Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Blockers and the Risk of Covid-19

Immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in children: A review of the current knowledge

Host immune responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), especially in children, are still under investigation. Children with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) constitute a significant study group of immune responses as they rarely present with severe clinical manifestations, require hospitalization, or develop complications such as multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS‐C) associated with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. The deciphering of children’s immune responses during COVID‐19 infection will provide information about the protective mechanisms, while new potential targets for future therapies are likely to be revealed. Despite the limited immunological studies in children with COVID‐19, this review compares data between adults and children in terms of innate and adaptive immunity to SARS‐CoV‐2, discusses the possible reasons why children are mostly asymptomatic, and highlights unanswered or unclear immunological issues. Current evidence suggests that the activity of innate immunity seems to be crucial to the early phases of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and adaptive memory immunity is vital to prevent reinfection.

Despite the limited immunological studies from children with COVID‐19, this review compares data between adults and children in terms of innate and adaptive immunity to SARS‐CoV‐2, discusses the possible reasons why children are mostly asymptomatic, and highlights unanswered or unclear immunological issues.

The Risk of SARS-COV-2 Infection and Covid-19 Severity Associated with The Exposure to Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were thought to increase the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) virus entrance into cells. Hence, it was suggested in the media that NSAIDs could lead to a higher risk of infection and/or disease severity. To determine the existence or absence of this association, we aimed to systematically evaluate the risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and mortality and the risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) associated with previous exposure to NSAIDs.

MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and EMBASE were searched in February 2021 for controlled studies. The results were calculated through random‐effect meta‐analyses and reported in terms of odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed with I² test.

Eleven studies were included, comprising a total of 683 715 patients. NSAID exposure did not increase the risk of having a positive test for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection (OR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.85‐1.11, I² = 24%; 5 studies). The exposure to NSAIDs did not increase the risk of severe/critical COVID‐19 disease (OR, 0.92; 95%CI, 0.80‐1.05; I² = 0%; 5 studies) nor all‐cause mortality among patients with COVID‐19 (OR, 0.86; 95%CI, 0.75‐0.99; I² = 14%, 4 studies).

Our data did not suggest that exposure to NSAIDs increases the risk of having SARS‐CoV‐2 infection or increases the severity of COVID‐19 disease. Also, the fragility of the studies included precludes definite conclusions and highlights the need for further robust data.

NSAIDs and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been discouraged for the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, fearing that they could increase the risk of infection or the severity of SARS-CoV-2.

Methods

Original studies providing information on exposure to NSAIDs and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes were retrieved and were included in a descriptive analysis and a meta-analysis with Cochrane Revue Manager (REVMAN 5.4), using inverse variance odds ratio (OR) with random- or fixed-effects models.

Results

Of 92,853 papers mentioning COVID-19, 266 mentioned NSAIDs and 61 mentioned ibuprofen; 19 papers had analysable data. Three papers described NSAID exposure and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 positivity, five papers described the risk of hospital admission in positive patients, 10 papers described death, and six papers described severe composite outcomes. Five papers studied exposure to ibuprofen and death. Using random-effects models, there was no excess risk of SARS-CoV-2 positivity (OR 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71–1.05). In SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, exposure to NSAIDs was not associated with excess risk of hospital admission (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80–1.17), death (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80–0.98), or severe outcomes (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.90–1.44). With ibuprofen, there was no increased risk of death (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78–1.13). Using a fixed-effect model did not modify the results, nor did the sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

The theoretical risks of NSAIDs or ibuprofen in SARS-CoV-2 infection are not confirmed by observational data.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40264-021-01089-5.

Is diabetes mellitus a wrongdoer to COVID-19 severity?

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) has turned out to be a pandemic in short period of time due to the high transmissibility of its causative agent, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Various reports have suggested the promising link between overexpression of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and COVID-19 pathogenesis. The severity of COVID-19 pathophysiology is greatly depended on several comorbidities, like hypertension, diabetes mellitus (DM), respiratory and cardiovascular disease, out of which DM has emerged as a major risk factor. The current review focuses on the link among the expression of ACE2, use of ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs), and risk of COVID-19 pathogenesis in DM. The review also emphasizes on synergistic detrimental effect of DM and COVID-19 on the immune system in provoking uncontrolled cytokine storm which eventually leads to lethal consequences. Finally, several possible therapeutic strategies have been highlighted to reduce the excess of risk associated with COVID-19 in people with DM.

Classical and Counter-Regulatory Renin-Angiotensin System: Potential Key Roles in COVID-19 Pathophysiology

In the current COVID-19 pandemic, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 uses angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE-2) receptors for cell entry, leading to ACE-2 dysfunction and downregulation, which disturb the balance between the classical and counter-regulatory renin-angiotensin system (RAS) in favor of the classical RAS. RAS dysregulation is one of the major characteristics of several cardiovascular diseases; thus, adjustment of this system is the main therapeutic target. RAS inhibitors-particularly angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs)-are commonly used for treatment of hypertension and cardiovascular disease. Patients with cardiovascular diseases are the group most commonly seen among those with COVID-19 comorbidity. At the beginning of this pandemic, a dilemma occurred regarding the use of ACEIs and ARBs, potentially aggravating cardiovascular and pulmonary dysfunction in COVID-19 patients. Urgent clinical trials from different countries and hospitals reported that there is no association between RAS inhibitor treatment and COVID-19 infection or comorbidity complication. Nevertheless, the disturbance of the RAS that is associated with COVID-19 infection and the potential treatment targeting this area have yet to be resolved. In this review, the link between the dysregulation of classical RAS and counter-regulatory RAS activities in COVID-19 patients with cardiovascular metabolic diseases is investigated. In addition, the latest findings based on ACEI and ARB administration and ACE-2 availability in relation to COVID-19, which may provide a better understanding of the RAS contribution to COVID-19 pathology, are discussed, as they are of the utmost importance amid the current pandemic.

Overexpression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 by renin-angiotensin system inhibitors. Truth or myth? A systematic review of animal studies

Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) protects against organ damage in hypertension and cardiovascular diseases by counter regulating the renin-angiotensin system (RAS). ACE2 is also the receptor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Based on the claim that RAS inhibitors (RASIs) cause ACE2 overexpression in some animal experiments, concerns have arisen that RASIs may aggravate SARS-CoV-2 infection and coronavirus disease-2019 severity in RASI-treated patients. To achieve a comprehensive review, a systematic search of MEDLINE/PubMed was conducted regarding the effects of RASIs on tissue ACE2 mRNA/protein expression in healthy animals and animal models of human diseases. We identified 88 eligible articles involving 168 experiments in the heart, kidneys, lungs, and other organs. Three of 38 experiments involving healthy animals showed ACE2 expression greater than twice that of the control (overexpression). Among 102 disease models (130 experiments), baseline ACE2 was overexpressed in 16 models (18 experiments) and less than half the control level (repression) in 28 models (40 experiments). In 72 experiments, RASIs did not change ACE2 levels from the baseline levels of disease models. RASIs caused ACE2 overexpression compared to control levels in seven experiments, some of which were unsupported by other experiments under similar conditions. In 36 experiments, RASIs reversed or prevented disease-induced ACE2 repression, yielding no or marginal changes. Therefore, ACE2 overexpression appears to be a rare rather than common consequence of RASI treatment in healthy animals and disease models. Future studies should clarify the pathophysiological significance of RASI-induced reversal or prevention of ACE2 repression in disease models.

MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR THE INVESTIGATION OF HYPOXIC STATES IN THE HEART MUSCLE AT VIRAL DAMAGE

The main complications of organism damaged by SARS-CoV-2 virus are various cardiovascular system lesions. As a result, the secondary tissue hypoxia is developed and it is relevant to search the means for hypoxic state alleviation. Mathematical modeling of this process, followed by the imitation of hypoxic states development, and subsequent correction of hypoxia at this model may be one of the directions for investigations. Aim. The purpose of this study was to construct mathematical models of functional respiratory and blood circulatory systems to simulate the partial occlusion of blood vessels during viral infection lesions and pharmacological correction of resulting hypoxic state. Methods. Methods of mathematical modeling and dynamic programming were used. Transport and mass exchange of respiratory gases in organism, partial occlusion of blood vessels and influence of antihypoxant were described by the systems of ordinary nonlinear differential equations. Results. Mathematical model of functional respiratory system was developed to simulate pharmacological correction of hypoxic states caused by the complications in courses of viral infection lesions. The model was based on the theory of functional systems by P. K. Anokhin and the assumption about the main function of respiratory system. The interactions and interrelations of individual functional systems in organism were assumed. Constituent parts of our model were the models of transport and mass exchange of respiratory gases in organism, selforganization of respiratory and blood circulatory systems, partial occlusion of blood vessels and the transport of pharmacological substance. Conclusions. The series of computational experiments for averaged person organism demonstrated the possibility of tissue hypoxia compensation using pharmacological substance with vasodilating effect, and in the case of individual data array, it may be useful for the development of strategy and tactics for individual patient medical treatment.

Bacille calmette-guérin: An ophthalmic perspective

Vaccines such as bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) are known for their heterologous effects mediated through a number of mechanisms, including trained immunity constituted by monocyte-macrophage based innate immunity. Other events such as direct hematogenous spread and induction of autoimmunity are also described. There has been a resurgent interest in harnessing some of the benefits of trained immunity in the management of COVID-19, even as several specific vaccines have been approved. We summarize the current knowledge of ocular effects of BCG. Potential effect of granulomatous inflammation on angiotensin converting enzyme activity and accentuation of cytokine storm that may result in undesirable ocular and systemic effects are also discussed.

One Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic. What Do We Know and What Is Yet to Come? - The Summarising Review

Objectives: The aim of this review is to summarize the most relevant scientific discoveries regarding SARS- CoV-2 virus infection, with the special emphasis put on its pathophysiology and way of treatment. Methods: In November 2020, the research articles have been collected and examined manually to pick the most relevant. In case of fresh topics, e.g. vaccines, we have performed searching using adequate keywords. Preliminary analysis was conducted on 200 manuscripts. Results: Among them 59 papers were out-of-scope, and thus were rejected from the further elaboration. Another 25 papers were rebuffed because they presented topics, that have been extensively described in the already included papers. Basing on the 29 papers we have estimated ratio of observed SARS-CoV-2 infection clinical manifestations and comorbidities among hospitalized patients. 12 papers let us evaluate frequencies of deviations within laboratory markers concentrations, as well as weighted average of the laboratory tests results. Conclusion: Due to the significant infectivity of the virus and its harmfulness towards organism further studies are required to find accurate way of the disease treatment and suspending its spreading.

Renin-Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors in Primary Prevention and COVID-19

Background

Considering the widespread risk of collider bias and confounding by indication in previous research, the associations between renin‐angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor use and COVID‐19 remain unknown. Accordingly, this study tested the hypothesis that RAAS inhibitors influence the summation effect of COVID‐19 and its progression to severe outcomes.

Methods and Results

This nationwide cohort study compared all residents of Sweden, without prior cardiovascular disease, in monotherapy (as of January 1, 2020) with a RAAS inhibitor to those using a calcium channel blocker or a thiazide diuretic. Comparative cohorts were balanced using machine‐learning‐derived propensity score methods. Of 165 355 people in the analysis (51% women), 367 were hospitalized or died with COVID‐19 (246 using a RAAS inhibitor versus 121 using a calcium channel blocker or thiazide diuretic; Cox proportional hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.74–1.27). When each outcome was assessed separately, 335 people were hospitalized with COVID‐19 (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.70–1.22), and 64 died with COVID‐19 (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.68–2.19). The severity of COVID‐19 outcomes did not differ between those using a RAAS inhibitor and those using a calcium channel blocker or thiazide diuretic (ordered logistic regression odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.89–1.14).

Conclusions

Despite potential limitations, this study is among the best available evidence that RAAS inhibitor use in primary prevention does not increase the risk of severe COVID‐19 outcomes; presenting strong data from which scientists and policy makers alike can base, with greater confidence, their current position on the safety of using RAAS inhibitors during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Cardiometabolic Therapy and Mortality in Very Old Patients With Diabetes Hospitalized due to COVID-19

Background

The effects of cardiometabolic drugs on the prognosis of diabetic patients with COVID-19, especially very old patients, are not well-known. This work aims to analyze the association between preadmission cardiometabolic therapy (antidiabetic, antiaggregant, antihypertensive, and lipid-lowering drugs) and in-hospital mortality among patients ≥80 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus hospitalized for COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted a nationwide, multicenter, observational study in patients ≥80 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 1 and May 29, 2020. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. A multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to assess the association between preadmission cardiometabolic therapy and in-hospital mortality.

Results

Of the 2,763 patients ≥80 years old hospitalized due to COVID-19, 790 (28.6%) had T2DM. Of these patients, 385 (48.7%) died during admission. On the multivariate analysis, the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (AOR 0.502, 95%CI 0.309-0.815, p=0.005) and angiotensin receptor blockers (AOR 0.454, 95%CI 0.274-0.759, p=0.003) were independent protectors against in-hospital mortality whereas the use of acetylsalicylic acid was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (AOR 1.761, 95%CI 1.092-2.842, p=0.020). Other antidiabetic drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and statins showed neutral association with in-hospital mortality.

Conclusions

We found important differences between cardiometabolic drugs and in-hospital mortality in older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus hospitalized for COVID-19. Preadmission treatment with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers could reduce in-hospital mortality; other antidiabetic drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and statins seem to have a neutral effect; and acetylsalicylic acid could be associated with excess mortality.

Cardiovascular injuries and SARS-COV-2 infection: focus on elderly people

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has hit the healthcare system worldwide. The risk of severe infection and mortality increases with advancing age, especially in subjects with comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, obesity and cancer. Moreover, cardiovascular complications such as myocardial injury, heart failure and thromboembolism are frequently observed in COVID-19 cases, and several biomarkers (troponin, NTproBNP and D-Dimer) have been identified as prognostic indicators of disease severity and worst outcome. Currently, there is no specific therapy against SARS-CoV-2, although many medications are under investigation. The aim of this review will be to explore the intertwined relationship between COVID-19 disease and the cardiovascular system, focusing on elderly population. The available supportive treatments along with the related concerns in elderly patients, due to their comorbidities and polypharmacotherapy, will be explored.

Predictors of COVID-19 in an outpatient fever clinic

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to identify clinical risk factors for COVID-19 in a German outpatient fever clinic that allow distinction of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients from other patients with flu-like symptoms.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, single-centre cohort study. Patients were included visiting the fever clinic from 4th of April 2020 to 15th of May 2020. Symptoms, comorbidities, and socio-demographic factors were recorded in a standardized fashion. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors of COVID-19, on the bases of those a model discrimination was assessed using area under the receiver operation curves (AUROC).

RESULTS

The final analysis included 930 patients, of which 74 (8%) had COVID-19. Anosmia (OR 10.71; CI 6.07-18.9) and ageusia (OR 9.3; CI 5.36-16.12) were strongly associated with COVID-19. High-risk exposure (OR 12.20; CI 6.80-21.90), especially in the same household (OR 4.14; CI 1.28-13.33), was also correlated; the more household members, especially with flu-like symptoms, the higher the risk of COVID-19. Working in an essential workplace was also associated with COVID-19 (OR 2.35; CI 1.40-3.96), whereas smoking was inversely correlated (OR 0.19; CI 0.08-0.44). A model that considered risk factors like anosmia, ageusia, concomitant of symptomatic household members and smoking well discriminated COVID-19 patients from other patients with flu-like symptoms (AUROC 0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

We report a set of four readily available clinical parameters that allow the identification of high-risk individuals of COVID-19. Our study will not replace molecular testing but will help guide containment efforts while waiting for test results.

