Artificial intelligence assessment of the potential of tocilizumab along with corticosteroids therapy for the management of COVID-19 evoked acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), associated with high mortality rate, affects up to 67% of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Early evidence indicated that the pathogenesis of COVID-19 evoked ARDS is, at least partially, mediated by hyperinflammatory cytokine storm in which interleukin 6 (IL-6) plays an essential role. The corticosteroid dexamethasone is an effective treatment for severe COVID-19 related ARDS. However, trials of other immunomodulatory therapies, including anti-IL6 agents such as tocilizumab and sarilumab, have shown limited evidence of benefit as monotherapy. But recently published large trials have reported added benefit of tocilizumab in combination with dexamethasone in severe COVID-19 related ARDS. In silico tools can be useful to shed light on the mechanisms evoked by SARS-CoV-2 infection and of the potential therapeutic approaches. Therapeutic performance mapping system (TPMS), based on systems biology and artificial intelligence, integrate available biological, pharmacological and medical knowledge to create mathematical models of the disease. This technology was used to identify the pharmacological mechanism of dexamethasone, with or without tocilizumab, in the management of COVID-19 evoked ARDS. The results showed that while dexamethasone would be addressing a wider range of pathological processes with low intensity, tocilizumab might provide a more direct and intense effect upon the cytokine storm. Based on this in silico study, we conclude that the use of tocilizumab alongside dexamethasone is predicted to induce a synergistic effect in dampening inflammation and subsequent pathological processes, supporting the beneficial effect of the combined therapy in critically ill patients. Future research will allow identifying the ideal subpopulation of patients that would benefit better from this combined treatment.

[COVID 19 - Hospital Admission in the First and Second Wave in Germany]. / COVID 19 ­ Hospitalisierung in der ersten und zweiten Welle.

PURPOSE: We analyzed patients' characteristics and hospital admission in Germany's first and second COVID 19 wave. METHODS: We include all patients hospitalized with the proven diagnosis COVID 19 admitted to the HELIOS Hospital Krefeld, Germany, in the first wave (n = 84; from 11.03.2020-30.06.2020) and the second wave (n = 344; from 01.07.2020-31.01.2021). RESULTS: Patients' age, gender and comorbidities were similar with the exception of venous thrombosis in medical history which was more frequent in the first wave (6 % vs 0.3 %, p = p = 0,001). At admission, there were no differences in the results of the initial lab values (c-reactive protein, leucocytes) and blood gas analyses between both groups. Treatment differed in the application of dexamethasone and anticoagulation. In the first wave, nobody received dexamethasone. However, this changed to 52.6 % of patients in the second wave for a mean length of 3.6 ±â€Š4.1 days. Anticoagulation with double standard prophylaxis (2 × 40 mg low molecular heparin, subcutaneous) was applied in 7.1 % of patients in the first wave but 30.2 % (p = 0.002) in the second wave. In the first wave more thromboembolic events were diagnosed after admission (19.0 % vs 7.0 %, p = 0.001). In-hospital death was 26.2 % in the first wave and 15.4 % in the second wave (p = 0.0234). Most deaths were attributed to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). CONCLUSION: Patients' characteristics did not vary in Germany's first and second COVID 19 wave, but anticoagulation and dexamethasone were applied more frequently in the second wave. In addition, there were fewer thromboembolic complications in the second wave.

[Dysglycemia in COVID-19 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Peculiarities of the Glycemic Profile in Hospitalized Patients and the Role of Steroid-Induced Disorders].

