Subcutaneous administration of interferon beta-1a for COVID-19: A non-controlled prospective trial

Twenty Years of Subcutaneous Interferon-Beta-1a for Multiple Sclerosis: Contemporary Perspectives

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, progressive, inflammatory disorder of the central nervous system. Relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), the most common form of the disease, is characterized by transient neurological dysfunction with concurrent accumulation of disability. Over the past three decades, disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) capable of reducing the frequency of relapses and slowing disability worsening have been studied and approved for use in patients with RRMS. The first DMTs were interferon-betas (IFN-βs), which were approved in the 1990s. Among them was IFN-β-1a for subcutaneous (sc) injection (Rebif®), which was approved for the treatment of MS in Europe and Canada in 1998 and in the USA in 2002. Twenty years of clinical data and experience have supported the efficacy and safety of IFN-β-1a sc in the treatment of RRMS, including pivotal trials, real-world data, and extension studies lasting up to 15 years past initial treatment. Today, IFN-β-1a sc remains an important therapeutic option in clinical use, especially around pregnancy planning and lactation, and may also be considered for aging patients, in which MS activity declines and long-term immunosuppression associated with some alternative therapies is a concern. In addition, IFN-β-1a sc is used as a comparator in many clinical studies and provides a framework for research into the mechanisms by which MS begins and progresses.

Reconsideration of interferon treatment for viral diseases: Lessons from SARS, MERS, and COVID-19

Periodic pandemics of coronavirus (CoV)-related pneumonia have been a major challenging issue since the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2002 and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) in 2012. The ongoing pandemic of CoV disease (COVID-19) poses a substantial threat to public health. As for the treatment options, only limited antiviral agents have been approved hitherto, and clinicians mainly focus on currently available drugs including the conventional antiviral interferons (IFNs). In clinical practice, IFNs, when used either alone or in combination with ribavirin and/or lopinavir/ritonavir, have shown promising outcomes, to some extent, in SARS-CoV or MERS-CoV treatment. Although the efficacy and safety of IFNs in COVID-19 treatment remain unclear, their possible use merits further evaluation. We present a review that summarizes current evidence of IFN treatment for COVID-19 and elaborates on other challenges in terms of the timing of IFN treatment initiation, treatment duration, and IFN type to be used. The review findings suggested that IFN acts by directly inhibiting viral replication and activating immune cell subsets. However, there is a lack of well-designed and controlled clinical trials providing firm evidence for the efficacy or safety of IFN therapy for CoVs. Additionally, critically ill patients with multiple immunosuppression-associated comorbidities may not benefit from IFN therapy, necessitating screening of those patients who would most benefit from IFN treatment.

Prospects of Novel and Repurposed Immunomodulatory Drugs against Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Associated with COVID-19 Disease

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is intricately linked with SARS-CoV-2-associated disease severity and mortality, especially in patients with co-morbidities. Lung tissue injury caused as a consequence of ARDS leads to fluid build-up in the alveolar sacs, which in turn affects oxygen supply from the capillaries. ARDS is a result of a hyperinflammatory, non-specific local immune response (cytokine storm), which is aggravated as the virus evades and meddles with protective anti-viral innate immune responses. Treatment and management of ARDS remain a major challenge, first, because the condition develops as the virus keeps replicating and, therefore, immunomodulatory drugs are required to be used with caution. Second, the hyperinflammatory responses observed during ARDS are quite heterogeneous and dependent on the stage of the disease and the clinical history of the patients. In this review, we present different anti-rheumatic drugs, natural compounds, monoclonal antibodies, and RNA therapeutics and discuss their application in the management of ARDS. We also discuss on the suitability of each of these drug classes at different stages of the disease. In the last section, we discuss the potential applications of advanced computational approaches in identifying reliable drug targets and in screening out credible lead compounds against ARDS.

An overview on the treatments and prevention against COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to plague the world. While COVID-19 is asymptomatic in most individuals, it can cause symptoms like pneumonia, ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome), and death in others. Although humans are currently being vaccinated with several COVID-19 candidate vaccines in many countries, however, the world still is relying on hygiene measures, social distancing, and approved drugs.

RESULT

There are many potential therapeutic agents to pharmacologically fight COVID-19: antiviral molecules, recombinant soluble angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), monoclonal antibodies, vaccines, corticosteroids, interferon therapies, and herbal agents. By an understanding of the SARS-CoV-2 structure and its infection mechanisms, several vaccine candidates are under development and some are currently in various phases of clinical trials.

CONCLUSION

This review describes potential therapeutic agents, including antiviral agents, biologic agents, anti-inflammatory agents, and herbal agents in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. In addition to reviewing the vaccine candidates that entered phases 4, 3, and 2/3 clinical trials, this review also discusses the various platforms that are used to develop the vaccine COVID-19.

Safety and Efficacy of Interferon β-1b in the Treatment of Severe COVID-19 Patients: An Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: About a year after the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the results of the studies conducted to investigate the effectiveness of interferon (INF) compounds in this disease were contradictory. Objectives: This study was carried out to examine the safety and efficacy of a treatment protocol containing INF-β-1b, hydroxychloroquine, and Kaletra (lopinavir/ritonavir) in patients with severe COVID-19. Methods: In this open-label, randomized controlled trial, severe cases of COVID-19 were included. Patients were eligible if they had epidemiological and radiological evidence compatible with COVID-19 or a positive polymerase chain reaction result and their disease was severe. They were randomly allocated into a control group that received the standard regimen (hydroxychloroquine and Kaletra) and an intervention group that received INF-β-1b treatment and the standard treatment regimen. Then, the two groups were compared in terms of in-hospital mortality, intubation, length of hospital stay, oxygen saturation, and lactate dehydrogenase before and after the intervention. Results: A total of 91 cases of severe COVID-19 were enrolled for analysis [intervention (n = 47) and control (n = 44)]. The length of hospital stay in the intervention group was significantly longer than in the control group (13.21 ± 6.88 vs. 10.52 ± 5.77 days; P = 0.047). The mortality rate did not significantly differ between the intervention and control groups (19.15% and 13.64%, respectively; P = 0.509). The intubation rate did not significantly differ between the intervention and control groups (12.76% and 11.36%, respectively; P = 0.838). Conclusions: The use of INF-β-1b-containing treatment regimens does not reduce mortality and intubation rates among patients with severe COVID-19. Furthermore, it might even increase the severity of the disease and the length of hospital stay for some patients; therefore, it is not recommended to use INF-β-1b in severe cases of COVID-19.

Uncovering the information immunology journals transmitted for COVID-19: A bibliometric and visualization analysis

BACKGROUND

Since the global epidemic of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a large number of immunological studies related to COVID-19 have been published in various immunology journals. However, the results from these studies were discrete, and no study summarized the important immunological information about COVID-19 released by these immunology journals. This study aimed to comprehensively summarize the knowledge structure and research hotspots of COVID-19 published in major immunology journals through bibliometrics.

METHODS

Publications on COVID-19 in major immunology journals were obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection. CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and R-bibliometrix were comprehensively used for bibliometric and visual analysis.

RESULTS

1,331 and 5,000 publications of 10 journals with high impact factors and 10 journals with the most papers were included, respectively. The USA, China, England, and Italy made the most significant contributions to these papers. University College London, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Harvard Medical School, University California San Diego, and University of Pennsylvania played a central role in international cooperation in the immunology research field of COVID-19. Yuen Kwok Yung was the most important author in terms of the number of publications and citations, and the H-index. CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES and FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY were the most essential immunology journals. These immunology journals mostly focused on the following topics: "Delta/Omicron variants", "cytokine storm", "neutralization/neutralizing antibody", "T cell", "BNT162b2", "mRNA vaccine", "vaccine effectiveness/safety", and "long COVID".

