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

Mutational dynamics of SARS-CoV-2: Impact on future COVID-19 vaccine strategies

The rapid emergence of multiple strains of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has sparked profound concerns regarding the ongoing evolution of the virus and its potential impact on global health. Classified by the World Health Organization (WHO) as variants of concern (VOC), these strains exhibit heightened transmissibility and pathogenicity, posing significant challenges to existing vaccine strategies. Despite widespread vaccination efforts, the continual evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants presents a formidable obstacle to achieving herd immunity. Of particular concern is the coronavirus spike (S) protein, a pivotal viral surface protein crucial for host cell entry and infectivity. Mutations within the S protein have been shown to enhance transmissibility and confer resistance to antibody-mediated neutralization, undermining the efficacy of traditional vaccine platforms. Moreover, the S protein undergoes rapid molecular evolution under selective immune pressure, leading to the emergence of diverse variants with distinct mutation profiles. This review underscores the urgent need for vigilance and adaptation in vaccine development efforts to combat the evolving landscape of SARS-CoV-2 mutations and ensure the long-term effectiveness of global immunization campaigns.

Comparative effectiveness of dexamethasone in treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the United States during the first year of the pandemic: Findings from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) data repository

BACKGROUND

Dexamethasone was approved for use in hospitalized COVID-19 patients early in the pandemic based on the RECOVERY trial, but evidence is still needed to support its real-world effectiveness in heterogeneous populations of patients with a wide range of comorbidities.

METHODS

COVID-19 inpatients represented within the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) Data Enclave, prior to vaccine availability, were studied. Primary outcome was in-hospital death; secondary outcome was combined in-hospital death and severe outcome defined by use of ECMO or mechanical ventilation. Missing data were imputed with single imputation. Dexamethasone-treated patients were propensity score (PS) matched to non-dexamethasone-treated controls, stratified by remdesivir treatment and based on demographics, baseline laboratory values, comorbidities, and amount of missing data before imputation. Treatment benefit was quantified using logistic regression. Further sensitivity analyses were performed using clinical adjusters in matched groups and in strata defined by quartiles of PS.

RESULTS

Dexamethasone treatment was associated with reduced risk of in-hospital mortality for n = 1,263 treated, matched 1:3 to untreated, patients not receiving remdesivir (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.95, p = 0.017), and for n = 804 treated, matched 1:1 to untreated, patients receiving remdesivir (OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.53 to 1.02, p = 0.054). Treatment showed secondary outcome benefit. In sensitivity analyses, treatment effect generally remained similar with some heterogeneity of benefit across quartiles of PS, possibly reflecting concentration of benefit among the more severely affected.

CONCLUSIONS

We add evidence that dexamethasone provides benefit with respect to mortality and severe outcomes in a diverse, national hospitalized sample, prior to vaccine availability.

Inhibition of the lysine demethylase LSD1 modulates the balance between inflammatory and antiviral responses against coronaviruses

Innate immune responses to coronavirus infections are highly cell specific. Tissue-resident macrophages, which are infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in patients but are inconsistently infected in vitro, exert critical but conflicting effects by secreting both antiviral type I interferons (IFNs) and tissue-damaging inflammatory cytokines. Steroids, the only class of host-targeting drugs approved for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), indiscriminately suppress both responses, possibly impairing viral clearance. Here, we established in vitro cell culture systems that enabled us to separately investigate the cell-intrinsic and cell-extrinsic proinflammatory and antiviral activities of mouse macrophages infected with the prototypical murine coronavirus MHV-A59. We showed that the nuclear factor κB-dependent inflammatory response to viral infection was selectively inhibited by loss of the lysine demethylase LSD1, which was previously implicated in innate immune responses to cancer, with negligible effects on the antiviral IFN response. LSD1 ablation also enhanced an IFN-independent antiviral response, blocking viral egress through the lysosomal pathway. The macrophage-intrinsic antiviral and anti-inflammatory activity of Lsd1 inhibition was confirmed in vitro and in a humanized mouse model of SARS-CoV-2 infection. These results suggest that LSD1 controls innate immune responses against coronaviruses at multiple levels and provide a mechanistic rationale for potentially repurposing LSD1 inhibitors for COVID-19 treatment.

The effect of corticosteroids, antibiotics, and anticoagulants on the development of post-COVID-19 syndrome in COVID-19 hospitalized patients 6 months after discharge: a retrospective follow up study

To assess the effect of pharmacotherapeutic interventions commonly employed in the management of COVID-19 hospitalized patients on the development of post-COVID-19 syndrome. This study employed two distinct databases, the Medisch Spectrum Twente (MST) clinical database comprising electronic health records of COVID-19 patients hospitalized at MST, and the Post-COVID cohort database which contains follow-up information on the same patients. These databases were integrated to establish the potential relationship between the administration of corticosteroids, antibiotics, or anticoagulants during hospitalization and the occurrence of post-COVID-19 syndrome after a 6-month interval following discharge. A total of 123 patients who were hospitalized due to COVID-19 infection were included in this study. Among these patients, 33 (26.8%) developed post-COVID-19 syndrome which persisted even 6 months after hospital discharge. Multivariate analysis revealed that patients who received treatment with corticosteroids had a significantly lower likelihood (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.11-0.90) of developing post-COVID-19 syndrome, while no significant association was observed for treatment with antibiotics (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.47-3.39) or anticoagulants (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.18-1.71). The findings of this study indicate that corticosteroids exert a significant protective effect against the development of post-COVID-19 syndrome in patients who were hospitalized due to COVID-19 infection. Although a trend towards a protective effect of anticoagulants was observed, it did not reach statistical significance. On the contrary, patients treated with antibiotics were shown to have increased chances of developing post-COVID-19 syndrome, although this effect was also not statistically significant.

COVID-19 outcome is not affected by anti-CD20 or high-titer convalescent plasma in immunosuppressed patients

The role of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) convalescent plasma in the treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in immunosuppressed individuals remains controversial. We describe the course of COVID-19 in patients who had received anti-CD20 therapy within the 3 years prior to infection. We compared outcomes between those treated with and those not treated with high titer SARS-CoV2 convalescent plasma. We identified 144 adults treated at Mayo clinic sites who had received anti-CD20 therapies within a median of 5.9 months prior to the COVID-19 index date. About one-third (34.7%) were hospitalized within 14 days and nearly half (47.9%) within 90 days. COVID-19 directed therapy included anti-spike monoclonal antibodies (n = 30, 20.8%), and, among those hospitalized within 14 days (n = 50), remdesivir (n = 45, 90.0%), glucocorticoids (n = 36, 72.0%) and convalescent plasma (n = 24, 48.0%). The duration from receipt of last dose of anti-CD20 therapy did not correlate with outcomes. The overall 90-day mortality rate was 14.7%. Administration of convalescent plasma within 14 days of the COVID-19 diagnosis was not significantly associated with any study outcome. Further study of COVID-19 in CD20-depleted individuals is needed focusing on the early administration of new and potentially combination antiviral agents, associated or not with vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma.

Identification of new drugs to counteract anti-spike IgG-induced hyperinflammation in severe COVID-19

Previously, we and others have shown that SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific IgG antibodies play a major role in disease severity in COVID-19 by triggering macrophage hyperactivation, disrupting endothelial barrier integrity, and inducing thrombus formation. This hyperinflammation is dependent on high levels of anti-spike IgG with aberrant Fc tail glycosylation, leading to Fcγ receptor hyperactivation. For development of immune-regulatory therapeutics, drug specificity is crucial to counteract excessive inflammation whereas simultaneously minimizing the inhibition of antiviral immunity. We here developed an in vitro activation assay to screen for small molecule drugs that specifically counteract antibody-induced pathology. We identified that anti-spike-induced inflammation is specifically blocked by small molecule inhibitors against SYK and PI3K. We identified SYK inhibitor entospletinib as the most promising candidate drug, which also counteracted anti-spike-induced endothelial dysfunction and thrombus formation. Moreover, entospletinib blocked inflammation by different SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Combined, these data identify entospletinib as a promising treatment for severe COVID-19.

Efficacy and Safety of Reparixin in Patients with Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study

INTRODUCTION

Polymorphonuclear cell influx into the interstitial and bronchoalveolar spaces is a cardinal feature of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), principally mediated by interleukin-8 (IL-8). We sought to determine whether reparixin, a novel IL-8 pathway inhibitor, could reduce disease progression in patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

METHODS

In this Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study, hospitalized adult patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia were randomized 2:1 to receive oral reparixin 1200 mg three times daily or placebo for up to 21 days or until hospital discharge. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28, with key secondary endpoints being the proportion of patients free of respiratory failure at Day 60, incidence of intensive care unit (ICU) admission by Day 28 and time to recovery by Day 28.

