Corticosteroids for treating sepsis in children and adults

Glucocorticoid therapy for sepsis in the AI era: a survey on current and future approaches

Sepsis, a life-threatening medical condition, manifests as new or worsening organ failures due to a dysregulated host response to infection. Many patients with sepsis have manifested a hyperinflammatory phenotype leading to the identification of inflammatory modulation by corticosteroids as a key treatment modality. However, the optimal use of corticosteroids in sepsis treatment remains a contentious subject, necessitating a deeper understanding of their physiological and pharmacological effects. Our study conducts a comprehensive review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on traditional corticosteroid treatment in sepsis, alongside an analysis of evolving clinical guidelines. Additionally, we explore the emerging role of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine, particularly in diagnosing, prognosticating, and treating sepsis. AI's advanced data processing capabilities reveal new avenues for enhancing corticosteroid therapeutic strategies in sepsis. The integration of AI in sepsis treatment has the potential to address existing gaps in knowledge, especially in the application of corticosteroids. Our findings suggest that combining corticosteroid therapy with AI-driven insights could lead to more personalized and effective sepsis treatments. This approach holds promise for improving clinical outcomes and presents a significant advancement in the management of this complex and often fatal condition.

Low-Dose Corticosteroids for Critically Ill Adults With Severe Pulmonary Infections: A Review

Importance

Severe pulmonary infections, including COVID-19, community-acquired pneumonia, influenza, and Pneumocystis pneumonia, are a leading cause of death among adults worldwide. Pulmonary infections in critically ill patients may cause septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or both, which are associated with mortality rates ranging between 30% and 50%.

Observations

Corticosteroids mitigate the immune response to infection and improve outcomes for patients with several types of severe pulmonary infections. Low-dose corticosteroids, defined as less than or equal to 400 mg hydrocortisone equivalent daily, can reduce mortality of patients with severe COVID-19, community-acquired pneumonia, and Pneumocystis pneumonia. A randomized clinical trial of 6425 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who required supplemental oxygen or noninvasive or invasive mechanical ventilation reported that dexamethasone 6 mg daily for 10 days decreased 28-day mortality (23% vs 26%). A meta-analysis that included 7 randomized clinical trials of 1689 patients treated in the intensive care unit for severe bacterial community-acquired pneumonia reported that hydrocortisone equivalent less than or equal to 400 mg daily for 8 days or fewer was associated with lower 30-day mortality compared with placebo (10% vs 16%). In a meta-analysis of 6 randomized clinical trials, low-dose corticosteroids were associated with lower mortality rates compared with placebo for patients with HIV and moderate to severe Pneumocystis pneumonia (13% vs 25%). In a predefined subgroup analysis of a trial of low-dose steroid treatment for septic shock, patients with community-acquired pneumonia randomized to 7 days of intravenous hydrocortisone 50 mg every 6 hours and fludrocortisone 50 μg daily had decreased mortality compared with the placebo group (39% vs 51%). For patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by various conditions, low-dose corticosteroids were associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (34% vs 45%) according to a meta-analysis of 8 studies that included 1091 patients. Adverse effects of low-dose corticosteroids may include hyperglycemia, gastrointestinal bleeding, neuropsychiatric disorders, muscle weakness, hypernatremia, and secondary infections.

Conclusions and Relevance

Treatment with low-dose corticosteroids is associated with decreased mortality for patients with severe COVID-19 infection, severe community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, and moderate to severe Pneumocystis pneumonia (for patients with HIV). Low-dose corticosteroids may also benefit critically ill patients with respiratory infections who have septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or both.

Critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) in paediatric patients: a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge

Critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency or CIRCI is characterized by acute and life-threatening disfunction of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis observed among intensive care unit- staying patients.It is associated with increased circulating levels of biological markers of inflammation and coagulation, morbidity, length of ICU stay, and mortality.Several mechanisms are involved in CIRCI pathogenesis: reduced CRH-stimulated ACTH release, peripheral resistance to glucocorticoids, altered cortisol synthesis, impaired cortisol-free fraction and bioavailability.Diagnostic and therapeutic management of this condition in children is still debated, probably because of the lack of agreement among intensive care specialists and endocrinologists regarding diagnostic criteria and prevalence of CIRCI in paediatric age.In the present narrative review, we focused on definition of CIRCI in paediatric age and we advise on how to diagnose and treat this poorly understood condition, based on current literature data.

An evaluation of pharmacists' general attitudes, knowledge, and phobias regarding medications that include corticosteroids: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroid-containing medications are widely accessible in various forms, including topical, injectable, and inhaled formulations. Due to uncertain safety profiles, healthcare providers, including pharmacists, often express apprehension when dispensing these drugs. This cross-sectional study assesses the knowledge, attitudes, and phobia of Jordanian pharmacists regarding corticosteroid-containing medications.

METHODS

Conducted through a self-administered online questionnaire.

RESULTS

the study reveals that dermatological conditions and respiratory disorders are the primary indications for prescribing corticosteroid-containing drugs. The most reported side effects among pharmacists' patients include increased appetite, diabetes, and skin thinning. Pharmacists generally exhibit acceptable knowledge, with a median score of 9.0 out of 11.0 (IQR = 3.0). Over two-thirds of pharmacists (69.9%) achieve a high knowledge score (Bloom's cut-off point ≥ 8.8). However, only 55.7% are aware that corticosteroids may induce mood changes. High phobia scores, particularly concerning increased blood pressure and osteoporosis risks, indicate pharmacist reservations in corticosteroid dispensing. Interestingly, pharmacists in rural areas display lower knowledge scores, while those working outside community pharmacies exhibit lower phobia scores compared to their counterparts in urban areas and community pharmacies, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Despite generally good knowledge levels, the study underscores high phobia scores among Jordanian pharmacists regarding corticosteroid dispensing, particularly due to concerns about blood pressure elevation and osteoporosis risks. This suggests a potential need for targeted educational interventions and support systems to enhance pharmacist confidence and optimize corticosteroid usage while minimizing associated risks.

Sepsis epidemiology in Australan and New Zealand children (SENTINEL): protocol for a multicountry prospective observational study

INTRODUCTION

Sepsis affects 25.2 million children per year globally and causes 3.4 million deaths, with an annual cost of hospitalisation in the USA of US$7.3 billion. Despite being common, severe and expensive, therapies and outcomes from sepsis have not substantially changed in decades. Variable case definitions, lack of a reference standard for diagnosis and broad spectrum of disease hamper efforts to evaluate therapies that may improve sepsis outcomes. This landscape analysis of community-acquired childhood sepsis in Australia and New Zealand will characterise the burden of disease, including incidence, severity, outcomes and cost. Sepsis diagnostic criteria and risk stratification tools will be prospectively evaluated. Sepsis therapies, quality of care, parental awareness and understanding of sepsis and parent-reported outcome measures will be described. Understanding these aspects of sepsis care is fundamental for the design and conduct of interventional trials to improve childhood sepsis outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This prospective observational study will include children up to 18 years of age presenting to 12 emergency departments with suspected sepsis within the Paediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative network in Australia and New Zealand. Presenting characteristics, management and outcomes will be collected. These will include vital signs, serum biomarkers, clinician assessment of severity of disease, intravenous fluid administration for the first 24 hours of hospitalisation, organ support therapies delivered, antimicrobial use, microbiological diagnoses, hospital and intensive care unit length-of-stay, mortality censored at hospital discharge or 30 days from enrolment (whichever comes first) and parent-reported outcomes 90 days from enrolment. We will use these data to determine sepsis epidemiology based on existing and novel diagnostic criteria. We will also validate existing and novel sepsis risk stratification criteria, characterise antimicrobial stewardship, guideline adherence, cost and report parental awareness and understanding of sepsis and parent-reported outcome measures.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was received from the Royal Children's Hospital of Melbourne, Australia Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/69948/RCHM-2021). This included incorporated informed consent for follow-up. The findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and at academic conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12621000920897; Pre-results.