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of data on the features of dysglycemia in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and concomitant diabetes mellitus (DM) confirmed by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). AIM: to study the glycemic profile in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and type 2 diabetes mellitus by continuous glucose monitoring and the role of steroid therapy in dysglycemiadevelopment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 21 patients with COVID-19 and DM 2 and 21 patients with DM 2 without COVID-19 (control group) using a professional 4-7-day CGM. We also compared two subgroups of patients with COVID-19 and DM 2: 1) patients received systemic glucocorticosteroids (GCS) during CGM and 2) patients in whomCGMwas performed after discontinuation of GCS. RESULTS: Compared with controls, patients with COVID-19 and DM2 had lesser values of glycemic «time in range¼ (32.7 ± 20.40 vs 48.0 ± 15.60%, p = 0.026) andhigher parameters of mean glycemia (p <0.05) but similar proportion of patients with episodes of hypoglycemia (33.3% vs 38.1%, p = 0.75). Patients who received dexamethasone during CGM were characterized by higher hyperglycemia and the absence of episodes of hypoglycemia. In patients who hadCGM after dexamethasone discontinuation, hyperglycemia was less pronounced, but 60% of them had episodes of hypoglycemia, often nocturnal, clinically significant and not detected by routine methods. CONCLUSION: Patients with COVID-19 and DM 2had severe and persistent hyperglycemia but a third of them hadalso episodes of hypoglycemia. During therapy with dexamethasone, they had the most pronounced hyperglycemia without episodes of hypoglycemia. In patients who underwent CGM after discontinuation of dexamethasone, hyperglycemia was less pronounced but 60% of them have episodes of hypoglycemia, often nocturnal, clinically significant and not diagnosed by routine methods. It would be advisable to recommend at least a 5-6-fold study of the blood glucose level (with its obligatory assessment at night) even for stable patients with COVID-19 and DM 2after the end of GCS treatment.

A hyperinflammation clinical risk tool, HI5-NEWS2, stratifies hospitalised COVID-19 patients to associate risk of death and effect of early dexamethasone in an observational cohort.

BACKGROUND: The success of early dexamethasone therapy for hospitalised COVID-19 cases in treatment of Sars-CoV-2 infection may predominantly reflect its anti-inflammatory action against a hyperinflammation (HI) response. It is likely that there is substantial heterogeneity in HI responses in COVID-19. METHODS: Blood CRP, ferritin, neutrophil, lymphocyte and platelet counts were scored to assess HI (HI5) and combined with a validated measure of generalised medical deterioration (NEWS2) before day 2. Our primary outcome was 28 day mortality from early treatment with dexamethasone stratified by HI5-NEWS2 status. FINDINGS: Of 1265 patients, high risk of HI (high HI5-NEWS2) (n = 367, 29.0%) conferred a strikingly increased mortality (36.0% vs 7.8%; Age adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 5.9; 95% CI 3.6-9.8, p<0.001) compared to the low risk group (n = 455, 36.0%). An intermediate risk group (n = 443, 35.0%) also showed significantly higher mortality than the low risk group (17.6% vs 7.8%), aHR 2.2, p = 0.005). Early dexamethasone treatment conferred a 50.0% reduction in mortality in the high risk group (36.0% to 18.0%, aHR 0.56, p = 0.007). The intermediate risk group showed a trend to reduction in mortality (17.8% to 10.3%, aHR 0.82, p = 0.46) which was not observed in the low risk group (7.8% to 9.2%, aHR 1.4, p = 0.31). INTERPRETATION: Higher HI5-NEWS2 scores measured at COVID-19 diagnosis, strongly associate with increased mortality at 28 days. Significant reduction in mortality with early dexamethasone treatment was only observed in the high risk group. Therefore, the HI5-NEWS2 score could be utilised to stratify randomised clinical trials to test whether intensified anti-inflammatory therapy would further benefit high risk patients and whether alternative approaches would benefit low risk groups. Considering its recognised morbidity, we suggest that early dexamethasone should not be routinely prescribed for HI5-NEWS2 low risk individuals with COVID-19 and clinicians should cautiously assess the risk benefit of this intervention in all cases.

Drug-drug interaction between dexamethasone and direct-acting oral anticoagulants: a nested case-control study in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C).

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this work is to evaluate if there is an increase in the risk of thromboembolic events (TEEs) due to concomitant exposure to dexamethasone and apixaban or rivaroxaban. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), as well as corticosteroid dexamethasone, are commonly used to treat individuals hospitalised with COVID-19. Dexamethasone induces cytochrome P450-3A4 enzyme that also metabolises DOACs apixaban and rivaroxaban. This raises a concern about possible interaction between dexamethasone and DOACs that may reduce the efficacy of the DOACs and result in an increased risk of TEE. DESIGN: We used nested case-control study design. SETTING: This study was conducted in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), the largest electronic health records repository for COVID-19 in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants were adults over 18 years who were exposed to a DOAC for 10 or more consecutive days. Exposure to dexamethasone was at least 5 or more consecutive days. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary exposure variable was concomitant exposure to dexamethasone for 5 or more days after exposure to either rivaroxaban or apixaban for 5 or more consecutive days. We used McNemar's Χ2 test and adjusted logistic regression to evaluate association between concomitant use of dexamethasone with either apixaban or rivaroxaban. RESULTS: McNemar's Χ2 test did not find a discernible association of TEE in patients concomitantly exposed to dexamethasone and a DOAC (χ2=0.5, df=1, p=0.48). In addition, a conditional logistic regression model did not find an increase in the risk of TEE (adjusted OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.18). CONCLUSION: This nested case-control study did not find evidence of an association between concomitant exposure to dexamethasone and a DOAC with an increase in risk of TEE. Due to small sample size, an association cannot be completely ruled out.

Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Modeling of Dexamethasone Anti-Inflammatory and Immunomodulatory Effects in LPS-Challenged Rats: A Model for Cytokine Release Syndrome.

Dexamethasone (DEX) is a potent synthetic glucocorticoid used for the treatment of variety of inflammatory and immune-mediated disorders. The RECOVERY clinical trial revealed benefits of DEX therapy in COVID-19 patients. Severe SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to an excessive inflammatory reaction commonly known as a cytokine release syndrome that is associated with activation of the toll like receptor 4 (TLR4) signaling pathway. The possible mechanism of action of DEX in the treatment of COVID-19 is related to its anti-inflammatory activity arising from inhibition of cytokine production but may be also attributed to its influence on immune cell trafficking and turnover. This study, by means of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling, aimed at the comprehensive quantitative assessment of DEX effects in lipopolysaccharide-challenged rats and to describe interrelations among relevant signaling molecules in this animal model of cytokine release syndrome induced by activation of TLR4 pathway. DEX was administered in a range of doses from 0.005 to 2.25 mg·kg-1 in LPS-challenged rats. Serum DEX, corticosterone (CST), tumor necrosis factor α, interleukin-6, and nitric oxide as well as lymphocyte and granulocyte counts in peripheral blood were quantified at different time points. A minimal physiologically based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (mPBPK/PD) model was proposed characterizing the time courses of plasma DEX and the investigated biomarkers. A high but not complete inhibition of production of inflammatory mediators and CST was produced in vivo by DEX. The mPBPK/PD model, upon translation to humans, may help to optimize DEX therapy in patients with diseases associated with excessive production of inflammatory mediators, such as COVID-19. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: A mPBPK/PD model was developed to describe concentration-time profiles of plasma DEX, mediators of inflammation, and immune cell trafficking and turnover in LPS-challenged rats. Interrelations among DEX and relevant biomarkers were reflected in the mechanistic model structure. The mPBPK/PD model enabled quantitative assessment of in vivo potency of DEX and, upon translation to humans, may help optimize dosing regimens of DEX for the treatment of immune-related conditions associated with exaggerated immune response.

Effects of dexamethasone use on viral clearance among patients with COVID-19: a multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: This study explored the outcomes and predictors of early viral clearance among patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This study recruited consecutive patients from March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2021. Early viral clearance was defined as having a duration from symptom onset to successive detection of SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction cycle threshold (Ct) value of ≥30 within 10 days. RESULTS: Among the 239 enrolled patients, 54.4% (130 patients) had early viral clearance. A multivariate logistic regression analysis identified that dexamethasone use and day 1 Ct values were independent factors associated with late viral clearance. Patients with mild-moderate severity and who received dexamethasone therapy had a longer time to viral clearance than those who did not receive dexamethasone (17.2 ± 1.8 days vs 12.3 ± 1.1 days, P = 0.018). Patients with severe-critical severity had a similar duration from symptom onset to Ct value ≥30, regardless of dexamethasone therapy (18.3 ± 0.9 days vs 16.7 ± 4.7 days, P = 0.626). CONCLUSION: The study revealed that dexamethasone therapy and Ct values are independent predictors of late viral clearance. Patients with severe disease course due to older age, increased number of comorbidities, and worse clinical outcomes experienced delayed viral clearance.

