Abatacept, Cenicriviroc, or Infliximab for Treatment of Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Efficacy of infliximab, abatacept, and cenicriviroc for the treatment of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted to investigate the efficacy of infliximab, abatacept, and cenicriviroc in treating patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The patient's clinical status was assessed daily on an 8-point ordinal scale. We evaluated the totality of evidence on the efficacy of the 3 immunomodulators by considering all possible changes in the clinical status of each patient over time. We demonstrated that infliximab accelerated improvement and reduced deterioration of clinical status when added to standard of care. There was also evidence for the benefit of abatacept. There was no evidence for the benefit of cenicriviroc.

Understanding the Evolving Pathophysiology of Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Adult Nursing Management

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first identified in December 2019 and quickly became a global pandemic. The understanding of the pathophysiology, treatment, and management of the disease has evolved since the beginning of the pandemic in 2020. COVID-19 can be complicated by immune system dysfunction, lung injury with hypoxemia, acute kidney injury, and coagulopathy. The treatment and management of COVID-19 is based on the severity of illness, ranging from asymptomatic to severe and often life-threatening disease. The 3 main recommended medication classes include antivirals, immunomodulators, and anticoagulants. Other supportive therapies include ensuring adequate oxygenation, mechanical ventilation, and prone positioning.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and SARS-CoV2 infection

Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) triggers coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which predominantly targets the respiratory tract. SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially severe COVID-19, is associated with dysregulated immune responses against the virus, including exaggerated inflammatory responses known as the cytokine storm, together with lymphocyte and NK cell dysfunction known as immune cell exhaustion. Overexpression of negative immune checkpoints such as PD-1 and CTLA-4 plays a considerable role in the dysfunction of immune cells upon SARS-CoV-2 infection. Blockade of these checkpoints has been suggested to improve the clinical outcome of COVID-19 patients by promoting potent immune responses against the virus. In the current review, we provide an overview of the potential of checkpoint inhibitors to induce potent immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 and improving the clinical outcome of severe COVID-19 patients.

Evaluating treatment efficacy in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, with applications to Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trials

BACKGROUND

The current endpoints for therapeutic trials of hospitalized COVID-19 patients capture only part of the clinical course of a patient and have limited statistical power and robustness.

METHODS

We specify proportional odds models for repeated measures of clinical status, with a common odds ratio of lower severity over time. We also specify the proportional hazards model for time to each level of improvement or deterioration of clinical status, with a common hazard ratio for overall treatment benefit. We apply these methods to Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trials.

RESULTS

For remdesivir versus placebo, the common odds ratio was 1.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.23-1.79; p < 0.001), and the common hazard ratio was 1.27 (95% CI = 1.09-1.47; p = 0.002). For baricitinib plus remdesivir versus remdesivir alone, the common odds ratio was 1.32 (95% CI = 1.10-1.57; p = 0.002), and the common hazard ratio was 1.30 (95% CI = 1.13-1.49; p < 0.001). For interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir versus remdesivir alone, the common odds ratio was 0.95 (95% CI = 0.79-1.14; p = 0.56), and the common hazard ratio was 0.98 (95% CI = 0.85-1.12; p = 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed methods comprehensively characterize the treatment effects on the entire clinical course of a hospitalized COVID-19 patient.

Efficacy of corticosteroid therapy for oxygen-free coronavirus disease 2019-derived pneumonia

Corticosteroid therapy for oxygen-free coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is not recommended due to its negative prognostic impact, but the efficacy of corticosteroids when limited to COVID-19 pneumonia is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of corticosteroid monotherapy for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia without supplemental oxygen. We retrospectively reviewed patients with oxygen-free COVID-19 pneumonia at our institute between September 2020 and August 2021 and assessed the use of corticosteroids and the timing of initiation. We classified the patients into the following 2 groups: those who were initiated corticosteroids without developing respiratory failure (early steroid group) and those who were not (standard of care [SOC] group). We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPW) to balance between the groups. The primary outcome was the incidence of respiratory failure. A total of 144 patient records were reviewed; 63 patients were in the early steroid group and 81 patients were in the SOC group. Of all patients, 14 (22.2%) and 27 (33.3%) patients in the early steroid and SOC group, respectively, required supplemental oxygen (P = .192). After adjusted by the IPW method, 10 (16.0%) and 32 (40.1%) patients in the early steroid and SOC groups, respectively, required supplemental oxygen (P = .004). The logistic regression analysis indicated that early corticosteroid use was significantly associated with a decreased incidence of respiratory failure (odds ratio; 0.17, 95% confidence intervals; 0.06-0.46, P < .001). Corticosteroid monotherapy may suppress the development of exacerbation requiring oxygen supply in patients with oxygen-free COVID-19 pneumonia.