The critically ill older patient with sepsis: a narrative review

Sepsis is a significant public health concern, particularly affecting individuals above 70 years in developed countries. This is a crucial fact due to the increasing aging population, their heightened vulnerability to sepsis, and the associated high mortality rates. However, the morbidity and long-term outcomes are even more notable. While many patients respond well to timely and appropriate interventions, it is imperative to enhance efforts in identifying, documenting, preventing, and treating sepsis. Managing sepsis in older patients poses greater challenges and necessitates a comprehensive understanding of predisposing factors and a heightened suspicion for diagnosing infections and assessing the risk of sudden deterioration into sepsis. Despite age often being considered an independent risk factor for mortality and morbidity, recent research emphasizes the pivotal roles of frailty, disease severity, and comorbid conditions in influencing health outcomes. In addition, it is important to inquire about the patient's preferences and establish a personalized treatment plan that considers their potential for recovery with quality of life and functional outcomes. This review provides a summary of the most crucial aspects to consider when dealing with an old critically ill patient with sepsis.

Corticosteroids in Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review, Pairwise, and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, up to January 10, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing corticosteroids with placebo or standard care with sepsis.

DATA EXTRACTION

The critical outcomes of interest included mortality, shock reversal, length of stay in the ICU, and adverse events.

DATA ANALYSIS

We performed both a pairwise and dose-response meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of different corticosteroid doses on outcomes. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to assess certainty in pooled estimates.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 45 RCTs involving 9563 patients. Corticosteroids probably reduce short-term mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.99; moderate certainty) and increase shock reversal at 7 days (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.11-1.38; high certainty). Corticosteroids may have no important effect on duration of ICU stay (mean difference, -0.6 fewer days; 95% CI, 1.48 fewer to 0.27 more; low certainty); however, probably increase the risk of hyperglycemia (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.18; moderate certainty) and hypernatremia (RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.32-2.03; moderate certainty) and may increase the risk of neuromuscular weakness (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.45; low certainty). The dose-response analysis showed a reduction in mortality with corticosteroids with optimal dosing of approximately 260 mg/d of hydrocortisone (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-0.98) or equivalent.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that corticosteroids may reduce mortality and increase shock reversal but they may also increase the risk of hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, and neuromuscular weakness. The dose-response analysis indicates optimal dosing is around 260 mg/d of hydrocortisone or equivalent.

Navigating the Landscape of Hydrocortisone Administration in Septic Shock: Current Concepts and Future Directions

Sepsis remains a formidable challenge in critical care medicine, often culminating in a life-threatening condition known as septic shock. This review article navigates the intricate landscape of hydrocortisone administration in septic shock management, delving into historical perspectives, current evidence, controversies, mechanisms of action, practical considerations, and the importance of precision medicine. Hydrocortisone's role as an adjunctive therapy is explored, highlighting its potential to stabilize hemodynamics, mitigate the inflammatory response, and improve patient outcomes. However, debates persist regarding patient selection, dosing regimens, safety profiles, and long-term consequences. The future of septic shock management lies in emerging therapies, precision medicine approaches, biomarker discovery, and targeted interventions. Moving forward, exploring novel therapeutic avenues, understanding patient-specific responses, and uncovering potential biomarkers will be crucial in advancing septic shock treatment strategies. Clinical guidelines provide a foundation, but individualized patient care, interdisciplinary collaboration, and ongoing research are essential to optimize treatment strategies. This article underscores the call for continued research and evidence-based practice as we strive to enhance the care of septic shock patients and pursue improved outcomes in this critical condition. Embracing future developments in the field will enable us to adapt and refine our approach, ultimately contributing to the advancement of septic shock management.

Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of Low-Dose Hydrocortisone in Adults with Septic Shock

BACKGROUND: Trials and study-level meta-analyses have failed to resolve the role of corticosteroids in the management of patients with septic shock. Patient-level meta-analyses may provide more precise estimates of treatment effects, particularly subgroup effects. METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from septic shock trials investigating the adjunctive use of intravenous hydrocortisone. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality, and it was also analyzed across predefined subgroups. Secondary outcomes included mortality at intensive care unit and hospital discharge, at 28 and 180 days, and vasopressor-, ventilator-, and organ failure–free days. Adverse events included superinfection, muscle weakness, hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, and gastroduodenal bleeding. RESULTS: Of 24 eligible trials (n=8528), 17 (n=7882) provided individual patient data, and 7 (n=5929) provided 90-day mortality. The marginal relative risk (RR) for 90-day mortality of hydrocortisone versus placebo was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.04; P=0.22; moderate certainty). It was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.92) for hydrocortisone with fludrocortisone and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.12) without fludrocortisone. There was no significant differential treatment effect across subgroups. Hydrocortisone was associated with little to no difference in any of the secondary outcomes except vasopressor-free days (mean difference, 1.24 days; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.73; high certainty). Hydrocortisone may not be associated with an increase in the risk of superinfection (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.15; low certainty), hyperglycemia (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.12; low certainty), or gastroduodenal bleeding (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.48; low certainty). Hydrocortisone may be associated with an increase in the risk of hypernatremia (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.56 to 2.60; low certainty) and muscle weakness (n=2647; RR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.49 to 1.99; low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: In this patient-level meta-analysis, hydrocortisone compared with placebo was not associated with reduced mortality for patients with septic shock. (Funded by “Programme d’Investissements d’Avenir,” a research Professorship from the National Institute of Health and Care Research, Leadership Fellowships from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, and Emerging Leaders Fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; PROSPERO registration number, CRD42017062198.)

Corticosteroids in ARDS

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is frequently associated with sepsis. ARDS and sepsis exhibit a common pathobiology, namely excessive inflammation. Corticosteroids are powerful anti-inflammatory agents that are routinely used in septic shock and in oxygen-dependent SARS-CoV-2 related acute respiratory failure. Recently, corticosteroids were found to reduce mortality in severe community-acquired pneumonia. Corticosteroids may therefore also have a role to play in the treatment of ARDS. This narrative review was undertaken following a PubMed search for English language reports published before January 2023 using the terms acute respiratory distress syndrome, sepsis and steroids. Additional reports were identified by examining the reference lists of selected articles and based on personnel knowledge of the authors of the field. High-quality research is needed to fully understand the role of corticosteroids in the treatment of ARDS and to determine the optimal timing, dosing and duration of treatment.

Emerging concepts in the care of patients with cirrhosis and septic shock

Septic shock impacts approximately 6% of hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Although a number of landmark clinical trials have paved the way for incremental improvements in the diagnosis and management of septic shock in the general population, patients with cirrhosis have largely been excluded from these studies and critical knowledge gaps continue to impact the care of these individuals. In this review, we discuss nuances in the care of patients with cirrhosis and septic shock using a pathophysiology-based approach. We illustrate that septic shock may be challenging to diagnose in this population in the context of factors such as chronic hypotension, impaired lactate metabolism, and concomitant hepatic encephalopathy. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the application of routine interventions such as intravenous fluids, vasopressors, antibiotics, and steroids should be carefully considered among those with decompensated cirrhosis in light of hemodynamic, metabolic, hormonal, and immunologic disturbances. We propose that future research should include and characterize patients with cirrhosis in a systematic manner, and clinical practice guidelines may need to be refined accordingly.

Rapid rEcognition of COrticosteRoiD resistant or sensitive Sepsis (RECORDS): study protocol for a multicentre, placebo-controlled, biomarker-guided, adaptive Bayesian design basket trial

INTRODUCTION

Corticosteroids affect variably survival in sepsis trials, suggesting heterogeneity in patients' response to corticosteroids. The RECORDS (Rapid rEcognition of COrticosteRoiD resistant or sensitive Sepsis) trial aimed at defining endotypes associated with adults with sepsis responsiveness to corticosteroids.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

RECORDS, a multicentre, placebo-controlled, biomarker-guided, adaptive Bayesian design basket trial, will randomly assign to a biomarker stratum 1800 adults with community-acquired pneumonia, vasopressor-dependent sepsis, septic shock or acute respiratory distress syndrome. In each stratum, patients will be randomly assigned to receive a 7-day course of hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone or their placebos. Patients with COVID-19 will be treated with a 10-day standard course of dexamethasone and randomised to fludrocortisone or its placebo. Primary outcome will be 90-day death or persistent organ dysfunction. Large simulation study will be performed across a range of plausible scenarios to foresee power to detect a 5%-10% absolute difference with corticosteroids. We will assess subset-by-treatment interaction by estimating in a Bayesian framework two quantities: (1) measure of influence, relying on the value of the estimation of corticosteroids' effect in each subset, and (2) measure of interaction.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes, Dijon, France), on 6 April 2020. Trial results will be disseminated at scientific conferences and results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04280497).

