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

Pathogenesis and virulence of coronavirus disease: Comparative pathology of animal models for COVID-19

Animal models that can replicate clinical and pathologic features of severe human coronavirus infections have been instrumental in the development of novel vaccines and therapeutics. The goal of this review is to summarize our current understanding of the pathogenesis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the pathologic features that can be observed in several currently available animal models. Knowledge gained from studying these animal models of SARS-CoV-2 infection can help inform appropriate model selection for disease modelling as well as for vaccine and therapeutic developments.

Comparative transcriptome reveals EphA2 and c-Fos as key factors driving enhanced replication in high-passage porcine deltacoronavirus strain

Porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV), a cross-species transmissible enterovirus, frequently induces severe diarrhea and vomiting symptoms in piglets, which not only pose a significant menace to the global pig industry but also a potential public safety risk. In a previous study, we isolated a vaccine candidate, PDCoV CZ2020-P100, by passaging a parental PDCoV strain in vitro, exhibiting attenuated virulence and enhanced replication. However, the factors underlying these differences between primary and passaged strains remain unknown. In this study, we present the transcriptional landscapes of porcine kidney epithelial cells (LLC-PK1) cells infected with PDCoV CZ2020-P1 strain and P100 strain using the RNA-sequencing. We identified 105 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in P1-infected cells and 295 DEGs in P100-infected cells. Enrichment analyses indicated that many DEGs showed enrichment in immune and inflammatory responses, with a more and higher upregulation of DEGs enriched in the P100-infected group. Notably, the DEGs were concentrated in the MAPK pathway within the P100-infected group, with significant upregulation in EphA2 and c-Fos. Knockdown of EphA2 and c-Fos reduced PDCoV infection and significantly impaired P100 replication compared to P1, suggesting a novel mechanism in which EphA2 and c-Fos are highly involved in passaged virus replication. Our findings illuminate the resemblances and distinctions in the gene expression patterns of host cells infected with P1 and P100, confirming that EphA2 and c-Fos play key roles in high-passage PDCoV replication. These results enhance our understanding of the changes in virulence and replication capacity during the process of passaging.

Mucosal and systemic immune correlates of viral control after SARS-CoV-2 infection challenge in seronegative adults

Human infection challenge permits in-depth, early, and pre-symptomatic characterization of the immune response, enabling the identification of factors that are important for viral clearance. Here, we performed intranasal inoculation of 34 young adult, seronegative volunteers with a pre-Alpha severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) strain. Of these participants, 18 (53%) became infected and showed an interferon-dominated mediator response with divergent kinetics between nasal and systemic sites. Peripheral CD4+ and CD8+ T cell activation and proliferation were early and robust but showed distinct kinetic and phenotypic profiles; antigen-specific T cells were largely CD38+Ki67+ and displayed central and effector memory phenotypes. Both mucosal and systemic antibodies became detectable around day 10, but nasal antibodies plateaued after day 14 while circulating antibodies continued to rise. Intensively granular measurements in nasal mucosa and blood allowed modeling of immune responses to primary SARS-CoV-2 infection that revealed CD8+ T cell responses and early mucosal IgA responses strongly associated with viral control, indicating that these mechanisms should be targeted for transmission-reducing intervention.

In silico screening and evaluation of antiviral peptides as inhibitors against ORF9b protein of SARS-CoV-2

The present study investigated antiviral peptides (AVPs) as inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Orf9b protein, a novel target for disrupting the Orf9b-TOM70 complex crucial for viral infection. In silico screening via molecular docking and MD simulations identified AVP1442 and AVP1896 with high binding affinities to Orf9b (- 846.3 kcal mol-1 and - 820 kcal mol-1, respectively), comparable to the Orf9b-TOM70 complex (- 810.99 kcal mol-1). These AVPs interacted with key amino acid residues in Orf9b, including phosphorylation sites. In addition, AVPs also closely interacted with conserved regions in Orf9b. AVP1896 formed a hydrogen bond with Orf9b's threonine at position 84. AVP1442 interacted with Orf9b's leucine at position 15. Favorable Ramachandran plots and compactness during MD simulations for up to 100 ns suggest good stability of formed complexes. These non-toxic AVPs warrant further in vitro and in vivo evaluation, potentially as components of drug cocktails with small molecules or interferon-based therapies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13205-024-04032-4.

