Effectiveness of tocilizumab in non-intubated cases with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Tocilizumab, a monoclonal IL-6 receptor blocker, is an effective agent for severe-to-critical cases of COVID-19; however, its target patients for the optimum use need to be detailed. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to define its effect among severely ill but non-intubated cases with COVID-19. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medrxiv, and Biorxiv until February 13, 2022, for non-intubated cases, and included randomized-controlled trials (RCT) based on bias assessment. The primary outcomes were the requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality. Random effect and fixed-effect models were used. The heterogeneity was measured using the χ2 and I2 statistics, with χ2 p ≤ 0.05 and I2 ≥ 50% indicating the presence of significant heterogeneity. We registered the study to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the registration number CRD42021232575. RESULTS: Among 261 articles, 11 RCTs were included. The pooled analysis of the 11 RCTs demonstrated that the rate of mortality was significantly lower in the tocilizumab group than in the control group (20.0% and 24.2%, OR: 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.96, and heterogeneity I2 = 0%. p = 0.82.). The mechanical ventilation rate was lower in the tocilizumab group than the control group (27% vs 35.2%, OR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.86, and heterogeneity I2 = 6%. p = 0.39). CONCLUSION: Among non-intubated severe COVID-19 cases, tocilizumab reduces the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality compared to standard-of-care treatment.

Metabolically healthy obesity: Misleading phrase or healthy phenotype?

Obesity is a heterogenous condition with multiple different phenotypes. Among these a particular subtype exists named as metabolically healthy obesity (MHO). MHO has multiple definitions and its prevalence varies according to study. The potential mechanisms underlying the pathophysiology of MHO include the different types of adipose tissue and their distribution, the role of hormones, inflammation, diet, the intestinal microbiota and genetic factors. In contrast to the negative metabolic profile associated with metabolically unhealthy obesity (MUO), MHO has relatively favorable metabolic characteristics. Nevertheless, MHO is still associated with many important chronic diseases including cardiovascular disease, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease as well as certain types of cancer and has the risk of progression into the unhealthy phenotype. Therefore, it should not be considered as a benign condition. The major therapeutic alternatives include dietary modifications, exercise, bariatric surgery and certain medications including glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogs, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and tirzepatide. In this review, we discuss the significance of MHO while comparing this phenotype with MUO.

Effectiveness of favipiravir in COVID-19: a live systematic review.

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for the effectiveness of Favipiravir on the fatality and the requirement of mechanical ventilation for the treatment of moderate to severe COVID-19 patients. We searched available literature and reported it by using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Until June 1, 2021, we searched PubMed, bioRxiv, medRxiv, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar by using the keywords "Favipiravir" and terms synonymous with COVID-19. Studies for Favipiravir treatment compared to standard of care among moderate and severe COVID-19 patients were included. Risk of bias assessment was performed using Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) and ROBINS-I assessment tool for non-randomized studies. We defined the outcome measures as fatality and requirement for mechanical ventilation. A total of 2702 studies were identified and 12 clinical trials with 1636 patients were analyzed. Nine out of 12 studies were randomized controlled trials. Among the randomized studies, one study has low risk of bias, six studies have moderate risk of bias, and 2 studies have high risk of bias. Observational studies were identified as having moderate risk of bias and non-randomized study was found to have serious risk of bias. Our meta-analysis did not reveal any significant difference between the intervention and the comparator on fatality rate (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.64-1.94) and mechanical ventilation requirement (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.13-1.95). There is no significant difference in fatality rate and mechanical ventilation requirement between Favipiravir treatment and the standard of care in moderate and severe COVID-19 patients.