Higher levels of IL-1ra, IL-6, IL-8, MCP-1, MIP-3α, MIP-3β, and fractalkine are associated with 90-day mortality in 132 non-immunomodulated hospitalized patients with COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Immune dysregulation with an excessive release of cytokines has been identified as a key driver in the development of severe COVID-19. The aim of this study was to evaluate the initial cytokine profile associated with 90-day mortality and respiratory failure in a cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID 19 that did not receive immunomodulatory therapy.

METHODS

Levels of 45 cytokines were measured in blood samples obtained at admission from patients with confirmed COVID-19. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to determine the association between cytokine levels and outcomes. The primary outcome was death within 90 days from admission and the secondary outcome was need for mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

A total of 132 patients were included during the spring of 2020. We found that one anti-inflammatory cytokine, one pro-inflammatory cytokine, and five chemokines were associated with the odds of 90-day mortality, specifically: interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, macrophage inflammatory protein-3α, macrophage inflammatory protein-3β, and fractalkine. All but fractalkine were also associated with the odds of respiratory failure during admission. Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 showed the strongest estimate of association with both outcomes.

CONCLUSION

We showed that one anti-inflammatory cytokine, one pro-inflammatory cytokine, and five chemokines were associated with 90-day mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 that did not receive immunomodulatory therapy.

Virus-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Causes Cardiomyopathy Through Eliciting Inflammatory Responses in the Heart

BACKGROUND

Viral infections can cause acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), systemic inflammation, and secondary cardiovascular complications. Lung macrophage subsets change during ARDS, but the role of heart macrophages in cardiac injury during viral ARDS remains unknown. Here we investigate how immune signals typical for viral ARDS affect cardiac macrophage subsets, cardiovascular health, and systemic inflammation.

METHODS

We assessed cardiac macrophage subsets using immunofluorescence histology of autopsy specimens from 21 patients with COVID-19 with SARS-CoV-2-associated ARDS and 33 patients who died from other causes. In mice, we compared cardiac immune cell dynamics after SARS-CoV-2 infection with ARDS induced by intratracheal instillation of Toll-like receptor ligands and an ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2) inhibitor.

RESULTS

In humans, SARS-CoV-2 increased total cardiac macrophage counts and led to a higher proportion of CCR2+ (C-C chemokine receptor type 2 positive) macrophages. In mice, SARS-CoV-2 and virus-free lung injury triggered profound remodeling of cardiac resident macrophages, recapitulating the clinical expansion of CCR2+ macrophages. Treating mice exposed to virus-like ARDS with a tumor necrosis factor α-neutralizing antibody reduced cardiac monocytes and inflammatory MHCIIlo CCR2+ macrophages while also preserving cardiac function. Virus-like ARDS elevated mortality in mice with pre-existing heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that viral ARDS promotes cardiac inflammation by expanding the CCR2+ macrophage subset, and the associated cardiac phenotypes in mice can be elicited by activating the host immune system even without viral presence in the heart.

COVID-19 therapeutics

SUMMARYSince the emergence of COVID-19 in 2020, an unprecedented range of therapeutic options has been studied and deployed. Healthcare providers have multiple treatment approaches to choose from, but efficacy of those approaches often remains controversial or compromised by viral evolution. Uncertainties still persist regarding the best therapies for high-risk patients, and the drug pipeline is suffering fatigue and shortage of funding. In this article, we review the antiviral activity, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and safety of COVID-19 antiviral therapies. Additionally, we summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the various COVID-19 antivirals and discuss unmet needs which should be addressed.

Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and Bronchoalveolar Cytokine Concentrations Redefine the COVID-19 Phenotypes in Critically Ill Patients

RATIONALE

Recent studies suggest that both hypo- and hyperinflammatory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) phenotypes characterize severe COVID-19-related pneumonia. The role of lung Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome - Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load in contributing to these phenotypes remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To redefine COVID-19 ARDS phenotypes when considering quantitative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR in the bronchoalveolar lavage of intubated patients. To compare the relevance of deep respiratory samples versus plasma in linking the immune response and the quantitative viral loads.

METHODS

Eligible subjects were adults diagnosed with COVID-19 ARDS who required mechanical ventilation and underwent bronchoscopy. We recorded the immune response in the bronchoalveolar lavage and plasma and the quantitative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR in the bronchoalveolar lavage. Hierarchical clustering on principal components was applied separately on the 2 compartments' datasets. Baseline characteristics were compared between clusters.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Twenty subjects were enrolled between August 2020 and March 2021. Subjects underwent bronchoscopy on average 3.6 days after intubation. All subjects were treated with dexamethasone prior to bronchoscopy, 11 of 20 (55.6%) received remdesivir and 1 of 20 (5%) received tocilizumab. Adding viral load information to the classic 2-cluster model of ARDS revealed a new cluster characterized by hypoinflammatory responses and high viral load in 23.1% of the cohort. Hyperinflammatory ARDS was noted in 15.4% of subjects. Bronchoalveolar lavage clusters were more stable compared to plasma.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a unique group of critically ill subjects with COVID-19 ARDS who exhibit hypoinflammatory responses but high viral loads in the lower airways. These clusters may warrant different treatment approaches to improve clinical outcomes.

SARS-CoV-2 resistance to monoclonal antibodies and small-molecule drugs

Over four years have passed since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The scientific response has been rapid and effective, with many therapeutic monoclonal antibodies and small molecules developed for clinical use. However, given the ability for viruses to become resistant to antivirals, it is perhaps no surprise that the field has identified resistance to nearly all of these compounds. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of the resistance profile for each of these therapeutics. We hope that this resource provides an atlas for mutations to be aware of for each agent, particularly as a springboard for considerations for the next generation of antivirals. Finally, we discuss the outlook and thoughts for moving forward in how we continue to manage this, and the next, pandemic.

Therapeutic inhibition of monocyte recruitment prevents checkpoint inhibitor-induced hepatitis

BACKGROUND

Checkpoint inhibitor-induced hepatitis (CPI-hepatitis) is an emerging problem with the widening use of CPIs in cancer immunotherapy. Here, we developed a mouse model to characterize the mechanism of CPI-hepatitis and to therapeutically target key pathways driving this pathology.

METHODS

C57BL/6 wild-type (WT) mice were dosed with toll-like receptor (TLR)9 agonist (TLR9-L) for hepatic priming combined with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) plus anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) ("CPI") or phosphate buffered saline (PBS) control for up to 7 days. Flow cytometry, histology/immunofluorescence and messenger RNA sequencing were used to characterize liver myeloid/lymphoid subsets and inflammation. Hepatocyte damage was assessed by plasma alanine transaminase (ALT) and cytokeratin-18 (CK-18) measurements. In vivo investigations of CPI-hepatitis were carried out in Rag2-/- and Ccr2rfp/rfp transgenic mice, as well as following anti-CD4, anti-CD8 or cenicriviroc (CVC; CCR2/CCR5 antagonist) treatment.

RESULTS

Co-administration of combination CPIs with TLR9-L induced liver pathology closely resembling human disease, with increased infiltration and clustering of granzyme B+perforin+CD8+ T cells and CCR2+ monocytes, 7 days post treatment. This was accompanied by apoptotic hepatocytes surrounding these clusters and elevated ALT and CK-18 plasma levels. Liver RNA sequencing identified key signaling pathways (JAK-STAT, NF-ΚB) and cytokine/chemokine networks (Ifnγ, Cxcl9, Ccl2/Ccr2) as drivers of CPI-hepatitis. Using this model, we show that CD8+ T cells mediate hepatocyte damage in experimental CPI-hepatitis. However, their liver recruitment, clustering, and cytotoxic activity is dependent on the presence of CCR2+ monocytes. The absence of hepatic monocyte recruitment in Ccr2rfp/rfp mice and CCR2 inhibition by CVC treatment in WT mice was able to prevent the development and reverse established experimental CPI-hepatitis.