Challenges of consolidating evidence collected during a pandemic and lessons for the future

OBJECTIVE

To illustrate the challenges encountered when gathering rapidly synthesized evidence in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

In this article, we describe the challenges encountered when we performed a systematic literature review (SLR) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of treatments for severe COVID-19. The methods of the SLR are described in full, to show the context of our objectives. Then we use the results of the SLR to demonstrate the problems of producing synthesized evidence in this setting.

RESULTS

Various challenges were identified during this SLR. These were primarily a result of heterogeneity in the study methodology of eligible studies. Definitions of the patient populations and outcome measurements were highly variable and the majority of studies demonstrated a high risk of bias, preventing quantitative synthesis of the collated evidence.

CONCLUSION

Consolidating evidence from RCTs evaluating COVID-19 interventions was problematic. Guidance is needed for scenarios with high rapid output in primary research.

Yin and yang of interferons: lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic

The host immune response against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 includes the induction of a group of natural antiviral cytokines called interferons (IFNs). Although originally recognized for their ability to potently counteract infections, the mechanistic functions of IFNs in patients with varying severities of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have highlighted a more complex scenario. Cellular and molecular analyses have revealed that timing, location, and subtypes of IFNs produced during severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection play a major role in determining disease progression and severity. In this review, we summarize what the COVID-19 pandemic has taught us about the protective and detrimental roles of IFNs during the inflammatory response elicited against a new respiratory virus across different ages and its longitudinal consequences in driving the development of long COVID-19.

Investigational pharmacological agents for the treatment of ARDS

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

Type I and type III interferons: From basic biology and genetics to clinical development for COVID-19 and beyond

Type I and type III interferons (IFNs) constitute a key antiviral defense systems of the body, inducing viral resistance to cells and mediating diverse innate and adaptive immune functions. Defective type I and type III IFN responses have recently emerged as the 'Achilles heel' in COVID-19, with such patients developing severe disease and exhibiting a high risk for critical pneumonia and death. Here, we review the biology of type I and type III IFNs, their similarities and important functional differences, and their roles in SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also appraise the various mechanisms proposed to drive defective IFN responses in COVID-19 with particular emphasis to the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to suppress IFN production and activities, the genetic factors involved and the presence of autoantibodies neutralizing IFNs and accounting for a large proportion of individuals with severe COVID-19. Finally, we discuss the long history of the type I IFN therapeutics for the treatment of viral diseases, cancer and multiple sclerosis, the various efforts to use them in respiratory infections, and the newly emerging type III IFN therapeutics, with emphasis to the more recent studies on COVID-19 and their potential use as broad spectrum antivirals for future epidemics or pandemics.

Type 1 interferon auto-antibodies are elevated in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis

Patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis, in particular those classified as Childs-Pugh class C, are at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) upon infection with severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The biological mechanisms underlying this are unknown. We aimed to examine the levels of serum intrinsic antiviral proteins as well as alterations in the innate antiviral immune response in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis. Serum from 53 SARS-CoV-2 unexposed and unvaccinated individuals, with decompensated liver cirrhosis undergoing assessment for liver transplantation, were screened using SARS-CoV-2 pseudoparticle and SARS-CoV-2 virus assays. The ability of serum to inhibit interferon (IFN) signalling was assessed using a cell-based reporter assay. Severity of liver disease was assessed using two clinical scoring systems, the Child-Pugh class and the MELD-Na score. In the presence of serum from SARS-CoV-2 unexposed patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis there was no association between SARS-CoV-2 pseudoparticle infection or live SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and severity of liver disease. Type I IFNs are a key component of the innate antiviral response. Serum from patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis contained elevated levels of auto-antibodies capable of binding IFN-α2b compared to healthy controls. High MELD-Na scores were associated with the ability of these auto-antibodies to neutralize type I IFN signalling by IFN-α2b but not IFN-β1a. Our results demonstrate that neutralizing auto-antibodies targeting IFN-α2b are increased in patients with high MELD-Na scores. The presence of neutralizing type I IFN-specific auto-antibodies may increase the likelihood of viral infections, including severe COVID-19, in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis.