RESULTS

Of 279 patients randomized, 182 received at least one dose of reparixin and 88 received placebo. The proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28 was similar in the two groups {83.5% versus 80.7%; odds ratio 1.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75, 3.51]; p = 0.216}. There were no statistically significant differences in the key secondary endpoints, but a numerically higher proportion of patients in the reparixin group were alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 60 (88.7% versus 84.6%; p = 0.195), fewer required ICU admissions by Day 28 (15.8% versus 21.7%; p = 0.168), and a higher proportion recovered by Day 28 compared with placebo (81.6% versus 74.9%; p = 0.167). Fewer patients experienced adverse events with reparixin than placebo (45.6% versus 54.5%), most mild or moderate intensity and not related to study treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial did not meet the primary efficacy endpoints, yet reparixin showed a trend toward limiting disease progression as an add-on therapy in COVID-19 severe pneumonia and was well tolerated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04878055, EudraCT: 2020-005919-51.

Secondary infections in critically ill patients with COVID-19 receiving steroid therapy

Secondary infections can occur during or after the treatment of an initial infection. Glucocorticoids may decrease mortality in patients with severe COVID-19; however, risk of secondary infection is not well described. Our primary objective was to investigate the risk of secondary infection among critically ill patients with COVID-19 treated with glucocorticoids. We examined patients with COVID-19 being treated in the intensive care unit at two academic medical centers from 1 to 7/2020. One hundred-seven patients were included. Of these, 31 received steroids and 76 patients did not. Analysis of the larger cohort was performed followed by a matched pairs analysis of 22 steroid and 22 non-steroid patients. Secondary infection was seen in 14 patients (45.2%) receiving steroids compared to 35(46.1%) not receiving steroids (p = 0.968). Secondary infections were most frequently encountered in the respiratory tract. Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus were the most frequently identified organisms. Mortality was 16.1% in the steroid-treated group compared to 23.7% in the control group (p = 0.388). After performing matched pairs analysis and multivariable logistic regression there was no significant difference between secondary infection or mortality and steroid receipt. Secondary infections were common among critically ill patients with COVID-19, but the incidence of secondary infection was not significantly impacted by steroid treatment.

COVID-19 admissions and mortality in patients with early inflammatory arthritis: results from a UK national cohort

OBJECTIVE

To describe the risks and predictors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization and mortality among patients with early inflammatory arthritis (EIA), recruited to the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit (NEIAA).

METHODS

NEIAA is an observational cohort. We included adults with EIA from Feb 2020 to May 2021. Outcomes of interest were hospitalization and death due to COVID-19, using NHS Digital linkage. Cox proportional hazards were used to calculate hazard ratios for outcomes according to initial treatment strategy, with adjustment for confounders.

RESULTS

From 14 127 patients with EIA, there were 143 hospitalizations and 47 deaths due to COVID-19, with incidence rates per 100 person-years of 0.93 (95% CI 0.79, 1.10) for hospitalization and 0.30 (95% CI 0.23, 0.40) for death. Increasing age, male gender, comorbidities and ex-smoking were associated with increased risk of worse COVID-19 outcomes. Higher baseline DAS28 was not associated with COVID-19 admissions [confounder adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.10; 95% CI 0.97, 1.24] or mortality (aHR 1.11; 95% CI 0.90, 1.37). Seropositivity was not associated with either outcome. Higher symptom burden on patient-reported measures predicted worse COVID-19 outcomes. In unadjusted models, CS associated with COVID-19 death (HR 2.29; 95% CI 1.02, 5.13), and SSZ monotherapy associated with COVID-19 admission (HR 1.92; 95% CI 1.04, 3.56). In adjusted models, associations for CS and SSZ were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Patient characteristics have stronger associations with COVID-19 than the initial treatment strategy in patients with EIA. An important limitation is that we have not looked at treatment changes over time.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of glucocorticoids treatment in severe COVID-19: methylprednisolone versus dexamethasone

OBJECTIVE

The preferred agent of glucocorticoids in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone and dexamethasone in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19.

METHODS

By searching the electronic literature database including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science, the clinical studies comparing methylprednisolone and dexamethasone in the treatment of severe COVID-19 were selected according to the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria. Relevant data were extracted and literature quality was assessed. The primary outcome was short-term mortality. The secondary outcomes were the rates of ICU admission and mechanical ventilation, PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio, plasma levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, hospital stay, and the incidence of severe adverse events. Statistical pooling applied the fixed or random effects model and reported as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.1.0.

RESULTS

Twelve clinical studies were eligible, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nine non-RCTs. A total of 2506 patients with COVID-19 were analyzed, of which 1242 (49.6%) received methylprednisolone and 1264 (50.4%) received dexamethasone treatment. In general, the heterogeneity across studies was significant, and the equivalent doses of methylprednisolone were higher than that of dexamethasone. Our meta-analysis showed that methylprednisolone treatment in severe COVID-19 patients was related to significantly reduced plasma ferritin and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio compared with dexamethasone, and that no significant difference in other clinical outcomes between the two groups was found. However, subgroup analyses of RCTs demonstrated that methylprednisolone treatment was associated with reduced short-term mortality, and decreased CRP level compared with dexamethasone. Moreover, subgroup analyses observed that severe COVID-19 patients treated with a moderate dose (2 mg/kg/day) of methylprednisolone were related to a better prognosis than those treated with dexamethasone.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that compared with dexamethasone, methylprednisolone could reduce the systemic inflammatory response in severe COVID-19, and its effect was equivalent to that of dexamethasone on other clinical outcomes. It should be noted that the equivalent dose of methylprednisolone used was higher. Based on the evidence of subgroup analyses of RCTs, methylprednisolone, preferably at a moderate dose, has an advantage over dexamethasone in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19.

The anaphylatoxin C5a: Structure, function, signaling, physiology, disease, and therapeutics

The complement system is one of the oldest known tightly regulated host defense systems evolved for efficiently functioning cell-based immune systems and antibodies. Essentially, the complement system acts as a pivot between the innate and adaptive arms of the immune system. The complement system collectively represents a cocktail of ∼50 cell-bound/soluble glycoproteins directly involved in controlling infection and inflammation. Activation of the complement cascade generates complement fragments like C3a, C4a, and C5a as anaphylatoxins. C5a is the most potent proinflammatory anaphylatoxin, which is involved in inflammatory signaling in a myriad of tissues. This review provides a comprehensive overview of human C5a in the context of its structure and signaling under several pathophysiological conditions, including the current and future therapeutic applications targeting C5a.

Pulse Methylprednisolone Versus Dexamethasone in COVID-19: A Multicenter Cohort Study

Although pulse (high-dose) methylprednisolone therapy can hypothetically control immune system flare-ups effectively, the clinical benefit of pulse methylprednisolone compared with dexamethasone in COVID-19 remains inconclusive.

Could the fibromyalgia syndrome be triggered or enhanced by COVID-19?

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a complex disease with an uncertain aetiology and intricate pathophysiology. Although its genesis is not fully explained, potential environmental factors, such as viral infections might trigger FM or worsen patients' clinical outcomes. The SARS-CoV-2 virus may affect central and peripheral nervous systems, leading to musculoskeletal, neurological, and psychological disturbances. These symptoms might persist at least 12 months beyond the recovery, often referred to as post-COVID syndrome, which resembles FM syndrome. In this sense, we argued the potential consequences of COVID-19 exclusively on FM syndrome. First, we have described post-COVID syndrome and its painful symptoms. Afterwards, we argued whether FM syndrome could be triggered or enhanced by COVID-19 infection or by numerous and persistent stressors imposed daily by the pandemic setting (isolation, uncertainty, depression, mental stress, generalized anxiety, and fear of the virus). In addition, we have demonstrated similarities between pathophysiological mechanisms and cardinal symptoms of FM and COVID-19, speculating that SARS-CoV-2 might represent a critical mediator of FM or an exacerbator of its symptoms once both syndromes share similar mechanisms and complaints. Therefore, pharmacologic and non-pharmacological approaches commonly used to treat FM could serve as strategic therapies to attenuate painful and neurological manifestations of post-COVID syndrome. Although it is still theoretical, clinicians and researchers should be alert of patients who develop symptoms similar to FM or those who had their FM symptoms increased post-COVID to manage them better.

Impact of systemic corticosteroids on length of hospitalization among patients with COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome. MéTHOD: We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team.

RESULTS

A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median=3 [interquartile range=0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p=0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤4 days than >4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised >4 days [p<0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

Critical patients COVID-19 has changed the management and outcomes in the ICU after 1 year of the pandemic? A multicenter, prospective, observational study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical characteristics, treatments, and evolution of critical patients with COVID-19 pneumonia treated in Intensive Care Units (ICU) after one year of pandemic.

METHODOLOGY

Multicenter, prospective study, which included critical COVID-19 patients in 9 ICUs in northwestern Spain. The clinical characteristics, treatments, and evolution of patients admitted to the ICU during the months of March-April 2020 (period 1) were compared with patients admitted in January-February 2021 (period 2).