CONCLUSION

This newly established mouse model provides a platform for in vivo mechanistic studies of CPI-hepatitis. Using this model, we demonstrate the central role of liver infiltrating CCR2+ monocyte interaction with tissue-destructive CD8+ T cells in the pathogenesis of CPI-hepatitis and highlight CCR2 inhibition as a novel therapeutic target.

Abatacept Pharmacokinetics and Exposure Response in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Secondary Analysis of the ACTIV-1 IM Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The pharmacokinetics of abatacept and the association between abatacept exposure and outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 are unknown.

Objective

To characterize abatacept pharmacokinetics, relate drug exposure with clinical outcomes, and evaluate the need for dosage adjustments.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This study is a secondary analysis of data from the ACTIV-1 (Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines) Immune Modulator (IM) randomized clinical trial conducted between October 16, 2020, and December 31, 2021. The trial included hospitalized adults who received abatacept in addition to standard of care for treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia. Data analysis was performed between September 2022 and February 2024.

Exposure

Single intravenous infusion of abatacept (10 mg/kg with a maximum dose of 1000 mg).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mortality at day 28 was the primary outcome of interest, and time to recovery at day 28 was the secondary outcome. Drug exposure was assessed using the projected area under the serum concentration time curve over 28 days (AUC0-28). Logistic regression modeling was used to analyze the association between drug exposure and 28-day mortality, adjusted for age, sex, and disease severity. The association between time to recovery and abatacept exposure was examined using Fine-Gray modeling with death as a competing risk, and was adjusted for age, sex, and disease severity.

Results

Of the 509 patients who received abatacept, 395 patients with 848 serum samples were included in the population pharmacokinetic analysis. Their median age was 55 (range, 19-89) years and most (250 [63.3%]) were men. Abatacept clearance increased with body weight and more severe disease activity at baseline. Drug exposure was higher in patients who survived vs those who died, with a median AUC0-28 of 21 428 (range, 8462-43 378) mg × h/L vs 18 262 (range, 9628-27 507) mg × h/L (P < .001). Controlling for age, sex, and disease severity, an increase of 5000 units in AUC0-28 was associated with lower odds of mortality at day 28 (OR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.35-0.79]; P = .002). For an AUC0-28 of 19 400 mg × h/L or less, there was a higher probability of recovery at day 28 (hazard ratio, 2.63 [95% CI, 1.70-4.08] for every 5000-unit increase; P < .001). Controlling for age, sex, and disease severity, every 5000-unit increase in AUC0-28 was also associated with lower odds of a composite safety event at 28 days (OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.33-0.63]; P < .001). Using the dosing regimen studied in the ACTIV-1 IM trial, 121 of the 395 patients (30.6%) would not achieve an abatacept exposure of at least 19 400 mg × h/L, particularly at the extremes of body weight. Using a modified, higher-dose regimen, only 12 patients (3.0%) would not achieve the hypothesized target abatacept exposure.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, patients who were hospitalized with severe COVID-19 and achieved higher projected abatacept exposure had reduced mortality and a higher probability of recovery with fewer safety events. However, abatacept clearance was high in this population, and the current abatacept dosing (10 mg/kg intravenously with a maximum of 1000 mg) may not achieve optimal exposure in all patients.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04593940.

Investigational pharmacological agents for the treatment of ARDS

INTRODUCTION

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) is a heterogeneous form of lung injury with severe hypoxemia and bilateral infiltrates after an inciting event that results in diffuse lung inflammation with a high mortality rate. While research in COVID-related ARDS has resulted in several pharmacotherapeutic agents that have undergone successful investigation, non-COVID ARDS studies have not resulted in many widely accepted pharmacotherapeutic agents despite exhaustive research.