Cysteamine-mediated blockade of the glycine cleavage system modulates epithelial cell inflammatory and innate immune responses to viral infection

Transient blockade of glycine decarboxylase (GLDC) can restrict de novo pyrimidine synthesis, which is a well-described strategy for enhancing the host interferon response to viral infection and a target pathway for some licenced anti-inflammatory therapies. The aminothiol, cysteamine, is produced endogenously during the metabolism of coenzyme A, and is currently being investigated in a clinical trial as an intervention in community acquired pneumonia resulting from viral (influenza and SARS-CoV-2) and bacterial respiratory infection. Cysteamine is known to inhibit both bacterial and the eukaryotic host glycine cleavage systems via competitive inhibition of GLDC at concentrations, lower than those required for direct antimicrobial or antiviral activity. Here, we demonstrate for the first time that therapeutically achievable concentrations of cysteamine can inhibit glycine utilisation by epithelial cells and improve cell-mediated responses to infection with respiratory viruses, including human coronavirus 229E and Influenza A. Cysteamine reduces interleukin-6 (IL-6) and increases the interferon-λ (IFN-λ) response to viral challenge and in response to liposomal polyinosinic:polycytidylic acid (poly I:C) simulant of RNA viral infection.

From Emergence to Endemicity: A Comprehensive Review of COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), later renamed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was first identified in Wuhan, China, in early December 2019. Initially, the China office of the World Health Organization was informed of numerous cases of pneumonia of unidentified etiology in Wuhan, Hubei Province at the end of 2019. This would subsequently result in a global pandemic with millions of confirmed cases of COVID-19 and millions of deaths reported to the WHO. We have analyzed most of the data published since the beginning of the pandemic to compile this comprehensive review of SARS-CoV-2. We looked at the core ideas, such as the etiology, epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical symptoms, diagnostics, histopathologic findings, consequences, therapies, and vaccines. We have also included the long-term effects and myths associated with some therapeutics of COVID-19. This study presents a comprehensive assessment of the SARS-CoV-2 virology, vaccines, medicines, and significant variants identified during the course of the pandemic. Our review article is intended to provide medical practitioners with a better understanding of the fundamental sciences, clinical treatment, and prevention of COVID-19. As of May 2023, this paper contains the most recent data made accessible.

Is there an association between peri-diagnostic vaccination and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients?

Background

Peri-diagnostic vaccination contemporaneous with SARS-CoV-2 infection might boost antiviral immunity and improve patient outcomes. We investigated, among previously unvaccinated patients, whether vaccination (with the Pfizer, Moderna, or J&J vaccines) during the week before or after a positive COVID-19 test was associated with altered 30-day patient outcomes.

Methods

Using a deidentified longitudinal EHR repository, we selected all previously unvaccinated adults who initially tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between December 11, 2020 (the date of vaccine emergency use approval) and December 19, 2021. We assessed whether vaccination between days -7 and +7 of a positive test affected outcomes. The primary measure was progression to a more severe disease outcome within 30 days of diagnosis using the following hierarchy: hospitalization, intensive care, or death.

Results

Among 60,031 hospitalized patients, 543 (0.91%) were initially vaccinated at the time of diagnosis and 59,488 (99.09%) remained unvaccinated during the period of interest. Among 316,337 nonhospitalized patients, 2,844 (0.90%) were initially vaccinated and 313,493 (99.1%) remained unvaccinated. In both analyses, individuals receiving vaccines were older, more often located in the northeast, more commonly insured by Medicare, and more burdened by comorbidities. Among previously unvaccinated patients, there was no association between receiving an initial vaccine dose between days -7 and +7 of diagnosis and progression to more severe disease within 30 days compared to patients who did not receive vaccines.

Conclusions

Immunization during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection does not appear associated with clinical progression during the acute infectious period.

Interferon β-1a ring prophylaxis to reduce household transmission of SARS-CoV-2: a cluster randomised clinical trial

Background

Accumulating evidence indicates that an early, robust type 1 interferon (IFN) response to SARS-CoV-2 is important in determining COVID-19 outcomes, with an inadequate IFN response associated with disease severity. Our objective was to examine the prophylactic potential of IFN administration to limit viral transmission.

