[Comments on the systemic corticosteroid strategy for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)].

Systemic corticosteroid is considered effective in treating severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in both Chinese and international consensus and/or guidelines. Dexamethasone (6 mg daily for up to 10 days) is usually recommended. However, based on the outcomes of variable clinical trials and our clinical experience in treating the COVID-19 patients, the starting time, initial dosage and course of corticosteroid might be varied case by case. Individualized administration of corticosteroid is suggested according to the COVID-19 patient's demographic characteristics, underlying disease and immune status, severity and progression rate of COVID-19, inflammatory condition and concomitant use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

The choice of new treatments in autoimmune hemolytic anemia: how to pick from the basket?

Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) is defined by increased erythrocyte turnover mediated by autoimmune mechanisms. While corticosteroids remain first-line therapy in most cases of warm-antibody AIHA, cold agglutinin disease is treated by targeting the underlying clonal B-cell proliferation or the classical complement activation pathway. Several new established or investigational drugs and treatment regimens have appeared during the last 1-2 decades, resulting in an improvement of therapy options but also raising challenges on how to select the best treatment in individual patients. In severe warm-antibody AIHA, there is evidence for the upfront addition of rituximab to prednisolone in the first line. Novel agents targeting B-cells, extravascular hemolysis, or removing IgG will offer further options in the acute and relapsed/refractory settings. In cold agglutinin disease, the development of complement inhibitors and B-cell targeting agents makes it possible to individualize therapy, based on the disease profile and patient characteristics. For most AIHAs, the optimal treatment remains to be found, and there is still a need for more evidence-based therapies. Therefore, prospective clinical trials should be encouraged.