Early antiviral and supervisory dexamethasone treatment improve clinical outcomes of nonsevere COVID-19 patients.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of early antiviral treatment in preventing clinical deterioration in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infected (COVID-19) patients in home isolation and to share our experiences with the ambulatory management of nonsevere COVID-19 patients. This retrospective study included mild COVID-19 adult patients confirmed by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. They received care via an ambulatory management strategy between July 2021 and November 2021. Demographic data, clinical progression, and outcomes were collected. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were performed to illustrate the cohort's characteristic and outcomes of the study. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were employed to investigate the associations between clinical factors and disease progression. A total of 1940 patients in the Siriraj home isolation system met the inclusion criteria. Their mean age was 42.1 ±â€…14.9 years, with 14.2% older than 60 years, 54.3% female, and 7.1% with a body weight ≥ 90 kg. Only 115 patients (5.9%) had deterioration of clinical symptoms. Two-thirds of these could be managed at home by dexamethasone treatment under physician supervision; however, 38 of the 115 patients (2.0% of the study cohort) needed hospitalization. Early favipiravir outpatient treatment (≤ 5 days from onset of symptoms) in nonsevere COVID-19 patients was significantly associated with a lower rate of symptom deterioration than late favipiravir treatment (50 [4.6%] vs 65 [7.5%] patients, respectively; P = .008; odds ratio 1.669; 95% confidence interval, 1.141-2.441). The unfavorable prognostic factors for symptom deterioration were advanced age, body weight ≥ 90 kg, unvaccinated status, higher reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction cycle threshold, and late favipiravir treatment. The early delivery of essential treatment, including antiviral and supervisory dexamethasone, to ambulatory nonsevere COVID-19 patients yielded favorable outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand.

Systemic corticosteroids for the treatment of COVID-19: Equity-related analyses and update on evidence.

BACKGROUND: Systemic corticosteroids are used to treat people with COVID-19 because they counter hyper-inflammation. Existing evidence syntheses suggest a slight benefit on mortality. Nonetheless, size of effect, optimal therapy regimen, and selection of patients who are likely to benefit most are factors that remain to be evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether and at which doses systemic corticosteroids are effective and safe in the treatment of people with COVID-19, to explore equity-related aspects in subgroup analyses, and to keep up to date with the evolving evidence base using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (which includes PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and medRxiv), Web of Science (Science Citation Index, Emerging Citation Index), and the WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies to 6 January 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated systemic corticosteroids for people with COVID-19. We included any type or dose of systemic corticosteroids and the following comparisons: systemic corticosteroids plus standard care versus standard care, different types, doses and timings (early versus late) of corticosteroids. We excluded corticosteroids in combination with other active substances versus standard care, topical or inhaled corticosteroids, and corticosteroids for long-COVID treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess the risk of bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' 2 tool for RCTs. We rated the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality up to 30 and 120 days, discharged alive (clinical improvement), new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death (clinical worsening), serious adverse events, adverse events, hospital-acquired infections, and invasive fungal infections. MAIN RESULTS: We included 16 RCTs in 9549 participants, of whom 8271 (87%) originated from high-income countries. A total of 4532 participants were randomised to corticosteroid arms and the majority received dexamethasone (n = 3766). These studies included participants mostly older than 50 years and male. We also identified 42 ongoing and 23 completed studies lacking published results or relevant information on the study design. Hospitalised individuals with a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of symptomatic COVID-19 Systemic corticosteroids plus standard care versus standard care plus/minus placebo We included 11 RCTs (8019 participants), one of which did not report any of our pre-specified outcomes and thus our analyses included outcome data from 10 studies. Systemic corticosteroids plus standard