Corticosteroids in Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia: a Systematic Review, Pairwise and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis

Association of cumulative methylprednisolone dosages with mortality risk from pneumonia in connective tissue disease patients

Corticosteroid is essential in the treatment regimen for connective tissue disease (CTD); however, its long-term use poses significant risks, including pulmonary infections. The relationship between cumulative corticosteroid doses and adverse pneumonia outcomes requires further investigation. This study aimed to explore the association between cumulative methylprednisolone dosages (CMD) and pneumonia mortality risks among CTD patients. We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from CTD patients treated with intravenous or oral corticosteroids across six academic hospitals over approximately five years in China. We evaluated follow-up outcomes at 30 and 90 days after the onset of pneumonia. Piecewise linear regression, Cox regression analysis, and survival analysis were employed to investigate the relationship between CMD and 30-day and 90-day mortality risks. Among 335 CTD patients with pneumonia, the mean CMD was 12 g. The 30-day and 90-day mortality rates were 25.07% and 29.55%, respectively. After adjusting for potential confounders, smooth curve fitting analysis revealed a specific nonlinear relationship between CMD and 30-day and 90-day mortality risks. Cox regression analysis indicated that the lowest pneumonia mortality risk occurred when CMD ranged from 11 to 24 g (30-day adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.77; 90-day aHR 0.37, 95% CI 0.17-0.81). Patients in the 11-24 g CMD group demonstrated significantly lower cumulative hazard and death rates compared to both the low CMD (< 11 g) and high CMD (> 24 g) groups (P < 0.05). Furthermore, interaction testing suggested that CMD's negative impact on pneumonia mortality risks was more pronounced in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) compared to hospital-acquired pneumonia (P for interaction < 0.05). CMD shows a distinct nonlinear relationship with 30-day and 90-day pneumonia mortality risks, with potentially lower risks observed within the 11-24 g CMD range. Moreover, the varying impact of CMD on CAP mortality risk warrants further consideration in clinical management strategies.

Real-world use of glucocorticoids and clinical outcomes in adults hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia on medical wards

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the real-world use of systemic glucocorticoids to treat patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) outside of the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 11,588 hospitalizations for CAP without chronic pulmonary disease at seven hospitals in Ontario, Canada. We report physician-level variation in the use of glucocorticoids and trends over time. We investigated the association between glucocorticoid prescriptions and clinical outcomes, using propensity score overlap weighting to account for confounding by indication.

RESULTS

Glucocorticoids were prescribed in 1283 (11.1%) patients, increasing over time from 10.0% in 2010 to 11.9% in 2020 (p = .008). Physician glucocorticoid prescribing ranged from 2.9% to 34.6% (median 10.0%, inter quartile range [IQR]: 6.7%-14.6%). Patients receiving glucocorticoids tended to be younger (median age 73 vs. 79), have higher Charlson comorbidity scores (score of 2 or more: 42.4% vs. 31.0%), more cancer (26.6% vs. 13.2%), more renal disease (11.5% vs. 6.6%), and less dementia (7.8% vs. 14.8%). Patients treated with glucocorticoids had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (weighted Risk Difference = 1.72, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.16-3.3, p = .033). Glucocorticoid use was not associated with ICU admission, hospital length-of-stay, or 30-day readmission.

CONCLUSION

Glucocorticoids were prescribed in 11.1% of patients hospitalized with CAP outside of ICU and one in four physicians prescribed glucocorticoids in more than 14% of patients. Glucocorticoid use was associated with greater in-hospital mortality, although these findings are limited by large selection effects. Clinicians should exercise caution in prescribing glucocorticoids for nonsevere CAP, and definitive trials are needed in this population.

Recent temporal trends, characteristics and outcomes of patients with non-COVID-19 community-acquired pneumonia at two tertiary hospitals in Australia: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) leads to considerable morbidity and mortality globally. However, data on CAP burden in Australia, especially during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, are limited.

AIMS

We characterised and assessed clinical outcomes of non-COVID-19 CAP hospitalisations over a 6-year period at two major hospitals in South Australia.

