Early experimental COVID-19 therapies: associations with length of hospital stay, mortality and related costs.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir have been used as experimental therapies to treat COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. Randomised controlled trials have recently shown that there are no meaningful benefits of these two therapies in hospitalised patients. Uncertainty remains regarding the potential harmful impact of these therapies as very early treatments and their burden to the health care system. The present study investigated the length of hospital stay (LOS), mortality, and costs of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir or their combination in comparison with standard of care among patients hospitalised for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study took place in the Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland (n = 840) between 26 February and 31 May 2020. Demographics, treatment regimens, comorbidities, the modified National Early Warning Score (mNEWS) on admission, and contraindications to COVID-19 treatment options were assessed. Outcomes included LOS, in-hospital mortality, and drug and LOS costs. RESULTS: After successful propensity score matching, patients treated with (1) hydroxychloroquine, (2) lopinavir/ritonavir or (3) their combination had on average 3.75 additional hospitalisation days (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37–6.12, p = 0.002), 1.23 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI −1.24 – 3.51, p = 0.319), and 4.19 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI 1.52–5.31, p <0.001), respectively, compared with patients treated with the standard of care. Neither experimental therapy was significantly associated with mortality. These additional hospital days amounted to 1010.77 additional days for hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine combined with lopinavir/ritonavir, resulting in an additional cost of US$ 2,492,214 (95%CI US$ 916,839–3,450,619). CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing experimental therapies for COVID-19 was not associated with a reduced LOS and might have increased the pressure put on healthcare systems.

Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome: pathophysiology, management, and experimental therapies.

INTRODUCTION: Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) is an increasingly well-recognized condition encountered in clinical practice. Diagnosis and treatment remain extremely challenging. The limited success of currently available therapies has laid the foundation for a number of experimental therapies. AREAS COVERED: In this review, we will briefly outline the pathophysiology and clinical features of this syndrome, before moving on to its management, with a specific focus on experimental pharmacological therapies. Finally, we briefly discuss POTS related to the SARS CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. EXPERT OPINION: Despite tremendous advances, the diagnosis and management of POTS remains extremely challenging. The multitude of contributory mechanisms, which predominate to varying degrees in different patients further complicates management. Improved characterization of pathophysiological phenotypes is essential to individualize management. Lifestyle measures form the first line of therapy, followed by beta-blockers, ivabradine, fludrocortisone, and midodrine. Supplemental therapies such as iron, vitamin D and α lipoic acid are quite safe and a trial of their use is reasonable. The use of erythropoietin, IVIG, desmopressin, etc., are more specialized and nuanced alternatives. In recent years, interest has grown in the use of cardiac neuromodulation. Though preliminary, some of these therapies are quite promising.

Study protocol for the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-COV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE): A longitudinal study of the medium and long-term sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: Reports on medium and long-term sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infections largely lack quantification of incidence and relative risk. We describe the rationale and methods of the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Registry (INSPIRE) that combines patient-reported outcomes with data from digital health records to understand predictors and impacts of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: INSPIRE is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal study of individuals with symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection in eight regions across the US. Adults are eligible for enrollment if they are fluent in English or Spanish, reported symptoms suggestive of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, and if they are within 42 days of having a SARS-CoV-2 viral test (i.e., nucleic acid amplification test or antigen test), regardless of test results. Recruitment occurs in-person, by phone or email, and through online advertisement. A secure online platform is used to facilitate the collation of consent-related materials, digital health records, and responses to self-administered surveys. Participants are followed for up to 18 months, with patient-reported outcomes collected every three months via survey and linked to concurrent digital health data; follow-up includes no in-person involvement. Our planned enrollment is 4,800 participants, including 2,400 SARS-CoV-2 positive and 2,400 SARS-CoV-2 negative participants (as a concurrent comparison group). These data will allow assessment of longitudinal outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection and comparison of the relative risk of outcomes in individuals with and without infection. Patient-reported outcomes include self-reported health function and status, as well as clinical outcomes including health system encounters and new diagnoses. RESULTS: Participating sites obtained institutional review board approval. Enrollment and follow-up are ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: This study will characterize medium and long-term sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection among a diverse population, predictors of sequelae, and their relative risk compared to persons with similar symptomatology but without SARS-CoV-2 infection. These data may inform clinical interventions for individuals with sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Current and investigational therapies for the treatment of refractory ventricular fibrillation.