care compared to standard care probably reduce all-cause mortality (up to 30 days) slightly (risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 0.97; 7898 participants; estimated absolute effect: 274 deaths per 1000 people not receiving systemic corticosteroids compared to 246 deaths per 1000 people receiving the intervention (95% CI 230 to 265 per 1000 people); moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on all-cause mortality (up to 120 days) (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.34; 485 participants). The chance of clinical improvement (discharged alive at day 28) may slightly increase (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.11; 6786 participants; low-certainty evidence) while the risk of clinical worsening (new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death) may slightly decrease (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.01; 5586 participants; low-certainty evidence). For serious adverse events (two RCTs, 678 participants), adverse events (three RCTs, 447 participants), hospital-acquired infections (four RCTs, 598 participants), and invasive fungal infections (one study, 64 participants), we did not perform any analyses beyond the presentation of descriptive statistics due to very low-certainty evidence (high risk of bias, heterogeneous definitions, and underreporting). Different types, dosages or timing of systemic corticosteroids We identified one RCT (86 participants) comparing methylprednisolone to dexamethasone, thus the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of methylprednisolone on all-cause mortality (up to 30 days) (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.07; 86 participants). None of the other outcomes of interest were reported in this study. We included four RCTs (1383 participants) comparing high-dose dexamethasone (12 mg or higher) to low-dose dexamethasone (6 mg to 8 mg). High-dose dexamethasone compared to low-dose dexamethasone may reduce all-cause mortality (up to 30 days) (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.04; 1269 participants; low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of high-dose dexamethasone on all-cause mortality (up to 120 days) (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 1383 participants) and it may have little or no impact on clinical improvement (discharged alive at 28 days) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.09; 200 participants; low-certainty evidence). Studies did not report data on clinical worsening (new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death). For serious adverse events, adverse events, hospital-acquired infections, and invasive fungal infections, we did not perform analyses beyond the presentation of descriptive statistics due to very low-certainty evidence. We could not identify studies for comparisons of different timing and systemic corticosteroids versus other active substances. Equity-related subgroup analyses We conducted the following subgroup analyses to explore equity-related factors: sex, age (< 70 years; ≥ 70 years), ethnicity (Black, Asian or other versus White versus unknown) and place of residence (high-income versus low- and middle-income countries). Except for age and ethnicity, no evidence for differences could be identified. For all-cause mortality up to 30 days, participants younger than 70 years seemed to benefit from systemic corticosteroids in comparison to those aged 70 years and older. The few participants from a Black, Asian, or other minority ethnic group showed a larger estimated effect than the many White participants. Outpatients with asymptomatic or mild disease There are no studies published in populations with asymptomatic infection or mild disease. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Systemic corticosteroids probably slightly reduce all-cause mortality up to 30 days in people hospitalised because of symptomatic COVID-19, while the evidence is very uncertain about the effect on all-cause mortality up to 120 days. For younger people (under 70 years of age) there was a potential advantage, as well as for Black, Asian, or people of a minority ethnic group; further subgroup analyses showed no relevant effects. Evidence related to the most effective type, dose, or timing of systemic corticosteroids remains immature. Currently, there is no evidence on asymptomatic or mild disease (non-hospitalised participants). Due to the low to very low certainty of the current evidence, we cannot assess safety adequately to rule out harmful effects of the treatment, therefore there is an urgent need for good-quality safety data. Findings of equity-related subgroup analyses should be interpreted with caution because of their explorative nature, low precision, and missing data. We identified 42 ongoing and 23 completed studies lacking published results or relevant information on the study design, suggesting there may be possible changes of the effect estimates and certainty of the evidence in the future.

