Darunavir-cobicistat versus lopinavir-ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19 infection (DOLCI): A multicenter observational study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an evolving pandemic that urged the need to investigate various antiviral therapies. This study was conducted to compare efficacy and safety outcomes of darunavir-cobicistat versus lopinavir-ritonavir in treating patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This retrospective, multicenter, observational study was conducted on adult patients hospitalized in one of the COVID-19 facilities in Qatar. Patients were included if they received darunavir-cobicistat or lopinavir-ritonavir for at least three days as part of their COVID-19 treatments. Data were collected from patients' electronic medical records. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of time to clinical improvement and/or virological clearance. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used at alpha level of 0.05. A total of 400 patients was analyzed, of whom 100 received darunavir-cobicistat and 300 received lopinavir-ritonavir. Majority of patients were male (92.5%), with a mean (SD) time from symptoms onset to start of therapy of 7.57 days (4.89). Patients received lopinavir-ritonavir had significantly faster time to clinical improvement and/or virological clearance than patients received darunavir-cobicistat (4 days [IQR 3-7] vs. 6.5 days [IQR 4-12]; HR 1.345 [95%CI: 1.070-1.691], P = 0.011). Patients received lopinavir-ritonavir had significantly faster time to clinical improvement (5 days [IQR 3-8] vs. 8 days [IQR 4-13]; HR 1.520 (95%CI: 1.2-1.925), P = 0.000), and slower time to virological clearance than darunavir-cobicistat (25 days [IQR 15-33] vs. 21 days [IQR 12.8-30]; HR 0.772 (95%CI: 0.607-0.982), P = 0.035). No significant difference in the incidence or severity of adverse events between groups. The study was limited to its retrospective nature and the possibility of covariates, which was accounted for by multivariate analyses. CONCLUSION: In patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, early treatment with lopinavir-ritonavir was associated with faster time to clinical improvement and/or virological clearance than darunavir-cobicistat. Future trials are warranted to confirm these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04425382.

Darunavir/Cobicistat Is Associated with Negative Outcomes in HIV-Negative Patients with Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia.

The aim of this study was to evaluate both positive outcomes, including reduction of respiratory support aid and duration of hospital stay, and negative ones, including mortality and a composite of invasive mechanical ventilation or death, in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia treated with or without oral darunavir/cobicistat (DRV/c, 800/150 mg/day) used in different treatment durations. The secondary objective was to evaluate the percentage of patients treated with DRV/c who were exposed to potentially severe drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and died during hospitalization. This observational retrospective study was conducted in consecutive patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to a tertiary care hospital in Modena, Italy. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to compare patients receiving standard of care with or without DRV/c. Adjustment for key confounders was applied. Two hundred seventy-three patients (115 on DRV/c) were included, 75.8% males, mean age was 64.6 (±13.2) years. Clinical improvement was similar between the groups, depicted by respiratory aid switch (p > .05). The same was observed for duration of hospital stay [13.2 (±8.9) for DRV/c vs. 13.4 (±7.2) days for no-DRV/c, p = .9]. Patients on DRV/c had higher rates of mortality (25.2% vs. 10.1%, p < .0001. The rate of composite outcome of mechanical ventilation and death was higher in the DRV/c group (37.4% vs. 25.3%, p = .03). Multiple serious DDI associated with DRV/c were observed in the 19 patients who died. DRV/c should not be recommended as a treatment option for COVID-19 pneumonia outside clinical trials.