RESULTS

337 patients were included (98 in period 1 and 239 in period 2). In period 2, fewer patients required invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (65% vs 84%, p < 0.001), using high-flow nasal cannulas (CNAF) more frequently (70% vs 7%, p < 0.001), ventilation non-invasive mechanical (NIMV) (40% vs 14%, p < 0.001), corticosteroids (100% vs 96%, p = 0.007) and prone position in both awake (42% vs 28%, p = 0.012), and intubated patients (67% vs 54%, p = 0.034). The days of IMV, ICU stay and hospital stay were lower in period 2. Mortality was similar in the two periods studied (16% vs 17%).

CONCLUSIONS

After 1 year of pandemic, we observed that in patients admitted to the ICU, CNAF, NIMV, use of the prone position, and corticosteroids have been used more frequently, reducing the number of patients in IMV, and the length of stay in the ICU and hospital stay. Mortality was similar in the two study periods.

[Critical patients COVID-19 has changed the management and outcomes in the ICU after 1 year of the pandemic? A multicenter, prospective, observational study]

Objective

To compare the clinical characteristics, treatments, and evolution of critical patients with COVID-19 pneumonia treated in intensive care units (ICU) after one year of pandemic.

Methodology

Multicenter, prospective study, which included critical COVID-19 patients in 9 ICUs in northwestern Spain. The clinical characteristics, treatments, and evolution of patients admitted to the ICU during the months of March-April 2020 (period 1) were compared with patients admitted in January-February 2021 (period 2).

Results

337 patients were included (98 in period 1 and 239 in period 2). In period 2, fewer patients required invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (65% vs. 84%, P < .001), using high-flow nasal cannulas (CNAF) more frequently (70% vs. 7%, P < .001), ventilation non-invasive mechanical (NIMV) (40% vs. 14%, P < .001), corticosteroids (100% vs. 96%, P = .007) and prone position in both awake (42% vs. 28%, P = .012), and intubated patients (67% vs. 54%, P = .034). The days of IMV, ICU stay and hospital stay were lower in period 2. Mortality was similar in the two periods studied (16% vs. 17%).

Conclusions

After one year of pandemic, we observed that in patients admitted to the ICU, CNAF, NIMV, use of the prone position, and corticosteroids have been used more frequently, reducing the number of patients in IMV, and the length of stay in the ICU and hospital stay. Mortality was similar in the two study periods.

Effect of Methylprednisolone on Mortality and Clinical Courses in Patients with Severe COVID-19: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether methylprednisolone therapy can reduce the mortality rate of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains controversial, and its effects on the length of hospital stay and virus shedding time are also unknown. This retrospective study investigates the previous issues to provide more evidence for methylprednisolone treatment in severe COVID-19.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 563 of 4827 patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to Wuhan Huoshenshan Hospital or Wuhan Guanggu Hospital between February 3, 2020 and March 30, 2020 who met the screening criteria. The participants' epidemiological and demographic data, comorbidities, laboratory test results, treatments, outcomes, and vital clinical time points were extracted from electronic medical records. The primary outcome was in-hospital death, and the secondary outcomes were 2 clinical courses: length from admission to viral clearance and discharge. Univariate and multivariate logistic or linear regression analyses were used to assess the role of methylprednisolone in different outcomes. Propensity score matching was performed to control for confounding factors.

RESULTS

Of the 563 patients who met the screening criteria and were included in the subsequent analysis, 138 were included in the methylprednisolone group and 425 in the nonmethylprednisolone group. The in-hospital death rate between the methylprednisolone and nonmethylprednisolone groups showed a significant difference (23.91% vs. 1.65%, P < 0.001), which was maintained after propensity score matching (13.98% vs. 5.38%, P = 0.048). However, univariate logistic analysis in the matched groups showed that methylprednisolone treatment (odds ratio [OR], 5.242; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.802 to 34.246; P = 0.084) was not a risk factor for in-hospital death in severe patients. Further multivariate logistic regression analysis found comorbidities (OR, 3.327; 95% CI, 1.702 to 6.501; P < 0.001), lower lymphocyte count (OR, 0.076; 95% CI, 0.012 to 0.461; P = 0.005), higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels (OR, 1.008; 95% CI, 1.003 to 1.013; P = 0.002), and anticoagulation therapy (OR, 11.187; 95% CI, 2.459 to 50.900; P = 0.002) were associated with in-hospital mortality. Multivariate linear regression analysis in the matched groups showed that methylprednisolone treatment was not a risk factor for a prolonged duration from admission to viral clearance (β Value 0.081; 95% CI, -1.012 to 3.657; P = 0.265) or discharge (β Value 0.114; 95% CI, -0.723 to 6.408; P = 0.117). d-dimer (β Value, 0.144; 95% CI, 0.012 to 0.817; P = 0.044), LDH (β Value 0.260; 95% CI, 0.010 to 0.034; P < 0.001), and antiviral therapy (β Value 0.220; 95% CI, 1.373 to 6.263; P = 0.002) were associated with a longer length from admission to viral clearance. The lymphocyte count (β Value -0.206; 95% CI, -6.248 to -1.197; P = 0.004), LDH (β Value 0.231; 95% CI, 0.012 to 0.048; P = 0.001), antiviral therapy (β Value 0.143; 95% CI, 0.058 to 7.497; P = 0.047), and antibacterial therapy (β Value 0.152; 95% CI, 0.133 to 8.154; P = 0.043) were associated with a longer hospitalization duration from admission to discharge. Further stratified analysis revealed that the low daily dose group (≤60 mg/d) and the low total dose group (≤200 mg) had shorter duration from admission to viral clearance (Z=-2.362, P = 0.018; Z=-2.010, P = 0.044) and a shorter hospital stay (Z=-2.735, P = 0.006; Z=-3.858, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe COVID-19, methylprednisolone is safe and does not prolong the duration from admission to viral clearance or discharge. Low-dose, short-term methylprednisolone treatment may be more beneficial in shortening the disease course.

A differential therapeutic consideration for use of corticosteroids according to established COVID-19 clinical phenotypes in critically ill patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the use of corticosteroids was associated with Intensive Care Unit (ICU) mortality among whole population and pre-specified clinical phenotypes.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis derived from multicenter, observational study.

SETTING

Critical Care Units.

PATIENTS

Adult critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 disease admitted to 63 ICUs in Spain.

INTERVENTIONS

Corticosteroids vs. no corticosteroids.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

Three phenotypes were derived by non-supervised clustering analysis from whole population and classified as (A: severe, B: critical and C: life-threatening). We performed a multivariate analysis after propensity optimal full matching (PS) for whole population and weighted Cox regression (HR) and Fine-Gray analysis (sHR) to assess the impact of corticosteroids on ICU mortality according to the whole population and distinctive patient clinical phenotypes.

RESULTS

A total of 2017 patients were analyzed, 1171 (58%) with corticosteroids. After PS, corticosteroids were shown not to be associated with ICU mortality (OR: 1.0; 95% CI: 0.98-1.15). Corticosteroids were administered in 298/537 (55.5%) patients of "A" phenotype and their use was not associated with ICU mortality (HR=0.85 [0.55-1.33]). A total of 338/623 (54.2%) patients in "B" phenotype received corticosteroids. No effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality was observed when HR was performed (0.72 [0.49-1.05]). Finally, 535/857 (62.4%) patients in "C" phenotype received corticosteroids. In this phenotype HR (0.75 [0.58-0.98]) and sHR (0.79 [0.63-0.98]) suggest a protective effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality.

CONCLUSION

Our finding warns against the widespread use of corticosteroids in all critically ill patients with COVID-19 at moderate dose. Only patients with the highest inflammatory levels could benefit from steroid treatment.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Low-Dose Versus High-Dose Dexamethasone in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Meta-Analysis

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of low-dose and high-dose dexamethasone in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. The current meta-analysis was conducted in compliance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was carried out using PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase. Outcomes assessed in the current meta-analysis included 28-day mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, length of ICU admission (days), and length of hospital stay (days). For safety, we compared hypoglycemia and the incidence of infection between the high-dose dexamethasone group and the low-dose dexamethasone group. A total of four studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of ICU admission (risk ratio (RR): 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.41-1.28, p-value: 0.27), length of stay in ICU in days (mean difference (MD): -0.05, 95%CI: -3.96-3.87, p-value: 0.98, I-square: 94%), length of hospital stay in days (MD: -0.94, 95%CI: -1.94-0.06, p-value: 0.07), need of mechanical ventilation (RR: 0.72, 95%CI: 0.36-1.48, p-value: 0.38), and 28-day mortality (RR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.50-1.64, p-value: 0.74). The current study showed that higher doses of dexamethasone failed to enhance efficacy compared to low-dose dexamethasone. Thus, based on the findings of this meta-analysis, low-dose dexamethasone can be recommended for these patients.

A differential therapeutic consideration for use of corticosteroids according to established COVID-19 clinical phenotypes in critically ill patients

Objective

To determine if the use of corticosteroids was associated with Intensive Care Unit (ICU) mortality among whole population and pre-specified clinical phenotypes.