How Would You Resuscitate This Patient With Septic Shock? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

Sepsis is a potentially life-threatening systemic dysregulatory response to infection, and septic shock occurs when sepsis leads to systemic vasodilation and subsequent tissue hypoperfusion. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign published updated guidelines in 2021 on the management of sepsis and septic shock. Here, in the context of a patient with septic shock, 2 critical care specialists discuss and debate conditional guideline recommendations on using lactate to guide resuscitation, the use of balanced crystalloids versus normal saline, and the use of corticosteroids.

Nomogram Prediction Model of Hypernatremia on Mortality in Critically Ill Patients

Objective

To investigate the value of hypernatremia in the intensive care unit (ICU) for the risk prediction of mortality in severe patients.

Methods

Clinical data of critically ill patients admitted to the ICU of Beijing Friendship Hospital, were collected for retrospective analysis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were employed to analyze the influencing factors. Nomograms predicting the mortality were constructed with R software and validated with repeated sampling.

Results

A total of 442 cases were eligible for this study. Hypernatremia within 48 hours of ICU admission, change in sodium concentration (CNa+) within 48 hours, septic shock, APACHE II score, hyperlactatemia within 48 hours, use of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) within 48 hours, and the use of mechanical ventilation (MV) within 48 hours of ICU admission were all identified as independent risk factors for death within 28 days of ICU admission. These predictors were included in a nomogram of 28-day mortality in severe patients, which was constructed using R software.

Conclusion

The nomogram could predict the individualized risk of 28-day mortality based on the above factors. The model has better discrimination and accuracy and has high clinical application value.

Should We Interfere with the Interleukin-6 Receptor During COVID-19: What Do We Know So Far?

Severe manifestations of COVID-19 consist of acute respiratory distress syndrome due to an initially local reaction leading to a systemic inflammatory response that results in hypoxia. Many therapeutic approaches have been attempted to reduce the clinical consequences of an excessive immune response to viral infection. To date, systemic corticosteroid therapy is still the most effective intervention. More recently, new hope has emerged with the use of interleukin (IL)-6 receptor inhibitors (tocilizumab and sarilumab). However, the great heterogeneity of the methodology and results of published studies obfuscate the true value of this treatment, leading to a confusing synthesis in recent meta-analyses, and the persistence of doubts in terms of patient groups and the appropriate time to treat. Moreover, their effects on the anti-infectious or pro-healing response are still poorly studied. This review aims to clarify the potential role of IL-6 receptor inhibitors in the treatment of severe forms of COVID-19.

IV Vitamin C in Sepsis: A Latest Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Sepsis is a high-incidence disease and demands intensive care. Finding effective treatment is the key to cure sepsis. Studies have shown a lower level of vitamin C in patients with sepsis. Therefore, vitamin C supplementation has become one of the measures to treat sepsis. However, the clinical studies of vitamin C in the treatment of sepsis have been controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate vitamin C's efficacy and safety in the treatment of sepsis. We searched four electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, and two researchers independently screened 24 eligible RCTs published in English. Our review demonstrates that intravenous (IV) vitamin C might improve short-term mortality (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.02; P=0.07; and I ² = 45%) and overall mortality (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-1.01; P=0.06; and I ² = 51%) of patients with sepsis. Moreover, the SOFA score of patients with sepsis improved significantly after treatment with vitamin C for over 72 hours (RR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.09-0.42; P=0.002; and I ² = 0%). The main results of our study were moderate-quality evidence. More high-quality, multicenter RCTs are needed to provide more substantial evidence on the efficacy and safety of IV vitamin C for sepsis.

Immune Modulation in Sepsis, ARDS, and Covid-19 - The Road Traveled and the Road Ahead

Immune Modulation in Sepsis, ARDS, and Covid-19Leligdowicz et al. consider the history and future of immunomodulating therapies in sepsis and ARDS, including ARDS due to Covid-19, and remark on the larger challenge of clinical research on therapies for syndromes with profound clinical and biologic heterogeneity.

SARS-CoV-2 IgG Levels Allow Predicting the Optimal Time Span of Convalescent Plasma Donor Suitability

Convalescent plasma (CP) has been in use for the treatment of numerous infectious diseases for more than a century, recently also for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A major challenge for this treatment is identifying suitable donors with sufficient levels of functional antibodies and to determine the optimal time span for CP donation. In this retrospective study, we analyzed 189 CP donations of 66 donors regarding anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-S IgG antibody levels. We found a significant correlation between the semi-quantitative SARS-CoV-2 IgG ratio values and in vitro antibody functionality. A time-to-event analysis allowed us to predict the optimal time span of COVID-19 CP donor suitability. We found that high IgG ratio values, which significantly correlate with high in vitro antibody functionality, were suitable for CP donation for a median of 134 days after the first CP donation. Donors with lower IgG ratios were suitable for a median of 53 days. Our data support plasma collection centers to determine optimal points in time for CP donation by means of widely used semi-quantitative laboratory IgG ratio values.

Comparison of the effect of intravenous dexamethasone and methylprednisolone on the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of intravenous dexamethasone and methylprednisolone on the treatment of inpatients with COVID-19.

METHODS

In this randomized clinical trial, 143 patients under 80 years of age with moderate to severe COVID-19 were enrolled and randomly assigned to two groups: dexamethasone (8 mg/day) and methylprednisolone (60 mg/day in two divided doses). The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay. The secondary outcomes included: duration of oxygen therapy, absolute leukocyte and lymphocyte count, hypokalemia, hyperglycemia, intensive care unit admission, and mortality in the two groups for 28 days. Data were analyzed by SPSS version 26 using t-test, chi-square, and analysis of variance.

RESULTS

The duration of hospitalization was significantly (P <0.001) shorter in the dexamethasone group than in the methylprednisolone group (8 [95% confidence interval [CI]:6-10] and 11 [95% CI: 7-14], respectively). In addition, the duration of oxygen therapy in the dexamethasone group (7 [95% CI: 5-9]) was significantly (P <0.001) shorter than in the methylprednisolone group (10 [95% CI: 5.5-14]). The mortality rate was 17.1% (95% CI: 8.1-26.1) in the dexamethasone group and 12.3% (95% CI: 4.6-20.0) in the methylprednisolone group, which was not statistically significant (P = 0.46).

CONCLUSION

Results showed better effectiveness of 8 mg/day dexamethasone compared with 60 mg/day methylprednisolone based on the shorter hospital stay, which can be considered in the therapeutic protocol of COVID-19.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

IRCT20210223050466N1.

The pharmacotherapeutic options in patients with catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock

INTRODUCTION

Septic and vasoplegic shock are common types of vasodilatory shock (VS) with high mortality. After fluid resuscitation and the use of catecholamine-mediated vasopressors (CMV), vasopressin, angiotensin II, methylene blue (MB) and hydroxocobalamin can be added to maintain blood pressure.

AREAS COVERED

VS treatment utilizes a phased approach with secondary vasopressors added to vasopressor agents to maintain an acceptable mean arterial pressure (MAP). This review covers additional vasopressors and adjunctive therapies used when fluid and catecholamine-mediated vasopressors fail to maintain target MAP.

EXPERT OPINION

Evidence supporting additional vasopressor agents in catecholamine resistant VS is limited to case reports, series, and a few randomized control trials (RCTs) to guide recommendations. Vasopressin is the most common agent added next when MAPs are not adequately supported with CMV. VS patients failing fluids and vasopressors with cardiomyopathy may have cardiotonic agents such as dobutamine or milrinone added before or after vasopressin. Angiotensin II, another class of vasopressor is used in VS to maintain adequate MAP. MB and/or hydoxocobalamin, vitamin C, thiamine and corticosteroids are adjunctive therapies used in refractory VS. More RCTs are needed to confirm the utility of these drugs, at what doses, which combinations and in what order they should be given.