Effectiveness of Streptococcus Pneumoniae Urinary Antigen Testing in Decreasing Mortality of COVID-19 Co-Infected Patients: A Clinical Investigation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Streptococcus pneumoniae urinary antigen (u-Ag) testing has recently gained attention in the early diagnosis of severe and critical acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2/pneumococcal co-infection. The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of Streptococcus pneumoniae u-Ag testing in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, in order to assess whether pneumococcal co-infection is associated with different mortality rate and hospital stay in these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Charts, protocols, mortality, and hospitalization data of a consecutive series of COVID-19 patients admitted to a tertiary hospital in northern Italy during COVID-19 outbreak were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent Streptococcus pneumoniae u-Ag testing to detect an underlying pneumococcal co-infection. Covid19+/u-Ag+ and Covid19+/u-Ag- patients were compared in terms of overall survival and length of hospital stay using chi-square test and survival analysis. RESULTS: Out of 575 patients with documented pneumonia, 13% screened positive for the u-Ag test. All u-Ag+ patients underwent treatment with Ceftriaxone and Azithromycin or Levofloxacin. Lopinavir/Ritonavir or Darunavir/Cobicistat were added in 44 patients, and hydroxychloroquine and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in 47 and 33 patients, respectively. All u-Ag+ patients were hospitalized. Mortality was 15.4% and 25.9% in u-Ag+ and u-Ag- patients, respectively (p = 0.09). Survival analysis showed a better prognosis, albeit not significant, in u-Ag+ patients. Median hospital stay did not differ among groups (10 vs. 9 days, p = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of Streptococcus pneumoniae u-Ag testing helped to better target antibiotic therapy with a final trend of reduction in mortality of u-Ag+ COVID-19 patients having a concomitant pneumococcal infection. Randomized trials on larger cohorts are necessary in order to draw definitive conclusion.

Current treatment of COVID-19 in renal patients: hope or hype?

To date the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS- CoV-2), known as COVID-19, is for clinicians the most difficult global therapeutic problem. In this landscape, the management of patients with chronic kidney disease, acute kidney injury or patients undergoing immunosuppressant therapies for kidney transplant or glomerular diseases, represent a clinical challenge for nephrologists, especially in patients with severe acute lung involvement. Therefore in this setting, due to the lack of anti-COVID treatment schedules, tailored management is mandatory to reduce the side effects, as consequence of impaired renal function and drugs interactions. We report the main treatment actually used against SARS-CoV-2, underlining its possible use in the nephropatic patients and the central role of nephrologists to improve the clinical outcome.

Use of Darunavir-Cobicistat as a Treatment Option for Critically Ill Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

We retrospectively reviewed patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections who were admitted to an intensive care unit in Daegu, South Korea. The outcomes of patients who did (cases) or did not (controls) receive darunavir-cobicistat (800-150 mg) therapy were compared. Fourteen patients received darunavir-cobicistat treatment, and 96 received other antiviral therapy (controls). Overall, the darunavir-cobicistat group comprised patients with milder illness, and the crude mortality rate of all patients in the darunavir-cobicistat group was lower than that in the controls [odds ratio (OR) 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04-0.89, p=0.035]. After 1:2 propensity-score matching, there were 14 patients in the darunavir-cobicistat group, and 28 patients in the controls. In propensity score-matched analysis, the darunavir-cobicistat group had lower mortality than the controls (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.52, p=0.009). In conclusion, darunavir-cobicistat therapy was found to be associated with a significant survival benefit in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

An infection-oriented approach for thoracic endovascular aortic repair in a SARS-CoV-2 positive patient. A case report.

CASE REPORT: A 64-year-old woman presented to our emergency department during the outbreak of the covid-19 emergency in Italy with syncope, anosmia, mild dyspnoea and atypical chest and dorsal pain. A chest CT scan showed an acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) and bilateral lung involvement with ground-glass opacity, compatible with interstitial pneumonia. Nasopharyngeal swabs resulted positive for SARS-CoV-2. For the persistence of chest pain, despite the analgesic therapy, we decided to treat her with a TEVAR. Patient's chest and back pain resolved during the first few days after the procedure. No surgical or respiratory complications occurred and the patient was discharged 14 days after surgery. DISCUSSION: By performing the operation under local anesthesia, it was possible to limit both the staff inside the operatory room and droplet/aerosol release. Since we had to perform the operation in a hemodynamics room, thanks to the limited extension of the endoprosthesis and the good caliber of the right vertebral artery we were able to reduce the risk of spinal cord ischemia despite the lack of a revascularization of the left subclavian artery. CONCLUSIONS: A minimally invasive total endovascular approach allows, through local anesthesia and percutaneous access, to avoid surgical cut down and orotracheal intubation. This, combined with a defined management protocol for infected patients, seems to be a reasonable way to perform endovascular aortic procedures in urgent setting, even in a SARSCoV- 2 positive patient. KEY WORDS: COVID-19, Dissection, TEVAR.

Comparative Population Pharmacokinetics of Darunavir in SARS-CoV-2 Patients vs. HIV Patients: The Role of Interleukin-6.