Design

A secondary analysis derived from multicenter, observational study.

Setting

Critical Care Units.

Patients

Adult critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 disease admitted to 63 ICUs in Spain.

Interventions

Corticosteroids vs. no corticosteroids.

Main variables of interest

Three phenotypes were derived by non-supervised clustering analysis from whole population and classified as (A: severe, B: critical and C: life-threatening). We performed a multivariate analysis after propensity optimal full matching (PS) for whole population and weighted Cox regression (HR) and Fine-Gray analysis (sHR) to assess the impact of corticosteroids on ICU mortality according to the whole population and distinctive patient clinical phenotypes.

Results

A total of 2017 patients were analyzed, 1171 (58%) with corticosteroids. After PS, corticosteroids were shown not to be associated with ICU mortality (OR: 1.0; 95% CI: 0.98-1.15). Corticosteroids were administered in 298/537 (55.5%) patients of "A" phenotype and their use was not associated with ICU mortality (HR = 0.85 [0.55-1.33]). A total of 338/623 (54.2%) patients in "B" phenotype received corticosteroids. No effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality was observed when HR was performed (0.72 [0.49-1.05]). Finally, 535/857 (62.4%) patients in "C" phenotype received corticosteroids. In this phenotype HR (0.75 [0.58-0.98]) and sHR (0.79 [0.63-0.98]) suggest a protective effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality.

Conclusion

Our finding warns against the widespread use of corticosteroids in all critically ill patients with COVID-19 at moderate dose. Only patients with the highest inflammatory levels could benefit from steroid treatment.

Screening for Femoral Head Osteonecrosis Following COVID-19: Is It Worth It?

Objectives

Based on WHO data, as of June 2022, there were 532.2 million confirmed COVID-19 cases globally. In the initial phase of the COVID -19 pandemic, patients experiencing critical illness marked by severe respiratory distress were commonly subjected to corticosteroid treatment. Regrettably, the administration of exogenous corticosteroids stands as the prevailing cause of ONFH. In the current narrative review, we aim to evaluate if active screening should be utilized to diagnose post-COVID-19 ONFH in its early stages.

Methods

The databases for PubMed, CINAHL, and Science Direct were systematically queried in March 2022. The search terms were as follows: "COVID-19", "severe acute respiratory syndrome", "coronavirus", "systemic steroid", "corticosteroid", "femoral head osteonecrosis", "avascular necrosis", or "steroid therapy." The included studies for review were all required to be peer-reviewed studies in the English language with Reported complications linked to steroid therapy in COVID-19 patients or potential connections to the development of ONFH in individuals recovering from the novel coronavirus have been documented.

Results

Systemic corticosteroids were frequently employed in managing critically ill COVID-19 patients. The CDC reports up to June 2022 showed more than 4.8 million COVID-19 hospitalizations in the US, with approximately over one million patients receiving steroids. In a study of ONFH after infection with COVID-19, all patients had bilateral involvement. The average duration from the initiation of corticosteroid treatment to the onset of symptoms was 132.8 days.

Conclusion

In summary, a distinct correlation exists between the administration of steroids to individuals with COVID-19 and the subsequent risk of ONFH. Moreover, an elevated dosage and prolonged duration of steroid therapy in COVID-19 patients are associated with an increased likelihood of developing ONFH. Therefore, active screening for high-risk patients, that may have received systemic corticosteroid treatment during a COVID-19 illness, may be reasonable.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on dispensing medicines in the community pharmacy

BACKGROUND

The world has faced an unprecedented challenge since COVID-19 emerged as a pandemic, which has led to quarantine and disruptions in drug services. During the pandemic, drug use habits and availability changed, causing a shift in behaviors and, in turn, medicine misuse. In Iraq, this is a major problem because many medicines can be easily obtained.

OBJECTIVE

The study aims to describe the pattern of dispensing medications during the pandemic and to evaluate the biochemical and pathological consequences.

METHOD

The analytical, observational, cross-sectional study was performed via a compiled questionnaire for 400 random pharmacists, and the analysis and interpretation of the biochemical changes and medical reports.

RESULTS

Results revealed that dispensing of medications since the COVID-19 outbreak has increased by 74%, and the demand for medicines seems higher than required in comparison to the periods before the pandemic, while 60% of the dispensed medicines were taken just in case needed. In addition, the availability of medicines decreased by 61%, and the dispensing of common medicines increased due to the belief in their prophylactic action. Several biochemical abnormalities and pathological consequences were recorded due to the irrational use of medicines, and the highest percentage (12%) was seen in hepatic and liver enzymatic dysfunction and 8% for the endocrine and hormonal abnormalities.

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that most of the dispensed medicines were not used on a therapeutic or scientific basis during the pandemic.

COVID-19 immunopathology: From acute diseases to chronic sequelae

The clinical manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mainly targets the lung as a primary affected organ, which is also a critical site of immune cell activation by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, recent reports also suggest the involvement of extrapulmonary tissues in COVID-19 pathology. The interplay of both innate and adaptive immune responses is key to COVID-19 management. As a result, a robust innate immune response provides the first line of defense, concomitantly, adaptive immunity neutralizes the infection and builds memory for long-term protection. However, dysregulated immunity, both innate and adaptive, can skew towards immunopathology both in acute and chronic cases. Here we have summarized some of the recent findings that provide critical insight into the immunopathology caused by SARS-CoV-2, in acute and post-acute cases. Finally, we further discuss some of the immunomodulatory drugs in preclinical and clinical trials for dampening the immunopathology caused by COVID-19.

Avascular necrosis of the epiphyses of bones in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection: Clinical observations and a narrative review of literature data

The SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic is a leading medical problem that is in the focus of attention of representatives of all medical specialties. In addition to fighting the COVID-19 infection itself, the task of preventing and treating a wide range of complications arising after the disease is becoming increasingly urgent. One of these complications is avascular necrosis (AN) of bone tissue – a severe pathology that leads to serious suffering, a decrease in the quality of life and disability of patients. For the period from 2020 to 2022 there are 9 reviews in the world literature devoted to the pathogenesis, clinical features and treatment possibilities of this complication. During the same period, 5 articles were published describing clinical observations of AN after suffering COVID-19.The purpose of this work is to demonstrate our own clinical observations, as well as to review the available literature data on the problem of AN after COVID-19 infection. Based on the analysis, it can be concluded that AN after SARS-CoV-2 infection most often develops in the femoral head (>50% of cases), occurs regardless of the severity of the disease and the cumulative dose of glucocorticoids used in the acute period of the disease. It seems advisable to perform an MRI of the hip joints at least once every 3 months for all patients who have had COVID-19 in severe and moderate form during the first year after convalescence.

Impact of systemic corticosteroids on hospital length of stay among patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome.

METHODS

We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team.

RESULTS

A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median = 3 [interquartile range = 0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p = 0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤ 4 days than > 4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤ 4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised > 4 days [p < 0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

Corticosteroids use for COVID-19: an overview of systematic reviews

PURPOSE

A reappraisal of the validity of the conclusions of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses related to corticosteroids use for the treatment of COVID-19.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An overview of SRs (umbrella review). The methodological quality of the SRs was assessed using tha AMSTAR-2 checklist; quality of the evidence was appraised following the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

35 SRs were included in this overview. Data were from 307 overlapping reports, based on 121 individual primary studies (25 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 96 non-RCTs. In critically ill patients the use of steroids significantly reduced mortality compared to standard of care in 80% of the SRs, more often with moderate/high level of certainty; however, in patients not requiring oxygen supplementation the use of steroids increased the overall mortality in 2/3 of the comparisons. Clinical progression of diseases (need for mechanical ventilation, or for intensive care admission) was more commonly observed among controls compared to steroids recipients (in 9 out of 14 comparisons; certainty of evidence from very-low to moderate). The occurrence of adverse events was similar among steroids recipients and controls. Other outcomes (i.e., viral clearance, length of hospital stay) or issue related to optimal dose and type of steroids were addressed in a minority of SRs, with a high level of uncertainty, so that no definitive conclusions can be drawn.

CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate certainty of evidence that corticosteroids reduce mortality and progression of disease in critically ill COVID-19 patients compared to standard of care, without increasing the occurrence of adverse events.

Effect of methylprednisolone therapy on hospital stay and viral clearance in patients with moderate COVID-19

Background

The benefits and harms of methylprednisolone treatment in patients with moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain controversial. In this study, we investigated the effect of methylprednisolone on mortality rate, viral clearance, and hospitalization stay in patients with moderate COVID-19.

Methods

This retrospective study included 4827 patients admitted to Wuhan Huoshenshan and Wuhan Guanggu hospitals from February to March 2020 diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia. The participants' epidemiological and demographic data, comorbidities, laboratory test results, treatments, outcomes, and vital clinical time points were extracted from electronic medical records. The primary outcome was in-hospital death; secondary outcomes were time from admission to viral clearance and hospital stay. Univariate and multivariate logistic or linear regression analysis were used to assess the roles of methylprednisolone in different outcomes. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to control for confounding factors.