METHODS

All non-COVID-19 CAP hospitalisations were identified using the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth revision, Australian modification (ICD-10-AM) codes, between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2023, at two tertiary hospitals in Adelaide. Clinical outcomes included in-hospital and 30-day mortality, length of stay (LOS) in, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and 30-day readmissions. Multilevel regression models were utilised to identify predictors of clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Over the 6-year period, there were 7853 non-COVID-19 CAP hospitalisations, with a temporal increase from 100 per 100 000 population in 2018 to 208 per 100 000 population in 2023 (P < 0.001). The mean (SD) age was 75.1 (17.6) years, and 54.6% were males. The mean age declined over time (P < 0.05), while other characteristics remained stable. Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most commonly identified bacterium (21.8% of cases). In-hospital mortality occurred in 7.8% of patients, with 30-day mortality and readmission rates of 14.3% and 16.9% respectively. LOS declined significantly during the pandemic years; however, mortality remained stable over time. Frailty status, malnutrition and number of comorbidities significantly predicted 30-day mortality and LOS, in addition to pneumonia severity and ICU admission.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been an increasing trend of hospitalisations for non-COVID-19 CAP during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a concomitant trend towards shorter LOS and no significant shift in other clinical outcomes.

Hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for community acquired pneumonia-related septic shock: a subgroup analysis of the APROCCHSS phase 3 randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Glucocorticoids probably improve outcomes in patients hospitalised for community acquired pneumonia (CAP). In this a priori planned exploratory subgroup analysis of the phase 3 randomised controlled Activated Protein C and Corticosteroids for Human Septic Shock (APROCCHSS) trial, we aimed to investigate responses to hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone between CAP and non-CAP related septic shock.

METHODS

APROCCHSS was a randomised controlled trial that investigated the effects of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone, drotrecogin-alfa (activated), or both on mortality in septic shock in a two-by-two factorial design; after drotrecogin-alfa was withdrawn on October 2011, from the market, the trial continued on two parallel groups. It was conducted in 34 centres in France. In this subgroup study, patients with CAP were a preselected subgroup for an exploratory secondary analysis of the APROCCHSS trial of hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone in septic shock. Adults with septic shock were randomised 1:1 to receive, in a double-blind manner, a 7-day treatment with daily administration of intravenous hydrocortisone 50 mg bolus every 6h and a tablet of 50 μg of fludrocortisone via the nasogastric tube, or their placebos. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality at intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital discharge, 28-day and 180-day mortality, the number of days alive and free of vasopressors, mechanical ventilation, or organ failure, and ICU and hospital free-days to 90-days. Analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00625209).

FINDINGS

Of 1241 patients included in the APROCCHSS trial, CAP could not be ruled in or out in 31 patients, 562 had a diagnosis of CAP (279 in the placebo group and 283 in the corticosteroid group), and 648 patients did not have CAP (329 in the placebo group and 319 in the corticosteroid group). In patients with CAP, there were 109 (39%) deaths of 283 patients at day 90 with hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone and 143 (51%) of 279 patients receiving placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0·60, 95% CI 0·43-0·83). In patients without CAP, there were 148 (46%) deaths of 319 patients at day 90 in the hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone group and 157 (48%) of 329 patients in the placebo group (OR 0·95, 95% CI 0·70-1·29). There was significant heterogeneity in corticosteroid effects on 90-day mortality across subgroups with CAP and without CAP (p=0·046 for both multiplicative and additive interaction tests; moderate credibility). Of 1241 patients included in the APROCCHSS trial, 648 (52%) had ARDS (328 in the placebo group and 320 in the corticosteroid group). There were 155 (48%) deaths of 320 patients at day 90 in the corticosteroid group and 186 (57%) of 328 patients in the placebo group. The OR for death at day 90 was 0·72 (95% CI 0·53-0·98) in patients with ARDS and 0·85 (0·61-1·20) in patients without ARDS (p=0·45 for multiplicative interaction and p=0·42 for additive interaction). The OR for observing at least one serious adverse event (corticosteroid group vs placebo) within 180 days post randomisation was 0·64 (95% CI 0·46-0·89) in the CAP subgroup and 1·02 (0·75-1·39) in the non-CAP subgroup (p=0·044 for multiplicative interaction and p=0·042 for additive interaction).