Arterial hypertension

Arterial hypertension is the most important contributor to the global burden of disease; however, disease control remains poor. Although the diagnosis of hypertension is still based on office blood pressure, confirmation with out-of-office blood pressure measurements (ie, ambulatory or home monitoring) is strongly recommended. The definition of hypertension differs throughout various guidelines, but the indications for antihypertensive therapy are relatively similar. Lifestyle adaptation is absolutely key in non-pharmacological treatment. Pharmacologically, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, and diuretics are the first-line agents, with advice for the use of single-pill combination therapy by most guidelines. As a fourth-line agent, spironolactone should be considered. The rapidly evolving field of device-based therapy, especially renal denervation, will further broaden therapeutic options. Despite being a largely controllable condition, the actual rates of awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension are disappointingly low. Further improvements throughout the process of patient screening, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up need to be urgently addressed.

The Value of Medical Registries and Observational Studies Early in Pandemics: The COVID-19 Experience

Whereas randomized clinical trials remain the gold standard for evaluating new therapies for infections, we argue that registries and observational studies early in the Covid-19 pandemic provided invaluable understanding of the natural history and preliminary data on risk factors and possible treatments. We review the data from the current pandemic, the history of registries in general and their value in public health emergencies. Lessons from these experiences should be incorporated into rigorous planning for the next pandemic.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and glucocorticoids in COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is characterized by a wide spectrum of symptom severity, which is manifested at different phases of infection and demands different levels of care. Viral load, host innate-immune response to SARS-CoV-2, and comorbidities have a direct impact on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients and determine the diverse disease trajectories. The initial SARS-CoV-2 penetrance and replication in the host causes death of infected cells, determining the viral response. SARS-CoV-2 replication in the host triggers the activation of host antiviral immune mechanisms, determining the inflammatory response. While a healthy immune response is essential to eliminate infected cells and prevent spread of the virus, a dysfunctional immune response can result in a cytokine storm and hyperinflammation, contributing to disease progression.

Current therapies for COVID-19 target the virus and/or the host immune system and may be complicated in their efficacy by comorbidities. Here we review the evidence for use of two classes of anti-inflammatory drugs, glucocorticoids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the treatment of COVID-19. We consider the clinical evidence regarding the timing and efficacy of their use, their potential limitations, current recommendations and the prospect of future studies by these and related therapies.

COVID-19 and cardiovascular diseases

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a global public health emergency. Despite being caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), besides the lung, this infectious disease also has severe implications in the cardiovascular system. In this review, we summarize diverse clinical complications of the heart and vascular system, as well as the relevant high mortality, in COVID-19 patients. Systemic inflammation and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2-involved signaling networking in SARS-CoV-2 infection and the cardiovascular system may contribute to the manifestations of cardiovascular diseases. Therefore, integration of clinical observations and experimental findings can promote our understanding of the underlying mechanisms, which would aid in identifying and treating cardiovascular injury in patients with COVID-19 appropriately.

Relationship between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers and COVID-19 incidence or severe disease

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may be associated with higher susceptibility of COVID-19 infection and adverse outcomes. We compared ACEI/ARB use and COVID-19 positivity in a case-control design, and severity in COVID-19 positive patients.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who attended Hong Kong's public hospitals or outpatient clinics between 1 January and 28 July 2020 for COVID-19 real time-PCR (RT-PCR) tests were included. Baseline demographics, past comorbidities, laboratory tests and use of different medications were compared between COVID-19 positive and negative patients. Severe endpoints for COVID-19 positive patients were 28-day mortality, need for intensive care admission or intubation.

RESULTS

This study included 213 788 patients (COVID-19 positive: n = 2774 patients; negative: n = 211 014). In total, 162 COVID-19 positive patients (5.83%) met the severity outcome. The use of ACEI/ARB was significantly higher amongst cases than controls (n = 156/2774, 5.62 vs. n = 6708/211014, 3.17%; P < 0.0001). Significant univariate predictors of COVID-19 positivity and severe COVID-19 disease were older age, higher Charlson score, comorbidities, use of ACEI/ARB, antidiabetic, lipid-lowering, anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs and laboratory tests (odds ratio >1, P < 0.05). The relationship between the use of ACEI/ARB and COVID-19 positivity or severe disease remained significant after multivariable adjustment. No significant differences in COVID-19 positivity or disease severity between ACEI and ARB use were observed (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

There was a significant relationship between ACEI/ARB use and COVID-19 positivity and severe disease after adjusting for significant confounders.

Renin-angiotensin system inhibitor is associated with the reduced risk of all-cause mortality in COVID-19 among patients with/without hypertension

Consecutively hospitalized patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China were retrospectively enrolled from January 2020 to March 2020 to investigate the association between the use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitor (RAS-I) and the outcome of this disease. Associations between the use of RAS-I (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)), ACEI, and ARB and in-hospital mortality were analyzed using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models in overall and subgroup of hypertension status. A total of 2771 patients with COVID-19 were included, with moderate and severe cases accounting for 45.0% and 36.5%, respectively. A total of 195 (7.0%) patients died. RAS-I (hazard ratio (HR)= 0.499, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.325-0.767) and ARB (HR = 0.410, 95% CI 0.240-0.700) use was associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality among patients with COVID-19. For patients with hypertension, RAS-I and ARB applications were also associated with a reduced risk of mortality with HR of 0.352 (95% CI 0.162-0.764) and 0.279 (95% CI 0.115-0.677), respectively. RAS-I exhibited protective effects on the survival outcome of COVID-19. ARB use was associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality among patients with COVID-19.

Insulin therapy and outcome from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression

BACKGROUND

Currently, the relationship between insulin therapy and COVID-19 outcome is not yet established. Our study aims to evaluate the possible association between insulin and the poor composite development of COVID-19.

METHODS

We systematically searched the PubMed and Europe PMC database using specific keywords related to our aims until December 12th, 2020. All articles published on COVID-19 and insulin were retrieved. Statistical analysis was done using Review Manager 5.4 and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3 software.

RESULTS

Our pooled analysis showed that insulin use was associated with poor composite development of COVID-19 [OR 2.06 (95% CI 1.70 - 2.48), p < 0.00001, I2 = 83%, random-effect modelling], and its subgroup which comprised of risk of COVID-19 [OR 1.70 (95% CI 1.40 - 2.08), p < 0.00001, I2 = 34%, random-effect modelling], severe COVID-19 [OR 2.30 (95% CI 1.60 - 3.30), p < 0.00001, I2 = 88%, random-effect modelling], and mortality [OR 2.14 (95% CI 1.47 - 3.10), p < 0.0001, I2 = 85%, random-effect modelling]. Meta-regression showed that the association was influenced by age (p = 0.008), but not by diabetes (p = 0.423), and cardiovascular disease (p = 0.086).

CONCLUSION

Physicians should be more aware and take extra precautions with diabetes patients who use insulin therapy.

Current Understanding of Clinical Manifestations of COVID-19 in Glomerular Disease

Background

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), also known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is an evolving pandemic with significant mortality. Information about the impact of infection on glomerular disease patients in particular has been lacking. Understanding the virus's effect in glomerular disease is constantly changing. This review article summarizes the data published thus far on COVID-19 and its manifestations in pre-existing and de novo glomerular disease.