PURPOSE: Esmolol, dual sequential defibrillation, vector change defibrillation, and left stellate ganglion block are presented and reviewed for the treatment of refractory ventricular fibrillation. SUMMARY: Although no formal definition has been established for refractory ventricular fibrillation, the literature describes it as a pulseless ventricular arrhythmia that persists despite 3 standard defibrillation attempts, administration of amiodarone 300 mg intravenously, and provision of three 1-mg intravenous doses of epinephrine. Evolving literature surrounding resuscitation in this particular subset of cardiac arrest challenges the efficacy of traditional therapies, such as epinephrine, and suggests that other treatment modalities may improve outcomes. Case reports, case series, and small retrospective studies have pointed to benefit when utilizing a variety of therapies, namely, esmolol, dual sequential defibrillation, vector change defibrillation, or left stellate ganglion block, in patients with refractory ventricular fibrillation arrest. CONCLUSION: A mounting, although limited, body of evidence suggests that esmolol, dual sequential defibrillation, vector change defibrillation, or left stellate ganglion block may be effective at terminating refractory ventricular fibrillation and improving patient outcomes. Further evidence is required before these therapies can be adopted as standard practice; however, as key members of the code response team, it is imperative for pharmacists to be familiar with the supporting evidence, safety considerations, and logistical challenges of utilizing these treatments during arrest.

Oncologists' reflections on patient rights and access to compassionate use drugs: A qualitative interview study from an academic cancer center.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allows patients with serious illnesses to access investigational drugs for "compassionate use" outside of clinical trials through expanded access (EA) Programs. The federal Right-to-Try Act created an additional pathway for non-trial access to experimental drugs without institutional review board or FDA approval. This removal of oversight amplifies the responsibility of physicians, but little is known about the role of practicing physicians in non-trial access to investigational drugs. We undertook semi-structured interviews to capture the experiences and opinions of 21 oncologists all with previous EA experience at a major cancer center. We found five main themes. Participants with greater EA experience reported less difficulty accessing drugs through the myriad of administrative processes and drug company reluctance to provide investigational products while newcomers reported administrative hurdles. Oncologists outlined several rationales patients offered when seeking investigational drugs, including those with stronger health literacy and a good scientific rationale versus others who remained skeptical of conventional medicine. Participants reported that most patients had realistic expectations while some had unrealistic optimism. Given the diverse reasons patients sought investigational drugs, four factors-scientific rationale, risk-benefit ratio, functional status of the patient, and patient motivation-influenced oncologists' decisions to request compassionate use drugs. Physicians struggled with a "right-to-try" framing of patient access to experimental drugs, noting instead their own responsibility to protect patients' best interest in the uncertain and risky process of off-protocol access. This study highlights the willingness of oncologists at a major cancer center to pursue non-trial access to experimental treatments for patients while also shedding light on the factors they use when considering such treatment. Our data reveal discrepancies between physicians' sense of patients' expectations and their own internal sense of professional obligation to shepherd a safe process for patients at a vulnerable point in their care.

Strategy for the control of drug-induced liver injury due to investigational treatments/drugs for COVID-19.

Investigational treatments/drugs for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been applied, with repurposed or newly developed drugs, and their effectiveness has been evaluated. Some of these drugs may be hepatotoxic, and each monotherapy or combination therapy may increase the risk of drug-induced liver injury (DILI). We should aim to control dysregulation of liver function, as well as the progression of COVID-19, as much as possible. We discussed the potential risks of investigational treatments/drugs and promising drugs for both COVID-19 and DILI due to investigational treatments/drugs.

Regulatory oversight on the use of experimental therapies during a pandemic: The case of early access to convalescent plasma therapy in three LMICs.

Clinicians, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), contend with limited economic and healthcare resources in deciding appropriate and feasible care for their patients. Some of the LMICs affected by COVID-19 implemented convalescent plasma therapy without sufficient regulatory guidance. Based on this experience, there are several requirements going forward, including: the need for an immediately accessible data gathering and processing system; the necessity of establishing regulatory pathways for early access to experimental treatment during emergency situations; and the accompanying reporting and monitoring requirements must be set. The different stakeholders must also be properly incorporated in the system that such a pathway will create, without neglecting to properly inform the public of the patient rights especially during an emergency situation.