CONCLUSION

This study systematically uncovered a holistic picture of the current research on COVID-19 published in major immunology journals from the perspective of bibliometrics, which will provide a reference for future research in this field.

Targeted therapy in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Implication from cell and gene therapy to immunotherapy and vaccine

Severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly pathogenic and transmissible virus. Infection caused by SARS-CoV-2 known as Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can be severe, especially among high risk populations affected of underlying medical conditions. COVID-19 is characterized by the severe acute respiratory syndrome, a hyper inflammatory syndrome, vascular injury, microangiopathy and thrombosis. Antiviral drugs and immune modulating methods has been evaluated. So far, a particular therapeutic option has not been approved for COVID-19 and a variety of treatments have been studied for COVID-19 including, current treatment such as oxygen therapy, corticosteroids, antiviral agents until targeted therapy and vaccines which are diverse in each patient and have various outcomes. According to the findings of different in vitro and in vivo studies, some novel approach such as gene editing, cell based therapy, and immunotherapy may have significant potential in the treatment of COVID-19. Based on these findings, this paper aims to review the different strategies of treatment against COVID-19 and provide a summary from traditional and newer methods in curing COVID-19.

Impact of IFN‐β1a in treatment of a COVID‐19 patient with beta thalassemia and diabetes mellitus: A case report

Patients with chronic diseases are severely affected by acute coronavirus syndrome. In this regard, patients with beta thalassemia intermedia and diabetes mellitus (DM) are also at high risk for coronavirus‐induced respiratory failure. The present study aimed to report a case with COVID‐19 with a history of chronic diseases, beta thalassemia intermedia, and DM. A 25‐year‐old man visited with complaints of severe shortness of breath, fever, cough without sputum, and tachypnea and admitted to the Intensive Care Unit. The patient had a history of DM, beta thalassemia intermedia, and pervious history of the splenectomy. In peripheral complete blood count (CBC diff), the number of white blood cell count was 41,100 of which 38.6% were lymphocytes. We measured the normal platelet count, hemoglobin level (9.4), and red blood cell count (3.56). ESR was 97, CRP = pos+++ and PCR was positive. The high‐resolution lung CT indicated ground glass opacities in peripheral areas. The patient underwent 13 days of oxygen therapy with reservoir bag‐mask, non‐invasive ventilation, nasal oxygen, and pharmacological treatment with IFN‐β1a and meropenem, and finally discharged with an improvement of the clinical condition. Timely initiation of treatment is very important and significant for patients with beta thalassemia intermedia with COVID‐19, especially despite the underlying disease of DM. According to the present report, the use of IFN‐β1a was effective as a treatment option for COVID‐19.

Bridging Therapies With Injectable Immunomodulatory Drugs in the Management of Multiple Sclerosis: A Delphi Survey of an Italian Expert Panel of Neurologists

Background

In multiple sclerosis (MS), bridging therapies are usually administered when switching from one therapy to another. Such treatments generally consist of injectable immunomodulatory drugs (interferon or glatiramer acetate), whose efficacy, safety, and tolerability data are consolidated for use even in fragile patients. We performed a nationwide survey to gather expert opinions regarding the most appropriate use of bridging therapies in MS.

Methods

An independent steering committee of Italian neurologists with expertise in MS treatment identified critical issues in the use of bridging therapies and formulated a questionnaire. This questionnaire was used to conduct a Delphi web survey, involving a panel of Italian neurologists with experience in MS treatment. Their anonymous opinions were collected in three sequential rounds. Consensus was defined as an interquartile range (IQR) ≤2.

Results

Responses were obtained from 38 experts (100%) in all three rounds. Injectable immunomodulatory drugs were considered first-line therapy in patients with mild-to-moderate disease activity and in women planning to become pregnant. In addition, the experts were confident about prescribing these drugs in patients at risk of cancer recurrence, while the panel agreed to discontinue any treatments in patients with uncontrolled cardiovascular or metabolic disorders. Moreover, bridging therapy with injectable immunomodulatory drugs was considered appropriate in order to protect the patient from disease reactivation when a prolonged washout was needed and also while waiting for the completion of the immunization schedule.

Conclusion

The results of this nationwide survey confirm that, among Italian neurologists, there was wide agreement on the use of bridging therapies with injectable immunomodulatory drugs in several conditions in order to minimize the risk of disease reactivation when a prolonged washout was required or when the immunization schedule still needed to be completed in patients planning to become pregnant and in patients at risk of cancer recurrence.

Immune-based therapeutic approaches in COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), a member of the Coronaviridae family. On March 11, 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) has named the newly emerged rapidly-spreading epidemic as a pandemic. Besides the risk-reduction measures such as physical and social distancing and vaccination, a wide range of treatment modalities have been developed; aiming to fight the disease. The immune system is known as a double-edged sword in COVID-19 pathogenesis, with respect to its role in eliminating the pathogen and in inducing complications such as cytokine storm syndrome. Hence, immune-based therapeutic approaches have become an interesting field of COVID-19 research, including corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), interferon therapy, and more COVID-19-specific approaches such as anti-SARS-CoV-2-monoclonal antibodies. Herein, we did a comprehensive review on immune-based therapeutic approaches for COVID-19. DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT: Not applicable.

Tryptanthrin attenuates TLR3-mediated STAT1 activation in THP-1 cells

Upon viral infection, dysregulated immune responses are associated with the disease exacerbation and poor prognosis. The Janus kinase/signal transducers and activators of transcription (JAK/STAT) pathway are essential for the innate immune responses against invading viruses as well as for sustained activation of macrophages. Tryptanthrin, a natural alkaloid, exhibits various bioactivities, including anti-microbial and anti-inflammatory effects. The aim of this study was to elucidate the effects of tryptanthrin on toll-like receptor 3 (TLR3)–mediated STAT1 activation in macrophages in vitro. Using phorbol myristate acetate (PMA)–differentiated THP-1 cells, we analyzed the protein level of phosphorylated-STAT1 (p-STAT1) upon stimulation with polyinosinic-polycytidylic acid (poly IC), a well-known TLR3 ligand, with and without tryptanthrin. We found that tryptanthrin decreased the protein level of p-STAT1 in a concentration-dependent manner after poly IC stimulation. On the other hand, tryptanthrin did not affect the levels of p-STAT1 upon stimulation with lipopolysaccharide from Escherichia coli. Consistently, tryptanthrin suppressed poly IC–induced mRNA expression of interferon (IFN)–stimulated genes which are regulated by STAT1. Moreover, tryptanthrin decreased the protein level of phosphorylated-IFN regulatory factor 3 and the subsequent IFN-β mRNA induction after poly IC stimulation. Tryptanthrin is a promising therapeutic agent for the aberrant activation of macrophages caused by viral infection.

Safety of Short-Term Treatments with Oral Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine in Patients with and without COVID-19: A Systematic Review

Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have recently become the focus of global attention as possible treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The current systematic review aims to assess their safety in short treatments (≤14 days), whether used alone or in combination with other drugs. Following the PRISMA and SWiM recommendations, a search was conducted using four health databases for all relevant English-, Chinese-, and Spanish-language studies from inception through 30 July 2021. Patients treated for any condition and with any comparator were included. The outcomes of interest were early drug adverse effects and their frequency. A total of 254 articles met the inclusion criteria, including case and case-control reports as well as cross-sectional, cohort, and randomised studies. The results were summarised either qualitatively in table or narrative form or, when possible (99 studies), quantitatively in terms of adverse event frequencies. Quality evaluation was conducted using the CARE, STROBE, and JADAD tools. This systematic review showed that safety depended on drug indication. In COVID-19 patients, cardiac adverse effects, such as corrected QT interval prolongation, were relatively frequent (0–27.3% and up to 33% if combined with azithromycin), though the risk of torsade de pointes was low. Compared to non-COVID-19 patients, COVID-19 patients experienced a higher frequency of cardiac adverse effects regardless of the regimen used. Dermatological adverse effects affected 0–10% of patients with autoimmune diseases and COVID-19. A broad spectrum of neuropsychiatric adverse effects affected patients treated with CQ for malaria with variable frequencies and some cases were reported in COVID-19 patients. Gastrointestinal adverse effects occurred regardless of drug indication affecting 0–50% of patients. In conclusion, CQ and HCQ are two safe drugs widely used in the treatment of malaria and autoimmune diseases. However, recent findings on their cardiac and neuropsychiatric adverse effects should be considered if these drugs were to be proposed as antivirals again.