Novel insights in endocrine and metabolic pathways in sepsis and gaps for future research

Sepsis is defined as any life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. It remains an important cause of critical illness and has considerable short- and long-term morbidity and mortality. In the last decades, preclinical and clinical research has revealed a biphasic pattern in the (neuro-)endocrine responses to sepsis as to other forms of critical illness, contributing to development of severe metabolic alterations. Immediately after the critical illness-inducing insult, fasting- and stress-induced neuroendocrine and cellular responses evoke a catabolic state in order to provide energy substrates for vital tissues, and to concomitantly activate cellular repair pathways while energy-consuming anabolism is postponed. Large randomized controlled trials have shown that providing early full feeding in this acute phase induced harm and reversed some of the neuro-endocrine alterations, which suggested that the acute fasting- and stress-induced responses to critical illness are likely interlinked and benefical. However, it remains unclear whether, in the context of accepting virtual fasting in the acute phase of illness, metabolic alterations such as hyperglycemia are harmful or beneficial. When patients enter a prolonged phase of critical illness, a central suppression of most neuroendocrine axes follows. Prolonged fasting and central neuroendocrine suppression may no longer be beneficial. Although pilot studies have suggested benefit of fasting-mimicking diets and interventions that reactivate the central neuroendocrine suppression selectively in the prolonged phase of illness, further study is needed to investigate patient-oriented outcomes in larger randomized trials.

Multidimensional analysis of the host response reveals prognostic and pathogen-driven immune subtypes among adults with sepsis in Uganda

Background

The global burden of sepsis is concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa, where severe infections disproportionately affect young, HIV-infected adults and high-burden pathogens are unique. In this context, poor understanding of sepsis immunopathology represents a crucial barrier to development of locally-effective treatment strategies. We sought to determine inter-individual immunologic heterogeneity among adults hospitalized with sepsis in a sub-Saharan African setting, and characterize associations between immune subtypes, infecting pathogens, and clinical outcomes.

Methods

Among a prospective observational cohort of 288 adults hospitalized with suspected sepsis in Uganda, we applied machine learning methods to 14 soluble host immune mediators, reflective of key domains of sepsis immunopathology (innate and adaptive immune activation, endothelial dysfunction, fibrinolysis), to identify immune subtypes in randomly-split discovery (N = 201) and internal validation (N = 87) sub-cohorts. In parallel, we applied similar methods to whole-blood RNA-sequencing data from a consecutive subset of patients (N = 128) to identify transcriptional subtypes, which we characterized using biological pathway and immune cell-type deconvolution analyses.

Results

Unsupervised clustering consistently identified two immune subtypes defined by differential activation of pro-inflammatory innate and adaptive immune pathways, with transcriptional evidence of concomitant CD56(-)/CD16( +) NK-cell expansion, T-cell exhaustion, and oxidative-stress and hypoxia-induced metabolic and cell-cycle reprogramming in the hyperinflammatory subtype. Immune subtypes defined by greater pro-inflammatory immune activation, T-cell exhaustion, and metabolic reprogramming were consistently associated with a high-prevalence of severe and often disseminated HIV-associated tuberculosis, as well as more extensive organ dysfunction, worse functional outcomes, and higher 30-day mortality.

Conclusions

Our results highlight unique host- and pathogen-driven features of sepsis immunopathology in sub-Saharan Africa, including the importance of severe HIV-associated tuberculosis, and reinforce the need to develop more biologically-informed treatment strategies in the region, particularly those incorporating immunomodulation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-03907-3.

Low-dose corticosteroid therapy for cardiogenic shock in adults (COCCA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening condition characterized by circulatory insufficiency caused by an acute dysfunction of the heart pump. The pathophysiological approach to CS has recently been enriched by the tissue consequences of low flow, including inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and alteration of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. The aim of the present trial is to evaluate the impact of early low-dose corticosteroid therapy on shock reversal in adults with CS.

Method/design

This is a multicentered randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with two parallel arms in adult patients with CS recruited from medical, cardiac, and polyvalent intensive care units (ICU) in France. Patients will be randomly allocated into the treatment or control group (1:1 ratio), and we will recruit 380 patients (190 per group). For the treatment group, hydrocortisone (50 mg intravenous bolus every 6 h) and fludrocortisone (50 μg once a day enterally) will be administered for 7 days or until discharge from the ICU. The primary endpoint is catecholamine-free days at day 7. Secondary endpoints include morbidity and all-cause mortality at 28 and 90 days post-randomization. Pre-defined subgroups analyses are planned, including: postcardiotomy, myocardial infarction, etomidate use, vasopressor use, and adrenal profiles according the short corticotropin stimulation test. Each patient will be followed for 90 days. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis.

Discussion

This trial will provide valuable evidence about the effectiveness of low dose of corticosteroid therapy for CS. If effective, this therapy might improve outcome and become a therapeutic adjunct for patients with CS.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03773822. Registered on 12 December 2018

The procalcitonin-to-cortisol ratio is a potential prognostic predictor in sepsis with abdominal source: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to investigate the procalcitonin-to-cortisol ratio (P/C ratio) as a prognostic predictor among septic patients with abdominal source.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 132 post-surgery patients between 18 and 90 years old with sepsis of the abdominal source. On the second day of sepsis onset, cortisol, procalcitonin (PCT), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, C-response protein (CRP), and other baseline characteristics were collected. In addition, the length of ICU stay, length of mechanical ventilation (MV) days, length of shock days, and 28-day mortality were also recorded. Univariate analysis was performed to screen potential risk factors. Stratified analysis was used to identify the interaction among the risk factors. Multivariate analysis was also utilized to demonstrate the relationship between the risk factors and mortality. The receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted to evaluate the risk factors. A restricted cubic spline (RCS) demonstrated the association between survival outcome and the P/C ratio variation.

RESULTS

A total of twenty-nine patients died, and 103 patients survived within 28 d. There were significant differences in cortisol, PCT, P/C ratio, interleukin (IL)-6, SOFA, and APACHE II scores between the survival and non-survival groups. No significant interaction was observed in the stratified analysis. Logistic regression analysis revealed that P/C ratio (P=0.033) was significantly related to 28-day mortality. Based on ROC curves, P/C ratio (AUC=0.919) had a higher AUC value than cortisol or PCT. RCS analysis depicted a positive relationship between survival possibility and P/C ratio decrement.

CONCLUSION

P/C ratio might be a potential prognostic predictor in septic patients with abdominal sources.

Systemic corticosteroids for management of COVID-19: Saving lives or causing harm?

The underlying cause of many complications associated with severe COVID-19 is attributed to the inflammatory cytokine storm that leads to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which appears to be the leading cause of death in COVID-19. Systemic corticosteroids have anti-inflammatory activity through repression of pro-inflammatory genes and inhibition of inflammatory cytokines, which makes them a potential medical intervention to diminish the upregulated inflammatory response. Early in the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, the role of corticosteroids was unclear. Corticosteroid use in other indications such as ARDS and septic shock has proven benefit while its use in other respiratory viral pneumonias is associated with reduced viral clearance and increased secondary infections. This review article evaluates the benefits and harms of systemic corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19 to assist clinicians in improving patient outcomes, including patient safety. Dexamethasone up to 10 days is the preferred regimen to reduce mortality risk in COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen support, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. If dexamethasone is unavailable, other corticosteroids can be substituted at equivalent doses. Higher doses of corticosteroids may be beneficial in patients who develop ARDS. Corticosteroids should be avoided early in the disease course when patients do not require oxygen support because of potential harms.

Administration of parenteral vitamin C in patients with severe infection: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Severe infections are characterized by inflammation and oxidative damage. Ascorbic acid (vitamin C) administration may attenuate oxidative damage and, in turn, reduce vascular endothelial injury in pulmonary and systemic vasculature.

Objective

We aim to describe a protocol for a living systematic review that will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of parenteral vitamin C administration in adults with severe infections, including those with COVID-19.