Information Opacity in Biopharmaceutical Innovation Through the Lens of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed myriad and complex challenges for our national health care system spanning preparedness, response, access, costs, infrastructure, coordination, and medical innovation. These challenges implicate federal, state, and local agencies and actors, as well as international collaborative bodies. One constant throughout the pandemic has been the pressing need for safe and effective diagnostics, prophylactic vaccines, and drug treatments to counter the virus.1 Inarguably, significant problems with the multi-faceted system of drug and vaccine innovation and regulation manifested long before the COVID-19 pandemic.2 The pandemic, however, has laid bare the inextricable connections among federal funding, patents, product review and approval mechanisms, and the eventual medical products and resulting costs.

Homecare Encounters: An Organizational Response to Innovative Care for Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare delivery has been significantly changed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) are vulnerable to infections because of their immunocompromised status. The risk of nosocomial infection may be reduced by providing care to patients at home. OBJECTIVES: This article describes one cancer center's approach for delivering safe patient care through homecare encounters, the benefits of home care for HSCT, and future directions. METHODS: Patients received detailed information on home encounters. Advanced practice providers visited patients daily and then returned to the clinic to formulate a plan of care with the interprofessional care team. Transplantation RNs visited patients on the same day to provide the prescribed care. FINDINGS: Based on evaluations from 32 patients and 12 providers, the results indicated that home care was safe, feasible, and beneficial for patient care post-HSCT during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Developing therapeutic approaches for twenty-first-century emerging infectious viral diseases.

The twenty-first century has already recorded more than ten major epidemic or pandemic virus emergence events, including the ongoing and devastating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. As viral disease emergence is expected to accelerate, these data dictate a need for proactive approaches to develop broadly active family-specific and cross-family therapeutics for use in future disease outbreaks. Emphasis should focus not only on the development of broad-spectrum small-molecule and antibody direct-acting antivirals, but also on host-factor therapeutics, including repurposing previously approved or in-pipeline drugs. Another new class of therapeutics with great antiviral therapeutic potential is RNA-based therapeutics. Rather than only focusing on known risks, dedicated efforts must be made toward pre-emptive research focused on outbreak-prone virus families, ultimately offering a strategy to shorten the gap between outbreak and response. Emphasis should also focus on orally available drugs for outpatient use, if possible, and on identifying combination therapies that combat viral and immune-mediated pathologies, extend the effectiveness of therapeutic windows and reduce drug resistance. While such an undertaking will require new vision, dedicated funding and private, federal and academic partnerships, this approach offers hope that global populations need never experience future pandemics such as COVID-19.

Conference on retroviruses and opportunistic infections (virtual): March 6-10, 2021.

The Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI) for 2021 was, as with so many other conferences in the past 12 months, held online. CROI provided a forum for basic scientists and clinical researchers to bring together and discuss their work on human retroviruses and associated diseases, with HIV and SARS-CoV-2 being the two viruses most covered this year. Below are some examples of the work presented at the conference, highlighting both the innovative approaches to understanding and treating viral infections but also the breadth of topics covered.

Glycyrrhizin: An old weapon against a novel coronavirus.

Currently, over 100 countries are fighting against a common enemy, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2, which causes COVID-19. This has created a demand for a substance whose effectiveness has already been demonstrated in a similar scenario. Glycyrrhizin (GZ) is a promising agent against SARS-CoV-2 as its antiviral activity against SARS-CoV has already been confirmed. It is worthwhile to extrapolate from its proven therapeutic effects as there is a high similarity in the structure and genome of SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. There are many possible mechanisms through which GZ acts against viruses: increasing nitrous oxide production in macrophages, affecting transcription factors and cellular signalling pathways, directly altering the viral lipid-bilayer membrane, and binding to the ACE2 receptor. In this review, we discuss the possible use of GZ in the COVID-19 setting, where topical administration appears to be promising, with the nasal and oral cavity notably being the potent location in terms of viral load. The most recently published papers on the distribution of ACE2 in the human body and documented binding of GZ to this receptor, as well as its antiviral activity, suggest that GZ can be used as a therapeutic for COVID-19 and as a preventive agent against SARS-CoV-2.

The changing face of family medicine in the COVID and post-COVID era.

