing Type I Interferon Auto-antibodies.

PURPOSE: Six to 19% of critically ill COVID-19 patients display circulating auto-antibodies against type I interferons (IFN-AABs). Here, we establish a clinically applicable strategy for early identification of IFN-AAB-positive patients for potential subsequent clinical interventions. METHODS: We analyzed sera of 430 COVID-19 patients from four hospitals for presence of IFN-AABs by ELISA. Binding specificity and neutralizing activity were evaluated via competition assay and virus-infection-based neutralization assay. We defined clinical parameters associated with IFN-AAB positivity. In a subgroup of critically ill patients, we analyzed effects of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) on the levels of IFN-AABs, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and clinical outcome. RESULTS: The prevalence of neutralizing AABs to IFN-α and IFN-ω in COVID-19 patients from all cohorts was 4.2% (18/430), while being undetectable in an uninfected control cohort. Neutralizing IFN-AABs were detectable exclusively in critically affected (max. WHO score 6-8), predominantly male (83%) patients (7.6%, 18/237 for IFN-α-AABs and 4.6%, 11/237 for IFN-ω-AABs in 237 patients with critical COVID-19). IFN-AABs were present early post-symptom onset and at the peak of disease. Fever and oxygen requirement at hospital admission co-presented with neutralizing IFN-AAB positivity. IFN-AABs were associated with lower probability of survival (7.7% versus 80.9% in patients without IFN-AABs). TPE reduced levels of IFN-AABs in three of five patients and may increase survival of IFN-AAB-positive patients compared to those not undergoing TPE. CONCLUSION: IFN-AABs may serve as early biomarker for the development of severe COVID-19. We propose to implement routine screening of hospitalized COVID-19 patients for rapid identification of patients with IFN-AABs who most likely benefit from specific therapies.

Characterization of antimicrobial use and co-infections among hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a prospective observational cohort study.

PURPOSE: To investigate antimicrobial use and primary and nosocomial infections in hospitalized COVID-19 patients to provide data for guidance of antimicrobial therapy. METHODS: Prospective observational cohort study conducted at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, including patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2-infection between March and November 2020. RESULTS: 309 patients were included, 231 directly admitted and 78 transferred from other centres. Antimicrobial therapy was initiated in 62/231 (26.8%) of directly admitted and in 44/78 (56.4%) of transferred patients. The rate of microbiologically confirmed primary co-infections was 4.8% (11/231). Although elevated in most COVID-19 patients, C-reactive protein and procalcitonin levels were higher in patients with primary co-infections than in those without (median CRP 110 mg/l, IQR 51-222 vs. 36, IQR 11-101, respectively; p < 0.0001). Nosocomial bloodstream and respiratory infections occurred in 47/309 (15.2%) and 91/309 (29.4%) of patients, respectively, and were associated with need for invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 45.6 95%CI 13.7-151.8 and 104.6 95%CI 41.5-263.5, respectively), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OR 14.3 95%CI 6.5-31.5 and 16.5 95%CI 6.5-41.6, respectively), and haemodialysis (OR 31.4 95%CI 13.9-71.2 and OR 22.3 95%CI 11.2-44.2, respectively). The event of any nosocomial infection was significantly associated with in-hospital death (33/99 (33.3%) with nosocomial infection vs. 23/210 (10.9%) without, OR 4.1 95%CI 2.2-7.3). CONCLUSIONS: Primary co-infections are rare, yet antimicrobial use was frequent, mostly based on clinical worsening and elevated inflammation markers without clear evidence for co-infection. More reliable diagnostic prospects may help to reduce overtreatment. Rates of nosocomial infections are substantial in severely ill patients on organ support and associated with worse patient outcome.