Methods

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to March 30, 2021, for randomized controlled trials evaluating parenteral vitamin C versus no parenteral vitamin C in hospitalized adults with severe infection. Eligible studies will include at least 1 arm involving any dose of parenteral vitamin C alone or in combination with other cointerventions and at least 1 arm not involving parenteral vitamin C. The primary outcomes of interest will include in-hospital, 30-day, and 90-day mortality. Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, data extraction, and risk of bias evaluation via a modified Risk of Bias 2.0 tool will be conducted independently and in pairs. We will perform random effects modeling for meta-analyses, in which study weights will be generated by using the inverse variance method. We will assess certainty in effect estimates by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Meta-analyses will be updated iteratively as new trial evidence becomes available.

Results

Among the 1386 citations identified as of March 30, 2021, a total of 17 eligible randomized controlled trials have been identified as of September 2021. We are in the process of updating the search strategy and associated data analyses.

Conclusions

The results will be of importance to critical care physicians and hospitalists who manage severe infection and COVID-19 in daily practice, and they may directly inform international clinical guidance. Although our systematic review will incorporate the most recent trial evidence, ongoing trials may change our confidence in the estimates of effects, thereby necessitating iterative updates in the form of a living review.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO CRD42020209187; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=209187

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR1-10.2196/33989

Promises and challenges of personalized medicine to guide ARDS therapy

Identifying new effective treatments for the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), including COVID-19 ARDS, remains a challenge. The field of ARDS investigation is moving increasingly toward innovative approaches such as the personalization of therapy to biological and clinical sub-phenotypes. Additionally, there is growing recognition of the importance of the global context to identify effective ARDS treatments. This review highlights emerging opportunities and continued challenges for personalizing therapy for ARDS, from identifying treatable traits to innovative clinical trial design and recognition of patient-level factors as the field of critical care investigation moves forward into the twenty-first century.

Corticosteroids for Treating Sepsis in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

Corticosteroids are a common option used in sepsis treatment. However, the efficacy and potential risk of corticosteroids in septic patients have not been well assessed. This review was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched from inception to March 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of corticosteroids on patients with sepsis were included. The quality of outcomes in the included articles was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. The data were pooled by using risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD). The random-effects model was used to evaluate the pooled MD or RR and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Fifty RCTs that included 12,304 patients with sepsis were identified. Corticosteroids were not associated with the mortality in 28-day (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87–1.02; evidence rank, moderate) and long-term mortality (>60 days) (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.88–1.05) in patients with sepsis (evidence rank, low). However, corticosteroids may exert a significant effect on the mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) (RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.83–0.97), in-hospital (RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.82–0.99; evidence rank, moderate) in patients with sepsis or septic shock (evidence rank, low). Furthermore, corticosteroids probably achieved a tiny reduction in the length of hospital stay and ICU. Corticosteroids were associated with a higher risk of hypernatremia and hyperglycemia; furthermore, they appear to have no significant effect on superinfection and gastroduodenal bleeding.

Conclusions

Corticosteroids had no significant effect on the 28-day and long-term mortality; however, they decreased the ICU and hospital mortality. The findings suggest that the clinical corticosteroids may be an effective therapy for patients with sepsis during the short time.

Systematic Review Registration

https://inplasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/INPLASY-Protocol-1074-4.pdf

Management of sepsis and septic shock in the emergency department

Early management of sepsis and septic shock is crucial for patients' prognosis. As the Emergency Department (ED) is the place where the first medical contact for septic patients is likely to occur, emergency physicians play an essential role in the early phases of patient management, which consists of accurate initial diagnosis, resuscitation, and early antibiotic treatment. Since the issuing of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines in 2016, several studies have been published on different aspects of sepsis management, adding a substantial amount of new information on the pathophysiology and treatment of sepsis and septic shock. In light of this emerging evidence, the present narrative review provides a comprehensive account of the recent advances in septic patient management in the ED.

Nationwide Population-Based Epidemiological Study for Outcomes of Adjunctive Steroid Therapy in Pediatric Patients with Bacterial Meningitis in Taiwan

Although corticosteroids can serve as an effective anti-inflammatory adjuvant therapy, the role of adjunctive steroid therapy in pediatric bacterial meningitis in Taiwan remains under-investigated. Cases of acute bacterial meningitis, aged between 1 month and 20 years, were divided into a steroid group (empirical antibiotics with adjunctive steroid therapy) and a non-steroid group (empirical antibiotics only). Data were identified from the annual hospitalization discharge claims of the National Health Insurance Research Database using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes. Of the 8083 episodes enrolled in this study, 26% (2122/8083) and 74% (5961/8083) were divided into the steroid and non-steroid groups, respectively. The fatality rates were 7.9% in the steroid group and 1.7% in the non-steroid group during hospitalization (p < 0.0001). In the steroid and non-steroid groups, the median length of hospital stay was 13 and 6 days, respectively (p < 0.0001). Medical costs (median (interquartile range)) of hospitalization were 77,941 (26,647–237,540) and 26,653 (14,287–53,421) New Taiwan dollars in the steroid and non-steroid groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). The steroid group had a more fulminant course at baseline, a higher fatality rate, length of hospital stay, and medical cost of hospitalization. Therefore, the beneficial effects of the adjunctive use of corticosteroids in pediatric bacterial meningitis are inconclusive, and additional prospective multicenter investigations are required to clarify this issue.

Impact of Inflammatory Response Modifiers on the Incidence of Hospital-Acquired Infections in Patients with COVID-19

Introduction

The study aim was to assess the influence of inflammatory response modifiers, including anti-interleukin-6 (IL-6) biologics and corticosteroids, on the incidence of hospital-acquired infections in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods

Case–control study performed at a university hospital from February 26 to May 26, 2020. Cases were defined as patients with COVID-19 who developed hospital-acquired infections. For each case, two controls were selected among patients without infections. Cases and controls were matched obeying three criteria in a hierarchical sequence: length of hospital stay up until the first infection; comorbidity; and need for Intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Conditional logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the association of exposures with being a case.

Results

A total of 71 cases and 142 controls were included. Independent predictors for acquiring a hospital infection were chronic liver disease [odds ratio (OR) 16.56, 95% CI 1.87–146.5, p = 0.012], morbid obesity (OR 6.11, 95% CI 1.06–35.4, p = 0.043), current or past smoking (OR 4.15, 95% CI 1.45–11.88, p = 0.008), exposure to hydroxychloroquine (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.041–1, p = 0.053), and invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 61.5, 95% CI 11.08–341, p ≤ 0.0001).

Conclusions

Inflammatory response modifiers had no influence on acquisition of nosocomial infections in admitted patients with COVID-19. Hospital-acquired infections primarily occurred in the critically ill and invasive mechanical ventilation was the main exposure conferring risk.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-021-00477-9.

Effect of dexamethasone on complications or all cause mortality after major non-cardiac surgery: multicentre, double blind, randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of dexamethasone on complications or all cause mortality after major non-cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

Phase III, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial.

SETTING

34 centres in France, December 2017 to March 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

1222 adults (>50 years) requiring major non-cardiac surgery with an expected duration of more than 90 minutes. The anticipated time frame for recruitment was 24 months.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomised to receive either dexamethasone (0.2 mg/kg immediately after the surgical procedure, and on day 1) or placebo. Randomisation was stratified on the two prespecified criteria of cancer and thoracic procedure.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative complications or all cause mortality within 14 days after surgery, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (at least one treatment administered).

RESULTS

Of the 1222 participants who underwent randomisation, 1184 (96.9%) were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. 14 days after surgery, 101 of 595 participants (17.0%) in the dexamethasone group and 117 of 589 (19.9%) in the placebo group had complications or died (adjusted odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 1.08; P=0.15). In the stratum of participants who underwent non-thoracic surgery (n=1038), the primary outcome occurred in 69 of 520 participants (13.3%) in the dexamethasone group and 93 of 518 (18%) in the placebo group (adjusted odds ratio 0.70, 0.50 to 0.99). Adverse events were reported in 288 of 613 participants (47.0%) in the dexamethasone group and 296 of 609 (48.6%) in the placebo group (P=0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone was not found to significantly reduce the incidence of complications and death in patients 14 days after major non-cardiac surgery. The 95% confidence interval for the main result was, however, wide and suggests the possibility of important clinical effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03218553.