Summary

While patients with glomerular disease may be at higher risk of severe COVID-19 due to their immunosuppressed status, some data suggest that a low amount of immunosuppression may be helpful in mitigating the systemic inflammatory response which is associated with high mortality rates in COVID-19. There have been a few case reports on COVID-19 causing glomerular disease relapse in patients. Multiple mechanisms have been proposed for kidney injury, proteinuria, and hematuria in the setting of COVID-19. More commonly, these are caused by direct tubular injury due to hemodynamic instability and hypoxic injury. However, the cytokine storm induced by COVID-19 may trigger common post-viral glomerular disease such as IgA nephropathy, anti-GBM, and ANCA vasculitis that have also been described in COVID-19 patients. Collapsing glomerulopathy, a hallmark of HIV-associated nephropathy, is being reported SARS-CoV-2 cases, particularly in patients with high-risk APOL1 alleles. Direct viral invasion of glomerular structures is hypothesized to cause a podocytopathy due to virus's affinity to ACE2, but evidence for this remains under study.

Key Messages

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 may cause glomerular disease in certain patients. The mechanism of de novo glomerular disease in the setting of COVID-19 is under study. The management of patients with existing glomerular disease poses unique challenges, especially with regard to immunosuppression management. Further studies are needed to inform clinician decisions about the management of these patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Cardiovascular RNA markers and artificial intelligence may improve COVID-19 outcome: a position paper from the EU-CardioRNA COST Action CA17129

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been as unprecedented as unexpected, affecting more than 105 million people worldwide as of 8 February 2020 and causing more than 2.3 million deaths according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Not only affecting the lungs but also provoking acute respiratory distress, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is able to infect multiple cell types including cardiac and vascular cells. Hence a significant proportion of infected patients develop cardiac events, such as arrhythmias and heart failure. Patients with cardiovascular comorbidities are at highest risk of cardiac death. To face the pandemic and limit its burden, health authorities have launched several fast-track calls for research projects aiming to develop rapid strategies to combat the disease, as well as longer-term projects to prepare for the future. Biomarkers have the possibility to aid in clinical decision-making and tailoring healthcare in order to improve patient quality of life. The biomarker potential of circulating RNAs has been recognized in several disease conditions, including cardiovascular disease. RNA biomarkers may be useful in the current COVID-19 situation. The discovery, validation, and marketing of novel biomarkers, including RNA biomarkers, require multi-centre studies by large and interdisciplinary collaborative networks, involving both the academia and the industry. Here, members of the EU-CardioRNA COST Action CA17129 summarize the current knowledge about the strain that COVID-19 places on the cardiovascular system and discuss how RNA biomarkers can aid to limit this burden. They present the benefits and challenges of the discovery of novel RNA biomarkers, the need for networking efforts, and the added value of artificial intelligence to achieve reliable advances.

The triumvirate: why hypertension, obesity, and diabetes are risk factors for adverse effects in patients with COVID-19

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a pandemic. The cellular receptor for SARS-CoV-2 entry is the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, a membrane-bound homolog of angiotensin-converting enzyme. Henceforth, this has brought the attention of the scientific community to study the interaction between COVID-19 and the renin-angiotensin system (RAS), as well as RAS inhibitors. However, these inhibitors are commonly used to treat hypertension, chronic kidney disorder, and diabetes. Obesity is a known risk factor for heart disease, diabetes, and hypertension, whereas diabetes and hypertension may be indirectly related to each other through the effects of obesity. Furthermore, people with hypertension, obesity, diabetes, and other related complications like cardiovascular and kidney diseases have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 infection than the general population and usually exhibit poor prognosis. This severity could be due to systemic inflammation and compromised immune response and RAS associated with these comorbid conditions. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop evidence-based treatment methods that do not affect the severity of COVID-19 infection and effectively manage these chronic diseases in people with COVID-19.

Renin-Angiotensin System Blockers and the Risk of COVID-19-Related Mortality in Patients with Kidney Failure

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There is concern about potential deleterious effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients with kidney failure, who often use ACEis/ARBs, are at higher risk of more severe COVID-19. However, there are no data available on the association of ACEi/ARB use with COVID-19 severity in this population.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

From the European Renal Association COVID-19 database (ERACODA), we retrieved data on kidney transplant recipients and patients on dialysis who were affected by COVID-19, between February 1 and October 1, 2020, and had information on 28-day mortality. We used Cox proportional-hazards regression to calculate hazard ratios for the association between ACEi/ARB use and 28-day mortality risk. Additionally, we studied the association of discontinuation of these agents with 28-day mortality.

RESULTS

We evaluated 1511 patients: 459 kidney transplant recipients and 1052 patients on dialysis. At diagnosis of COVID-19, 189 (41%) of the transplant recipients and 288 (27%) of the patients on dialysis were on ACEis/ARBs. A total of 88 (19%) transplant recipients and 244 (23%) patients on dialysis died within 28 days of initial presentation. In both groups of patients, there was no association between ACEi/ARB use and 28-day mortality in both crude and adjusted models (in transplant recipients, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.69 to 1.83; in patients on dialysis, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.47). Among transplant recipients, ACEi/ARB discontinuation was associated with a higher mortality risk after adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, but the association was no longer statistically significant after adjustment for severity of COVID-19 (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.40 to 4.58). Among patients on dialysis, ACEi/ARB discontinuation was not associated with mortality in any model. We obtained similar results across subgroups when ACEis and ARBs were studied separately, and when other outcomes for severity of COVID-19 were studied, e.g., hospital admission, admission to the intensive care unit, or need for ventilator support.

CONCLUSIONS

Among kidney transplant recipients and patients on dialysis with COVID-19, there was no significant association of ACEi/ARB use or discontinuation with mortality.

Outcomes of COVID-19-positive acute coronary syndrome patients: A multisource electronic healthcare records study from England

BACKGROUND

Patients with underlying cardiovascular disease and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to characterize the presenting profile and outcomes of patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

This observational cohort study was conducted using multisource data from all acute NHS hospitals in England. All consecutive patients hospitalized with diagnosis of ACS with or without COVID-19 infection between 1 March and 31 May 2020 were included. The primary outcome was in-hospital and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 12 958 patients were hospitalized with ACS during the study period, of which 517 (4.0%) were COVID-19-positive and were more likely to present with non-ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction. The COVID-19 ACS group were generally older, Black Asian and Minority ethnicity, more comorbid and had unfavourable presenting clinical characteristics such as elevated cardiac troponin, pulmonary oedema, cardiogenic shock and poor left ventricular systolic function compared with the non-COVID-19 ACS group. They were less likely to receive an invasive coronary angiography (67.7% vs 81.0%), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (30.2% vs 53.9%) and dual antiplatelet medication (76.3% vs 88.0%). After adjusting for all the baseline differences, patients with COVID-19 ACS had higher in-hospital (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 3.27; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.41-4.42) and 30-day mortality (aOR: 6.53; 95% CI: 5.1-8.36) compared to patients with the non-COVID-19 ACS.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 infection was present in 4% of patients hospitalized with an ACS in England and is associated with lower rates of guideline-recommended treatment and significant mortality hazard.

Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors effect before and during hospitalization in COVID-19 outcomes: Final analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19) registry

BACKGROUND

The use of Renin-Angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been questioned because both share a target receptor site.

METHODS

HOPE-COVID-19 (NCT04334291) is an international investigator-initiated registry. Patients are eligible when discharged after an in-hospital stay with COVID-19, dead or alive. Here, we analyze the impact of previous and continued in-hospital treatment with RASi in all-cause mortality and the development of in-stay complications.

RESULTS

We included 6503 patients, over 18 years, from Spain and Italy with data on their RASi status. Of those, 36.8% were receiving any RASi before admission. RASi patients were older, more frequently male, with more comorbidities and frailer. Their probability of death and ICU admission was higher. However, after adjustment, these differences disappeared. Regarding RASi in-hospital use, those who continued the treatment were younger, with balanced comorbidities but with less severe COVID19. Raw mortality and secondary events were less frequent in RASi. After adjustment, patients receiving RASi still presented significantly better outcomes, with less mortality, ICU admissions, respiratory insufficiency, need for mechanical ventilation or prone, sepsis, SIRS and renal failure (p<0.05 for all). However, we did not find differences regarding the hospital use of RASi and the development of heart failure.