National Research Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (NRITLD) Protocol for the Treatment of Patients with COVID-19

: More than a year after the onset of the coronavirus disease pandemic in 2019, the disease remains a major global health issue. During this time, health organizations worldwide have tried to provide integrated treatment guidelines to control coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at different levels. However, due to the novel nature of the disease and the emergence of new variants, medical teams' updating medical information and drug prescribing guidelines should be given special attention. This version is an updated instruction of the National Research Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (NRITLD) in collaboration with a group of specialists from Masih Daneshvari Hospital in Tehran, Iran, which is provided to update the information of caring clinicians for the treatment and care of COVID-19 hospitalized patients.

Therapeutic role of immunomodulators during the COVID-19 pandemic- a narrative review

The emergency state caused by COVID-19 saw the use of immunomodulators despite the absence of robust research. To date, the results of relatively few randomized controlled trials have been published, and methodological approaches are riddled with bias and heterogeneity. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, convalescent plasma and the JAK inhibitor baricitinib have gained Emergency Use Authorizations and tentative recommendations for their use in clinical practice alone or in combination with other therapies. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are predominating the management of non-hospitalized patients, while the inpatient setting is seeing the use of convalescent plasma, baricitinib, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, sarilumab, and corticosteroids, as applicable. Available clinical data also suggest the potential clinical benefit of the early administration of blood-derived products (e.g. convalescent plasma, non-SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobins) and the blockade of factors implicated in the hyperinflammatory state of severe COVID-19 (Interleukin 1 and 6; Janus Kinase). Immune therapies seem to have a protective effect and using immunomodulators alone or in combination with viral replication inhibitors and other treatment modalities might prevent progression into severe COVID-19 disease, cytokine storm and death. Future trials should address existing gaps and reshape the landscape of COVID-19 management.

Exploiting natural antiviral immunity for the control of pandemics: Lessons from Covid-19

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), triggered by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and the disruptive global consequences in terms of mortality and social and economic crises, have taught lessons that may help define strategies to better face future pandemics. Innate and intrinsic immunity form the front-line natural antiviral defense. They involve both tissue-resident and circulating cells, which can produce anti-viral molecules shortly after viral infection. Prototypes of these factors are type I interferons (IFN), antiviral cytokines with a long record of clinical use. During the last two years, there has been an impressive progress in understanding the mechanisms of both SARS-CoV-2 infection and the cellular and soluble antiviral responses occurring early after viral exposure. However, this information was not sufficiently translated into therapeutic approaches. Insufficient type I IFN activity probably accounts for disease progression in many patients. This results from both the multiple interfering mechanisms developed by SARS-CoV-2 to decrease type I IFN response and various pre-existing human deficits of type I IFN activity, inherited or auto-immune. Emerging data suggest that IFN-I-mediated boosting of patients' immunity, achieved directly through the exogenous administration of IFN-β early post viral infection, or indirectly following inoculation of heterologous vaccines (e.g., Bacillus Calmette Guerin), might play a role against SARS-CoV-2. We review how recent insights on the viral and human determinants of critical COVID-19 pneumonia can foster clinical studies of IFN therapy. We also discuss how early therapeutic use of IFN-β and prophylactic campaigns with live attenuated vaccines might prevent a first wave of new pandemic viruses.

Drug-based therapeutic strategies for COVID-19-infected patients and their challenges

Emerging epidemic-prone diseases have introduced numerous health and economic challenges in recent years. Given current knowledge of COVID-19, herd immunity through vaccines alone is unlikely. In addition, vaccination of the global population is an ongoing challenge. Besides, the questions regarding the prevalence and the timing of immunization are still under investigation. Therefore, medical treatment remains essential in the management of COVID-19. Herein, recent advances from beginning observations of COVID-19 outbreak to an understanding of the essential factors contributing to the spread and transmission of COVID-19 and its treatment are reviewed. Furthermore, an in-depth discussion on the epidemiological aspects, clinical symptoms and most efficient medical treatment strategies to mitigate the mortality and spread rates of COVID-19 is presented.

Efficacy of subcutaneous interferon-beta in COVID-19: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Type 1 interferons, especially interferon-beta, has been reported to be effective in COVID-19 patients in multiple randomized controlled trials. The aim of our meta-analysis and systematic review is to assess efficacy of subcutaneous IFN-beta in regards to mortality and discharge rate. Prospective, retrospective and randomized controlled trials were included. Primary outcomes measured were 28-day mortality and discharge rate. Secondary outcomes measured were mean hospital stay and post-intervention intubation rate. A thorough literature search was conducted in Medline, PubMed, Ovid journals, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials & Database of Systematic Reviews from 1 April 2020 to 28 February 2021. Relative risk was calculated using both the Mantel-Haenszel method (fixed-effects model) and DerSimonian Laird method (random effects model). The heterogeneity among studies was tested using Cochran's Q test, based upon inverse variance weights. 7 studies were included in the meta-analysis and systematic review. The IFN-beta group did not improve the 28-day mortality (RR = 1.276; 95% CI: 1.106-1.472, p = 0.001) or the discharge rate (RR = 0.906; 95% CI = 0.85-0.95, p = < 0.001). The mean hospital stay was 11.95± 2.5 days in the interferon-beta group and 11.43 ± 3.74 days in the traditional treatment group. Likewise, interferon-beta did not add any advantage to post-intervention intubation rate (RR = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.7841-1.0816, p = 0.3154). Our findings revealed that use of subcutaneous interferon-beta is futile in COVID-19.

Infection, Inflammation and Immunity in Covid-19 Infection

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 has increased the burden on healthcare system. Despite some progress in its diagnostics has been made, effective prevention and treatment are still insufficient. Since SARS-CoV-2 infections often cause systemic inflammation and multiple organ failure, the therapeutic options aimed at modulating the host immune responses to prevent subsequent systemic complications are demanding. The review provides a summary of the SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and underlines the current perception of pulmonary host’s immune response and its contributions to disease severity and systemic inflammation. Signaling pathways which have the potential to manipulate host immunity and improve clinical outcomes are also presented.

An update comprehensive review on the status of COVID-19: vaccines, drugs, variants and neurological symptoms

Various recently reported mutant variants, candidate and urgently approved current vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), many current situations with severe neurological damage and symptoms as well as respiratory tract disorders have begun to be reported. In particular, drug, vaccine, and neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been developed and are currently being evaluated in clinical trials. Here, we review lessons learned from the use of novel mutant variants of the COVID-19 virus, immunization, new drug solutions, and antibody therapies for infections. Next, we focus on the B 1.1.7, B 1.351, P.1, and B.1.617 lineages or variants of concern that have been reported worldwide, the new manifestations of neurological manifestations, the current therapeutic drug targets for its treatment, vaccine candidates and their efficacy, implantation of convalescent plasma, and neutralization of mAbs. We review specific clinical questions, including many emerging neurological effects and respiratory tract injuries, as well as new potential biomarkers, new studies in addition to known therapeutics, and chronic diseases of vaccines that have received immediate approval. To answer these questions, further understanding of the burden kinetics of COVID-19 and its correlation with neurological clinical outcomes, endogenous antibody responses to vaccines, pharmacokinetics of neutralizing mAbs, and action against emerging viral mutant variants is needed.