Practice Patterns in the Initiation of Secondary Vasopressors and Adjunctive Corticosteroids during Septic Shock in the US

RATIONALE

A central component of septic shock treatment is the infusion of vasopressors, most commonly starting with norepinephrine. However, the optimal approach and practice patterns to initiating adjunctive vasopressors and corticosteroids are unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To characterize practice pattern variation in the norepinephrine dose at which secondary vasopressors and adjunctive corticosteroids are initiated and to identify factors associated with a treatment strategy favoring secondary vasopressors to a treatment strategy favoring adjunctive corticosteroids among patients with septic shock on norepinephrine.

METHODS

We used a multicenter ICU database to identify patients with septic shock who were started on norepinephrine followed by an additional vasopressor or corticosteroids. We used multi-level models to determine the hospital risk-adjusted norepinephrine dose at which additional vasopressors and corticosteroids were started, the percentage of variation in norepinephrine dose at the time of adjunctive treatment associated with hospital of admission, and the factors associated with choosing an 'additional vasopressor first' strategy vs. a 'corticosteroid first' strategy.

RESULTS

Among 4,401 patients with septic shock on norepinephrine, 1940 (44.0%) were started on adjuncts (1357 received an 'additional vasopressor first' strategy and 583 received a "corticosteroid first strategy). The hospital risk-adjusted norepinephrine dose at which vasopressors were initiated ranged 6.4 mcg/min (95% CI 5.9-7.0 mcg/min) to 92.6 mcg/min (95% CI 72.8-113.0 mcg/min). The hospital risk-adjusted norepinephrine dose at which corticosteroids was initiated ranged 3.0 mcg/min (95% CI 2.4-3.8 mcg/min) to 32.7 mcg/min (95% CI 24.9-43.0 mcg/min). 25.1% (intraclass correlation coefficient 95% CI 24.8%, 25.5%) of the variation in norepinephrine dose at which additional vasopressors were initiated was explained by hospital site after adjusting for all hospital- and patient-level covariates. Hospital of admission was strongly associated with receiving an 'additional vasopressor first' over a 'corticosteroids first' strategy (median odds ratio 3.28 (95% CI 2.81-3.83)).

CONCLUSIONS

Practice patterns for adjunctive therapies to norepinephrine during septic shock are variable and are determined in large part by hospital of admission. These results inform several future studies seeking to improve septic shock management.

Impact of Corticosteroids in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outcomes: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Since its appearance in late 2019, infections caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 have created unprecedented challenges for health systems worldwide. Multiple therapeutic options have been explored, including corticosteroids. Preliminary results of corticosteroids in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are encouraging; however, the role of corticosteroids remains controversial.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the impact of corticosteroids in mortality, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and viral shedding in COVID-19 patients?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of literature on corticosteroids and COVID-19 in major databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE) of published literature through July 22, 2020, that report outcomes of interest in COVID-19 patients receiving corticosteroids with a comparative group.

RESULTS

A total of 73 studies with 21,350 COVID-19 patients were identified. Corticosteroid use was reported widely in mechanically ventilated patients (35.3%), ICU patients (51.3%), and severe COVID-19 patients (40%). Corticosteroids showed mortality benefit in severelly ill COVID-19 patients (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.83; P = .0006); however, no beneficial or harmful effects were noted among high-dose or low-dose corticosteroid regimens. Emerging evidence shows that low-dose corticosteroids do not have a significant impact in the duration of SARS-CoV-2 viral shedding. The analysis was limited by highly heterogeneous literature for high-dose and low-dose corticosteroids regimens.

INTERPRETATION

Our results showed evidence of mortality benefit in severely ill COVID-19 patients treated with corticosteroids. Corticosteroids are used widely in COVID-19 patients worldwide, and a rapidly developing global pandemic warrants further high-quality clinical trials to define the most beneficial timing and dosing for corticosteroids.

Concomitant use of dexamethasone and tetracyclines: a potential therapeutic option for the management of severe COVID-19 infection?

Introduction: The global coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed a critical challenge to the research community as well as to the healthcare systems. Severe COVID-19 patients are at a higher risk of developing serious complications and mortality. There is a dire need for safe and effective pharmacotherapy for addressing unmet needs of these patients. Concomitant use of dexamethasone and tetracyclines, by virtue of their immunomodulatory and other relevant pharmacological properties, offers a potential strategy for synergy aimed at improving clinical outcomes.Areas covered: Here we review the potential benefits of combining dexamethasone and tetracyclines (minocycline or doxycycline) for the management of severe COVID-19 patients. We have critically examined the evidence obtained from in silico, experimental, and clinical research. We have also discussed the plausible mechanisms, advantages, and drawbacks of this proposed combination therapy for managing severe COVID-19.Expert opinion: The concomitant use of dexamethasone and one of the tetracyclines among severe COVID-19 patients offers several advantages in terms of additive immunomodulatory effects, cost-effectiveness, wide-availability, and well-known pharmacological properties including adverse-effect profile and contraindications. There is an urgent need to facilitate pilot studies followed by well-designed and adequately-powered multicentric clinical trials to generate conclusive evidence related to utility of this approach.

Sepsis and Septic Shock; Current Treatment Dilemma and Role of Stem Cell Therapy in Pediatrics

Context: Sepsis’s primary therapy consists of antibiotics therapy, supportive therapies, and source control of infection. The failure rate of this approach is about 20 - 40%. The widespread use of antibiotics has caused multiple drug resistance in primary etiological agents of sepsis in community-acquired and healthcare-associated infections. In the absence of new antibiotic options, alternative treatment modalities seem necessary. Evidence Acquisition: Herein, we have reviewed and discussed current problems with sepsis management and stem cell therapy in sepsis, preclinical, experimental studies, and early-phase clinical trials using stem cells to treat sepsis. In the preparation of the paper, PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate), Scopus, and the web address (www.clinicaltrials.gov) were searched by the keywords (sepsis and cell therapy, septic shock, and cell therapy). Results: After the inclusion of criteria, we reviewed 301 original articles. Few articles were found for phase II and phase III clinical trials. Eighty-three articles were included in the current review article. Besides problems with infection source control, the host immune response to the infection enumerated for primary underlying pathophysiologic dysregulation of sepsis and complicated the treatment. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) therapy offers a promising treatment option for sepsis. Indeed, immunomodulatory properties, antimicrobial activity, the capacity of protection against organ failure, enhance the resolution of tissue injury, tissue repair, and restoration after sepsis confer MSCs with a significant advantage to treat the immune and inflammatory dysfunctions associated with severe sepsis and septic shock. Conclusions: It seems that MSCs therapy exhibits an appropriate safety index. Future trials should focus on strengthening study quality, reporting MSCs’ therapeutic effects and adverse events. Although early clinical trials seem promising and have beneficial effects, we need more controlled clinical studies, especially in phases II and III.

Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in immunocompetent patients with septic shock

BACKGROUND

The use of corticosteroids in septic shock has been studied for many decades but yielded conflicting results. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of corticosteroids in immunocompetent patients with septic shock.

METHODS

Medline via PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched from inception to March 2020. Two reviewers independently identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing corticosteroids with a control group for immunocompetent patients with septic shock. Data were abstracted and reported following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Intervention and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The efficacy outcome included mortality and shock reversal. The safety outcomes were infection, gastrointestinal bleeding, and hyperglycemia.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs with a total of 1,298 patients were included. Compared with the control group, corticosteroid group did not lower the short-term (28 or 30 days) mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.06, inconsistency [I ²]=0%, trial sequential analysis [TSA]-adjusted CI 0.83 to 1.09, moderate-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids significantly shortened the time to shock reversal compared with the control group (mean difference [MD] -21.56 hours; 95% CI -32.95 to -10.16, I ²=0%; TSA-adjusted CI -33.33 to -9.78, moderate-certainty evidence). The corticosteroid treatment was associated with an increased risk of hyperglycemia but not the infection or gastrointestinal bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

The corticosteroid treatment is not associated with lower short- or long- term mortality compared with placebo in immunocompetent patients with septic shock. However, corticosteroids significantly shorten the time to shock reversal without increasing the risk of infection. The patient's immune status should also be considered during clinical treatment and clinical trials in future.