A living WHO guideline on drugs for covid-19

UPDATES: This is the twelfth version (eleventh update) of the living guideline, replacing earlier versions (available as data supplements). New recommendations will be published as updates to this guideline. CLINICAL QUESTION: What is the role of drugs in the treatment of patients with covid-19? CONTEXT: The evidence base for therapeutics for covid-19 is evolving with numerous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recently completed and under way. The emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants (such as omicron) and subvariants are also changing the role of therapeutics. This update provides updated recommendations for remdesivir, addresses the use of combination therapy with corticosteroids, interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor blockers, and janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in patients with severe or critical covid-19, and modifies previous recommendations for the neutralising monoclonal antibodies sotrovimab and casirivimab-imdevimab in patients with non-severe covid-19. NEW OR UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS: • Remdesivir: a conditional recommendation for its use in patients with severe covid-19; and a conditional recommendation against its use in patients with critical covid-19. • Concomitant use of IL-6 receptor blockers (tocilizumab or sarilumab) and the JAK inhibitor baricitinib: these drugs may now be combined, in addition to corticosteroids, in patients with severe or critical covid-19. • Sotrovimab and casirivimab-imdevimab: strong recommendations against their use in patients with covid-19, replacing the previous conditional recommendations for their use. UNDERSTANDING THE NEW RECOMMENDATIONS: When moving from new evidence to updated recommendations, the Guideline Development Group (GDG) considered a combination of evidence assessing relative benefits and harms, values and preferences, and feasibility issues. For remdesivir, new trial data were added to a previous subgroup analysis and provided sufficiently trustworthy evidence to demonstrate benefits in patients with severe covid-19, but not critical covid-19. The GDG considered benefits of remdesivir to be modest and of moderate certainty for key outcomes such as mortality and mechanical ventilation, resulting in a conditional recommendation. For baricitinib, the GDG considered clinical trial evidence (RECOVERY) demonstrating reduced risk of death in patients already receiving corticosteroids and IL-6 receptor blockers. The GDG acknowledged that the clinical trials were not representative of the world population and that the risk-benefit balance may be less advantageous, particularly in patients who are immunosuppressed at higher risk of opportunistic infections (such as serious fungal, viral, or bacteria), those already deteriorating where less aggressive or stepwise addition of immunosuppressive medications may be preferred, and in areas where certain pathogens such as HIV or tuberculosis, are of concern. The panel anticipated that there would be situations where clinicians may opt for less aggressive immunosuppressive therapy or to combine medications in a stepwise fashion in patients who are deteriorating. The decision to combine the medications will depend on their availability, and the treating clinician's perception of the risk-benefit balance associated with combination immunosuppressive therapy, particularly in patient populations at risk of opportunistic infections who may have been under-represented in clinical trials. When making a strong recommendation against the use of monoclonal antibodies for patients with covid-19, the GDG considered in vitro neutralisation data demonstrating that sotrovimab and casirivimab-imdevimab evaluated in clinical trials have meaningfully reduced neutralisation activity of the currently circulating variants of SARS-CoV-2 and their subvariants. There was consensus among the panel that the absence of in vitro neutralisation activity strongly suggests absence of clinical effectiveness of these monoclonal antibodies. However, there was also consensus regarding the need for clinical trial evidence in order to confirm clinical efficacy of new monoclonal antibodies that reliably neutralise the circulating strains in vitro. Whether emerging new variants and subvariants might be susceptible to sotrovimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, or other anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies cannot be predicted. PRIOR RECOMMENDATIONS: • Recommended for patients with severe or critical covid-19­strong recommendations for systemic corticosteroids; IL-6 receptor blockers (tocilizumab or sarilumab) in combination with corticosteroids; and baricitinib as an alternative to IL-6 receptor blockers, in combination with corticosteroids. • Recommended for patients with non-severe covid-19 at highest risk of hospitalisation­a strong recommendation for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir; conditional recommendations for molnupiravir and remdesivir. • Not recommended for patients with non-severe covid-19­a conditional recommendation against systemic corticosteroids; a strong recommendation against convalescent plasma; a recommendation against fluvoxamine, except in the context of a clinical trial; and a strong recommendation against colchicine. • Not recommended for patients with non-severe covid-19 at low risk of hospitalisation­a conditional recommendation against nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. • Not recommended for patients with severe or critical covid-19­a recommendation against convalescent plasma except in the context of a clinical trial; and a conditional recommendation against the JAK inhibitors ruxolitinib and tofacitinib. • Not recommended, regardless of covid-19 disease severity­a strong recommendations against hydroxychloroquine and against lopinavir/ritonavir; and a recommendation against ivermectin except in the context of a clinical trial. ABOUT THIS GUIDELINE: This living guideline from the World Health Organization (WHO) incorporates new evidence to dynamically update recommendations for covid-19 therapeutics. The GDG typically evaluates a therapy when the WHO judges sufficient evidence is available to make a recommendation. While the GDG takes an individual patient perspective in making recommendations, it also considers resource implications, acceptability, feasibility, equity, and human rights. This guideline was developed according to standards and methods for trustworthy guidelines, making use of an innovative process to achieve efficiency in dynamic updating of recommendations. The methods are aligned with the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development and according to a pre-approved protocol (planning proposal) by the Guideline Review Committee (GRC). A box at the end of the article outlines key methodological aspects of the guideline process. MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation provides methodological support, including the coordination of living systematic reviews with network meta-analyses to inform the recommendations. The full version of the guideline is available online in MAGICapp and in PDF, with a summary version here in The BMJ. These formats should facilitate adaptation, which is strongly encouraged by WHO to contextualise recommendations in a healthcare system to maximise impact. Future recommendations: Recommendations on anticoagulation are planned for the next update to this guideline.

Treatment of coronavirus disease 2019.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious and potentially lethal pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). No specific antiviral treatment is currently available. The purpose of this review is to highlight the main repurposed drug treatments with in-vitro or in-vivo efficacy against the SARS-CoV-2. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent clinical trials suggested remdesivir, IFN-ß-1b and favipiravir have potential clinical and/or virological benefits on patients with COVID-19. Short course of stress dose of corticosteroids might be used as adjunctive treatment to patients who are late presenters with cytokine storm. Convalescent plasma from recovered COVID-19 patients with high neutralizing antibody might also be beneficial in the treatment of severe disease. SUMMARY: Early effective antiviral therapy in COVID-19 patients will suppress the SARS-CoV-2 viral load. Adjunctive therapy with corticosteroid and convalescent plasma might further ameliorate the cytokine response. Further randomized clinical trials of combination therapy are needed.