CONCLUSION

RASi historic use, at admission, is not related to an adjusted worse prognosis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, although it points out a high-risk population. In this setting, the in-hospital prescription of RASi is associated with improved survival and fewer short-term complications.

A multi-center phase II randomized clinical trial of losartan on symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The SARS-CoV-2 virus enters cells via Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), disrupting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis, potentially contributing to lung injury. Treatment with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), such as losartan, may mitigate these effects, though induction of ACE2 could increase viral entry, replication, and worsen disease.

METHODS

This study represents a placebo-controlled blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) to test the efficacy of losartan on outpatients with COVID-19 across three hospital systems with numerous community sites in Minnesota, U.S. Participants included symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 not already taking ACE-inhibitors or ARBs, enrolled within 7 days of symptom onset. Patients were randomized to 1:1 losartan (25 mg orally twice daily unless estimated glomerular filtration rate, eGFR, was reduced, when dosing was reduced to once daily) versus placebo for 10 days, and all patients and outcome assesors were blinded. The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization within 15 days. Secondary outcomes included functional status, dyspnea, temperature, and viral load. (clinicatrials.gov, NCT04311177, closed to new participants).

FINDINGS

From April to November 2020, 117 participants were randomized 58 to losartan and 59 to placebo, and all were analyzed under intent to treat principles. The primary outcome did not differ significantly between the two arms based on Barnard's test [losartan arm: 3 events (5.2% 95% CI 1.1, 14.4%) versus placebo arm: 1 event (1.7%; 95% CI 0.0, 9.1%)]; proportion difference -3.5% (95% CI -13.2, 4.8%); p = 0.32]. Viral loads were not statistically different between treatment groups at any time point. Adverse events per 10 patient days did not differ signifcantly [0.33 (95% CI 0.22-0.49) for losartan vs. 0.37 (95% CI 0.25-0.55) for placebo]. Due to a lower than expected hospitalization rate and low likelihood of a clinically important treatment effect, the trial was terminated early.

INTERPRETATION

In this multicenter blinded RCT for outpatients with mild symptomatic COVID-19 disease, losartan did not reduce hospitalizations, though assessment was limited by low event rate. Importantly, viral load was not statistically affected by treatment. This study does not support initiation of losartan for low-risk outpatients.

Risk factors for COVID-19 hospitalisation and death in people living with diabetes: A virtual cohort study from the Western Cape Province, South Africa

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 outcomes and risk factors, including comorbidities and medication regimens, in people living with diabetes (PLWD) are poorly defined for low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

The Provincial Health Data Centre (Western Cape, South Africa) is a health information exchange collating patient-level routine health data for approximately 4 million public sector health care seekers. Data from COVID-19 patients diagnosed between March and July 2020, including PLWD, were analysed to describe risk factors, including dispensed diabetes medications and comorbidities, and their association with COVID-19 outcomes in this population.

FINDINGS

There were 64,476 COVID-19 patients diagnosed. Of 9305 PLWD, 44.9% were hospitalised, 4.0% admitted to ICU, 0.6% received ventilation and 15.4% died. In contrast, proportions of COVID-19 patients without diabetes were: 12.2% hospitalised, 1.0% admitted, 0.1% ventilated and 4.6% died. PLWD were significantly more likely to be admitted (OR:3.73, 95 %CI: 3.53, 3.94) and to die (OR:3.01, 95 %CI: 2.76,3.28). Significant hospitalised risk factors included HIV infection, chronic kidney disease, current TB, male sex and increasing age. Significant risk factors for mortality were CKD, male sex, HIV infection, previous TB and increasing age. Pre-infection use of insulin was associated with a significant increased risk for hospitalisation (OR:1·39, 95 %CI:1·24,1·57) and mortality (OR1·49, 95 %CI:1·27; 1·74) and metformin was associated with a reduced risk for hospitalisation (OR:0·62,95 %CI:0·55, 0·71) and mortality (OR 0·77, 95 %CI:0·64; 0·92).

INTERPRETATION

Using routine health data from this large virtual cohort, we have described the association of infectious and noncommunicable comorbidities as well as pre-infection diabetes medications with COVID-19 outcomes in PLWD in the Western Cape, South Africa.

FUNDING

This research was funded in part, by the Wellcome Trust 203135/Z/16/Z, through support of NT. For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission. The Wellcome Centre for Infectious Diseases Research in Africa is supported by core funding from the Wellcome Trust [203135/Z/16/Z]. NT receives funding from the CIDRI-Africa Wellcome Trust grant (203135/Z/16/Z), and NT and TT receive funding from the NIH H3ABioNET award (U24HG006941). NT receives funding from the UKRI/MRC (MC_PC_MR/T037733/1).

COVID-19 and chronic kidney disease: a comprehensive review

Kidney impairment in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with increased in-hospital mortality and worse clinical evolution, raising concerns towards patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). From a pathophysiological perspective, COVID-19 is characterized by an overproduction of inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, TNF-alpha), causing systemic inflammation and hypercoagulability, and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Emerging data postulate that CKD under conservative treatment or renal replacement therapy (RRT) is an important risk factor for disease severity and higher in-hospital mortality amongst patients with COVID-19. Regarding RAAS blockers therapy during the pandemic, the initial assumption of a potential increase and deleterious impact in infectivity, disease severity, and mortality was not evidenced in medical literature. Moreover, the challenge of implementing social distancing in patients requiring dialysis during the pandemic prompted national and international societies to publish recommendations regarding the adoption of safety measures to reduce transmission risk and optimize dialysis treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Current data convey that kidney transplant recipients are more vulnerable to more severe infection. Thus, we provide a comprehensive review of the clinical outcomes and prognosis of patients with CKD under conservative treatment and dialysis, and kidney transplant recipients and COVID-19 infection.

Association between Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers and Mortality in Patients with Hypertension Hospitalized with COVID-19

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are common hypertension medications. We aimed to investigate the association between treatment with ACEIs/ARBs and disease severity and mortality in patients with hypertension hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: Information from the medical records of 180 hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection admitted in 2020 to Loghman Hakim Hospital, Tehran, Iran, was collected. Clinical histories, drug therapies, radiological findings, hospital courses, and outcomes were analyzed in all the patients. The demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients were also analyzed, and the percentage of patients with hypertension taking ACEIs/ARBs was compared between survivors and nonsurvivors. Results: The study population consisted of 180 patients at mean±SD age of 67.76±18.72 years. Hypertension was reported in 72 patients (40.0%). Patients with hypertension were older than those without it (mean±SD age =72.35±12.09 y). Among those with hypertension, death occurred in 33 patients (45.8%), of whom 60.6% were men. Fifty-three patients (73.6%) with hypertension were on ACEIs/ARBs. The ACEIs/ARBs group had a significantly lower mortality rate than the non-ACEIs/ARBs group (37.7% vs 68.4%; OR: 0.192; 95% CI: 0.05-0.68; P=0.011). Conclusion: This single-center study found no harmful effects associated with ACEIs/ARBs treatment. Patients on ACEIs/ARBs had a lower rate of mortality and disease severity than the non-ACEIs/ARBs group. Our study supports the current guideline to continue ACEIs/ARBs in patients with hypertension.