Pragmatic Recommendations for Therapeutics of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

The therapeutic options for COVID-19 patients are currently limited, but numerous randomized controlled trials are being completed, and many are on the way. For COVID-19 patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), we recommend against using remdesivir outside of a clinical trial. We recommend against using hydroxychloroquine ± azithromycin or lopinavir-ritonavir. We suggest empiric antimicrobial treatment for likely coinfecting pathogens if an alternative infectious cause is likely. We suggest close monitoring without additional empiric antimicrobials if there are no clinical or laboratory signs of other infections. We recommend using oral or intravenous low-dose dexamethasone in adults with COVID-19 disease who require oxygen or mechanical ventilation. We recommend against using dexamethasone in patients with COVID-19 who do not require supplemental oxygen. We recommend using alternate equivalent doses of steroids in the event that dexamethasone is unavailable. We also recommend using low-dose corticosteroids in patients with refractory shock requiring vasopressor support. We recommend against the use of convalescent plasma and interleukin-6 inhibitors, such as tocilizumab, for the treatment of COVID-19 in LMICs outside of clinical trials.

Pragmatic Recommendations for the Management of COVID-19 Patients with Shock in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

As some patients infected with the novel coronavirus progress to critical illness, a subset will eventually develop shock. High-quality data on management of these patients are scarce, and further investigation will provide valuable information in the context of the pandemic. A group of experts identify a set of pragmatic recommendations for the care of patients with SARS-CoV-2 and shock in resource-limited environments. We define shock as life-threatening circulatory failure that results in inadequate tissue perfusion and cellular dysoxia/hypoxia, and suggest that it can be operationalized via clinical observations. We suggest a thorough evaluation for other potential causes of shock and suggest against indiscriminate testing for coinfections. We suggest the use of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) as a simple bedside prognostic score for COVID-19 patients and point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) to evaluate the etiology of shock. Regarding fluid therapy for the treatment of COVID-19 patients with shock in low-middle-income countries, we favor balanced crystalloids and recommend using a conservative fluid strategy for resuscitation. Where available and not prohibited by cost, we recommend using norepinephrine, given its safety profile. We favor avoiding the routine use of central venous or arterial catheters, where availability and costs are strong considerations. We also recommend using low-dose corticosteroids in patients with refractory shock. In addressing targets of resuscitation, we recommend the use of simple bedside parameters such as capillary refill time and suggest that POCUS be used to assess the need for further fluid resuscitation, if available.

Effectiveness of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis or septic shock using the new third international consensus definitions (Sepsis-3): A retrospective observational study

Background

The effects of intravenous corticosteroids in patients with sepsis remain controversial due to mixed results from randomized trials. Moreover, updated definitions of sepsis, Sepsis-3, were proposed in 2016, and findings related to the effects of corticosteroids in patients defined by the Sepsis-3 criteria are scarce.

Objective

To investigate the effectiveness of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis or septic shock using real-world data to complement the findings of randomized controlled trials, and to determine whether the treatment effects differ by sepsis definitions.

Methods

We conducted this study by utilizing a large, multi-center healthcare database, eICU, in which we identified patients with sepsis admitted to 208 intensive care units across the US from 2014 to 2015 based on two different definitions: prior explicit definitions (i.e., based on diagnosis codes) and the Sepsis-3 definitions (i.e., based on SOFA score). The association between intravenous corticosteroids and in-hospital survival up to 50 days in patients with sepsis was retrospectively analyzed. A parametric hazard model with stabilized inverse probability of treatment weight adjustment was used to control for baseline confounders.

Results

Of the 7,158 patients identified based on the explicit definition, 562 (7.9%) received corticosteroids; of the 5,009 patients identified based on the Sepsis-3 definition, 465 (9.3%) received corticosteroids. In the explicit cohort, adjusted in-hospital survival at day 50 was 0.62 in the treated vs 0.57 in the non-treated, with a survival difference of 0.05 (95%CI: -0.11, 0.17). Similar results were seen in the Sepsis-3 cohort (0.58 vs 0.56 in treated and non-treated, respectively), with a 50-day survival difference of 0.02 (95%CI: -0.19, 0.17).

Conclusions

In patients with sepsis or septic shock, intravenous corticosteroids were not associated with a higher in-hospital survival up to 50 days regardless of the sepsis definitions. Further research may be necessary to definitively confirm effectiveness in real-world practice.

Effects of low-dose hydrocortisone and hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone in adults with septic shock: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

INTRODUCTION

The benefits and risks of low-dose hydrocortisone in patients with septic shock have been investigated in numerous randomised controlled trials and trial-level meta-analyses. Yet, the routine use of this treatment remains controversial. To overcome the limitations of previous meta-analyses inherent to the use of aggregate data, we will perform an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) on the effect of hydrocortisone with or without fludrocortisone compared with placebo or usual care on 90-day mortality and other outcomes in patients with septic shock.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

To assess the benefits and risks of hydrocortisone, with or without fludrocortisone for adults with septic shock, we will search major electronic databases from inception to September 2020 (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature), complimented by a search for unpublished trials. The primary analysis will compare hydrocortisone with or without fludrocortisone to placebo or no treatment in adult patients with septic shock. Secondary analyses will compare hydrocortisone to placebo (or usual care), hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone to placebo (or usual care), and hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone. The primary outcome will be all cause mortality at 90 days. We will conduct both one-stage IPDMA using mixed-effect models and machine learning with targeted maximum likelihood analyses. We will assess the risk of bias related to unshared data and related to the quality of individual trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This IPDMA will use existing data from completed randomised clinical trials and will comply with the ethical and regulatory requirements regarding data sharing for each of the component trials. The findings of this study will be submitted for publication in a peer-review journal with straightforward policy for open access.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017062198.

Assessment of Machine Learning to Estimate the Individual Treatment Effect of Corticosteroids in Septic Shock

Importance

The survival benefit of corticosteroids in septic shock remains uncertain.

Objective

To estimate the individual treatment effect (ITE) of corticosteroids in adults with septic shock in intensive care units using machine learning and to evaluate the net benefit of corticosteroids when the decision to treat is based on the individual estimated absolute treatment effect.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used individual patient data from 4 trials on steroid supplementation in adults with septic shock as a training cohort to model the ITE using an ensemble machine learning approach. Data from a double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial comparing hydrocortisone with placebo were used for external validation. Data analysis was conducted from September 2019 to February 2020.

Exposures

Intravenous hydrocortisone 50 mg dose every 6 hours for 5 to 7 days with or without enteral 50 μg of fludrocortisone daily for 7 days. The control was either the placebo or usual care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

All-cause 90-day mortality.

Results

A total of 2548 participants were included in the development cohort, with median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 66 (55-76) years and 1656 (65.0%) men. The median (IQR) Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) was 55 [42-69], and median (IQR) Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment score on day 1 was 11 (9-13). The crude pooled relative risk (RR) of death at 90 days was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.96) in favor of corticosteroids. According to the optimal individual model, the estimated median absolute risk reduction was of 2.90% (95% CI, 2.79% to 3.01%). In the external validation cohort of 75 patients, the area under the curve of the optimal individual model was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92). For any number willing to treat (NWT; defined as the acceptable number of people to treat to avoid 1 additional outcome considering the risk of harm associated with the treatment) less than 25, the net benefit of treating all patients vs treating nobody was negative. When the NWT was 25, the net benefit was 0.01 for the treat all with hydrocortisone strategy, -0.01 for treat all with hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone strategy, 0.06 for the treat by SAPS II strategy, and 0.31 for the treat by optimal individual model strategy. The net benefit of the SAPS II and the optimal individual model treatment strategies converged to zero for a smaller number willing to treat, but the individual model was consistently superior than model based on the SAPS II score.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that an individualized treatment strategy to decide which patient with septic shock to treat with corticosteroids yielded positive net benefit regardless of potential corticosteroid-associated side effects.