BACKGROUND: Darunavir is an anti-HIV protease inhibitor repurposed for SARS-CoV-2 treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the population pharmacokinetics of darunavir in SARS-CoV-2 patients compared with HIV patients. METHODS: Two separate models were created by means of a nonlinear mixed-effect approach. The influence of clinical covariates on each basic model was tested and the association of significant covariates with darunavir parameters was assessed at multivariate regression and classification and regression tree (CART) analyses. Monte Carlo simulation assessed the influence of covariates on the darunavir concentration versus time profile. RESULTS: A one-compartment model well-described darunavir concentrations in both groups. In SARS-CoV-2 patients (n = 30), interleukin (IL)-6 and body surface area were covariates associated with darunavir oral clearance (CL/F) and volume of distribution (Vd), respectively; no covariates were identified in HIV patients (n = 25). Darunavir CL/F was significantly lower in SARS-CoV-2 patients compared with HIV patients (4.1 vs. 10.3 L/h; p < 0.001). CART analysis found that an IL-6 level of 18 pg/mL may split the SARS-CoV-2 population in patients with low versus high darunavir CL/F (mean ± standard deviation 3.47 ± 1.90 vs. 8.03 ± 3.24 L/h; proportion of reduction in error = 0.46). Median (interquartile range) darunavir CL/F was significantly lower in SARS-CoV-2 patients with IL-6 levels ≥ 18 pg/mL than in SARS-CoV-2 patients with IL-6 levels < 18 pg/mL or HIV patients (2.78 [2.16-4.47] vs. 7.24 [5.88-10.38] vs. 9.75 [8.45-13.79] L/h, respectively; p < 0.0001). Increasing IL-6 levels affected darunavir concentration versus time simulated profiles. We hypothesized that increases in IL-6 levels associated with severe SARS-CoV-2 disease may downregulate the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4-mediated metabolism of darunavir. CONCLUSIONS: This is a proof-of-concept of SARS-CoV-2 disease-drug interactions, and may support the need for optimal dose selection of sensitive CYP3A4 substrates in severe SARS-CoV-2 patients.

Tocilizumab and steroid treatment in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to respiratory failure due to severe immune response. Treatment targeting this immune response might be beneficial but there is limited evidence on its efficacy. The aim of this study was to determine if early treatment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with tocilizumab and/or steroids was associated with better outcome. METHODS: This observational single-center study included patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who were not intubated and received either standard of care (SOC, controls) or SOC plus early (within 3 days from hospital admission) anti-inflammatory treatment. SOC consisted of hydroxychloroquine 400mg bid plus, in those admitted before March 24th, also darunavir/ritonavir. Anti-inflammatory treatment consisted of either tocilizumab (8mg/kg intravenously or 162mg subcutaneously) or methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg for 5 days or both. Failure was defined as intubation or death, and the endpoints were failure-free survival (primary endpoint) and overall survival (secondary) at day 30. Difference between the groups was estimated as Hazard Ratio by a propensity score weighted Cox regression analysis (HROW). RESULTS: Overall, 196 adults were included in the analyses. They were mainly male (67.4%), with comorbidities (78.1%) and severe COVID-19 pneumonia (83.7%). Median age was 67.9 years (range, 30-100) and median PaO2/FiO2 200 mmHg (IQR 133-289). Among them, 130 received early anti-inflammatory treatment with: tocilizumab (n = 29, 22.3%), methylprednisolone (n = 45, 34.6%), or both (n = 56, 43.1%). The adjusted failure-free survival among tocilizumab/methylprednisolone/SOC treated patients vs. SOC was 80.8% (95%CI, 72.8-86.7) vs. 64.1% (95%CI, 51.3-74.0), HROW 0.48, 95%CI, 0.23-0.99; p = 0.049. The overall survival among tocilizumab/methylprednisolone/SOC patients vs. SOC was 85.9% (95%CI, 80.7-92.6) vs. 71.9% (95%CI, 46-73), HROW 0.41, 95%CI: 0.19-0.89, p = 0.025. CONCLUSION: Early adjunctive treatment with tocilizumab, methylprednisolone or both may improve outcomes in non-intubated patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

First report of manic-like symptoms in a COVID-19 patient with no previous history of a psychiatric disorder.