Results

A total of 1320 patients were included in this study, of whom 100 received methylprednisolone. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 0.91% (12/1320); the 12 patients who died were all in the methylprednisolone group, though multivariate logistic regression analysis showed methylprednisolone treatment was not a risk factor for in-hospital death in moderate patients before or after adjustment for confounders by PSM. Methylprednisolone treatment was correlated with longer length from admission to viral clearance time and hospital stay before and after adjustment for confounders.

Conclusions

Methylprednisolone therapy was not associated with increased in-hospital mortality but with delayed viral clearance and extended hospital stay in moderate COVID-19 patients.

Glucocorticoids and COVID-19

Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates globally, representing the greatest health and economic challenge today. Several drugs are currently approved for the treatment of COVID-19. Among these, glucocorticoids (GCs) have received particular attention due to their anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive effects. In fact, GC are widely used in current clinical practice to treat inflammatory, allergic and autoimmune diseases. Major mechanisms of GC action include inhibition of innate and adaptive immune activity. In particular, an important role is played by the inhibition of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines, and the induction of proteins with anti-inflammatory activity. Overall, as indicated by various national and international regulatory agencies, GCs are recommended for the treatment of COVID-19 in patients requiring oxygen therapy, with or without mechanical ventilation. Regarding the use of GCs for the COVID-19 treatment of non-hospitalized patients at an early stage of the disease, many controversial studies have been reported and regulatory agencies have not recommended their use. The decision to start GC therapy should be based not only on the severity of COVID-19 disease, but also on careful considerations of the benefit/risk profile in individual patients, including monitoring of adverse events. In this review we summarize the effects of GCs on the major cellular and molecular components of the inflammatory/immune system, the benefits and the adverse common reactions in the treatment of inflammatory/autoimmune diseases, as well as in the management of COVID-19.

Mucormycosis an added burden to Covid-19 Patients: An in-depth systematic review

As of 25th July, 2022, global Disease burden of 575,430,244 confirmed cases and over 6,403,511 deaths have been attributed to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Co-infections/secondary infections continue to plague patients around the world as result of the co-morbidities like diabetes mellitus, biochemical changes caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) especially significant elevation in free iron levels, immune suppression caused by SARS-CoV-2, and indiscriminate use of systemic corticosteroids for the treatment of severe COVID-19 disease. In such circumstances, opportunistic fungal infections pose significant challenge for COVID-19 disease therapy in patients with other co-morbidities. Although COVID-19-associated Mucormycosis (CAM) has been widely recognized, currently extensive research is being conducted on mucormycosis. It has been widely agreed that patients undergoing corticosteroid therapy are highly susceptible for CAM, henceforth high index of screening and intensive care and management is need of an hour in order to have favorable outcomes in these patients. Diagnosis in such cases is often delayed and eventually the disease progresses quickly which poses added burden to clinician and increases patient load in critical care units of hospitals. A vast perusal of literature indicated that patients with diabetes mellitus and those with other co-morbidities might be highly vulnerable to develop mucormycosis. In the present work, the case series of three patients presented at Chest Disease Hospital Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir infected with CAM has been described with their epidemiological data in supplementary section. All these cases were found to be affected with co-morbidity of Diabetes Mellitus (DM) and were under corticosteroid therapy. Furthermore, given the significant death rate linked with mucormycosis and the growing understanding of the diseases significance, systematic review of the literature on CAM has been discussed and we have attempted to discuss emerging CAM and related aspects of the disease.

Comparative Effectiveness of Dexamethasone in Treatment of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients during the First Year of the Pandemic: The N3C Data Repository

Background

Dexamethasone, a widely available glucocorticoid, was approved for use in hospitalized COVID-19 patients early in the pandemic based on the RECOVERY trial; however, evidence is still needed to support its real-world effectiveness in patients with a wide range of comorbidities and in diverse care settings.

Objectives

To conduct a comparative effectiveness analysis of dexamethasone use with and without remdesivir in hospitalized COVID-19 patients using electronic health record data.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective real-world effectiveness analysis using the harmonized, highly granular electronic health record data of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) Data Enclave. Analysis was restricted to COVID-19 patients in an inpatient setting, prior to vaccine availability. Primary outcome was in-hospital death; secondary outcome was combined in-hospital death and severe outcome as defined by use of ECMO or mechanical ventilation during stay. Missing data were imputed with single imputation. Matching of dexamethasone-treated patients to non-dexamethasone-treated controls was accomplished using propensity score (PS) matching, stratified by remdesivir treatment and based on demographics, baseline laboratory values, and comorbidities. Treatment benefit was quantified using logistic regression. Further sensitivity analyses were performed using clinical adjusters in matched groups and in strata defined by quartiles of PS.

Results

Regression analysis revealed a statistically significant association between dexamethasone use and reduced risk of in-hospital mortality for those not receiving remdesivir (OR=0.77, 95% CI:0.62 to 0.95, p=0.017), and a borderline statistically significant risk for those receiving remdesivir (OR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.53 to 1.02, p=0.054). Treatment also showed secondary outcome benefit. In sensitivity analyses, treatment effect size generally remained similar with some heterogeneity of benefit across strata of PS.

Conclusions

We add evidence that dexamethasone provides benefit with respect to mortality and severe outcomes in a diverse, national hospitalized sample, prior to vaccine availability.

Charge-transfer chemistry of two corticosteroids used adjunctively to treat COVID-19. Part II: The CT reaction of hydrocortisone and dexamethasone donors with TCNQ and fluoranil acceptors in five organic solvents

Hydrocortisone (termed as D1) and dexamethasone (termed as D2) are corticosteroids currently used to treat COVID-19. COVID-19 is a disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Exploring additional chemical properties of drugs used in the treatment protocols for COVID-19 could help scientists alike improve these treatment protocols and potentially even the vaccines (i.e., Janssen, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Pfizer-BioNTech). In this work, the charge-transfer (CT) properties of these two corticosteroids (D1 and D2) with two universal acceptors: 7,8,8-tetracyanoquinodimethane (termed as TCNQ) and fluoranil (termed as TFQ) in five different solvents were investigated. The examined solvents were MeOH, EtOH, MeCN, CH₂Cl₂, and CHCl₃. The CT interactions formed stable corticosteroid CT complexes in all examined solvents. Several spectroscopic parameters were derived, and the oscillator strength (f) and transition dipole moment (μ_e.g.) values revealed that the interaction between the investigated corticosteroids with TCNQ acceptor is much stronger than their interaction with TFQ acceptor. The CT interactions were proposed to process via n → π* transition.

Association Between Maintenance Immunosuppressive Regimens and COVID-19 Mortality in Kidney Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Solid organ transplant recipients are at high risk for fatal forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a cohort study among kidney transplant (KT) recipients from the French Solid Organ Transplant COVID-19 Registry to investigate the association between maintenance immunosuppressive drugs and 60-d mortality.

METHODS

Data from all KT recipients with COVID-19 included in the French Solid Organ Transplant COVID-19 Registry between February 28, 2020, and December 30, 2020, were retrieved. We evaluated associations between immunosuppressive drugs and death within 60 d using logistic regression, with all baseline characteristics considered to influence outcome or immunosuppressive regimen. The Benjamini-Hochberg correction was used for controlling false positive rate; 40 multiple imputations were performed. Adjusted P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

There were 1451 KT recipients included. Median age was 58 y, and 66.4% were men. Most frequent comorbidities were hypertension (81.9%), diabetes (34.5%), and cardiovascular disease (29.5%). Median time since transplant was 71 mo. Maintenance immunosuppression regimens included calcineurin inhibitors (1295, 89.2%), antimetabolites (1205, 83%), corticosteroids (1094, 75.4%), mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (144, 9.9%), and belatacept (58, 4.0%). Among 1451 transplant recipients, 201 (13.9%) died within 60 d. Older age and higher baseline serum creatinine were associated with mortality (odds ratios, 1.09 [1.07-1.11] and 1.01 [1.005-1.009], P < 0.001). Corticosteroid-free regimens were associated with a significantly lower risk of death (odds ratio, 0.48 [0.31-0.76]; P = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Corticosteroid-free regimens were associated with a lower risk of death in KT recipients with COVID-19. Long-term exposure to corticosteroids impairs immune functions and may predispose solid organ transplant recipients to severe forms of COVID-19.