Troxerutin attenuates inflammatory response in lipopolysaccharide-induced sepsis in mice

Troxerutin (Tx), known as vitamin P₄ is a derivative of natural bioflavonoid rutin. Tx possesses different biological activities such as antioxidant, anticancer, and anti-inflammatory. The current study was conducted to determine potential therapeutic effect of Tx in lipopolysaccharides (LPS)-induced sepsis in mice. In LPS-induced sepsis, the mice were treated intraperitoneally (ip) with Tx twice daily. Therapeutic effect was assessed by measuring serum level of cytokines, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Level of nitric oxide (NO), superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), Myeloperoxidase (MPO) and Malondialdehyde (MDA) was measured. Expression of CD40 receptor on leucocytes was measured using flowcytometry. Splenocyte proliferation was evaluated using MTT assay. The effect of Tx on survival rate during administration of lethal dose of LPS was investigated. The results showed that Tx inhibited LPS induced NO production. Inflammatory pathways were suppressed by reduction of inflammatory cytokines production. Further, elevated CD40 expression of leucocytes and proliferation of splenocytes markedly reduced in Tx treated group. Antioxidant defense system was enhanced by increased activity of SOD and CAT and decreased level of MDA. MPO, ALT and LDH activity. Additionally, treatment with Tx significantly increased the mean survival time of mice compared with the LPS treated group. Histologically, Tx treatment decreased inflammatory cells infiltration and histopathologicl changes in the liver. Our findings showed that reduced inflammatory parameters, improved antioxidant activity, reduced histological lesions and increased survival rate. These findings suggest that Tx is an effective anti-inflammatory agent for the treatment of LPS-induced sepsis.

Pharmacological principles guiding prolonged glucocorticoid treatment in ARDS

Current literature addressing the pharmacological principles guiding glucocorticoid (GC) administration in ARDS is scant. This paucity of information may have led to the heterogeneity of treatment protocols and misinterpretation of available findings. GCs are agonist compounds that bind to the GC receptor (GR) producing a pharmacological response. Clinical efficacy depends on the magnitude and duration of exposure to GR. We updated the meta-analysis of randomized trials investigating GC treatment in ARDS, focusing on treatment protocols and response. We synthesized the current literature on the role of the GR in GC therapy including genomic and non-genomic effects, and integrated current clinical pharmacology knowledge of various GCs, including hydrocortisone, methylprednisolone and dexamethasone. This review addresses the role dosage, timing of initiation, mode of administration, duration, and tapering play in achieving optimal response to GC therapy in ARDS. Based on RCTs’ findings, GC plasma concentration–time profiles, and pharmacodynamic studies, optimal results are most likely achievable with early intervention, an initial bolus dose to achieve close to maximal GRα saturation, followed by a continuous infusion to maintain high levels of response throughout the treatment period. In addition, patients receiving similar GC doses may experience substantial between-patient variability in plasma concentrations affecting clinical response. GC should be dose-adjusted and administered for a duration targeting clinical and laboratory improvement, followed by dose-tapering to achieve gradual recovery of the suppressed hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis. These findings have practical clinical relevance. Future RCTs should consider these pharmacological principles in the study design and interpretation of findings.

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%).

RESULTS

After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%).

RESULTS

After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.

Association Between Administration of Systemic Corticosteroids and Mortality Among Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Meta-analysis

Importance

Effective therapies for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are needed, and clinical trial data have demonstrated that low-dose dexamethasone reduced mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who required respiratory support.

Objective

To estimate the association between administration of corticosteroids compared with usual care or placebo and 28-day all-cause mortality.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Prospective meta-analysis that pooled data from 7 randomized clinical trials that evaluated the efficacy of corticosteroids in 1703 critically ill patients with COVID-19. The trials were conducted in 12 countries from February 26, 2020, to June 9, 2020, and the date of final follow-up was July 6, 2020. Pooled data were aggregated from the individual trials, overall, and in predefined subgroups. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Inconsistency among trial results was assessed using the I2 statistic. The primary analysis was an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effect meta-analysis of overall mortality, with the association between the intervention and mortality quantified using odds ratios (ORs). Random-effects meta-analyses also were conducted (with the Paule-Mandel estimate of heterogeneity and the Hartung-Knapp adjustment) and an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effect analysis using risk ratios.

Exposures

Patients had been randomized to receive systemic dexamethasone, hydrocortisone, or methylprednisolone (678 patients) or to receive usual care or placebo (1025 patients).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. A secondary outcome was investigator-defined serious adverse events.

Results

A total of 1703 patients (median age, 60 years [interquartile range, 52-68 years]; 488 [29%] women) were included in the analysis. Risk of bias was assessed as "low" for 6 of the 7 mortality results and as "some concerns" in 1 trial because of the randomization method. Five trials reported mortality at 28 days, 1 trial at 21 days, and 1 trial at 30 days. There were 222 deaths among the 678 patients randomized to corticosteroids and 425 deaths among the 1025 patients randomized to usual care or placebo (summary OR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53-0.82]; P < .001 based on a fixed-effect meta-analysis). There was little inconsistency between the trial results (I2 = 15.6%; P = .31 for heterogeneity) and the summary OR was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.48-1.01; P = .053) based on the random-effects meta-analysis. The fixed-effect summary OR for the association with mortality was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.50-0.82; P < .001) for dexamethasone compared with usual care or placebo (3 trials, 1282 patients, and 527 deaths), the OR was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.43-1.12; P = .13) for hydrocortisone (3 trials, 374 patients, and 94 deaths), and the OR was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.29-2.87; P = .87) for methylprednisolone (1 trial, 47 patients, and 26 deaths). Among the 6 trials that reported serious adverse events, 64 events occurred among 354 patients randomized to corticosteroids and 80 events occurred among 342 patients randomized to usual care or placebo.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this prospective meta-analysis of clinical trials of critically ill patients with COVID-19, administration of systemic corticosteroids, compared with usual care or placebo, was associated with lower 28-day all-cause mortality.

Immune Response Resetting as a Novel Strategy to Overcome SARS-CoV-2-Induced Cytokine Storm

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which rapidly became a pandemic of global proportions. Sepsis is commonly present with high lethality in the severe forms of the disease. The virus-induced cytokine storm puts the immune system in overdrive at the expense of the pathogen-specific immune response and is likely to underlie the most advanced COVID-19 clinical features, including sepsis-related multiple organ dysfunction as well as the pathophysiological changes found in the lungs. We review the major therapeutic strategies that have been considered for sepsis and might be amenable to repurposing for COVID-19. We also discuss two different immunization strategies that have the potential to confer antiviral heterologous protection: innate-induced trained immunity and adaptive-induced immune response resetting.

COVID-19: An Archetype Innate Immunity Reaction and Modes of Treatment

The magnitude of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic found health systems unprepared, not allowing for prompt evaluation, collaboration among specialities and treatment of severely ill patients admitted to intensive care units, with many of them having an unfortunate outcome. Current data demonstrate an acute immune dysregulation in severe forms of the disease. The above is concluded by clinical evolution and laboratory findings, indicating a severe inflammatory response of the innate immune system, initiating predominately with the involvement of the respiratory tract epithelial cells, occasionally progressing to thrombotic diathesis and related complications. Besides the clinical manifestations, the immune response expresses an extremely high acute phase reactants repertoire including hyperferritinemia, hyper-fibrinogenaemia, and a storm of cytokines that require an alternative view and collaboration with rheumatologists. Thrombotic diathesis in some cases may not attribute only to a possible disseminated intravascular coagulation, but also to an additional activation of adaptive immunity and the development of the antiphospholipid syndrome. Unifying speciality evaluation and treatment may improve patient outcomes by recognizing early the evolving syndromes, treating properly, in a stratifying manner, with medications that alleviate the inflammatory reaction. Corticosteroids, colchicine, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, and possibly potent immunosuppressants are in the armamentarium. Additionally, biologics that interrupt the innate immune dysfunction, such as IL-1, IL-6 and selective JAK inhibitors, are also used. Convalescent plasma therapy and human immunoglobulin may be restricted for those whom the proposed treatments are found inadequate. The above combined with antiretroviral medications may improve the outcome until the development of safe and effective vaccination.