Type I Interferons in COVID-19 Pathogenesis

Among the many activities attributed to the type I interferon (IFN) multigene family, their roles as mediators of the antiviral immune response have emerged as important components of the host response to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Viruses likewise have evolved multiple immune evasion strategies to circumvent the host immune response and promote virus propagation and dissemination. Therefore, a thorough characterization of host-virus interactions is essential to understand SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis. Here, we summarize the virus-mediated evasion of the IFN responses and the viral functions involved, the genetic basis of IFN production in SARS-CoV-2 infection and the progress of clinical trials designed to utilize type I IFN as a potential therapeutic tool.

Detecting Novel Ototoxins and Potentiation of Ototoxicity by Disease Settings

Over 100 drugs and chemicals are associated with permanent hearing loss, tinnitus, and vestibular deficits, collectively known as ototoxicity. The ototoxic potential of drugs is rarely assessed in pre-clinical drug development or during clinical trials, so this debilitating side-effect is often discovered as patients begin to report hearing loss. Furthermore, drug-induced ototoxicity in adults, and particularly in elderly patients, may go unrecognized due to hearing loss from a variety of etiologies because of a lack of baseline assessments immediately prior to novel therapeutic treatment. During the current pandemic, there is an intense effort to identify new drugs or repurpose FDA-approved drugs to treat COVID-19. Several potential COVID-19 therapeutics are known ototoxins, including chloroquine (CQ) and lopinavir-ritonavir, demonstrating the necessity to identify ototoxic potential in existing and novel medicines. Furthermore, several factors are emerging as potentiators of ototoxicity, such as inflammation (a hallmark of COVID-19), genetic polymorphisms, and ototoxic synergy with co-therapeutics, increasing the necessity to evaluate a drug's potential to induce ototoxicity under varying conditions. Here, we review the potential of COVID-19 therapies to induce ototoxicity and factors that may compound their ototoxic effects. We then discuss two models for rapidly detecting the potential for ototoxicity: mammalian auditory cell lines and the larval zebrafish lateral line. These models offer considerable value for pre-clinical drug development, including development of COVID-19 therapies. Finally, we show the validity of in silico screening for ototoxic potential using a computational model that compares structural similarity of compounds of interest with a database of known ototoxins and non-ototoxins. Preclinical screening at in silico, in vitro, and in vivo levels can provide an earlier indication of the potential for ototoxicity and identify the subset of candidate therapeutics for treating COVID-19 that need to be monitored for ototoxicity as for other widely-used clinical therapeutics, like aminoglycosides and cisplatin.

Pharmacological interventions for COVID-19: a systematic review of observational studies and clinical trials

Introduction: Currently, there is no approved therapeutic entity for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and clinicians are primarily relying on drug repurposing. However, findings across studies are widely disparate, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions. Since clinicians need accurate evidence to treat COVID-19, this manuscript systematically analyzed the published and ongoing studies evaluating the pharmacological interventions for COVID-19.Areas Covered: A systematic search of observational studies and Clinical Trials on the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 was performed by using various databases from inception to 2 December 2020.Expert Opinion: A total of 460 studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 37 were research studies, 386 were ongoing trials, and 37 were completed trials. Anti-virals, steroids, anti-malarial, plasma exchange, and monoclonal antibodies were the most common treatment modalities used alone or in combination in these studies. However, tocilizumab, plasma exchange, and steroids have shown significant improvements in patient's clinical and radiological status. Tocilizumab reported minimum hospital stay of 2 days along with maximum recovery and patient's stability rate. Existing literature demonstrate promising results of tocilizumab, plasma exchange, and steroids among COVID-19 patients. Nevertheless, these studies are accompanied by several methodological disparities which should be considered while interpreting the results.

Umifenovir in hospitalized moderate to severe COVID-19 patients: A randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness of umifenovir against COVID-19 is controversial; therefore, clinical trials are crucial to evaluate its efficacy.

METHODS

The study was conducted as a single-center, randomized, open-label clinical trial. Eligible moderate-severe hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-Cov-2 infection were randomly segregated into intervention and control groups. The intervention group were treated with lopinavir/ritonavir (400 mg/100 mg bid for 10-14 days) + hydroxychloroquine (400 mg single dose) + interferon-β1a (Subcutaneous injections of 44 µg (12,000 IU) on days 1, 3, 5) + umifenovir (200 mg trice daily for 10 days), and the control group received lopinavir/ritonavir (same dose) + hydroxychloroquine (same dose) + interferon-β1a (same dose).

RESULTS

Of 1180 patients with positive RT-PCRs and positive chest CT scans, 101 patients were finally included in the trial; 50 were assigned to receive IFNβ1a + hydroxychloroquine + lopinavir/ritonavir group and 51 were managed to treat with IFNβ1a + hydroxychloroquine + lopinavir/ritonavir + umifenovir. Since all patients received the intended treatment as scheduled, the analysis just included as the ITT population. Time to clinical improvement (TTCI) did not hold a statistically significant difference between intervention and control groups (median, 9 days for intervention group versus 7 days for the control group; P: 0.22). Besides, Hazard Ratio for TTCI in the Cox regression model was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.45-1.23, P:0.25) which also confirmed that there was no statistically significant difference between the treatment group and the control group. The mortality was not statistically significant between the two groups (38% in controls vs 33.3% treatment group).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings shed new lights on the facts that additional umifenovir has not been found to be effective in shortening the duration of SARS-CoV-2 in severe patients and improving the prognosis in non-ICU patients and mortality.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was confirmed by the Ethics in Medical Research Committee of the Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. signed informed consents were obtained from all the participants or their legally authorized representatives. This trial has been registered as ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04350684.

An investigation into the beneficial effects of high-dose interferon beta 1-a, compared to low-dose interferon beta 1-a in severe COVID-19: The COVIFERON II randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a serious obstacle in front of public health. Interferon-beta 1a (IFN-β 1a) has been used to treat patients with COVID-19. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of high-dose IFN-β 1a compared to low dose IFN-β 1a in severe COVID-19 cases.

Methods

In this randomized, controlled, and clinical trial, eligible patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections were randomly assigned to receive one of the two following therapeutic regimens: The intervention group was treated with high-dose IFN-β 1a (Recigen) (Subcutaneous injections of 88 μg (24 million IU) on days 1, 3, 6) + lopinavir /ritonavir (Kaletra) (400 mg/100 mg twice a day for 10 days, orally) and the control group was treated with low-dose IFN-β 1a (Recigen) (Subcutaneous injections of 44 μg (12 million IU) on days 1, 3, 6) + lopinavir /ritonavir (Kaletra) (400 mg/100 mg twice a day for 10 days, orally).

Result

A total of 168 COVID- 19 confirmed patients underwent randomization; 83 were assigned to the intervention group and 85 were assigned to the control group. Median Time To Clinical Improvement (TTIC) for cases treated with low-dose IFN-β1a was shorter than that for cases treated with high-dose IFN-β1a (6 vs 10 days; P = 0.018). The mortality rates in intervention and control group were 41% and 36.5%, respectively.

Conclusion

The use of high-dose IFN-β 1a did not improve TTCI in hospitalized patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. Also, it did not have any significant effect on mortality reduction compared with treating with low-dose IFN-β 1a.

Trial registration: This trial has been registered as ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04521400.