Comparative risk assessment of COVID‐19 associated mucormycosis and aspergillosis: A systematic review

COVID‐19 is not only limited to a defined array but also has expanded with several secondary infections. Two uncommon opportunistic fungal infections, COVID‐19 associated mucormycosis (CAM) and aspergillosis (CAA), have recently been highly acquainted by many worldwide cases. Two immune response deteriorating factors are considered to be responsible for immunosuppression: comorbidities and medication. Due to unlike infection sites and patterns, CAM and CAA‐associated factors deflect a few degrees of proximity, and the present study is for its assessment. The study evaluated 351 CAM cases and 191 CAA cases retrieved from 65 and 53 articles based on inclusion criteria, respectively. Most of the CAM reported from India and CAA were from four South‐European and West‐European neighbor countries. The mean ages of CAM and CAA were 52.72 ± 13.74 and 64.81 ± 11.14, correspondingly. Mortality of CAA (56.28%) was two times greater than CAM (26.02%). Nevertheless, the count of diabetes cases was very high in CAM compared to CAA. The main comorbidities of CAM were diabetes (nearly 80%) and hypertension (more than 38%). All noticeable complications were higher in CAA except diabetes, and these were diabetes (34.55%), hypertension (45.03%), and obesity (18.32%). Moreover, pre‐existing respiratory complications like asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are visible in CAA. The uses of steroids in CAM and CAA were nearly 70% and 66%, respectively. Almost one‐fourth of CAA cases were reported using immunosuppressant monoclonal antibodies, whereas only 7.69% were for CAM. The overall finding highlights diabetes, hypertension, and steroids as the risk factors for CAM, whereas obesity, chronic pulmonary disease, and immunosuppressants for CAA.

Outcomes of COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the Intermediate Respiratory Care Unit: Non-Invasive Respiratory Therapy in a Sequential Protocol

The intermediate respiratory care units (IRCUs) have a pivotal role managing escalation and de-escalation between the general wards and the intensive care units (ICUs). Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, the early detection of patients that could improve on non-invasive respiratory therapies (NRTs) in IRCUs without invasive approaches is crucial to ensure proper medical management and optimize limiting ICU resources. The aim of this study was to assess factors associated with survival, ICU admission and intubation likelihood in COVID-19 patients admitted to IRCUs. Observational retrospective study in consecutive patients admitted to the IRCU of a tertiary hospital from March 2020 to April 2021. Inclusion criteria: hypoxemic respiratory failure (SpO₂ ≤ 94% and/or respiratory rate ≥ 25 rpm with FiO₂ > 50% supplementary oxygen) due to acute COVID-19 infection. Demographic, comorbidities, clinical and analytical data, and medical and NRT data were collected at IRCU admission. Multivariate logistic regression models assessed factors associated with survival, ICU admission, and intubation. From 679 patients, 79 patients (12%) had an order to not do intubation. From the remaining 600 (88%), 81% survived, 41% needed ICU admission and 37% required intubation. In the IRCU, 51% required non-invasive ventilation (NIV group) and 49% did not (non-NIV group). Older age and lack of corticosteroid treatment were associated with higher mortality and intubation risk in the scheme, which could be more beneficial in severe forms. Initial NIV does not always mean worse outcomes.

In-hospital mortality in SARS-CoV-2 stratified by the use of corticosteroid

Objective

To investigate COVID-19 related mоrtаlity according to the use of corticosteroid therapy.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Two tertiary hospitals in Kuwait.

Participants

Overall, 962 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, were stratified according to whether they were treated with corticosteroids (dexamethasone or methylprednisolone). The mean age of the patients was 50.2 ± 15.9 years and 344/962 (35.9%) were female.

Main outcome measures

In-hospital mortality and cumulative all-cause mortality.

Results

Compared to non-corticosteroid therapy patients, corticosteroid therapy patients had a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, chronic lung disease, and chronic kidney disease; a longer hospital stay (median [IQR]: 17.0 [5.0–57.3] days vs 14.0 [2.0–50.2] days); and a higher in-hospital mortality (51/199 [25.6%] vs 36/763 [4.7%]). Logistic regression analysis showed a higher in-hospital mortality in the corticosteroid group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 4.57, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.64–8.02, p < 0.001). Cox proportional hazards regression showed that corticosteroid use was a significant predictor of mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.96, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

In-hospital mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 on corticosteroid therapy was 4.6 times higher than in those without corticosteroid therapy.

•

In-hospital mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 on corticosteroid was evaluated.

•

Risk of mortality was 4.6 times higher in those with corticosteroid therapy.

•

Corticosteroid therapy patients had a longer hospital stay.

The efficiency of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials

The objective of this study was to assess whether convalescent plasma therapy could offer survival advantages for patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). An electronic search of Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane library and MedRxiv was performed from January 1st, 2020 to April 1st, 2022. We included studies containing patients with COVID-19 and treated with CCP. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers and synthesized with a random-effect analysis model. The primary outcome was 28-d mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, ventilation-free days, 14-d mortality, improvements of symptoms, progression of diseases and requirements of mechanical ventilation. Safety outcomes included the incidence of all adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). The Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool 2.0 was used to assess the potential risk of bias in eligible studies. The heterogeneity of results was assessed by I^2 test and Q statistic test. The possibility of publication bias was assessed by conducting Begg and Egger test. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method were used for quality of evidence. This study had been registered on PROSPERO, CRD42021273608. 32 RCTs comprising 21478 patients with Covid-19 were included. Compared to the control group, COVID-19 patients receiving CCP were not associated with significantly reduced 28-d mortality (CCP 20.0% vs control 20.8%; risk ratio 0.94; 95% CI 0.87-1.02; p = 0.16; I² = 8%). For all secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between CCP group and control group. The incidence of AEs (26.9% vs 19.4%,; risk ratio 1.14; 95% CI 0.99-01.31; p = 0.06; I² = 38%) and SAEs (16.3% vs 13.5%; risk ratio 1.03; 95% CI 0.87-1.20; p = 0.76; I² = 42%) tended to be higher in the CCP group compared to the control group, while the differences did not reach statistical significance. In all, CCP therapy was not related to significantly improved 28-d mortality or symptoms recovery, and should not be viewed as a routine treatment for COVID-19 patients.

Trial registration number

CRD42021273608. Registration on February 28, 2022.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, Identifier CRD42022313265.

Efficacy and Safety of MSC Cell Therapies for Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

MSC (a.k.a. mesenchymal stem cell or medicinal signaling cell) cell therapies show promise in decreasing mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and suggest benefits in treatment of COVID-19-related ARDS. We performed a meta-analysis of published trials assessing the efficacy and adverse events (AE) rates of MSC cell therapy in individuals hospitalized for COVID-19. Systematic searches were performed in multiple databases through November 3, 2021. Reports in all languages, including randomized clinical trials (RCTs), non-randomized interventional trials, and uncontrolled trials, were included. Random effects model was used to pool outcomes from RCTs and non-randomized interventional trials. Outcome measures included all-cause mortality, serious adverse events (SAEs), AEs, pulmonary function, laboratory, and imaging findings. A total of 736 patients were identified from 34 studies, which included 5 RCTs (n = 235), 7 non-randomized interventional trials (n = 370), and 22 uncontrolled comparative trials (n = 131). Patients aged on average 59.4 years and 32.2% were women. When compared with the control group, MSC cell therapy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (RR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.35-0.85, I  2 = 0.0%), reduction in SAEs (IRR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.14-0.90, I  2 = 0.0%) and no significant difference in AE rate. A sub-group with pulmonary function studies suggested improvement in patients receiving MSC. These findings support the potential for MSC cell therapy to decrease all-cause mortality, reduce SAEs, and improve pulmonary function compared with conventional care. Large-scale double-blinded, well-powered RCTs should be conducted to further explore these results.

A comprehensive review of adverse events to drugs used in COVID-19 patients: Recent clinical evidence

BACKGROUND

Since the breakthrough of the pandemic, several drugs have been used to treat COVID-19 patients. This review aims to gather information on adverse events (AE) related to most drugs used in this context.

METHODS

We performed a literature search to find articles that contained information about AE in COVID-19 patients. We analysed and reviewed the most relevant studies in the Medline (via PubMed), Scopus and Web of Science. The most frequent AE identified were grouped in our qualitative analysis by System Organ Class (SOC), the highest level of the MedDRA medical terminology for each of the drugs studied.

RESULTS

The most frequent SOCs among the included drugs are investigations (n = 7 drugs); skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (n = 5 drugs); and nervous system disorders, infections and infestations, gastrointestinal disorders, hepatobiliary disorders, and metabolism and nutrition disorders (n = 4 drugs). Other SOCs also emerged, such as general disorders and administration site conditions, renal and urinary disorders, vascular disorders and cardiac disorders (n = 3 drugs). Less frequent SOC were eye disorders, respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders, musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders, and immune system disorders (n = 2 drugs). Psychiatric disorders, and injury, poisoning and procedural complications were also reported (n = 1 drug).

CONCLUSIONS

Some SOCs seem to be more frequent than others among the COVID-19 drugs included, although neither of the studies included reported causality analysis. For that purpose, further clinical studies with robust methodologies, as randomised controlled trials, should be designed and performed.