Systemic corticosteroid use and cardiovascular risk in patients hospitalized for pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available concerning cardiovascular risk with respect to adjunctive corticosteroid use in patients with pneumonia. We aimed to assess the associations between systemic corticosteroid use and the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients hospitalized for pneumonia. METHODS: Among study participants enrolled via surveillance for severe acute respiratory infection from July 2016 to January 2017, the clinical course of patients with pneumonia was retrospectively investigated until December 2019. We evaluated the occurrence of in-hospital and after-discharge MACEs according to steroid use during hospitalization. RESULTS: Of the 424 patients hospitalized for pneumonia, 118 (28.8%) received systemic corticosteroids during hospitalization. The most common reason for steroid use was acute exacerbation of chronic lung disease (75.4%). Systemic steroid use was significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital MACEs; it was not associated with after-discharge MACEs. The risk of in-hospital MACEs was significantly greater in patients with more comorbidities, more severe pneumonia, and a higher inflammatory marker level; moreover, it was positively associated with duration and cumulative dose of steroid treatment. CONCLUSION: Systemic corticosteroid use was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital MACEs in patients hospitalized for pneumonia.

Geographical differences in the use of oral corticosteroids in patients with severe asthma in Spain: heat map based on existing databases analyses.

BACKGROUND: Although there are currently alternative treatments to the long-term use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) in severe asthma, recent studies show excessive use depending on geography and differences in medical practice. The objective of the study was to describe the differences in OCS use for severe asthma across the Spanish geography. METHODS: This is a real-world study using existing databases (year 2019): longitudinal patient database (EMR), based on electronic medical records, and database of pharmacological consumption (Sell-in) in basic healthcare areas. With EMR, the percentage of OCS prescriptions corresponding to patients with severe asthma (ICD-9 "asthma" and prescription of biological treatment and/or high dose of inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting inhaled ß2 agonists) was calculated. This percentage was transferred to the OCS consumption of each basic healthcare area as reported in the Sell-in database and a national heat map was created. The estimation of OCS use in patients with severe asthma per 100,000 inhabitants for each region was calculated by grouping basic healthcare areas and the mean OCS use per patient for different regions in Spain was also estimated. RESULTS: Patients with severe asthma in Spain were mostly female (69.6%), with a mean age (SD) of 57.6 years (18.01). Median time (Pc25-Pc75) since asthma diagnosis was 83.1 months (34.65-131.56). Of all patients with OCS prescriptions in 2019 identified in EMR, 4.4% corresponded to patients with severe asthma. Regions with the highest OCS use were Asturias, Andalucía, and Galicia, whereas those with the lowest use were Navarra, Baleares, Madrid and País Vasco. The mean OCS use per patient with severe asthma in 2019 throughout Spain was 1099.85 mg per patient, ranging from 782.99 mg in Navarra to 1432.64 in Asturias. CONCLUSIONS: There are geographical differences between Spanish regions with respect to the use of OCS in patients with severe asthma. The national mean consumption of OCS per patient with severe asthma and year is above the limits that indicate good asthma control.

Factors associated with improved outcome of inhaled corticosteroid use in COVID-19: A single institutional study.

Asthmatics seem less prone to adverse outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and some data shows that inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are protective. We gathered data on anecdotal ICS and outcomes of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, given there is literature supporting ICS may reduce risk of severe infection. In addition, we fill gaps in current literature evaluating Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) as a risk assessment tool for COVID-19. This was a single-center, retrospective study designed and conducted to identify factors associated intubation and inpatient mortality. A multivariate logistic regression model was fit to generate adjusted odds ratios (OR). Intubation was associated with male gender (OR, 2.815; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.348-5.881; P = .006) and increasing body mass index (BMI) (OR, 1.053; 95% CI, 1.009-1.099; P = .019). Asthma was associated with lower odds for intubation (OR, 0.283; 95% CI, 0.108-0.74; P = .01). 80% of patients taking pre-hospital ICS were not intubated (n = 8). In-patient mortality was associated with male gender (OR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.167-5.1; P = .018), older age (OR, 1.096; 95% CI, 1.052-1.142; P = <.001), and increasing BMI (OR, 1.079; 95% CI, 1.033-1.127; P = .001). Asthma was associated with lower in-patient mortality (OR, 0.221; 95% CI, 0.057-0.854; P = .029). CCI did not correlate with intubation (OR, 1.262; 95% CI, 0.923-1.724; P = .145) or inpatient mortality (OR, 0.896; 95% CI, 0.665-1.206; P = .468). Asthmatics hospitalized for COVID-19 had less adverse outcomes, and most patients taking pre-hospital ICS were not intubated. CCI score was not associated with intubation or inpatient mortality.