Interferon-alpha position in combating with COVID-19: A systematic review

The newborn coronaivus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has become the foremost concern of health system worldwide. Interferon typeI (IFN‐I) are among the well‐known antiviruses. Hence IFN‐α have gained much attention as a treatment for COVID‐19 recently. To sum up the efficiency of IFN‐α against COVID‐19, we searched PubMed, SCOPUS, and EMBASE, from the date of genesis to the 1st of October 2020. Discharge from hospital and virus clearance considered as primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. We compared the aforementioned outcomes of patients treated with standard care protocol and the patients treated with IFN‐α in addition to standard care protocol. Out of 356 identified records, 14 studies were subjected for full‐text screening. Finally, a systematic review was performed with inclusion of five studies. Majority of the participants were males (ranged from 43.50% to 90.0%). We found that time of viral clearance and polymerase chain reaction negative (days) in most studies were decreased in the INF‐α + standard care group. The mean days of virus's clearance in INF‐α group and standard group reported 27.3 and 32.43. Likewise, the average days of hospitalization was found also lower in INF‐α group (18.55 vs. 24.36). This study provides a stand to conclude that early administration of INF‐α may be accounted as a promising treatment of COVID‐19.

Clinical Management of COVID-19: A Review of Pharmacological Treatment Options

Since the outbreak and subsequent declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic in March 2020, concerted efforts have been applied by the scientific community to curtail the spread of the disease and find a cure. While vaccines constitute a vital part of the public health strategy to reduce the burden of COVID-19, the management of this disease will continue to rely heavily on pharmacotherapy. This study aims to provide an updated review of pharmacological agents that have been developed and/or repurposed for the treatment of COVID-19. To this end, a comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Google Scholar, and LitCovid databases. Relevant clinical studies on drugs used in the management of COVID-19 were identified and evaluated in terms of evidence of efficacy and safety. To date, the FDA has approved three therapies for the treatment of COVID-19 Emergency Use Authorization: convalescent plasma, remdesivir, and casirivimab/imdevimab (REGN-COV2). Drugs such as lopinavir/ritonavir, umifenovir, favipiravir, anakinra, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, interferons, tissue plasminogen activator, intravenous immunoglobulins, and nafamosat have been used off-label with mixed therapeutic results. Adjunctive administration of corticosteroids is also very common. The clinical experience with these approved and repurposed drugs is limited, and data on efficacy for the new indication are not strong. Overall, the response of the global scientific community to the COVID-19 pandemic has been impressive, as evident from the volume of scientific literature elucidating the molecular biology and pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 and the approval of three new drugs for clinical management. Reviewed studies have shown mixed data on efficacy and safety of the currently utilized drugs. The lack of standard treatment for COVID-19 has made it difficult to interpret results from most of the published studies due to the risk of attribution error. The long-term effects of drugs can only be assessed after several years of clinical experience; therefore, the efficacy and safety of current COVID-19 therapeutics should continue to be rigorously monitored as part of post-marketing studies.

The understanding of the immunopathology in COVID-19 infection

Coronaviruses belonging to the Coronaviridae family are single-stranded RNA viruses. The entry of SARS-CoV-2 is accomplished via ACE-2 receptors. SARS-CoV-2 infection coactivates both innate and adaptive immune responses. Although SARS-CoV-2 stimulates antibody production with a typical pattern of IgM/IgG, cellular immunity is also impaired. In severe cases, low CD4 + and CD8 + T cell counts are associated with impaired immune functions, and high neutrophil/lymphocyte ratios accompanying low lymphocyte subsets have been demonstrated. Recently, high IFN -α/γ ratios with impaired T cell responses, and increased IL-1, IL-6, TNF-α, MCP-1, IP-10, IL-4, IL-10 have been reported in COVID-19 infection. Increased proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines in patients with severe COVID-19 may cause the suppression of CD4 + and CD8 + T cells and regulatory T cells, causing excessive inflammatory responses and fatal cytokine storm with tissue and organ damage. Consequently, novel therapeutics to be developed against host immune system, including blockade of cytokines (IL-6, IL-1, IFN) themselves, their receptors or signaling pathways- JAK inhibitors- could be effective as potential therapeutics.

Biomaterials-Based Opportunities to Engineer the Pulmonary Host Immune Response in COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the global spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has led to a staggering number of deaths worldwide and significantly increased burden on healthcare as nations scramble to find mitigation strategies. While significant progress has been made in COVID-19 diagnostics and therapeutics, effective prevention and treatment options remain scarce. Because of the potential for the SARS-CoV-2 infections to cause systemic inflammation and multiple organ failure, it is imperative for the scientific community to evaluate therapeutic options aimed at modulating the causative host immune responses to prevent subsequent systemic complications. Harnessing decades of expertise in the use of natural and synthetic materials for biomedical applications, the biomaterials community has the potential to play an especially instrumental role in developing new strategies or repurposing existing tools to prevent or treat complications resulting from the COVID-19 pathology. Leveraging microparticle- and nanoparticle-based technology, especially in pulmonary delivery, biomaterials have demonstrated the ability to effectively modulate inflammation and may be well-suited for resolving SARS-CoV-2-induced effects. Here, we provide an overview of the SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and highlight current understanding of the host's pulmonary immune response and its contributions to disease severity and systemic inflammation. Comparing to frontline COVID-19 therapeutic options, we highlight the most significant untapped opportunities in immune engineering of the host response using biomaterials and particle technology, which have the potential to improve outcomes for COVID-19 patients, and identify areas needed for future investigations. We hope that this work will prompt preclinical and clinical investigations of promising biomaterials-based treatments to introduce new options for COVID-19 patients.

SARS-CoV-2 Induced Neurological Manifestations Entangles Cytokine Storm That Implicates For Therapeutic Strategies

The new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), can present with neurological symptoms and induce neurological complications. The involvement in both the central and peripheral nervous systems in COVID-19 patients has been associated with direct invasion of the virus and the induction of cytokine storm. This review discussed the pathways for the virus invasion into the nervous system and characterized the SARS-CoV-2 induced cytokine storm. In addition, the mechanisms underlying the immune responses and cytokine storm induction after SARS-CoV-2 infection were also discussed. Although some neurological symptoms are mild and disappear after recovery from infection, some severe neurological complications contribute to the mortality of COVID-19 patients. Therefore, the insight into the cause of SARS-CoV-2 induced cytokine storm in context with neurological complications will formulate the novel management of the disease and further identify new therapeutic targets for COVID-19.

Potential COVID-19 Therapeutic Agents and Vaccines: An Evidence-Based Review

Since the early days of 2020, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has become a global health concern. Currently, some therapies and vaccines have received US Food and Drug Administration approval or emergency use authorization for the management of coronavirus disease 2019. According to the pathophysiology of the disease, several medications have been evaluated in different clinical conditions of the disease. Evidence-based reviewing and categorizing these medications can guide the clinicians to select the proper medications according to each patient's condition. Therefore, we performed this review to categorize the coronavirus disease 2019 potential therapeutics and vaccines.

Peginterferon Lambda-1a for treatment of outpatients with uncomplicated COVID-19: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

Type III interferons have been touted as promising therapeutics in outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT04331899) in 120 outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 to determine whether a single, 180 mcg subcutaneous dose of Peginterferon Lambda-1a (Lambda) within 72 hours of diagnosis could shorten the duration of viral shedding (primary endpoint) or symptoms (secondary endpoint). In both the 60 patients receiving Lambda and 60 receiving placebo, the median time to cessation of viral shedding was 7 days (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 1.19). Symptoms resolved in 8 and 9 days in Lambda and placebo, respectively, and symptom duration did not differ significantly between groups (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.39). Both Lambda and placebo were well-tolerated, though liver transaminase elevations were more common in the Lambda vs. placebo arm (15/60 vs 5/60; p = 0.027). In this study, a single dose of subcutaneous Peginterferon Lambda-1a neither shortened the duration of SARS-CoV-2 viral shedding nor improved symptoms in outpatients with uncomplicated COVID-19.