Charge-transfer chemistry of two corticosteroids used adjunctively to treat COVID-19. Part I: Complexation of hydrocortisone and dexamethasone donors with DDQ acceptor in five organic solvents

COVID-19 is the disease caused by a novel coronavirus (CoV) named the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (termed SARS coronavirus 2 or SARS-CoV-2). Since the first case reported in December 2019, infections caused by this novel virus have led to a continuous global pandemic that has placed an unprecedented burden on health, economic, and social systems worldwide. In response, multiple therapeutic options have been developed to stop this pandemic. One of these options is based on traditional corticosteroids, however, chemical modifications to enhance their efficacy remain largely unexplored. Obtaining additional insight into the chemical and physical properties of pharmacologically effective drugs used to combat COVID-19 will help physicians and researchers alike to improve current treatments and vaccines (i.e., Pfizer-BioNTech, AstraZeneca, Moderna, Janssen). Herein, we examined the charge-transfer properties of two corticosteroids used as adjunctive therapies in the treatment of COVID-19, hydrocortisone and dexamethasone, as donors with 2,3-dichloro-5,6-dicyano-p-benzoquinone as an acceptor in various solvents. We found that the examined donors reacted strongly with the acceptor in CH₂Cl₂ and CHCl₃ solvents to create stable compounds with novel clinical potential.

The roles of methylprednisolone treatment in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The roles of methylprednisolone in treatment of patients with COVID-19 remain unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone in treatment of COVID-19 patients. PubMed, Cochrane and Web of Science were searched for studies comparing methylprednisolone and no glucocorticoids treatment in patients with COVID-19. Statistical pooling was reported as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95 % confidence interval (CI). Thirty-three studies were eligible, including 5 randomized trials and 28 observational studies. Meta-analysis showed that compared with no glucocorticoids, methylprednisolone in treatment of COVID-19 patients was associated with reduced short-term mortality (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.60-0.89), less need for ICU admission (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.66-0.91) and mechanical ventilation (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.57-0.84), increased 28-day ventilator-free days (MD 2.81; 95% CI 2.64-2.97), without increasing risk of secondary infections (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.82-1.32), but could prolong duration of viral shedding (MD 1.03; 95% CI 0.25-1.82). Subgroup analyses revealed that low-dose (≤2mg/kg/day) methylprednisolone treatment for ≤ 7 days in severe COVID-19 patients was associated with relatively better clinical outcomes, without increasing duration of viral shedding. Compared with no glucocorticoids, methylprednisolone treatment in COVID-19 patients is associated with reduced short-term mortality and better clinical outcomes, without increasing secondary infections, but could slightly prolong duration of viral shedding. Patients with severe COVID-19 are more likely to benefit from short-term low-dose methylprednisolone treatment (1-2 mg/kg/day for ≤ 7 days).

Glucocorticoid therapy in respiratory illness: bench to bedside

Each year, hundreds of millions of individuals are affected by respiratory disease leading to approximately 4 million deaths. Most respiratory pathologies involve substantially dysregulated immune processes that either fail to resolve the underlying process or actively exacerbate the disease. Therefore, clinicians have long considered immune-modulating corticosteroids (CSs), particularly glucocorticoids (GCs), as a critical tool for management of a wide spectrum of respiratory conditions. However, the complex interplay between effectiveness, risks and side effects can lead to different results, depending on the disease in consideration. In this comprehensive review, we present a summary of the bench and the bedside evidence regarding GC treatment in a spectrum of respiratory illnesses. We first describe here the experimental evidence of GC effects in the distal airways and/or parenchyma, both in vitro and in disease-specific animal studies, then we evaluate the recent clinical evidence regarding GC treatment in over 20 respiratory pathologies. Overall, CS remain a critical tool in the management of respiratory illness, but their benefits are dependent on the underlying pathology and should be weighed against patient-specific risks.

Major candidate variables to guide personalised treatment with steroids in critically ill patients with COVID-19: CIBERESUCICOVID study

Purpose

Although there is evidence supporting the benefits of corticosteroids in patients affected with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), there is little information related to their potential benefits or harm in some subgroups of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with COVID-19. We aim to investigate to find candidate variables to guide personalized treatment with steroids in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Multicentre, observational cohort study including consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to 55 Spanish ICUs. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Subsequent analyses in clinically relevant subgroups by age, ICU baseline illness severity, organ damage, laboratory findings and mechanical ventilation were performed. High doses of corticosteroids (≥ 12 mg/day equivalent dexamethasone dose), early administration of corticosteroid treatment (< 7 days since symptom onset) and long term of corticosteroids (≥ 10 days) were also investigated.

Results

Between February 2020 and October 2021, 4226 patients were included. Of these, 3592 (85%) patients had received systemic corticosteroids during hospitalisation. In the propensity-adjusted multivariable analysis, the use of corticosteroids was protective for 90-day mortality in the overall population (HR 0.77 [0.65–0.92], p = 0.003) and in-hospital mortality (SHR 0.70 [0.58–0.84], p < 0.001). Significant effect modification was found after adjustment for covariates using propensity score for age (p = 0.001 interaction term), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (p = 0.014 interaction term), and mechanical ventilation (p = 0.001 interaction term). We observed a beneficial effect of corticosteroids on 90-day mortality in various patient subgroups, including those patients aged ≥ 60 years; those with higher baseline severity; and those receiving invasive mechanical ventilation at ICU admission. Early administration was associated with a higher risk of 90-day mortality in the overall population (HR 1.32 [1.14–1.53], p < 0.001). Long-term use was associated with a lower risk of 90-day mortality in the overall population (HR 0.71 [0.61–0.82], p < 0.001). No effect was found regarding the dosage of corticosteroids. Moreover, the use of corticosteroids was associated with an increased risk of nosocomial bacterial pneumonia and hyperglycaemia.

Conclusion

Corticosteroid in ICU-admitted patients with COVID-19 may be administered based on age, severity, baseline inflammation, and invasive mechanical ventilation. Early administration since symptom onset may prove harmful.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-022-06726-w.

Association between dexamethasone treatment and the host response in COVID-19 patients admitted to the general ward

Dexamethasone improves clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients requiring supplementary oxygen. We investigated possible mechanisms of action by comparing sixteen plasma host response biomarkers in general ward patients before and after implementation of dexamethasone as standard of care. 48 patients without and 126 patients with dexamethasone treatment were sampled within 48 h of admission. Endothelial cell and coagulation activation biomarkers were comparable. Dexamethasone treatment was associated with lower plasma interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-1 receptor antagonist levels, whilst other inflammation parameters were not affected. These data argue against modification of vascular-procoagulant responses as an early mechanism of action of dexamethasone in COVID-19.

Post-COVID Syndrome: The Research Progress in the Treatment of Pulmonary sequelae after COVID-19 Infection

Post-COVID syndrome or long COVID is defined as the persistence of symptoms after confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, the pathogen responsible for coronavirus disease. The content herein presented reviews the reported long-term consequences and aftereffects of COVID-19 infection and the potential strategies to adopt for their management. Recent studies have shown that severe forms of COVID-19 can progress into acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a predisposing factor of pulmonary fibrosis that can irreversibly compromise respiratory function. Considering that the most serious complications are observed in the airways, the inhalation delivery of drugs directly to the lungs should be preferred, since it allows to lower the dose and systemic side effects. Although further studies are needed to optimize these techniques, recent studies have also shown the importance of in vitro models to recreate the SARS-CoV-2 infection and study its sequelae. The information reported suggests the necessity to develop new inhalation therapies in order to improve the quality of life of patients who suffer from this condition.

Effects of different doses of methylprednisolone on clinical outcomes in patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

The specific use of methylprednisolone in severe community-acquired pneumonia (SCAP) has not yet formed a consensus. It is not clear whether the clinical efficacy of methylprednisolone in SCAP is dose-dependent, and how to balance the best efficacy with the least complications. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different doses of methylprednisolone in the adjuvant treatment for patients with SCAP.

Methods/design

This is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different doses of methylprednisolone in the adjuvant treatment for patients with SCAP. Patients with diagnosed SCAP are randomized to the following four groups at a 1:1:1:1 ratio: group 1 (control group)—standard ICU patient care+100ml of normal saline once a day for 5 days; group 2—standard ICU patient care+40mg of methylprednisolone (dissolved in normal saline with a final volume of 100ml) once a day for 5 days; group 3—standard ICU patient care+80mg of methylprednisolone (dissolved in normal saline with a final volume of 100ml) once a day for 5 days; and group 4—standard ICU patient care+120mg of methylprednisolone (dissolved in normal saline with a final volume of 100ml) once a day for 5 days. The primary outcome is PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio at day 5 following randomization. The secondary outcomes are 28-day mortality, ventilator-free days at 28 days, mechanical ventilation duration at 28 days, endotracheal intubation rate, time for temperature recovery, duration of vasopressors use, serum CRP and interleukin-6 level at day 5 following randomization, hospital stay, frequency of nosocomial infections, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, and hyperglycemia.