[Exacerbation of obstructive pulmonary diseases by SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients treated in the Pulmonology Clinic of Târgu Mures]. / Obstruktív tüdobetegségek súlyosbodása SARS-CoV-2-fertozés hatására a marosvásárhelyi Pulmonológiai Klinika beteganyagában.

INTRODUCTION: Literature data show an increased severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with cardiovascular, renal comorbidities, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, obesity, diabetes, tumors and immunosuppression. METHOD: This retrospective study includes 90 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection associated with COPD or asthma exacerbations from 303 patients hospitalized during a 7-month period (29.7%). The clinical aspect of COPD/asthma exacerbations overlapped to the one by SARS-CoV-2 infection, therefore, we compared our group with 90 patients with SARS-CoV-2 without obstructive disease. We excluded from both groups the patients with known severe cardiac impairment, diabetes, or tumors in order to not having interference with other unfavorable prognostic factors. We assessed the cases severity on clinical basis, pulzoximetry, CT/chest x-ray, and inflammatory markers. RESULTS: 72.2% of our group (48/52 with COPD and 17/38 with asthma) had moderate/severe pneumonia (bilateral interstitial-alveolar infiltrates, increased inflammatory markers, respiratory dysfunction) compared with 56.6% from the nonobstructive group. 14 patients required intensive therapy (including mechanical ventilation). We recorded 4 deaths in COPD group, 1 in asthma group, compared to 2 in non-obstructive patients (fatality 7.6% in COPD compared to 2.2% in nonobstructive group). Treatment included maximized inhaled bronchodilators ± corticosteroids, oxygen, antivirals, anticoagulants, corticosteroids, symptomatic. All patients were referred for clinical-functional and CT scan reassessment 2 months after discharge. CONCLUSION: The association of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with COPD or asthma was common, leading to exacerbation with significant severity. Fatality increased in COPD. Outpatient follow-up aims to restage adjust the treatment and monitor post-COVID-19 possible sequels. Orv Hetil. 2023; 164(2): 43-50.

Hearing loss and COVID-19: an umbrella review.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 can result in an extensive range of extrapulmonary, and neurological signs and symptoms such as olfactory and/or taste dysfunction, and otologic symptoms. The aim of this study was to investigate the hearing loss manifestation from COVID-19. METHODS: The goal of this umbrella review was to examine hearing loss associated with COVID-19 disease. English literature published until October 15, 2022 in online databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase was considered for this purpose. Eligibility of the articles for subsequent data extraction was evaluated in a two-step selection process with consideration to an inclusion/exclusion criterion. This review followed the PRISMA protocol and the Amstar-2 checklist for quality assessment. RESULTS: A total of four treatment strategies were used by different studies which included oral corticosteroids, intratympanic corticosteroids, combined oral and intratympanic corticosteroids, and hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Five studies investigated corticosteroid use in the forms of oral or intratympanic injection; four studies reported (complete or partial) hearing improvements after steroid treatment, while one study stated no significant improvement in hearing function. One study reported that oral corticosteroid monotherapy alone was not effective, while vestibular symptoms were ameliorated by a combination of oral prednisone, intratympanic dexamethasone injection, and hydroxychloroquine. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that despite being one of the rare complications of COVID-19, hearing loss can impact a patient's quality of life. The most common type reported was sensorineural hearing loss, which can be diagnosed with variable techniques.