High levels of soluble RAGE are associated with a greater risk of mortality in COVID-19 patients treated with dexamethasone.

Blood levels of the soluble receptor for advanced glycation end-products (sRAGE) are acutely elevated during the host inflammatory response to infection and predict mortality in COVID-19. However, the prognostic performance of this biomarker in the context of treatments to reduce inflammation is unclear. In this study we investigated the association between sRAGE and mortality in dexamethasone-treated COVID-19 patients. We studied 89 SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects and 22 controls attending the emergency department of a University Teaching Hospital during the second wave of COVID-19 and measured sRAGE at admission. In positive individuals sRAGE increased with disease severity and correlated with the National Early Warning Score 2 (Pearson's r = 0.56, p < 0.001). Fourteen out of 72 patients treated with dexamethasone died during 28 days of follow-up. Survival rates were significantly lower in patients with high sRAGE (> 3532 pg/mL) than in those with low sRAGE (p = 0.01). Higher sRAGE levels were associated with an increased risk of death after adjustment for relevant covariates. In contrast, IL-6 did not predict mortality in these patients. These results demonstrate that sRAGE remains an independent predictor of mortality among COVID-19 patients treated with dexamethasone. Determination of sRAGE could be useful for the clinical management of this patient population.

Glucocorticoid-Induced Hyperglycemia Including Dexamethasone-Associated Hyperglycemia in COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Optimal glucocorticoid-induced hyperglycemia (GCIH) management is unclear. The COVID-19 pandemic has made this issue more prominent because dexamethasone became the standard of care in patients needing respiratory support. This systematic review aimed to describe the management of GCIH and summarize available management strategies for dexamethasone-associated hyperglycemia in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases with results from 2011 through January 2022. Keywords included synonyms for "steroid-induced diabetes" or "steroid-induced hyperglycemia." Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included for review of GCIH management. All studies focusing on dexamethasone-associated hyperglycemia in COVID-19 were included regardless of study quality. RESULTS: Initial search for non-COVID GCIH identified 1230 references. After screening and review, 33 articles were included in the non-COVID section of this systematic review. Initial search for COVID-19-related management of dexamethasone-associated hyperglycemia in COVID-19 identified 63 references, whereas 7 of these were included in the COVID-19 section. RCTs of management strategies were scarce, did not use standard definitions for hyperglycemia, evaluated a variety of treatment strategies with varying primary end points, and were generally not found to be effective except for Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin added to basal-bolus regimens. CONCLUSION: Few RCTs are available evaluating GCIH management. Further studies are needed to support the formulation of clinical guidelines for GCIH especially given the widespread use of dexamethasone during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Experiences of the Data Monitoring Committee for the RECOVERY trial, a large-scale adaptive platform randomised trial of treatments for patients hospitalised with COVID-19.

AIM: To inform the oversight of future clinical trials during a pandemic, we summarise the experiences of the Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) for the Randomised Evaluation of COVID therapy trial (RECOVERY), a large-scale randomised adaptive platform clinical trial of treatments for hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS AND FINDINGS: During the first 24 months of the trial (March 2020 to February 2022), the DMC oversaw accumulating data for 14 treatments in adults (plus 10 in children) involving > 45,000 randomised patients. Five trial aspects key for the DMC in performing its role were: a large committee of members, including some with extensive DMC experience and others who had broad clinical expertise; clear strategic planning, communication, and responsiveness by the trial principal investigators; data collection and analysis systems able to cope with phases of very rapid recruitment and link to electronic health records; an ability to work constructively with regulators (and other DMCs) to address emerging concerns without the need to release unblinded mortality results; and the use of videoconferencing systems that enabled national and international members to meet at short notice and from home during the pandemic when physical meetings were impossible. Challenges included that the first four treatments introduced were effectively 'competing' for patients (increasing pressure to make rapid decisions on each one); balancing the global health imperative to report on findings with the need to maintain confidentiality until the results were sufficiently certain to appropriately inform treatment decisions; and reliably assessing safety, especially for newer agents introduced after the initial wave and in the small numbers of pregnant women and children included. We present a series of case vignettes to illustrate some of the issues and the DMC decision-making related to hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone, casirivimab + imdevimab, and tocilizumab. CONCLUSIONS: RECOVERY's streamlined adaptive platform design, linked to hospital-level and population-level health data, enabled the rapid and reliable assessment of multiple treatments for hospitalised patients with COVID-19. The later introduction of factorial assessments increased the trial's efficiency, without compromising the DMC's ability to assess safety and efficacy. Requests for the release of unblinded primary outcome data to regulators at points when data were not mature required significant efforts in communication with the regulators by the DMC to avoid inappropriate early trial termination.

Factors Associated With Severe COVID-19 Among Vaccinated Adults Treated in US Veterans Affairs Hospitals.

Importance: With a large proportion of the US adult population vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, it is important to identify who remains at risk of severe infection despite vaccination. Objective: To characterize risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease in a vaccinated population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide, retrospective cohort study included US veterans who received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination series and later developed laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and were treated at US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals. Data were collected from December 15, 2020, through February 28, 2022. Exposures: Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, immunocompromised status, and vaccination-related variables. Main Outcomes and Measures: Development of severe vs nonsevere SARS-CoV-2 infection. Severe disease was defined as hospitalization within 14 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test and either blood oxygen level of less than 94%, receipt of supplemental oxygen or dexamethasone, mechanical ventilation, or death within 28 days. Association between severe disease and exposures was estimated using logistic regression models. Results: Among 110 760 patients with infections following vaccination (97 614 [88.1%] men, mean [SD] age at vaccination, 60.8 [15.3] years; 26 953 [24.3%] Black, 11 259 [10.2%] Hispanic, and 71 665 [64.7%] White), 10 612 (9.6%) had severe COVID-19. The strongest association with risk of severe disease after vaccination was age, which increased among patients aged 50 years or older with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.42 (CI, 1.40-1.44) per 5-year increase in age, such that patients aged 80 years or older had an aOR of 16.58 (CI, 13.49-20.37) relative to patients aged 45 to 50 years. Immunocompromising conditions, including receipt of different classes of immunosuppressive medications (eg, leukocyte inhibitor: aOR, 2.80; 95% CI, 2.39-3.28) or cytotoxic chemotherapy (aOR, 2.71; CI, 2.27-3.24) prior to breakthrough infection, or leukemias or lymphomas (aOR, 1.87; CI, 1.61-2.17) and chronic conditions associated with end-organ disease, such as heart failure (aOR, 1.74; CI, 1.61-1.88), dementia (aOR, 2.01; CI, 1.83-2.20), and chronic kidney disease (aOR, 1.59; CI, 1.49-1.69), were also associated with increased risk. Receipt of an additional (ie, booster) dose of vaccine was associated with reduced odds of severe disease (aOR, 0.50; CI, 0.44-0.57). Conclusions and Relevance: In this nationwide, retrospective cohort of predominantly male US Veterans, we identified risk factors associated with severe disease despite vaccination. Findings could be used to inform outreach efforts for booster vaccinations and to inform clinical decision-making about patients most likely to benefit from preexposure prophylaxis and antiviral therapy.