Coronavirus disease 2019 and cardiovascular complications: focused clinical review

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may cause not only an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) but also multiple organ damage and failure requiring intensive care and leading to death. Male sex, advanced age, chronic lung disease, chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular disease, such as hypertension, diabetes and obesity have been identified as risk factors for the COVID-19 severity. Presumably, as these three cardiovascular risk factors are associated with a high prevalence of multiorgan damage. In the present focused clinical review, we will discuss the cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 including acute cardiovascular syndrome (acute cardiac injury/COVID cardiomyopathy, thromboembolic complications and arrhythmias) and post-COVID-19 sequelae. Preliminary data shows that the cause of acute cardiovascular syndrome may be multifactorial and involve direct viral invasion of the heart and vascular system, as well as through the immune and inflammation-mediated systemic cytokine storm. COVID-19 survivors may also show persistently elevated blood pressure and sinus tachycardia at rest. Furthermore, poor diabetic control, persistent renal damage and cerebral sequelae, such as persistent cognitive and neuropsychiatric alterations are also frequently reported. A particular attention should be paid towards cardiovascular protection in COVID-19 patients who develop acute cardiovascular syndromes during hospitalization, and/or permanent/semipermanent sequelae after recovery from COVID-19. These conditions may require careful clinical assessment, treatment and close follow-up to avoid short-term and long-term complications.

Neues zu Hypertonie und Diabetes

Hypertonie und Diabetes treten oft gemeinsam auf und erhöhen die kardiovaskuläre Mortalität. Beide Erkrankungen sind bei COVID-19-Patienten (COVID-19: „coronavirus disease 2019“) mit schweren Verläufen gehäuft anzutreffen. Hinsichtlich der Kausalität für COVID-19 ist die Datenlage widersprüchlich. Sicher ist ein Surrogateffekt, da meiste ältere COVID-19-Patienten einen schweren Verlauf aufgrund der Vorschäden aufweisen. Hemmer des Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosteron-Systems (RAAS-Blocker) erhöhen nicht die Wahrscheinlichkeit der positiven SARS-CoV-2-Testung (SARS-CoV-2: „severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2“). Sie haben keinen Einfluss auf die Schwere des Verlaufs und die Mortalität und sollten daher unter COVID-19 nicht pausiert/abgesetzt werden. Die renale Denervierung erfreut sich einer Renaissance, nachdem sich die Studiendesigns und Technologien stark weiterentwickelt haben. Bei den SGLT-2-Hemmern (SGLT-2: „sodium glucose linked transporter 2“) ist der Wissenszuwachs enorm. In den ersten beiden großen randomisierten kontrollierten Studien mit primären renalen Endpunkten verzögerten sie die Progression der chronischen Niereninsuffizienz (CKD) bis zum Dialysebeginn deutlich um zusätzliche ca. 12–13 Jahre. Sie sind prinzipiell bei Typ‑2- sowie Typ-1-Diabetes und auch bei herzinsuffizienten Patienten mit und ohne Diabetes einsetzbar und reduzieren den systolischen Blutdruck. Der nichtsteroidale Mineralokortikoidrezeptorantagonist (MRA) Finerenon wirkt bei Typ‑2-Diabetes reno- und kardioprotektiv bezüglich kardiovaskulärer Mortalität und Niereninsuffizienz. Wie bei den klassischen MRA kann es auch hier zur Hyperkaliämie in höheren CKD-Bereichen kommen. Größere Vergleichsstudien zu den klassischen MRA liegen nicht vor. Die Zulassung in Deutschland steht noch aus.

Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of death from COVID-19: an OpenSAFELY cohort analysis based on two cohorts

OBJECTIVES

To assess the association between routinely prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and deaths from COVID-19 using OpenSAFELY, a secure analytical platform.

METHODS

We conducted two cohort studies from 1 March to 14 June 2020. Working on behalf of National Health Service England, we used routine clinical data in England linked to death data. In study 1, we identified people with an NSAID prescription in the last 3 years from the general population. In study 2, we identified people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis. We defined exposure as current NSAID prescription within the 4 months before 1 March 2020. We used Cox regression to estimate HRs for COVID-19 related death in people currently prescribed NSAIDs, compared with those not currently prescribed NSAIDs, accounting for age, sex, comorbidities, other medications and geographical region.

RESULTS

In study 1, we included 536 423 current NSAID users and 1 927 284 non-users in the general population. We observed no evidence of difference in risk of COVID-19 related death associated with current use (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14) in the multivariable-adjusted model. In study 2, we included 1 708 781 people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis, of whom 175 495 (10%) were current NSAID users. In the multivariable-adjusted model, we observed a lower risk of COVID-19 related death (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.94) associated with current use of NSAID versus non-use.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of a harmful effect of routinely prescribed NSAIDs on COVID-19 related deaths. Risks of COVID-19 do not need to influence decisions about the routine therapeutic use of NSAIDs.

Increased risk of acute kidney injury in coronavirus disease patients with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system blockade use: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a severe complication of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) that negatively affects its outcome. Concern had been raised about the potential effect of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockades on renal outcomes in COVID-19 patients. However, the association between RAAS blockade use and incident AKI in COVID-19 patients has not been fully understood. We investigated the association between RAAS blockade exposure and COVID-19-related AKI in hospitalized patients through meta-analysis. Electronic databases were searched up to 24th December 2020. Summary estimates of pooled odds ratio (OR) of COVID-19-related AKI depending on RAAS blockade exposure were obtained through random-effects model. The random-effect meta-analysis on fourteen studies (17,876 patients) showed that RAAS blockade use was significantly associated with increased risk of incident AKI in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (OR 1.68; 95% confidence interval 1.19-2.36). Additional analysis showed that the association of RAAS blockade use on COVID-19-related AKI remains significant even after stratification by drug class and AKI severity. RAAS blockade use is significantly associated with the incident AKI in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Therefore, careful monitoring of renal complications is recommended for COVID-19 patients with recent RAAS blockade use due to the potential risk of AKI.

Safety and Efficacy of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors in COVID-19 Population

Introduction

The safety of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) among COVID-19 patients has been controversial since the onset of the pandemic.

Methods

Digital databases were queried to study the safety of RAASi in COVID-19. The primary outcome of interest was mortality. The secondary outcome was seropositivity improvement/viral clearance, clinical manifestation progression, and progression to intensive care units. A random-effect model was used to compute an unadjusted odds ratio (OR).

Results

A total of 49 observational studies were included in the analysis consisting of 83,269 COVID-19 patients (RAASi n = 34,691; non-RAASi n = 48,578). The mean age of the sample was 64, and 56% were males. We found that RAASi was associated with similar mortality outcomes as compared to non-RAASi groups (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.99–1.15; p > 0.05). RAASi was associated with seropositivity improvement including negative RT-PCR or antibodies, (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.93–0.99; p < 0.05). There was no association between RAASi versus control with progression to ICU admission (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.79–1.23; p > 0.05) or higher odds of worsening of clinical manifestations (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.97–1.11; p > 0.05). Metaregression analysis did not change our outcomes for effect modifiers including age, sex, comorbidities, RAASi type, or study type on outcomes.

Conclusions

COVID-19 is not a contraindication to hold or discontinue RAASi as they are not associated with higher mortality or worsening symptoms. Continuation of RAASi might be associated with favorable outcomes in COVID-19, including seropositivity/viral clearance.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40292-021-00462-w.

Covid and Cardiovascular Diseases: Direct and Indirect Damages and Future Perspective

SARS-CoV-2 infection determines a disease that predominantly affects lungs. However the cytokines storms, determined by the huge immune response to the infection, could affect also other organs and apparatus such as heart and vessels. Beyond the acute inflammation itself also hypercoagulative status has been linked to SARSCoV-2 infection and this surely relates to the increase seen in prevalence of pulmonary embolism and myocardial infarction. A number of cardiac abnormalities and pathologies have been observed, with special attention to cardiac arrhythmias and myocardial involvement. Furthermore, indirect damages determined by the reduction in acute and chronic cardiovascular care, results in a strong mortality and morbidity outcomes in cardiological patients. In this review we will summarise current knowledge on both direct and indirect cardiovascular damages determined by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemia.