Association between prolonged corticosteroids use in COVID-19 and increased mortality in hospitalized patients: a retrospective study with inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated a beneficial effect of early use of corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19. This study aimed to compare hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received short-course corticosteroid treatment with those who received prolonged-course corticosteroid treatment to determine whether prolonged use of corticosteroids improves clinical outcomes, including mortality. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study including adult patients with positive testing for Sars-CoV-2 hospitalized for more than 10 days. Data were obtained from electronic medical records. Patients were divided into two groups, according to the duration of treatment with corticosteroids: a short-course (10 days) and a prolonged-course (longer than 10 days) group. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was used to evaluate whether prolonged use of corticosteroids improved outcomes. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital infection and the association of different doses of corticosteroids with hospital mortality. Restricted cubic splines were used to assess the nonlinear association between mortality and dose and duration of corticosteroids use. RESULTS: We enrolled 1,539 patients with COVID-19. Among them, 1127 received corticosteroids for more than 10 days (prolonged-course group). The in-hospital mortality was higher in patients that received prolonged course corticosteroids (39.5% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). The IPTW revealed that prolonged use of corticosteroids significantly increased mortality [relative risk (RR) = 1.52, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.24-1.89]. In comparison to short course treatment, the cubic spline analysis showed an inverted U-shaped curve for mortality, with the highest risk associated with the prolonged use at 30 days (RR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.21-1.78). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged course of treatment with corticosteroids in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was associated with higher mortality.

Higher dose corticosteroids in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 who are hypoxic but not requiring ventilatory support (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose corticosteroids have been shown to reduce mortality for patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen or ventilatory support (non-invasive mechanical ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). We evaluated the use of a higher dose of corticosteroids in this patient group. METHODS: This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]) is assessing multiple possible treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19. Eligible and consenting adult patients with clinical evidence of hypoxia (ie, receiving oxygen or with oxygen saturation <92% on room air) were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual care with higher dose corticosteroids (dexamethasone 20 mg once daily for 5 days followed by 10 mg dexamethasone once daily for 5 days or until discharge if sooner) or usual standard of care alone (which included dexamethasone 6 mg once daily for 10 days or until discharge if sooner). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality among all randomised participants. On May 11, 2022, the independent data monitoring committee recommended stopping recruitment of patients receiving no oxygen or simple oxygen only due to safety concerns. We report the results for these participants only. Recruitment of patients receiving ventilatory support is ongoing. The RECOVERY trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04381936). FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2021, and May 13, 2022, 1272 patients with COVID-19 and hypoxia receiving no oxygen (eight [1%]) or simple oxygen only (1264 [99%]) were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus higher dose corticosteroids (659 patients) versus usual care alone (613 patients, of whom 87% received low-dose corticosteroids during the follow-up period). Of those randomly assigned, 745 (59%) were in Asia, 512 (40%) in the UK, and 15 (1%) in Africa. 248 (19%) had diabetes and 769 (60%) were male. Overall, 123 (19%) of 659 patients allocated to higher dose corticosteroids versus 75 (12%) of 613 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 1·59 [95% CI 1·20-2·10]; p=0·0012). There was also an excess of pneumonia reported to be due to non-COVID infection (64 cases [10%] vs 37 cases [6%]; absolute difference 3·7% [95% CI 0·7-6·6]) and an increase in hyperglycaemia requiring increased insulin dose (142 [22%] vs 87 [14%]; absolute difference 7·4% [95% CI 3·2-11·5]). INTERPRETATION: In patients hospitalised for COVID-19 with clinical hypoxia who required either no oxygen or simple oxygen only, higher dose corticosteroids significantly increased the risk of death compared with usual care, which included low-dose corticosteroids. The RECOVERY trial continues to assess the effects of higher dose corticosteroids in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 who require non-invasive ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), National Institute of Health and Care Research, and Wellcome Trust.

The role of corticosteroids in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at Mexico general Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the evolution of hospitalized patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 who received corticosteroid-based treatment versus patients who received standard therapy. METHOD: Retrospective, observational, and analytical study. Clinical records were collected from the different intensive care units, and data were obtained from confirmed COVID-19 patients over 18 years of age who were hospitalized. The population was divided into two groups: patients who received corticosteroid treatment, and those who received standard therapy. RESULTS: A total of 1603 patients were admitted to hospital, and of these 984 (62.9%) were discharged due to death. The main result was the identification by odds ratio (OR: 4.68; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 3.75-5.83; p = 0.001) as risk for death to the use of systemic steroids, as well as the use of invasive mechanical ventilation (OR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.80-2.82; p < 0.001). The male gender was the most affected with 1051 (65.6%) patients. Mean age was 56 years (± 14). CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroid use was associated with poor prognosis in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 compared to those receiving standard therapy.