Methods

A cluster randomised open label clinical trial was undertaken to determine the effects of pegylated IFNβ-1a administration on SARS-CoV-2 household transmission between December 3rd, 2020 and June 29th, 2021. Index cases were identified from databases of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 individuals in Santiago, Chile. Households were cluster randomised (stratified by household size and age of index cases) to receive 3 doses of 125 μg subcutaneous pegylated IFNβ-1a (172 households, 607 participants), or standard care (169 households, 565 participants). The statistical team was blinded to treatment assignment until the analysis plan was finalised. Analyses were undertaken to determine effects of treatment on viral shedding and viral transmission. Safety analyses included incidence and severity of adverse events in all treatment eligible participants in the standard care arm, or in the treatment arm with at least one dose administered. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04552379.

Findings

5154 index cases were assessed for eligibility, 1372 index cases invited to participate, and 341 index cases and their household contacts (n = 831) enrolled. 1172 participants in 341 households underwent randomisation, with 607 assigned to receive IFNβ-1a and 565 to standard care. Based on intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses for the primary endpoints, IFNβ-1a treatment did not affect duration of viral shedding in index cases (absolute risk reduction = -0.2%, 95% CI = -8.46% to 8.06%) and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to household contacts (absolute risk reduction = 3.87%, 95% CI = -3.6% to 11.3%). Treatment with IFNβ-1a resulted in significantly more treatment-related adverse events, but no increase in overall adverse events or serious adverse events.

Interpretation

Based upon the primary analyses, IFNβ-1a treatment did not affect duration of viral shedding or the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to uninfected contacts within a household.

Funding

Biogen PTY Ltd. Supply of interferon as 'Plegridy (peginterferon beta-1a).' The study was substantially funded by BHP Holdings Pty Ltd.

Effect of Disease-Modifying Therapies on COVID-19 Vaccination Efficacy in Multiple Sclerosis Patients: A Comprehensive Review

According to current knowledge, the etiopathogenesis of multiple sclerosis (MS) is complex, involving genetic background as well as several environmental factors that result in dysimmunity in the central nervous system (CNS). MS is an immune-mediated, inflammatory neurological disease affecting the CNS. As part of its attack on the axons of the CNS, MS witnesses varying degrees of myelin and axonal loss. A total of about 20 disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are available today that, both in clinical trials and in real-world studies, reduce disease activity, such as relapses, magnetic resonance imaging lesions, and disability accumulation. Currently, the world is facing an outbreak of the new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which originated in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in December 2019 and spread rapidly around the globe. Viral infections play an important role in triggering and maintaining neuroinflammation through direct and indirect mechanisms. There is an old association between MS and viral infections. In the context of MS-related chronic inflammatory damage within the CNS, there has been concern regarding COVID-19 worsening neurological damage. A high rate of disability and increased susceptibility to infection have made MS patients particularly vulnerable. In addition, DMTs have been a concern during the pandemic since many DMTs have immunosuppressive properties. In this article, we discuss the impact of DMTs on COVID-19 risks and the effect of DMTs on COVID-19 vaccination efficacy and outcome in MS patients.

Immunohematologic Biomarkers in COVID-19: Insights into Pathogenesis, Prognosis, and Prevention

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had profound effects on the health of individuals and on healthcare systems worldwide. While healthcare workers on the frontlines have fought to quell multiple waves of infection, the efforts of the larger research community have changed the arch of this pandemic as well. This review will focus on biomarker discovery and other efforts to identify features that predict outcomes, and in so doing, identify possible effector and passenger mechanisms of adverse outcomes. Identifying measurable soluble factors, cell-types, and clinical parameters that predict a patient's disease course will have a legacy for the study of immunologic responses, especially stimuli, which induce an overactive, yet ineffectual immune system. As prognostic biomarkers were identified, some have served to represent pathways of therapeutic interest in clinical trials. The pandemic conditions have created urgency for accelerated target identification and validation. Collectively, these COVID-19 studies of biomarkers, disease outcomes, and therapeutic efficacy have revealed that immunologic systems and responses to stimuli are more heterogeneous than previously assumed. Understanding the genetic and acquired features that mediate divergent immunologic outcomes in response to this global exposure is ongoing and will ultimately improve our preparedness for future pandemics, as well as impact preventive approaches to other immunologic diseases.