[Interferon gamma in the treatment of patients with moderate COVID-19]

INTRODUCTION

Interferons are produced in response to the presence of pathogens in cells and are responsible for the proper formation of immune reaction. Preliminary data obtained in studies of properties of recombinant interferon gamma (IFN-γ) that involved patients with community-acquired pneumonia (including bacterial), acute respiratory viral infection (ARVI), influenza and new coronavirus infection have shown promising results.The purpose of the study was to assess the effect of subcutaneous administration of IFN-γ in patients with viral pneumonia on the changes of vital signs and the duration of hospital stay.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An open-label, randomized, low-interventional study included patients with moderate new coronavirus infection COVID-19 over 18 years of age of both sexes. IFN-γ 500,000 IU was administered s/c, daily, once a day, during 5 days.

RESULTS

IFN-y in addition to complex therapy of the disease resulted in more favorable changes in the stabilization of vital signs, as well as in reduced length of fever and hospital stay by 2 days what allows suggesting a positive effect of this substance on the recovery processes in patients with moderate COVID-19. Special emphasis should be made to the fact that patients who received recombinant IFN- γ experienced no progression of respiratory failure and required no transfer to intensive care unit.

DISCUSSION

This study confirms earlier obtained data on the positive effect of IFN-y on the rate of clinical stabilization and recovery of patients with community-acquired pneumonia and viral infections. Presented results are limited to a small number of patients; further study of drug properties in post-marketing studies is required.

CONCLUSION

Progress in the treatment of patients with moderate COVID-19 by adding recombinant IFN-γ to the complex therapy may reasonably expand the range of existing treatment options for this infection.

Pharmacotherapeutics of SARS-CoV-2 Infections

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected more than 38 million people world-wide by person to person transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Therapeutic and preventative strategies for SARS-CoV-2 remains a significant challenge. Within the past several months, effective treatment options have emerged and now include repurposed antivirals, corticosteroids and virus-specific antibodies. The latter has included convalescence plasma and monoclonal antibodies. Complete viral eradication will be achieved through an effective, safe and preventative vaccine. To now provide a comprehensive summary for each of the pharmacotherapeutics and preventative strategies being offered or soon to be developed for SARS-CoV-2.

4-Aminoquinoline compounds from the Spanish flu to COVID-19

In 1918, quinine was used as one of the unscientifically based treatments against the H1N1 virus during the Spanish flu pandemic. Originally, quinine was extracted from the bark of Chinchona trees by South American natives of the Amazon forest, and it has been used to treat fever since the seventeenth century. The recent COVID-19 pandemic caused by Sars-Cov-2 infection has forced researchers to search for ways to prevent and treat this disease. Based on the antiviral potential of two 4-aminoquinoline compounds derived from quinine, known as chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), clinical investigations for treating COVID-19 are being conducted worldwide. However, there are some discrepancies among the clinical trial outcomes.Thus, even after one hundred years of quinine use during the Spanish flu pandemic, the antiviral properties promoted by 4-aminoquinoline compounds remain unclear. The underlying molecular mechanisms by which CQ and HCQ inhibit viral replication open up the possibility of developing novel analogs of these drugs to combat COVID-19 and other viruses.

Inflammation, immunity and potential target therapy of SARS-COV-2: A total scale analysis review

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is a complex disease that causes illness ranging from mild to severe respiratory problems. It is caused by a novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2) that is an enveloped positive-sense single-stranded RNA (+ssRNA) virus belongs to coronavirus CoV family. It has a fast-spreading potential worldwide, which leads to high mortality regardless of lows death rates. Now some vaccines or a specific drug are approved but not available for every country for disease prevention and/or treatment. Therefore, it is a high demand to identify the known drugs and test them as a possible therapeutic approach. In this critical situation, one or more of these drugs may represent the only option to treat or reduce the severity of the disease, until some specific drugs or vaccines will be developed and/or approved for everyone in this pandemic. In this updated review, the available repurpose immunotherapeutic treatment strategies are highlighted, elucidating the crosstalk between the immune system and SARS-CoV-2. Despite the reasonable data availability, the effectiveness and safety of these drugs against SARS-CoV-2 needs further studies and validations aiming for a better clinical outcome.

Therapeutic Intervention of COVID-19 by Natural Products: A Population-Specific Survey Directed Approach

To date very few promising leads from natural products (NP) secondary metabolites with antiviral and immunomodulatory properties have been identified for promising/potential intervention for COVID-19. Using in-silico docking studies and genome based various molecular targets, and their in vitro anti-SARS CoV-2 activities against whole cell and/or selected protein targets, we select a few compounds of interest, which can be used as potential leads to counteract effects of uncontrolled innate immune responses, in particular those related to the cytokine storm. A critical factor for prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection relates to factors independent of viral infection or host response. They include population-related variables such as concurrent comorbidities and genetic factors critically relevant to COVID-19 health disparities. We discuss population risk factors related to SARS-CoV-2. In addition, we focus on virulence related to glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency (G6PDd), the most common human enzymopathy. Review of data on the response of individuals and communities with high prevalence of G6PDd to NP, prompts us to propose the rationale for a population-specific management approach to rationalize design of therapeutic interventions of SARS-CoV-2 infection, based on use of NP. This strategy may lead to personalized approaches and improve disease-related outcomes.

Interferon-beta offers promising avenues to COVID-19 treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trial studies

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 principally weakens the hosts’ innate immune system by impairing the interferon function and production. Type I interferons (IFNs) especially IFN-β are best known for their antiviral activities. IFNs accompanied by the standard care protocols have opened up unique opportunities for treating the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The databases including PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched up to October 30, 2020. The primary and secondary outcomes were considered discharge and mortality, respectively. The abovementioned outcomes of standard care protocol were compared with the standard care plus IFN-β in the confirmed COVID-19 patients. Out of 356 records identified, 12 randomized clinical trial studies were selected for full-text screening. Finally, 5 papers were included in the systematic review and 3 papers in the meta-analysis. The average mortality rate was reported as 6.195% and 18.02% in intervention and control groups, respectively. Likewise, the median days of hospitalization were lower in the intervention group (9 days) than the control group (12.25 days). According to meta-analysis, IFN-β was found to increase the overall discharge rate (RR = 3.05; 95% CI: 1.09–5.01). Our findings revealed that early administration of IFN-β in combination with antiviral drugs is a promising therapeutic strategy against COVID-19.

High-dose corticosteroid pulse therapy increases the survival rate in COVID-19 patients at risk of hyper-inflammatory response

OBJECTIVE

Test whether high dose corticosteroid pulse therapy (HDCPT) with either methylprednisolone or dexamethasone is associated with increased survival in COVID-19 patients at risk of hyper-inflammatory response. Provide some initial diagnostic criteria using laboratory markers to stratify these patients.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational study, 318 met the inclusion criteria. 64 patients (20.1%) were treated with HDCPT by using at least 1.5mg/kg/24h of methylprednisolone or dexamethasone equivalent. A multivariate Cox regression (controlling for co-morbidities and other therapies) was carried out to determine whether HDCPT (among other interventions) was associated with decreased mortality. We also carried out a 30-day time course analysis of laboratory markers between survivors and non-survivors, to identify potential markers for patient stratification.

RESULTS

HDCPT showed a statistically significant decrease in mortality (HR = 0.087 [95% CI 0.021-0.36]; P < 0.001). 30-day time course analysis of laboratory marker tests showed marked differences in pro-inflammatory markers between survivors and non-survivors. As diagnostic criteria to define the patients at risk of developing a COVID-19 hyper-inflammatory response, we propose the following parameters (IL-6 > = 40 pg/ml, and/or two of the following: C-reactive protein > = 100 mg/L, D-dimer > = 1000 ng/ml, ferritin > = 500 ng/ml and lactate dehydrogenase > = 300 U/L).