OBJETIVO: Comparar la evolución de los pacientes hospitalizados infectados por SARS-CoV-2 que recibieron tratamiento a base de corticoesteroides frente a los pacientes que recibieron la terapia estándar. MÉTODO: Estudio de tipo retrospectivo, observacional y analítico. Se recolectaron los expedientes clínicos de las diferentes unidades de terapia intensiva y se obtuvieron datos de los pacientes confirmados de COVID-19, mayores de 18 años, que estuvieron hospitalizados. Se dividió la población en dos grupos: pacientes que recibieron tratamiento con corticoesteroides y pacientes que recibieron terapia estándar. RESULTADOS: De un total de 1603 pacientes ingresados a hospitalización, 984 (62.9%) fallecieron. El resultado principal fue la identificación mediante razón de momios (odds ratio [OR]: 4.68; intervalo de confianza del 95% [IC95%]: 3.75-5.83; p = 0.001) como riesgo para defunción con uso de esteroides sistémicos, así como con uso de ventilación mecánica invasiva (OR: 2.26; IC95%: 1.80-2.82; p < 0.001). El sexo masculino fue el más afectado, con 1051 (65.6%) pacientes. La media de edad fue de 56 años (± 14). CONCLUSIONES: El uso de corticoesteroides se asoció con mal pronóstico en los pacientes hospitalizados por COVID-19, en comparación con los que recibieron la terapia estándar.

Implementation of corticosteroids in treatment of COVID-19 in the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK: prospective, cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone was the first intervention proven to reduce mortality in patients with COVID-19 being treated in hospital. We aimed to evaluate the adoption of corticosteroids in the treatment of COVID-19 in the UK after the RECOVERY trial publication on June 16, 2020, and to identify discrepancies in care. METHODS: We did an audit of clinical implementation of corticosteroids in a prospective, observational, cohort study in 237 UK acute care hospitals between March 16, 2020, and April 14, 2021, restricted to patients aged 18 years or older with proven or high likelihood of COVID-19, who received supplementary oxygen. The primary outcome was administration of dexamethasone, prednisolone, hydrocortisone, or methylprednisolone. This study is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN66726260. FINDINGS: Between June 17, 2020, and April 14, 2021, 47 795 (75·2%) of 63 525 of patients on supplementary oxygen received corticosteroids, higher among patients requiring critical care than in those who received ward care (11 185 [86·6%] of 12 909 vs 36 415 [72·4%] of 50 278). Patients 50 years or older were significantly less likely to receive corticosteroids than those younger than 50 years (adjusted odds ratio 0·79 [95% CI 0·70-0·89], p=0·0001, for 70-79 years; 0·52 [0·46-0·58], p<0·0001, for >80 years), independent of patient demographics and illness severity. 84 (54·2%) of 155 pregnant women received corticosteroids. Rates of corticosteroid administration increased from 27·5% in the week before June 16, 2020, to 75-80% in January, 2021. INTERPRETATION: Implementation of corticosteroids into clinical practice in the UK for patients with COVID-19 has been successful, but not universal. Patients older than 70 years, independent of illness severity, chronic neurological disease, and dementia, were less likely to receive corticosteroids than those who were younger, as were pregnant women. This could reflect appropriate clinical decision making, but the possibility of inequitable access to life-saving care should be considered. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research and UK Medical Research Council.

Impact of systemic corticosteroids on length of hospitalization among patients with COVID-19. / [Artículo traducido] Impacto de los corticoides sistémicos en el tiempo de hospitalización en pacientes con COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome. MéTHOD: We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team. RESULTS: A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median=3 [interquartile range=0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p=0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤4 days than >4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised >4 days [p<0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

Impact of systemic corticosteroids on hospital length of stay among patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome. METHODS: We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team. RESULTS: A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median = 3 [interquartile range = 0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p = 0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤ 4 days than > 4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤ 4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised > 4 days [p < 0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

