ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Immunomodulatory drugs have been used in patients with severe COVID-19. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of two different strategies, based either on an interleukin-1 inhibitor, anakinra, or on a JAK inhibitor, such as baricitinib, on the survival of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: Individuals admitted to two hospitals because of COVID-19 were included if they fulfilled the clinical, radiological, and laboratory criteria for moderate-to-severe disease. Patients were classified according to the first immunomodulatory drug prescribed: anakinra or baricitinib. All subjects were concomitantly treated with corticosteroids, in addition to standard care. The main outcomes were the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and in-hospital death. Statistical analysis included propensity score matching and Cox regression model. RESULTS: The study subjects included 125 and 217 individuals in the anakinra and baricitinib groups, respectively. IMV was required in 13 (10.4%) and 10 (4.6%) patients, respectively (p = 0.039). During this period, 22 (17.6%) and 36 (16.6%) individuals died in both groups (p = 0.811). Older age, low functional status, high comorbidity, need for IMV, elevated lactate dehydrogenase, and use of a high flow of oxygen at initially were found to be associated with worse clinical outcomes. No differences according to the immunomodulatory therapy used were observed. For most of the deceased individuals, early interruption of anakinra or baricitinib had occurred at the time of their admission to the intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: Similar mortality is observed in patients treated with anakinra or baricitinib plus corticosteroids.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: Impaired response to antiplatelet therapy in diabetic patients results in a higher incidence of drug-eluting stent thrombosis. This study determined the prevalence of high on-aspirin (AS) platelet reactivity in type 2 diabetic patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using the VerifyNow Aspirin Assay (VN) and platelet function analyzer PFA-100 (PFA-100) and analyzed the correlation between both methods. METHODS: Type 2 diabetic patients (100) with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome who underwent PCI and Xience V drug-eluting stent implantation were included in this study. After PCI, platelet antiaggregation mediated by acetylsalicylic acid was assessed by VN and PFA-100. The degree of correlation and concordance was then determined. RESULTS: When assayed with VN, 7% of the patients were nonresponders to aspirin (aspirin reaction units >550), and when assayed with PFA-10, 41% were nonresponders (closure time <193 seconds). Of the patients, 4% were nonresponders to aspirin according to VN but were sensitive to aspirin according to PFA-100, and 38% were sensitive to aspirin according to VN and nonresponders according to PFA-100. Overall, 55% of the patients were aspirin-sensitive in both methods. The Spearman's coefficient between VN and PFA-100 results was r = 0.09 (P = 0.35). The kappa index value was 0.0062 (P = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: There is no concordance or correlation between the VN and PFA-100 results. Therefore, the use of these analyses should be restricted to clinical research, which limits its application in clinical practice.