CONCLUSIONS

HDCPT can be an effective intervention to increase COVID-19 survival rates in patients at risk of developing a COVID-19 hyper-inflammatory response, laboratory marker tests can be used to stratify these patients who should be given HDCPT. This study is not a randomized clinical trial (RCT). Future RCTs should be carried out to confirm the efficacy of HDCPT to increase the survival rates of COVID-19.

A Narrative Review of Pharmacologic Treatments for COVID-19: Safety Considerations and Ototoxicity

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this review is to summarize evidence-based data regarding the ototoxic effects of potential COVID-19 therapeutics to treat patients suffering from SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

Medications under investigation as novel therapeutics to treat COVID-19 were identified using the search term coronavirus therapeutics, COVID therapeutics, and SARS-CoV-2 therapeutics on ClinicalTrials.gov and the PubMed Database. A literature review was performed using the PubMed Database for each proposed COVID-19 therapeutic to identify relevant articles. Search criteria included Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and key word search terms for ototoxicity, vestibulotoxicity, hearing disorders, and vertigo.

RESULTS

Six proposed COVID-19 therapeutics were identified as possessing ototoxic side effects including chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir-ritonavir, interferon, ribavirin, and ivermectin.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence suggests that ototoxic effects may be improved or mitigated by stopping the offending agent. Recognition of hearing loss, tinnitus, or imbalance/vertigo is therefore crucial to facilitate early intervention and prevent long-term damage. Hospitals should consider the inclusion of audiologic monitoring protocols for patients receiving COVID-19 therapeutics with known ototoxicity, especially in high-risk patient groups such as the elderly and hearing impaired. Laryngoscope, 131:1626-1632, 2021.

JAK-inhibitor and type I interferon ability to produce favorable clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The spread of a highly pathogenic, novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged as a once-in-a-century pandemic, having already infected over 63 million people worldwide. Novel therapies are urgently needed. Janus kinase-inhibitors and Type I interferons have emerged as potential antiviral candidates for COVID-19 patients due to their proven efficacy against diseases with excessive cytokine release and their direct antiviral ability against viruses including coronaviruses, respectively.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE and MedRxiv was conducted by three investigators from inception until July 30th 2020 and included any study type that compared treatment outcomes of humans treated with Janus kinase-inhibitor or Type I interferon against controls. Inclusion necessitated data with clearly indicated risk estimates or those that permitted their back-calculation. Outcomes were synthesized using RevMan.

RESULTS

Of 733 searched studies, we included four randomized and eleven non-randomized trials. Five of the studies were unpublished. Those who received Janus kinase-inhibitor had significantly reduced odds of mortality (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03-0.39, p< 0.001) and ICU admission (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.26, p< 0.001), and had significantly increased odds of hospital discharge (OR, 22.76; 95% CI, 10.68-48.54, p< 0.00001) when compared to standard treatment group. Type I interferon recipients had significantly reduced odds of mortality (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.85, p< 0.05), and increased odds of discharge bordering significance (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.00-3.59, p=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Janus kinase-inhibitor treatment is significantly associated with positive clinical outcomes in terms of mortality, ICU admission, and discharge. Type I interferon treatment is associated with positive clinical outcomes in regard to mortality and discharge. While these data show promise, additional well-conducted RCTs are needed to further elucidate the relationship between clinical outcomes and Janus kinase-inhibitors and Type I interferons in COVID-19 patients.

Prevention and treatment of COVID-19: Focus on interferons, chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and vaccine

The ongoing pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has drawn the attention of researchers and clinicians from several disciplines and sectors who are trying to find durable solutions both at preventive and treatment levels. To date, there is no approved effective treatment or vaccine available to control the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). The preliminary in vitro studies on viral infection models showed potential antiviral activities of type I and III interferons (IFNs), chloroquine (CQ)/hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), and azithromycin (AZM); however, the clinical studies on COVID-19 patients treated with CQ/HCQ and AZM led to controversies in different regions due to their adverse side effects, as well as their combined treatment could prolong the QT interval. Interestingly, the treatment with type I IFNs showed encouraging results. Moreover, the different preliminary reports of COVID-19 candidate vaccines showcase promising results by inducing the production of a high level of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) and specific T cell-mediated immune response in almost all participants. The present review aims to summarize and analyze the recent progress evidence concerning the use of IFNs, CQ/HCQ, and AZM for the treatment of COVID-19. The available data on immunization options to prevent the COVID-19 are also analyzed with the aim to present the promising options which could be investigated in future for sustainable control of the pandemic.

Effects of Interferon Beta in COVID-19 adult patients: Systematic Review

Background

The high rate of transmission and infection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a public health emergency of major epidemiological concern. No definitive treatments have been established, and vaccinations have only recently begun. We aim to review the efficacy and safety of Interferon Beta (IFN-β) in patients who have a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis.

Materials and Methods

A search from PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were conducted from December 2019 to December 2020 to review the efficacy and safety of IFN-β in adult patients with COVID-19 confirmed. We included randomized controlled trials, case reports, and experimental studies. Correspondences, letters, editorials, reviews, commentaries, case control, cross-sectional, and cohort studies that did not include any new clinical data were excluded.

Results

Of the 66 searched studies, 8 were included in our review. These studies demonstrated that although IFN-β did not reduce the time to clinical response, there was an increase in discharge rate at day 14 and a decrease in mortality at day 28. The time to negative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was shown to be significantly shortened in patients receiving IFN-β, along with a lower nasopharyngeal viral load. Further, patients receiving IFN-β had a less significant rise in IL-6. IFN-β was shown to decrease intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate, the requirement of invasive ventilation in severe cases, and improve the survival rate compared to control groups. There were no severe adverse events reported. Our review found that patients who received early treatment with IFN-β experienced significantly reduced length of hospitalization, mortality, ICU admission, and mechanical ventilation. A greater chance of clinical improvement and improved imaging studies was noted in patients who received IFN-β. There were no reported deaths associated with the addition of IFN-β. Further randomized trials involving more significant sample sizes are needed to better understand the effect of IFN-β on survival in COVID-19.

Conclusion

This review identified encouraging data and outcomes of incorporating IFN-β to treat COVID-19 patients. IFN-β has been shown to decrease hospital stay's overall length and decrease the severity of respiratory symptoms when added to the standard of care. Also, in some studies, it has been demonstrated to reduce the length of ICU stay, enhance survival rate, and decrease the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. There were minor side effects reported (neuropsychiatric symptoms and hypersensitivity reaction). However, randomized clinical trials with a large sample size are needed to assess IFN-β's benefit precisely.

An overview on the use of antivirals for the treatment of patients with COVID19 disease

Introduction: There is an urgent need for safe and efficacious antiviral drugs to improve outcomes for COVID-19 patients. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 virology can elucidate potential drug targets for the inhibition of viral replication. Areas covered: This review offers insights into novel and repurposed drugs that may have activity against SARS-CoV-2. We searched the PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov for COVID-19 related therapy until 28 October 2020. using search words 'SARS-CoV-2', 'COVID-19', 'antiviral', and/or 'treatment'. Expert opinion: Remdesivir decreased symptom duration modestly but had no significant impact on survival. Antivirals alone may be insufficient for a specific subset of patients with severe disease because of cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Treatment may require a combination of antivirals and immunomodulators to inhibit viral replication and CRS, respectively. A safe and efficacious SARS-CoV-2 specific vaccine is critical for prevention and mortality reduction. Moreover, we cannot overstate the importance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in testing of novel treatments. The pervasive stumbling block, however, is the low representation of minority groups. The benefit of remdesivir may not be generalizable to these populations because of significant underrepresentation in trials. Future endeavors should encompass the recruitment of patient populations that are reflective of the demographics significantly impacted by COVID-19.