INTERPRETATION

In a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the APROCCHSS trial of patients with CAP and septic shock, hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone reduced mortality as compared with placebo. Although a large proportion of patients with CAP also met criteria for ARDS, the subgroup analysis was underpowered to fully discriminate between ARDS and CAP modifying effects on mortality reduction with corticosteroids. There was no evidence of a significant treatment effect of corticosteroids in the non-CAP subgroup.

FUNDING

Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique of the French Ministry of Health, by Programme d'Investissements d'Avenir, France 2030, and IAHU-ANR-0004.

2024 Focused Update: Guidelines on Use of Corticosteroids in Sepsis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, and Community-Acquired Pneumonia

RATIONALE

New evidence is available examining the use of corticosteroids in sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), warranting a focused update of the 2017 guideline on critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency.

OBJECTIVES

To develop evidence-based recommendations for use of corticosteroids in hospitalized adults and children with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP.

PANEL DESIGN

The 22-member panel included diverse representation from medicine, including adult and pediatric intensivists, pulmonologists, endocrinologists, nurses, pharmacists, and clinician-methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines. We followed Society of Critical Care Medicine conflict of interest policies in all phases of the guideline development, including task force selection and voting.

METHODS

After development of five focused Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) questions, we conducted systematic reviews to identify the best available evidence addressing each question. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach and formulated recommendations using the evidence-to-decision framework.

RESULTS

In response to the five PICOs, the panel issued four recommendations addressing the use of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. These included a conditional recommendation to administer corticosteroids for patients with septic shock and critically ill patients with ARDS and a strong recommendation for use in hospitalized patients with severe CAP. The panel also recommended against high dose/short duration administration of corticosteroids for septic shock. In response to the final PICO regarding type of corticosteroid molecule in ARDS, the panel was unable to provide specific recommendations addressing corticosteroid molecule, dose, and duration of therapy, based on currently available evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The panel provided updated recommendations based on current evidence to inform clinicians, patients, and other stakeholders on the use of corticosteroids for sepsis, ARDS, and CAP.

Adjunctive immunotherapeutic agents in patients with sepsis and septic shock: a multidisciplinary consensus of 23

BACKGROUND

In the last decades, several adjunctive treatments have been proposed to reduce mortality in septic shock patients. Unfortunately, mortality due to sepsis and septic shock remains elevated and NO trials evaluating adjunctive therapies were able to demonstrate any clear benefit. In light of the lack of evidence and conflicting results from previous studies, in this multidisciplinary consensus, the authors considered the rational, recent investigations and potential clinical benefits of targeted adjunctive therapies.

METHODS

A panel of multidisciplinary experts defined clinical phenotypes, treatments and outcomes of greater interest in the field of adjunctive therapies for sepsis and septic shock. After an extensive systematic literature review, the appropriateness of each treatment for each clinical phenotype was determined using the modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.

RESULTS

The consensus identified two distinct clinical phenotypes: patients with overwhelming shock and patients with immune paralysis. Six different adjunctive treatments were considered the most frequently used and promising: (i) corticosteroids, (ii) blood purification, (iii) immunoglobulins, (iv) granulocyte/monocyte colony-stimulating factor and (v) specific immune therapy (i.e. interferon-gamma, IL7 and AntiPD1). Agreement was achieved in 70% of the 25 clinical questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although clinical evidence is lacking, adjunctive therapies are often employed in the treatment of sepsis. To address this gap in knowledge, a panel of national experts has provided a structured consensus on the appropriate use of these treatments in clinical practice.

Adverse Effects Related to Corticosteroid Use in Sepsis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, and Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

We postulate that corticosteroid-related side effects in critically ill patients are similar across sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). By pooling data across all trials that have examined corticosteroids in these three acute conditions, we aim to examine the side effects of corticosteroid use in critical illness.

DATA SOURCES

We performed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention library of COVID research, CINAHL, and Cochrane center for trials.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared corticosteroids to no corticosteroids or placebo in patients with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP.