Corticosteroid effectiveness among hospitalised COVID-19 patients in Malaysia.

INTRODUCTION: Using steroids to manage hospitalised coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection has been shown to reduce the need for mechanical ventilation and mortality. To date, low-dose dexamethasone and methylprednisolone corticosteroids have been effective in reducing the infection's progress in hospitalised patients. However, it is unknown if high dosages of corticosteroids can achieve a better clinical outcome. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients who are given a 10-day low-dose corticosteroid treatment (IV 2 mg/kg/day methylprednisolone loading dose (LD) then 0.25 mg/kg four times a day (q.i.d.)) with patients given a 10-day high-dose corticosteroid treatment (IV 20 mg dexamethasone once daily (o.d.) or a 1.5 mg/kg prednisolone tablet o.d.). METHODOLOGY: Retrospective data on hospitalised COVID-19 patients were collected for this study, and the primary outcome measure was the patients' clinical status based on the World Health Organization's (WHO) Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement (OSCI) on Day-5 and Day-10 post-steroid. RESULTS: The results demonstrated that using steroids significantly improved patients' clinical outcomes from a WHO OSCI level of 4 (0.1) on Day-1 to 2.6 (2.5) on Day-5 (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in clinical outcome between low-dose and high-dose corticosteroid treatment on Day-5 (H = 2.15; p = 0.34) and Day-10 (H = 1.12; p = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: This study concludes that using low-dose corticosteroids is recommended for hospitalised COVID-19 patients to ensure clinical outcomes are optimised.

Herpesviral encephalitis associated with bortezomib use in a patient with multiple myeloma and associated light-chain amyloidosis.

INTRODUCTION: Bortezomib is proteasome inhibitor used in multiple myeloma treatment. The reactivation of herpes simplex virus (HSV) and varicella-zoster virus (VZV) during bortezomib-based therapy is a well-known adverse event. Antiviral prophylaxis is mandatory. Nevertheless, reports of herpesviral encephalitis are scarce. CASE REPORT: A 57-year-old multiple myeloma patient who during CyBorD protocol (Bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone), after a transient suspension of antiviral prophylaxis presented progressive headaches unresponsive to conventional analgesics, asthenia, fever, episodic visual hallucinations, and vesicular lesions in the right supraorbital and frontal region. Herpetic encephalitis was diagnosed after detecting herpes zoster in cerebrospinal fluid. MANAGEMENT & OUTCOME: The patient was treated with acyclovir 500mg every 6 hours for 21 days, and subsequent valacyclovir prophylaxis achieving an excellent clinical evolution. Anti-myeloma treatment was changed to lenalidomide and dexamethasone achieving a durable complete response. Herpesviral encephalitis is a rare but severe complication associated with the use of Bortezomib, especially when patients did not receive acyclovir prophylaxis. However, a rapid detection based on the clinical suspicion, and the prompt start of treatment, may lead to overcome this adverse event.

Old drugs, new tricks: leveraging known compounds to disrupt coronavirus-induced cytokine storm.