Is there any potential management against COVID-19? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

A recent survey has shown that the COVID-19 pandemic has culminated in dramatical and critical treatment particularly in acute infected patients. In fact, this systematic review-meta-analysis was directly pertained to estimation at the efficient value of some clinical managements to confront the COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Scholar databases were searched from inception to July 1, 2020, to identify studies reporting the current treatment process and medications (e.g. hydroxychloroquine, antiviral therapy, convalescent plasma, and immunomodulatory agents) for COVID-19. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed to calculate the relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The outcomes of this study were the frequency of negative conversion cases, clinical improvements, mechanical ventilation demand, intensive care unit (ICU) entry, and mortality. The standard treatment refers to the published guidelines and specialist experience which varies in different articles, and the proposed treatment refers to the kind of interest suggested in the included studies.

RESULTS

A number of 45 articles met the eligibility criteria (out of 6793 articles). Among them, 26 articles involving 3263 patients were included in quantitative analysis. Anti-COVID-19 interventions could significantly increase clinical improvement (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.08-1.27; I2 = 49.8%) and reduce the mortality rate (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.35-0.95; I2 = 74.8%). Although in terms of negative conversion, ICU entry, and mechanical ventilation demand, clinical intervention had no beneficial effect. The clinical effect of immunomodulatory agents (especially tocilizumab and anakinra) was noticeable compared to other medications with RR of 0.22 (95% CI 0.09-0.53; I2 = 40.9%) for mortality and 1.25 (95% CI 1.07-1.46; I2 = 45.4%) for clinical improvement. Moreover, Antivirals (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.26; I2 = 47.0%) and convalescent plasma therapy (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.01-1.98; I2 = 66.6%) had significant beneficial effects on clinical improvement.

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings, all the included interventions significantly declined the mortality and enhanced clinical improvements with no effect on negative conversion and mechanical ventilation demand. Especially, immunomodulators and plasma therapy showed favorable outcomes. An evaluation on the efficacy of proposed treatment against COVID-19.

Classification of the present pharmaceutical agents based on the possible effective mechanism on the COVID-19 infection

OBJECTIVES

There are several types of research on the COVID-19 disease which have been conducting. It seems that prevailing over the pandemic would be achieved only by mastering over the virus pathophysiology. We tried to categorize the massive amount of available information for useful interpretation.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We searched databases with different keywords and search strategies that focus on virulence and pathophysiology of COVID-19. The present review has aimed to gather and categorize all implemented drugs based on the susceptible virulence mechanisms, and the pathophysiological events in the host cells, discussing and suggesting treatments.

RESULTS

As a result, the COVID-19 lifecycle were categorized as following steps: "Host Cell Attachment" which is mainly conducted with ACE2 receptors and TMPRSS2 from the host cell and Spike (S) protein, "Endocytosis Pathway" which is performed mainly by clathrin-mediated endocytosis, and "Viral Replication" which contains translation and replication of RNA viral genome. The virus pathogenicity is continued by "Inflammatory Reactions" which mainly caused moderate to severe COVID-19 disease. Besides, the possible effective therapeutics' mechanism and the pharmaceutical agents that had at least one experience as a preclinical or clinical study on COVID-19 were clearly defined.

CONCLUSION

The treatment protocol would be occasional based on the stage of the infection and the patient situation. The cocktail of medicines, which could affect almost all mentioned stages of COVID-19 disease, might be vital for patients with severe phenomena. The classification of the possible mechanism of medicines based on COVID-19 pathogenicity.

Harnessing immunotherapy to combat COVID-19: A modern snake oil or silver bullet?

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), has emerged into a global health and economic menace. Amidst the COVID-19 turmoil, recent failures/uncertain outcomes in clinical trials involving the anti-malarial (hydroxychloroquine), anti-viral (remdesivir) or the combination of anti-malarial/antibiotic (hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin) regimens have predisposed the physicians to distrust these “highly-touted” drugs for COVID-19. In this milieu, immunotherapy might be a credible modality to target or modify specific/non-specific immune responses that interfere with the survival of intracellular pathogens. This scientific review throws light on the epidemiology of COVID-19, its pathogenesis and the current clinical scenario of immunotherapeutics including convalescent plasma (CP), type-1 interferons (IFN–I) and human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to combat COVID-19. The treatment outcomes underscore that immunotherapy might be a reliable tool to assuage COVID-19-associated immunopathology. However, specific patient pool studies are warranted to ascertain the precise (re)purposing of immunotherapeutics for COVID-19.

Interferon β-1b in treatment of severe COVID-19: A randomized clinical trial

In this study, efficacy and safety of interferon (IFN) β-1b in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 were evaluated. Among an open-label, randomized clinical trial, adult patients (≥18 years old) with severe COVID-19 were randomly assigned (1:1) to the IFN group or the control group. Patients in the IFN group received IFN β-1b (250 mcg subcutaneously every other day for two consecutive weeks) along with the national protocol medications while in the control group, patients received only the national protocol medications (lopinavir/ritonavir or atazanavir/ritonavir plus hydroxychloroquine for 7-10 days). The primary outcome of the study was time to clinical improvement. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital complications and 28-daymortality. Between April 20 and May 20, 2020, 80 patients were enrolled and finally 33 patients in each group completed the study. Time to clinical improvment in the IFN group was significantly shorter than the control group ([9(6-10) vs. 11(9-15) days respectively, p = 0.002, HR = 2.30; 95% CI: 1.33-3.39]). At day 14, the percentage of discharged patients was 78.79% and 54.55% in the IFN and control groups respectively (OR = 3.09; 95% CI: 1.05-9.11, p = 0.03). ICU admission rate in the control group was significantly higher than the IFN group (66.66% vs. 42.42%, p = 0.04). The duration of hospitalization and ICU stay were not significantly different between the groups All-cause 28-day mortality was 6.06% and 18.18% in the IFN and control groups respectively (p = 0.12). IFN β-1b was effective in shortening the time to clinical improvement without serious adverse events in patients with severe COVID-19. Furthermore, admission in ICU and need for invasive mechanical ventilation decreased following administration of IFN β-1b. Although 28-day mortality was lower in the IFN group, further randomized clinical trials with large sample size are needed for exact estimation of survival benefit of IFN β-1b.

Immunotherapeutic approaches to curtail COVID-19

COVID-19, the disease induced by the recently emerged severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has imposed an unpredictable burden on the world. Drug repurposing has been employed to rapidly find a cure; but despite great efforts, no drug or vaccine is presently available for treating or prevention of COVID-19. Apart from antivirals, immunotherapeutic strategies are suggested considering the role of the immune response as the host defense against the virus, and the fact that SARS-CoV-2 suppresses interferon induction as an immune evasion strategy. Active immunization through vaccines, interferon administration, passive immunotherapy by convalescent plasma or synthesized monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies, as well as immunomodulatory drugs, are different immunotherapeutic approaches that will be mentioned in this review. The focus would be on passive immunotherapeutic interventions. Interferons might be helpful in some stages. Vaccine development has been followed with unprecedented speed. Some of these vaccines have been advanced to human clinical trials. Convalescent plasma therapy is already practiced in many countries to help save the lives of severely ill patients. Different antibodies that target various steps of SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis or the associated immune responses are also proposed. For treating the cytokine storm induced at a late stage of the disease in some patients, immune modulation through JAK inhibitors, corticosteroids, and some other cognate classes are evaluated. Given the changing pattern of cytokine induction and immune responses throughout the COVID-19 disease course, different adapted approaches are needed to help patients. Gaining more knowledge about the detailed pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2, its interplay with the immune system, and viral-mediated responses are crucial to identify efficient preventive and therapeutic approaches. A systemic approach seems essential in this regard.