Discussion

The results of our study may find the optimal dose of glucocorticoid in the adjuvant treatment of SCAP and provide evidence-based proof for clinicians to treat patients with SCAP. Since coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) also belongs to community-acquired pneumonia, perhaps the results of our study will help to determine the appropriate dose of methylprednisolone in COVID-19 treatment.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100045056. Registered on 4 April 2021.

Effectiveness of Systemic Corticosteroids Therapy for Nonsevere Patients With COVID-19: A Multicenter, Retrospective, Longitudinal Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

Corticosteroids were clinically used in the treatment of nonsevere patients with COVID-19, but the efficacy of such treatment lacked sufficient clinical evidence, and the impact of dose had never been studied. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of systemic corticosteroid use (SCU) in nonsevere patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study in Hubei Province. A total of 1726 patients admitted with nonsevere type COVID-19 were included. Mixed-effect Cox model, mixed-effect Cox model with time-varying exposure, multiple linear regression, and propensity score analysis (inverse probability of treatment weight and propensity score matching) were used to explore the association between SCU and progression into severe type, all-cause mortality, and length of stay.

RESULTS

During the follow-up of 30 days, 29.8% of nonsevere patients with COVID-19 received treatment with systemic corticosteroids. The use of systemic corticosteroids was associated with higher probability of developing severe type (adjusted hazard ratio 1.81; 95% confidence interval 1.47-2.21), all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.92; 95% confidence interval 1.39-6.15) in time-varying Cox analysis, and prolonged hospitalization (β 4.14; P < .001) in multiple linear regression. Analysis with 2 propensity score cohorts displayed similar results. Besides, increased corticosteroid dose was significantly associated with elevated probability of developing severe type (P < .001) and prolonged hospitalization (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Corticosteroid treatment against nonsevere patients with COVID-19 was significantly associated with worse clinical outcomes. The higher dose was significantly associated with elevated risk of poor disease progression. We recommend that SCU should be avoided unless necessary among nonsevere patients with COVID-19.

High Dose versus Low Dose Corticosteroids in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

The clinical efficacy of corticosteroids remains unclear. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the use of high-dose versus low- dose corticosteroids on the mortality rate of COVID-19 patients.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Setting

Electronic search for randomized controlled trials and observational studies (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL).

Participants

Hospitalized adults ≥ 18 years old who were SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive.

Interventions

High-dose and low-dose corticosteroids.

Measurements and Main Results

A total of twelve studies (n=2759 patients) were included in this review. The pooled analysis demonstrated no significant difference in mortality rate between the high-dose and low-dose corticosteroids groups (n=2632; OR: 1.07 [95%CI 0.67, 1.72], p=0.77, I²=76%, trial sequential analysis=inconclusive). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate (n=1544; OR: 0.77[95%CI 0.43, 1.37], p=0.37, I²= 72%), duration of hospital stay (n=1615; MD: 0.53[95%CI -1.36, 2.41], p=0.58, I²=87%), respiratory support (n=1694; OR: 1.51[95%CI 0.77, 2.96], p=0.23, I²=84%), duration of mechanical ventilation (n=419; MD: -1.44[95%CI -4.27, 1.40], p=0.32, I²=93%), incidence of hyperglycemia (n=516, OR: 0.91[95%CI 0.58, 1.43], p=0.68, I²=0%) and infection rate (n=1485, OR: 0.86[95%CI 0.64, 1.16], p=0.33, I²=29%).

Conclusion

The meta-analysis demonstrated high-dose corticosteroids did not reduce mortality rate. However, high-dose corticosteroids did not pose higher risk of hyperglycemia and infection rate for COVID-19 patients. Due to the inconclusive trial sequential analysis, substantial heterogeneity and low level of evidence, future large-scale randomized clinical trials are warranted to improve the certainty of evidence for the use of high-dose compared to low-dose corticosteroids in COVID-19 patients.

Usage of compromised lung volume in monitoring steroid therapy on severe COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) analysis may serve as a tool for assessing the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and for monitoring its progress. The present study aimed to assess the association between steroid therapy and quantitative CT parameters in a longitudinal cohort with COVID-19.

METHODS

Between February 7 and February 17, 2020, 72 patients with severe COVID-19 were retrospectively enrolled. All 300 chest CT scans from these patients were collected and classified into five stages according to the interval between hospital admission and follow-up CT scans: Stage 1 (at admission); Stage 2 (3-7 days); Stage 3 (8-14 days); Stage 4 (15-21 days); and Stage 5 (22-31 days). QCT was performed using a threshold-based quantitative analysis to segment the lung according to different Hounsfield unit (HU) intervals. The primary outcomes were changes in percentage of compromised lung volume (%CL, - 500 to 100 HU) at different stages. Multivariate Generalized Estimating Equations were performed after adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of 72 patients, 31 patients (43.1%) received steroid therapy. Steroid therapy was associated with a decrease in %CL (- 3.27% [95% CI, - 5.86 to - 0.68, P = 0.01]) after adjusting for duration and baseline %CL. Associations between steroid therapy and changes in %CL varied between different stages or baseline %CL (all interactions, P < 0.01). Steroid therapy was associated with decrease in %CL after stage 3 (all P < 0.05), but not at stage 2. Similarly, steroid therapy was associated with a more significant decrease in %CL in the high CL group (P < 0.05), but not in the low CL group.

CONCLUSIONS

Steroid administration was independently associated with a decrease in %CL, with interaction by duration or disease severity in a longitudinal cohort. The quantitative CT parameters, particularly compromised lung volume, may provide a useful tool to monitor COVID-19 progression during the treatment process. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04953247. Registered July 7, 2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04953247.

Usage of compromised lung volume in monitoring steroid therapy on severe COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) analysis may serve as a tool for assessing the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and for monitoring its progress. The present study aimed to assess the association between steroid therapy and quantitative CT parameters in a longitudinal cohort with COVID-19.

METHODS

Between February 7 and February 17, 2020, 72 patients with severe COVID-19 were retrospectively enrolled. All 300 chest CT scans from these patients were collected and classified into five stages according to the interval between hospital admission and follow-up CT scans: Stage 1 (at admission); Stage 2 (3-7 days); Stage 3 (8-14 days); Stage 4 (15-21 days); and Stage 5 (22-31 days). QCT was performed using a threshold-based quantitative analysis to segment the lung according to different Hounsfield unit (HU) intervals. The primary outcomes were changes in percentage of compromised lung volume (%CL, - 500 to 100 HU) at different stages. Multivariate Generalized Estimating Equations were performed after adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of 72 patients, 31 patients (43.1%) received steroid therapy. Steroid therapy was associated with a decrease in %CL (- 3.27% [95% CI, - 5.86 to - 0.68, P = 0.01]) after adjusting for duration and baseline %CL. Associations between steroid therapy and changes in %CL varied between different stages or baseline %CL (all interactions, P < 0.01). Steroid therapy was associated with decrease in %CL after stage 3 (all P < 0.05), but not at stage 2. Similarly, steroid therapy was associated with a more significant decrease in %CL in the high CL group (P < 0.05), but not in the low CL group.

CONCLUSIONS

Steroid administration was independently associated with a decrease in %CL, with interaction by duration or disease severity in a longitudinal cohort. The quantitative CT parameters, particularly compromised lung volume, may provide a useful tool to monitor COVID-19 progression during the treatment process. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04953247. Registered July 7, 2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04953247.

Post-COVID-19 HSV encephalitis: a review

BACKGROUND

Herpes simplex virus encephalitis (HSVE) is one of the most common infectious causes of sporadic encephalitis. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been associated with immune dysregulation of the host that might increase the risk of infections like HSVE following SARS-CoV-2 infection. There is paucity of literature on post COVID-19 HSVE. This study was conducted with the aim of analyzing the clinical presentation, brain imaging, and outcome of patients presenting with HSVE within 6 weeks of COVID-19 and providing a comprehensive review on the possible mechanisms of post-COVID-19 HSVE.

METHODS

This observational study included patients who had laboratory-confirmed HSVE (type 1 or type 2) and a history of COVID-19 within the previous 6 weeks. Patients were followed up for 3 months.

RESULTS

Eight patients were included and all of them had type 1 HSVE. The mean latency of onset of neurological symptoms from being diagnosed with COVID-19 is 23.87 days and a majority of the patients have received injectable steroids with a mean duration of 6.5 days. Behavioral abnormality was the commonest neurological presentation and typical brain imaging involved T2 FLAIR hyperintensities of the medial temporal lobes. All patients received intravenous acyclovir 10 mg/kg every eight hourly for atleast 14 days. One patient with concomitant rhinocerebral mucormycosis succumbed while the majority had a complete recovery.

CONCLUSION

Possible immune dysregulation in COVID-19 may increase the susceptibility of HSVE in patients with a history of recent SARS-CoV-2 infection. The clinical manifestations and laboratory findings of HSVE in such patients are similar to typical HSVE.