A major complication in COVID-19 infection consists in the onset of acute respiratory distress fueled by a dysregulation of the host immune network that leads to a run-away cytokine storm. Here, we present an in silico approach that captures the host immune system's complex regulatory dynamics, allowing us to identify and rank candidate drugs and drug pairs that engage with minimal subsets of immune mediators such that their downstream interactions effectively disrupt the signaling cascades driving cytokine storm. Drug-target regulatory interactions are extracted from peer-reviewed literature using automated text-mining for over 5000 compounds associated with COVID-induced cytokine storm and elements of the underlying biology. The targets and mode of action of each compound, as well as combinations of compounds, were scored against their functional alignment with sets of competing model-predicted optimal intervention strategies, as well as the availability of like-acting compounds and known off-target effects. Top-ranking individual compounds identified included a number of known immune suppressors such as calcineurin and mTOR inhibitors as well as compounds less frequently associated for their immune-modulatory effects, including antimicrobials, statins, and cholinergic agonists. Pairwise combinations of drugs targeting distinct biological pathways tended to perform significantly better than single drugs with dexamethasone emerging as a frequent high-ranking companion. While these predicted drug combinations aim to disrupt COVID-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome, the approach itself can be applied more broadly to other diseases and may provide a standard tool for drug discovery initiatives in evaluating alternative targets and repurposing approved drugs.

In adults hospitalized with COVID-19, adding baricitinib vs. dexamethasone to remdesivir did not differ for MV-free survival.

SOURCE CITATION: Wolfe CR, Tomashek KM, Patterson TF, et al. Baricitinib versus dexamethasone for adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (ACTT-4): a randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med. 2022;10:888-99. 35617986.

Literature Highlights.

Literature Highlights is a digest of notable papers recently published in the leading respiratory journals, allowing our readers to stay up-to-date with research advances. This month we include coverage on use of monoclonal antibodies for prevention of COVID-19, acoustic epidemiology and cough assessment; immunotherapeutic interventions for viral and bacterial infections; the potential for harmful use of dexamethasone in COVID-19 patients; diagnostic accuracy of a new finger stick blood test for TB; Clinical standards for pulmonary TB.

Real-world effectiveness of steroids in severe COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Randomised controlled trials have shown that steroids reduce the risk of dying in patients with severe Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), whilst many real-world studies have failed to replicate this result. We aim to investigate real-world effectiveness of steroids in severe COVID-19. METHODS: Clinical, demographic, and viral genome data extracted from electronic patient record (EPR) was analysed from all SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive patients admitted with severe COVID-19, defined by hypoxia at presentation, between March 13th 2020 and May 27th 2021. Steroid treatment was measured by the number of prescription-days with dexamethasone, hydrocortisone, prednisolone or methylprednisolone. The association between steroid > 3 days treatment and disease outcome was explored using multivariable cox proportional hazards models with adjustment for confounders (including age, gender, ethnicity, co-morbidities and SARS-CoV-2 variant). The outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: 1100 severe COVID-19 cases were identified having crude hospital mortality of 15.3%. 793/1100 (72.1%) individuals were treated with steroids and 513/1100 (46.6%) received steroid ≤ 3 days. From the multivariate model, steroid > 3 days was associated with decreased hazard of in-hospital mortality (HR: 0.47 (95% CI: 0.31-0.72)). CONCLUSION: The protective effect of steroid treatment for severe COVID-19 reported in randomised clinical trials was replicated in this retrospective study of a large real-world cohort.

Secondary respiratory early and late infections in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Patients with COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation may become aggravated with a secondary respiratory infection. The aim of this study was to describe secondary respiratory infections, their predictive factors, and outcomes in patients with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation. METHODS: A cohort study was carried out in a single tertiary hospital in Santiago, Chile, from 1st June to 31st July 2020. All patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit that required mechanical ventilation were included. RESULTS: A total of 175 patients were enrolled, of which 71 (40.6%) developed at least one secondary respiratory infection during follow-up. Early and late secondary infections were diagnosed in 1.7% and 31.4% respectively. Within late secondary infections, 88% were bacterial, 10% were fungal, and 2% were of viral origin. One-third of isolated bacteria were multidrug-resistant. Bivariate analysis showed that the history of corticosteroids used before admission and the use of dexamethasone during hospitalization were associated with a higher risk of secondary infections (p = 0.041 and p = 0.019 respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that for each additional day of mechanical ventilation, the risk of secondary infection increases 1.1 times (adOR = 1.07; 95% CI 1.02-1.13, p = 0.008) CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit and requiring mechanical ventilation had a high rate of secondary infections during their hospital stay. The number of days on MV was a risk factor for acquiring secondary respiratory infections.