Long-term (180-Day) Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19 in the REMAP-CAP Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The longer-term effects of therapies for the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19 are unknown. Objective: To determine the effect of multiple interventions for critically ill adults with COVID-19 on longer-term outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prespecified secondary analysis of an ongoing adaptive platform trial (REMAP-CAP) testing interventions within multiple therapeutic domains in which 4869 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 were enrolled between March 9, 2020, and June 22, 2021, from 197 sites in 14 countries. The final 180-day follow-up was completed on March 2, 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive 1 or more interventions within 6 treatment domains: immune modulators (n = 2274), convalescent plasma (n = 2011), antiplatelet therapy (n = 1557), anticoagulation (n = 1033), antivirals (n = 726), and corticosteroids (n = 401). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was survival through day 180, analyzed using a bayesian piecewise exponential model. A hazard ratio (HR) less than 1 represented improved survival (superiority), while an HR greater than 1 represented worsened survival (harm); futility was represented by a relative improvement less than 20% in outcome, shown by an HR greater than 0.83. Results: Among 4869 randomized patients (mean age, 59.3 years; 1537 [32.1%] women), 4107 (84.3%) had known vital status and 2590 (63.1%) were alive at day 180. IL-6 receptor antagonists had a greater than 99.9% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.74 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.61-0.90]) and antiplatelet agents had a 95% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.71-1.03]) compared with the control, while the probability of trial-defined statistical futility (HR >0.83) was high for therapeutic anticoagulation (99.9%; HR, 1.13 [95% CrI, 0.93-1.42]), convalescent plasma (99.2%; HR, 0.99 [95% CrI, 0.86-1.14]), and lopinavir-ritonavir (96.6%; HR, 1.06 [95% CrI, 0.82-1.38]) and the probabilities of harm from hydroxychloroquine (96.9%; HR, 1.51 [95% CrI, 0.98-2.29]) and the combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine (96.8%; HR, 1.61 [95% CrI, 0.97-2.67]) were high. The corticosteroid domain was stopped early prior to reaching a predefined statistical trigger; there was a 57.1% to 61.6% probability of improving 6-month survival across varying hydrocortisone dosing strategies. Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill patients with COVID-19 randomized to receive 1 or more therapeutic interventions, treatment with an IL-6 receptor antagonist had a greater than 99.9% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control, and treatment with an antiplatelet had a 95.0% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control. Overall, when considered with previously reported short-term results, the findings indicate that initial in-hospital treatment effects were consistent for most therapies through 6 months.

A review of organizing pneumonia.

ABSTRACT: Organizing pneumonia is a clinical and pathological syndrome that describes a lung injury caused by an inflammatory reaction in the alveolar connective tissue. Classified as an interstitial lung disease, it can be secondary to infection, drug toxicity, connective tissue disorders, inhalation injuries (cocaine), organ transplant, or radiotherapy, and also can be idiopathic. Although organizing pneumonia is not a new phenomenon, it has been noted to be a complication of COVID-19, and should be considered in patients who have had COVID-19 and have atypical chest imaging, because treatment includes corticosteroids instead of antimicrobials.

The outcome of COVID-19 in children with chronic lung disease: Systematic review and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the impact of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection on children with chronic lung disease (CLD). OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prevalence, risk factors for contracting COVID-19, and complications of COVID-19, in children with CLD. METHODS: This systematic review was based on articles published between January 1, 2020 and July 25, 2022. Children under 18 years old, with any CLD and infected with COVID-19 were included. RESULTS: Ten articles involving children with asthma and four involving children with cystic fibrosis (CF) were included in the analyses. The prevalence of COVID-19 in children with asthma varied between 0.14% and 19.1%. The use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) was associated with reduced risk for COVID-19 (risk ratio [RR]: 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40-0.90). Uncontrolled asthma, younger age, AND moderate-severe asthma were not significant risk factors for contracting COVID-19. Children with asthma had an increased risk for hospitalization (RR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.07-2.45) but were not more likely to require assisted ventilation (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.14-1.90). The risk of COVID-19 infection among children with CF was <1%. Posttransplant and cystic fibrosis-related diabetes mellitus (CFRDM) patients were at an increased risk for hospitalization and intensive care treatment. CONCLUSION: Hospitalizations were higher in children with asthma with COVID-19 infection. However, using ICS reduced the risk of COVID-19 infection. As for CF, postlung transplantation and CFRDM were risk factors for severe disease.