This article describes the prospective changes and the fundamental values of the relationships between family doctors, patients and community according to an ethical-social concept of medicine. New aspects of the organization of the activity and of the roles of family doctors are reported in order to build hypotheses pointing to a modern and efficient management of patients in the coming the post-COVID era.

An update review of emerging small-molecule therapeutic options for COVID-19.

The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak and pandemic that began near the end of 2019 has posed a challenge to global health. At present, many candidate small-molecule therapeutics have been developed that can inhibit both the infection and replication of SARS-CoV-2 and even potentially relieve cytokine storms and other related complications. Meanwhile, host-targeted drugs that inhibit cellular transmembrane serine protease (TMPRSS2) can prevent SARS-CoV-2 from entering cells, and its combination with chloroquine and dihydroorotate dehydrogenase (DHODH) inhibitors can limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and reduce the morbidity and mortality of patients with COVID-19. The present article provides an overview of these small-molecule therapeutics based on insights from medicinal chemistry research and focuses on RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) inhibitors, such as the nucleoside analogues remdesivir, favipiravir and ribavirin. This review also covers inhibitors of 3C-like protease (3CLpro), papain-like protease (PLpro) and other potentially innovative active ingredient molecules, describing their potential targets, activities, clinical status and side effects.

Ethics of emerging infectious disease outbreak responses: Using Ebola virus disease as a case study of limited resource allocation.

Emerging infectious diseases such as Ebola Virus Disease (EVD), Nipah Virus Encephalitis and Lassa fever pose significant epidemic threats. Responses to emerging infectious disease outbreaks frequently occur in resource-constrained regions and under high pressure to quickly contain the outbreak prior to potential spread. As seen in the 2020 EVD outbreaks in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the current COVID-19 pandemic, there is a continued need to evaluate and address the ethical challenges that arise in the high stakes environment of an emerging infectious disease outbreak response. The research presented here provides analysis of the ethical challenges with regard to allocation of limited resources, particularly experimental therapeutics, using the 2013-2016 EVD outbreak in West Africa as a case study. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with senior healthcare personnel (n = 16) from international humanitarian aid organizations intimately engaged in the 2013-2016 EVD outbreak response in West Africa. Interviews were recorded in private setting, transcribed, and iteratively coded using grounded theory methodology. A majority of respondents indicated a clear propensity to adopt an ethical framework of guiding principles for international responses to emerging infectious disease outbreaks. Respondents agreed that prioritization of frontline workers' access to experimental therapeutics was warranted based on a principle of reciprocity. There was widespread acceptance of adaptive trial designs and greater trial transparency in providing access to experimental therapeutics. Many respondents also emphasized the importance of community engagement in limited resource allocation scheme design and culturally appropriate informed consent procedures. The study results inform a potential ethical framework of guiding principles based on the interview participants' insights to be adopted by international response organizations and their healthcare workers in the face of allocating limited resources such as experimental therapeutics in future emerging infectious disease outbreaks to ease the moral burden of individual healthcare providers.

Managing Clinical Trials for Alzheimer's Disease During the COVID-19 Crisis: Experience at Fundació ACE in Barcelona, Spain.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought great disruption to health systems worldwide. This affected ongoing clinical research, particularly among those most vulnerable to the pandemic, like dementia patients. Fundació ACE is a research center and memory clinic based in Barcelona, Spain, one of the hardest-hit countries. OBJECTIVE: To describe the ad-hoc strategic plan developed to cope with this crisis and to share its outcomes. METHODS: We describe participants' clinical and demographic features. Additionally, we explain our strategic plan aimed at minimizing the impact on clinical trial research activities, which included SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and IgG serological tests to all participants and personnel. The outcomes of the plan are described in terms of observed safety events and drop-outs during the study period. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were participating in 16 active clinical trials in Fundació ACE when the lockdown was established. During the confinement, we performed 1018 calls to the participants, which led to identify adverse events in 26 and COVID-19 symptoms in 6. A total of 83 patients (64%) could restart on-site visits as early as May 11, 2020. All SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR diagnostic tests performed before on-site visits were negative and only three IgG serological tests were positive. Throughout the study period, we only observed one drop-out, due to an adverse event unrelated to COVID-19. DISCUSSION: The plan implemented by Fundació ACE was able to preserve safety and integrity of ongoing clinical trials. We must use the lessons learned from the pandemic and design crisis-proof protocols for clinical trials.