Pulmonary adverse drug event data in hypertension with implications on COVID-19 morbidity

Hypertension is a recognized comorbidity for COVID-19. The association of antihypertensive medications with outcomes in patients with hypertension is not fully described. However, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), responsible for host entry of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) leading to COVID-19, is postulated to be upregulated in patients taking angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs). Here, we evaluated the occurrence of pulmonary adverse drug events (ADEs) in patients with hypertension receiving ACEIs/ARBs to determine if disparities exist between individual drugs within the respective classes using data from the FDA Spontaneous Reporting Systems. For this purpose, we proposed the proportional reporting ratio to provide a statistical summary for the commonality of an ADE for a specific drug as compared to the entire database for drugs in the same or other classes. In addition, a statistical procedure, multiple logistic regression analysis, was employed to correct hidden confounders when causative covariates are underreported or untrusted to correct analyses of drug-ADE combinations. To date, analyses have been focused on drug classes rather than individual drugs which may have different ADE profiles depending on the underlying diseases present. A retrospective analysis of thirteen pulmonary ADEs showed significant differences associated with quinapril and trandolapril, compared to other ACEIs and ARBs. Specifically, quinapril and trandolapril were found to have a statistically significantly higher incidence of pulmonary ADEs compared with other ACEIs as well as ARBs (P < 0.0001) for group comparison (i.e., ACEIs vs. ARBs vs. quinapril vs. trandolapril) and (P ≤ 0.0007) for pairwise comparison (i.e., ACEIs vs. quinapril, ACEIs vs. trandolapril, ARBs vs. quinapril, or ARBs vs. trandolapril). This study suggests that specific members of the ACEI antihypertensive class (quinapril and trandolapril) have a significantly higher cluster of pulmonary ADEs.

Prevalence and characteristics of myocardial injury during COVID-19 pandemic: A new role for high-sensitive troponin

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic disease that is causing a public health emergency. Characteristics and clinical significance of myocardial injury remain unclear.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study analyzed 189 patients who received a COVID-19 diagnosis out of all 758 subjects with a high sensitive troponin I (Hs-TnI) measurement within the first 24 h of admission at the Policlinico A.Gemelli (Rome, Italy) between February 20th 2020 to April 09th 2020.

RESULTS

The prevalence of myocardial injury in our COVID-19 population is of 16%. The patients with cardiac injury were older, had a greater number of cardiovascular comorbidities and higher values of acute phase and inflammatory markers and leucocytes. They required more frequently hospitalization in Intensive Care Unit (10 [32.3%] vs 18 [11.4%]; p = .003) and the mortality rate was significantly higher (17 [54.8%] vs. 15 [9.5%], p < .001). Among patients in ICU, the subjects with myocardial injury showed an increase need of endotracheal intubation (8 out of 9 [88%] vs 7 out of 19[37%], p = .042). Multivariate analyses showed that hs-TnI can significantly predict the degree of COVID-19 disease, the intubation need and in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study we demonstrate that hs-Tn can significantly predict disease severity, intubation need and in-hospital death. Therefore, it may be reasonable to use Hs-Tn as a clinical tool in COVID-19 patients in order to triage them into different risk groups and can play a pivotal role in the detection of subjects at high risk of cardiac impairment during both the early and recovery stage.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Withdrawal Is Associated with Higher Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19

Our main aim was to describe the effect on the severity of ACEI (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) and ARB (angiotensin II receptor blocker) during COVID-19 hospitalization. A retrospective, observational, multicenter study evaluating hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with ACEI/ARB. The primary endpoint was the incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis (IMV (invasive mechanical ventilation), NIMV (non-invasive mechanical ventilation), ICU admission (intensive care unit), and/or all-cause mortality). We evaluated both outcomes in patients whose treatment with ACEI/ARB was continued or withdrawn. Between February and June 2020, 11,205 patients were included, mean age 67 years (SD = 16.3) and 43.1% female; 2162 patients received ACEI/ARB treatment. ACEI/ARB treatment showed lower all-cause mortality (p < 0.0001). Hypertensive patients in the ACEI/ARB group had better results in IMV, ICU admission, and the composite outcome of prognosis (p < 0.0001 for all). No differences were found in the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events. Patients previously treated with ACEI/ARB continuing treatment during hospitalization had a lower incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis than those whose treatment was withdrawn (RR 0.67, 95%CI 0.63-0.76). ARB was associated with better survival than ACEI (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.62-0.96). ACEI/ARB treatment during COVID-19 hospitalization was associated with protection on mortality. The benefits were greater in hypertensive, those who continued treatment, and those taking ARB.

Discontinuation versus continuation of renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors in COVID-19 (ACEI-COVID): a prospective, parallel group, randomised, controlled, open-label trial

Background

SARS-CoV-2 entry in human cells depends on angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, which can be upregulated by inhibitors of the renin–angiotensin system (RAS). We aimed to test our hypothesis that discontinuation of chronic treatment with ACE-inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) mitigates the course o\f recent-onset COVID-19.

Methods

ACEI-COVID was a parallel group, randomised, controlled, open-label trial done at 35 centres in Austria and Germany. Patients aged 18 years and older were enrolled if they presented with recent symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and were chronically treated with ACEIs or ARBs. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to discontinuation or continuation of RAS inhibition for 30 days. Primary outcome was the maximum sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score within 30 days, where death was scored with the maximum achievable SOFA score. Secondary endpoints were area under the death-adjusted SOFA score (AUC_SOFA), mean SOFA score, admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, and death. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04353596.

Findings

Between April 20, 2020, and Jan 20, 2021, 204 patients (median age 75 years [IQR 66–80], 37% females) were randomly assigned to discontinue (n=104) or continue (n=100) RAS inhibition. Within 30 days, eight (8%) of 104 died in the discontinuation group and 12 (12%) of 100 patients died in the continuation group (p=0·42). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint between the discontinuation and continuation group (median [IQR] maximum SOFA score 0·00 (0·00–2·00) vs 1·00 (0·00–3·00); p=0·12). Discontinuation was associated with a significantly lower AUC_SOFA (0·00 [0·00–9·25] vs 3·50 [0·00–23·50]; p=0·040), mean SOFA score (0·00 [0·00–0·31] vs 0·12 [0·00–0·78]; p=0·040), and 30-day SOFA score (0·00 [10–90th percentile, 0·00–1·20] vs 0·00 [0·00–24·00]; p=0·023). At 30 days, 11 (11%) in the discontinuation group and 23 (23%) in the continuation group had signs of organ dysfunction (SOFA score ≥1) or were dead (p=0·017). There were no significant differences for mechanical ventilation (10 (10%) vs 8 (8%), p=0·87) and admission to intensive care unit (20 [19%] vs 18 [18%], p=0·96) between the discontinuation and continuation group.

Interpretation

Discontinuation of RAS-inhibition in COVID-19 had no significant effect on the maximum severity of COVID-19 but may lead to a faster and better recovery. The decision to continue or discontinue should be made on an individual basis, considering the risk profile, the indication for RAS inhibition, and the availability of alternative therapies and outpatient monitoring options.

Funding

Austrian Science Fund and German Center for Cardiovascular Research.

Efficacy of Serum Angiotensin II Levels in Prognosis of Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine serum angiotensin II levels in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 infection and to investigate the effect of these levels on the prognosis of the disease.

DESIGN

The study was planned prospectively and observationally.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a tertiary university hospital.

PATIENTS

Coronavirus disease 2019 patients older than 18 years old, polymerase chain reaction test positive, with signs of pneumonia on tomography, and hospitalized were included in the study. ICU need, development of acute respiratory distress syndrome, and in-hospital mortality were considered as primary endpoints.