AREAS COVERED

The aim of this review is to discuss adjuvant pharmacotherapies targeting non-COVID Acute Lung Injury (ALI)/ARDS and novel therapeutics in COVID associated ALI/ARDS. In ARDS, variable data may support selective use of neuromuscular blocking agents, corticosteroids and neutrophil elastase inhibitors, but are not yet universally used. COVID-ALI/ARDS has data supporting the use of IL-6 monoclonal antibodies, corticosteroids, and JAK inhibitor therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Although ALI/ARDS modifying pharmacological agents have been identified in COVID-related disease, the data in non-COVID ALI/ARDS has been less compelling. The increased use of more specific molecular phenotyping based on physiologic parameters and biomarkers, will ensure equipoise between groups, and will likely allow more precision in confirming pharmacological agent efficacy in future studies.

CCR5/CXCR3 antagonist TAK-779 prevents diffuse alveolar damage of the lung in the murine model of the acute respiratory distress syndrome

Introduction: The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), secondary to viral pneumonitis, is one of the main causes of high mortality in patients with COVID-19 (novel coronavirus disease 2019)-ongoing SARS-CoV-2 infection- reached more than 0.7 billion registered cases. Methods: Recently, we elaborated a non-surgical and reproducible method of the unilateral total diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) of the left lung in ICR mice-a publicly available imitation of the ARDS caused by SARS-CoV-2. Our data read that two C-C chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) ligands, macrophage inflammatory proteins (MIPs) MIP-1α/CCL3 and MIP-1β/CCL4, are upregulated in this DAD model up to three orders of magnitude compared to the background level. Results: Here, we showed that a nonpeptide compound TAK-779, an antagonist of CCR5/CXCR3, readily prevents DAD in the lung with a single injection of 2.5 mg/kg. Histological analysis revealed reduced peribronchial and perivascular mononuclear infiltration in the lung and mononuclear infiltration of the wall and lumen of the alveoli in the TAK-779-treated animals. Administration of TAK-779 decreased the 3-5-fold level of serum cytokines and chemokines in animals with DAD, including CCR5 ligands MIP-1α/β, MCP-1, and CCL5. Computed tomography revealed rapid recovery of the density and volume of the affected lung in TAK-779-treated animals. Discussion: Our pre-clinical data suggest that TAK-779 is more effective than the administration of dexamethasone or the anti-IL6R therapeutic antibody tocilizumab, which brings novel therapeutic modality to TAK-779 and other CCR5 inhibitors for the treatment of virus-induced hyperinflammation syndromes, including COVID-19.

Impact of Risk Factors on COVID-19 Outcomes in Unvaccinated People With Rheumatic Diseases: A Comparative Analysis of Pandemic Epochs Using the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Registry

OBJECTIVE

Approximately one third of individuals worldwide have not received a COVID-19 vaccine. Although studies have investigated risk factors linked to severe COVID-19 among unvaccinated people with rheumatic diseases (RDs), we know less about whether these factors changed as the pandemic progressed. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with severe COVID-19 in unvaccinated individuals in different pandemic epochs corresponding to major variants of concern.

METHODS

Patients with RDs and COVID-19 were entered into the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Registry between March 2020 and June 2022. An ordinal logistic regression model (not hospitalized, hospitalized, and death) was used with date of COVID-19 diagnosis, age, sex, race and/or ethnicity, comorbidities, RD activity, medications, and the human development index (HDI) as covariates. The main analysis included all unvaccinated patients across COVID-19 pandemic epochs; subanalyses stratified patients according to RD types.

RESULTS

Among 19,256 unvaccinated people with RDs and COVID-19, those who were older, male, had more comorbidities, used glucocorticoids, had higher disease activity, or lived in lower HDI regions had worse outcomes across epochs. For those with rheumatoid arthritis, sulfasalazine and B-cell-depleting therapy were associated with worse outcomes, and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were associated with improved outcomes. In those with connective tissue disease or vasculitis, B-cell-depleting therapy was associated with worse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes were similar throughout pandemic epochs in unvaccinated people with RDs. Ongoing efforts, including vaccination, are needed to reduce COVID-19 severity in this population, particularly in those with medical and social vulnerabilities identified in this study.