DATA EXTRACTION

We summarized data addressing the most described side effects of corticosteroid use in critical care: gastrointestinal bleeding, hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, superinfections/secondary infections, neuropsychiatric effects, and neuromuscular weakness.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 47 RCTs (n = 13,893 patients). Corticosteroids probably have no effect on gastrointestinal bleeding (relative risk [RR], 1.08; 95% CI, 0.87-1.34; absolute risk increase [ARI], 0.3%; moderate certainty) or secondary infections (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.89-1.05; absolute risk reduction, 0.5%; moderate certainty) and may have no effect on neuromuscular weakness (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03-1.45; ARI, 1.4%; low certainty) or neuropsychiatric events (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.82-1.74; ARI, 0.5%; low certainty). Conversely, they increase the risk of hyperglycemia (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.31; ARI, 5.4%; high certainty) and probably increase the risk of hypernatremia (RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.29-1.96; ARI, 2.3%; moderate certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

In ARDS, sepsis, and CAP, corticosteroids are associated with hyperglycemia and probably with hypernatremia but likely have no effect on gastrointestinal bleeding or secondary infections. More data examining effects of corticosteroids, particularly on neuropsychiatric outcomes and neuromuscular weakness, would clarify the safety of this class of drugs in critical illness.

Impact of different corticosteroids on severe community-acquired pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated conflicting results regarding the effects of corticosteroids on the treatment of severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of different corticosteroids on patients who were hospitalised for severe CAP.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to May 2023. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Data analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 10 RCTs comprising 1962 patients were included. Corticosteroids were associated with a lower rate of all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR), 0.70 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.90); I2=0.00%). When stratified into different corticosteroid types, hydrocortisone was associated with an approximately 50% lower mortality risk (RR, 0.48 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.72); I2=0.00%). However, dexamethasone, methylprednisolone or prednisolone were not associated with an improvement in mortality. Furthermore, hydrocortisone was associated with a reduction in the rate of mechanical ventilation, acute respiratory distress syndrome, shock and duration of intensive care unit stay. These trends were not observed for dexamethasone, methylprednisolone or prednisolone. Corticosteroids were not associated with an increased risk of adverse events including gastrointestinal bleeding, secondary infection or hyperglycaemia.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of hydrocortisone, but not other types of corticosteroids, was associated with a reduction in mortality and improvement in pneumonia outcomes among patients hospitalised with severe CAP.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42023431360.

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.

Efficacy of N-acetylcysteine plus pirfenidone in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies have demonstrated the potential of pirfenidone to enhance the prognosis of patients afflicted with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Although N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is utilized as an antioxidant in IPF treatment, the combination of NAC and pirfenidone has produced inconsistent outcomes in certain studies. To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of NAC plus pirfenidone (designated as the treatment group) versus pirfenidone monotherapy (designated as the control group), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

RCTs of NAC plus pirfenidone were reviewed searching from databases and networks of unpublished and published studies in any language. Using pair-wise meta-analysis, changes in pulmonary function test (PFT) parameters and safety were evaluated.

RESULTS

Two independent reviewers selected and obtained data from 5 RCTs (n = 398), comprising 1 study from Japan, 1 from Europe, and 3 from China. NAS plus pirfenidone as compared to pirfenidone monotherapy for IPF may not reduce the incidence of skin effects(RR 1.26 [95%CI 0.64 to 2.45]) and mortality(RR 0.35 [95%CI 0.07 to 1.68])(both moderate certainty). NAS plus pirfenidone as compared to pirfenidone monotherapy for IPF may not reduce the incidence of at least one side effects(RR 1.00 [95%CI 0.84 to 1.19]; low certainty),severe side effects(RR 0.67 [95%CI 0.30 to 1.47]; low certainty) and gastrointestinal effects(RR 0.67 [95%CI 0.41 to 1.09]; low certainty) with possibly no effect in Δ%DLco(SMD -0.17 [95%CI -0.15 to 0.48]; low certainty). Meanwhile, the effect of NAS plus pirfenidone as compared to pirfenidone monotherapy on ΔFVC(SMD 0.18 [95%CI -0.68 to 1.05]), Δ%FVC(SMD -2.62 [95%CI -5.82 to 0.59]) and Δ6MWT(SMD -0.35 [95%CI -0.98 to 0.28]) is uncertain(extremely low certainty).

CONCLUSION

Moderate certainty evidence suggests that NAS plus pirfenidone, compared to pirfenidone monotherapy for IPF, does not reduce the incidence of skin effects and mortality.