INTERVENTIONS

Blood samples were taken from patients three times for angiotensin II levels.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Angiotensin II levels were studied by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method. The SPSS 24.0 program (Statistics Program for Social Scientists, SPSS, Chicago, IL) was used to analyze the data. A total of 112 patients were included in the study, of which 63.4% of the patients were men. The serum angiotensin II levels were statistically significantly lower in the patients with coronavirus disease 2019 compared with the healthy control group (p < 0.001). There was no statistical significance between the serum angiotensin II levels measured at three different times (p > 0.05). The serum angiotensin II levels of the patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome were found to be statistically significantly lower than those without acute respiratory distress syndrome in three samples collected at different clinical periods (p < 0.05). The angiotensin II levels of the patients who required admission to the ICU at all three times of blood sample collection were found to be statistically significantly lower than those who did not (p < 0.05). Although the serum angiotensin II levels of the patients who died were low, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality at all three times (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The serum angiotensin II levels decrease significantly in patients with coronavirus disease 2019, and this decrease is correlated with lung damage.

American College of Rheumatology Guidance for the Management of Pediatric Rheumatic Disease During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Version 2

OBJECTIVE

To provide clinical guidance to rheumatology providers who treat children with pediatric rheumatic disease (PRD) in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

The task force, consisting of 7 pediatric rheumatologists, 2 pediatric infectious disease physicians, 1 adult rheumatologist, and 1 pediatric nurse practitioner, was convened on May 21, 2020. Clinical questions and subsequent guidance statements were drafted based on a review of the queries posed by the patients as well as the families and healthcare providers of children with PRD. An evidence report was generated and disseminated to task force members to assist with 3 rounds of asynchronous, anonymous voting by email using a modified Delphi approach. Voting was completed using a 9-point numeric scoring system with predefined levels of agreement (categorized as disagreement, uncertainty, or agreement, with median scores of 1-3, 4-6, and 7-9, respectively) and consensus (categorized as low, moderate, or high). To be approved as a guidance statement, median vote ratings were required to fall into the highest tertile for agreement, with either moderate or high levels of consensus.

RESULTS

To date, 39 guidance statements have been approved by the task force. Those with similar recommendations were combined to form a total of 33 final guidance statements, all of which received median vote ratings within the highest tertile of agreement and were associated with either moderate consensus (n = 5) or high consensus (n = 28).

CONCLUSION

These guidance statements have been generated based on review of the available literature, indicating that children with PRD do not appear to be at increased risk for susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection. This guidance is presented as a "living document," recognizing that the literature on COVID-19 is rapidly evolving, with future updates anticipated.

Comparison of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors with other antihypertensives in association with coronavirus disease-19 clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Reports on the effects of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) have been conflicting. We performed this meta-analysis to find conclusive evidence.

METHODS

We searched published articles through PubMed, EMBASE and medRxiv from 5 January 2020 to 3 August 2020. Studies that reported clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19, stratified by the class of antihypertensives, were included. Random and fixed-effects models were used to estimate pooled odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

A total 36 studies involving 30,795 patients with COVID-19 were included. The overall risk of poor patient outcomes (severe COVID-19 or death) was lower in patients taking RAAS inhibitors (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: [0.67, 0.95]) compared with those receiving non-RAAS inhibitor antihypertensives. However, further sub-meta-analysis showed that specific RAAS inhibitors did not show a reduction of poor COVID-19 outcomes when compared with any class of antihypertensive except beta-blockers (BBs). For example, compared to calcium channel blockers (CCBs), neither angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (OR = 0.91, 95% CI: [0.67, 1.23]) nor angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: [0.62, 1.33]) showed a reduction of poor COVID-19 outcomes. When compared with BBs, however, both ACEIs (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: [0.73, 0.99) and ARBs (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: [0.55, 0.94]) showed an apparent decrease in poor COVID-19 outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

RAAS inhibitors did not increase the risk of mortality or severity of COVID-19. Differences in COVID-19 clinical outcomes between different class of antihypertensive drugs were likely due to the underlying comorbidities for which the antihypertensive drugs were prescribed, although adverse effects of drugs such as BBs could not be excluded.

The Effect of Prior Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Treatment on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Susceptibility and Outcome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

There have been arguments on whether angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) treatment alters the risk of COVID-19 susceptibility and disease severity. We identified a total of 102 eligible studies for systematic review, in which 49 studies adjusting for confounders were included in the meta-analysis. We found no association between prior ACEI/ARB use and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in general population (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94-1.05). The risk of mortality (aOR 0.87, 95%CI 0.66-1.04) and severe outcomes (aOR 0.95, 95%CI 0.73-1.24) are also unchanged among COVID-19 patients taking ACEI/ARB. These findings remain consistent in subgroup analyses stratified by populations, drug exposures and in other secondary outcomes. This systematic review provides evidence-based support to current medical guidelines and position statements that ACEI/ARB should not be discontinued. Additionally, there has been no evidence for initiating ACEI/ARB regimen as prevention or treatment of COVID-19.

The interactive effects of ambient air pollutants-meteorological factors on confirmed cases of COVID-19 in 120 Chinese cities

Emerging evidence has confirmed meteorological factors and air pollutants affect novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, no studies to date have considered the impact of interactions between meteorological factors and air pollutants on COVID-19 transmission. This study explores the association between ambient air pollutants (PM_2.5, NO₂, SO₂, CO, and O₃), meteorological factors (average temperature, diurnal temperature range, relative humidity, wind velocity, air pressure, precipitation, and hours of sunshine), and their interaction on confirmed case counts of COVID-19 in 120 Chinese cities. We modeled total confirmed cases of COVID-19 as the dependent variable with meteorological factors, air pollutants, and their interactions as the independent variables. To account for potential migration effects, we included the migration scale index (MSI) from Wuhan to each of the 120 cities included in the model, using data from 15 Jan. to 18 Mar. 2020. As an important confounding factor, MSI was considered in a negative binomial regression analysis. Positive associations were found between the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 and CO, PM_2.5, relative humidity, and O₃, with and without MSI-adjustment. Negative associations were also found for SO₂ and wind velocity both with and without controlling for population migration. In addition, air pollutants and meteorological factors had interactive effects on COVID-19 after controlling for MSI. In conclusion, air pollutants, meteorological factors, and their interactions all affect COVID-19 cases.

Clinical factors associated with death in 3044 COVID-19 patients managed in internal medicine wards in Italy: results from the SIMI-COVID-19 study of the Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI)

During the COVID-19 2020 outbreak, a large body of data has been provided on general management and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Yet, relatively little is known on characteristics and outcome of patients managed in Internal Medicine Units (IMU). To address this gap, the Italian Society of Internal Medicine has conducted a nationwide cohort multicentre study on death outcome in adult COVID-19 patients admitted and managed in IMU. This study assessed 3044 COVID-19 patients at 41 referral hospitals across Italy from February 3rd to May 8th 2020. Demographics, comorbidities, organ dysfunction, treatment, and outcomes including death were assessed. During the study period, 697 patients (22.9%) were transferred to intensive care units, and 351 died in IMU (death rate 14.9%). At admission, factors independently associated with in-hospital mortality were age (OR 2.46, p = 0.000), productive cough (OR 2.04, p = 0.000), pre-existing chronic heart failure (OR 1.58, p = 0.017) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 1.17, p = 0.048), the number of comorbidities (OR 1.34, p = 0.000) and polypharmacy (OR 1.20, p = 0.000). Of note, up to 40% of elderly patients did not report fever at admission. Decreasing PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio at admission was strongly inversely associated with survival. The use of conventional oxygen supplementation increased with the number of pre-existing comorbidities, but it did not associate with better survival in patients with PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio < 100. The latter, significantly benefited by the early use of non-invasive mechanical ventilation. Our study identified PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio at admission and comorbidity as the main alert signs to inform clinical decisions and resource allocation in non-critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to IMU.