BACKGROUND: In December 2019, the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection was first reported in Wuhan city, central China, which has spread rapidly. The common clinical features of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection included fever, fatigue, and damage to the respiratory or digestive system. However, it is still unclear whether SARS-CoV-2 infection could cause damage to the central nervous system (CNS) inducing psychiatric symptoms. CASE REPORT: Herein, we present the first case of SARS-CoV-2 infection with manic-like symptoms and describe the diagnosis, clinical course, and treatment of the case, focusing on the identifications of SARS-CoV-2 in the specimen of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). The patient developed manic-like symptoms when his vital signs recovered on illness day 17. After manic-like attack, the detection of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibody in CSF was positive, while the reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on CSF for the SARS-CoV-2 was negative. The patient received Olanzapine for treatment and his mood problems concurrently improved as indicated by scores of Young Manic Rating Scale (YMRS). LIMITATION: This is a single case report only, and the RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 in CSF was not performed simultaneously when SARS-CoV-2 was positive in samples of sputum and stool. CONCLUSION: This first case of COVID-19 patient with manic-like symptoms highlights the importance of evaluation of mental health status and may contribute to our understanding of potential risk of CNS impairments by SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Effects on QT interval of hydroxychloroquine associated with ritonavir/darunavir or azithromycin in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

INTRODUCTION: Most of the drugs associations that have been used to treat patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection increase the risk of prolongation of the corrected QT interval (QTc). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of an association therapy of hydroxychloroquine (HY) plus ritonavir/darunavir (RD) or azithromycin (AZ) on QTc intervals. METHODS: At the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic patients admitted to our hospital were treated with the empiric association of HY/RD; one week later the therapeutic protocol was modified with the combination of HY/AZ. Patients underwent an ECG at baseline, then 3 and 7 days after starting therapy. We prospectively enrolled 113 patients (61 in the HY/RD group-52 in the HY/AZ group). RESULTS: A significant increase in median QTc was reported after seven days of therapy in both groups: from 438 to 452 ms in HY/RD patients; from 433 to 440 ms in HY/AZ patients (p = 0.001 for both). 23 patients (21.2%) had a QTc > 500 ms at 7 days. The risk of developing a QTc > 500 ms was greater in patients with prolonged baseline QTc values (≥ 440 ms for female and ≥ 460 ms for male patients) (OR 7.10 (95% IC 1.88-26.81); p = 0.004) and in patients with an increase in the QTc > 40 ms 3 days after onset of treatment (OR 30.15 (95% IC 6.96-130.55); p = 0.001). One patient per group suffered a malignant ventricular arrhythmia. CONCLUSION: Hydroxychloroquine with both ritonavir/darunavir or azithromycin therapy significantly increased the QTc-interval at 7 days. The risk of developing malignant arrhythmias remained relatively low when these drugs were administered for a limited period of time.

Covid-19: A systemic disease treated with a wide-ranging approach: A case report.

At the end of December 2019, the Health Commission of the city of Wuhan, China, alerted the World Health Organization (WHO) to a pneumonia cluster in the city. The cause was identified as being a new virus, later named SARS-CoV-2. We can distinguish three clinical phases of the disease with a distinct pathogenesis, manifestations and prognosis. Here, we describe the case of a 45-year-old male, successfully treated for Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The patient was feeling sick in early April 2020; he had a fever and pharyngodynia. When he came to our COVID hospital, his breathing was normal. The nasopharyngeal swab specimen turned out positive. High-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) showed mild interstitial pneumonia. The patient was admitted to our department and treated with hydroxychloroquine, ritonavir, darunavir, azithromycin and enoxaparin. On day seven of the disease, the patient's respiratory condition got worse as he was developing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). He was given tocilizumab and corticosteroids and was immediately treated with non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV). His condition improved, and in the ensuing days, the treatment gradually switched to a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC); after 18 days, the patient's clinical condition was good.The successful results we have been able to obtain are closely associated with avoidance of invasive ventilation that may lead to intensive care unit (ICU)-related superinfections. In our opinion, it is fundamental to understand that COVID-19 is a systemic disease that is a consequence of an overwhelming inflammatory response, which can cause severe medical conditions, even in young patients.