The occurrence and development mechanisms of esophageal stricture: state of the art review

BACKGROUND

Esophageal strictures significantly impair patient quality of life and present a therapeutic challenge, particularly due to the high recurrence post-ESD/EMR. Current treatments manage symptoms rather than addressing the disease's etiology. This review concentrates on the mechanisms of esophageal stricture formation and recurrence, seeking to highlight areas for potential therapeutic intervention.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted through PUBMED using search terms: esophageal stricture, mucosal resection, submucosal dissection. Relevant articles were identified through manual review with reference lists reviewed for additional articles.

RESULTS

Preclinical studies and data from animal studies suggest that the mechanisms that may lead to esophageal stricture include overdifferentiation of fibroblasts, inflammatory response that is not healed in time, impaired epithelial barrier function, and multimethod factors leading to it. Dysfunction of the epithelial barrier may be the initiating mechanism for esophageal stricture. Achieving perfect in-epithelialization by tissue-engineered fabrication of cell patches has been shown to be effective in the treatment and prevention of esophageal strictures.

CONCLUSION

The development of esophageal stricture involves three stages: structural damage to the esophageal epithelial barrier (EEB), chronic inflammation, and severe fibrosis, in which dysfunction or damage to the EEB is the initiating mechanism leading to esophageal stricture. Re-epithelialization is essential for the treatment and prevention of esophageal stricture. This information will help clinicians or scientists to develop effective techniques to treat esophageal stricture in the future.

An Update on SARS-CoV-2 Clinical Trial Results-What We Can Learn for the Next Pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has claimed over 7 million lives worldwide, providing a stark reminder of the importance of pandemic preparedness. Due to the lack of approved antiviral drugs effective against coronaviruses at the start of the pandemic, the world largely relied on repurposed efforts. Here, we summarise results from randomised controlled trials to date, as well as selected in vitro data of directly acting antivirals, host-targeting antivirals, and immunomodulatory drugs. Overall, repurposing efforts evaluating directly acting antivirals targeting other viral families were largely unsuccessful, whereas several immunomodulatory drugs led to clinical improvement in hospitalised patients with severe disease. In addition, accelerated drug discovery efforts during the pandemic progressed to multiple novel directly acting antivirals with clinical efficacy, including small molecule inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies. We argue that large-scale investment is required to prepare for future pandemics; both to develop an arsenal of broad-spectrum antivirals beyond coronaviruses and build worldwide clinical trial networks that can be rapidly utilised.

COVID-19

COVID-19, the illness caused by SARS-CoV-2, became a worldwide pandemic in 2020. Initial clinical manifestations range from asymptomatic infection to mild upper respiratory illness but may progress to pulmonary involvement with hypoxemia and, in some cases, multiorgan involvement, shock, and death. Older adults, pregnant persons, those with common comorbidities, and those with immunosuppression are at greatest risk for progression. Vaccination is effective in preventing symptomatic infection and reducing risk for severe disease, hospitalization, and death. Antiviral treatment and immunomodulators have been shown to benefit certain patients. This article summarizes current recommendations on prevention, diagnosis, management, and treatment of COVID-19.

Intravenous immunoglobulin as a potential treatment for long COVID

INTRODUCTION

On 31 July 2023, the United States Department of Health and Human Services announced the formation of the Office of Long COVID Research and Practice and the United States National Institutes of Health (NIH) opened enrollment for the therapeutic arm of the RECOVER initiative, a prospective, randomized study to evaluate new treatment options for long coronavirus disease 2019 (long COVID).

AREAS COVERED

One of the first drugs to be studied in this nationwide initiative is intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), which will be a treatment option for subjects enrolled in RECOVER-AUTO, a randomized trial to investigate therapeutic strategies for autonomic dysfunction related to long COVID.

EXPERT OPINION

IVIG is a mixture of human antibodies (human immunoglobulin) that has been widely used to treat a variety of diseases, including immune thrombocytopenia purpura, Kawasaki disease, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, and certain infections such as influenza, human immunodeficiency virus, and measles. However, the role of IVIG in the treatment of post-COVID-19 conditions is uncertain. This manuscript examines what is known about IVIG in the treatment of long COVID and explores how this therapeutic agent may be used in the future to address this condition.