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.

Antiviral Therapy of COVID-19

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the scientific community has focused on prophylactic vaccine development. In parallel, the experience of the pharmacotherapy of this disease has increased. Due to the declining protective capacity of vaccines against new strains, as well as increased knowledge about the structure and biology of the pathogen, control of the disease has shifted to the focus of antiviral drug development over the past year. Clinical data on safety and efficacy of antivirals acting at various stages of the virus life cycle has been published. In this review, we summarize mechanisms and clinical efficacy of antiviral therapy of COVID-19 with drugs based on plasma of convalescents, monoclonal antibodies, interferons, fusion inhibitors, nucleoside analogs, and protease inhibitors. The current status of the drugs described is also summarized in relation to the official clinical guidelines for the treatment of COVID-19. In addition, here we describe innovative drugs whose antiviral effect is provided by antisense oligonucleotides targeting the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Analysis of laboratory and clinical data suggests that current antivirals successfully combat broad spectra of emerging strains of SARS-CoV-2 providing reliable defense against COVID-19.

Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis to Evaluate Therapeutic Effectiveness of Interferon Beta-1b in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused havoc in the health sector. Inflammatory cytokines play an important role in the disease condition. Existing evidence has provided certain insights into the repurposing of the drugs. This meta-analysis and systematic review aimed to explore the efficacy of the administration of interferon beta-1b (IFN β-1b) and standard care versus only standard care as the therapeutic agent for managing COVID-19 patients who are severely ill. The search was conducted in the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, which were published during the period January 1, 2020, to February 16, 2023. All the included three studies were independently assessed for eligibility. The modified data extraction form of Cochrane were used. The quality of the three included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. GradePro software was used to summarize the quality grading of the primary outcome measures. The time taken for clinical improvement was (MD: -3.28 days; 95% CI: -5.65, -0.91; P value = 0.007) when treated with IFN β-1b. The duration of hospital stays (MD: -2.43 days; 95% CI: -4.45, -0.30; P value = 0.03), and need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.52, 0.97; P value = 0.03) was statistically significant. Interferon beta-1b is proven to reduce the duration of hospital stay, and the improved clinical status may become a cornerstone of COVID-19 treatment.

The effect of interferon in the therapy of severe coronavirus infection

BACKGROUND

So far, several protocols have been used for the treatment of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). In this study, we aimed to study the effect of interferon on the treatment of hypoxemia caused by COVID-19.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a quasi-experiment with a nonequivalent group design. All participants were admitted to Shahid Beheshti Hospital, Qom province. In total, 60 patients were enrolled in the study, and inclusion criteria were age over 18 years, positive PCR test result, pulmonary involvement in computed tomography (CT) scan, and SpO₂ level below 93%. Individuals were divided into two control (hydroxychloroquine + lopinavir/ritonavir [Kaletra]) and intervention (hydroxychloroquine + lopinavir/ritonavir [Kaletra] + interferon-β 1a [recigen]) groups. The data were analyzed in Stata/SE 14.2 using Chi-square, t-test, and Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age of patients was 63 ± 16.12 years and 43.3% were male. In terms of outcome variables, 20% of patients in the intervention group and 53.3% of subjects in the control group died and this difference was significant (P = 0.007). According to the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score, the severe cases were 16.7% in the intervention group and 50% in the control group (P = 0.006). In addition, the median days of hospitalization were 11.5 days-significantly higher than those in the control group (5.5 days) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of this study, the use of interferon in the treatment of COVID-19 can improve health and reduce the severity of the disease and mortality.

Interfering with Interferons: A Critical Mechanism for Critical COVID-19 Pneumonia

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 results in clinical outcomes ranging from silent or benign infection in most individuals to critical pneumonia and death in a few. Genetic studies in patients have established that critical cases can result from inborn errors of TLR3- or TLR7-dependent type I interferon immunity, or from preexisting autoantibodies neutralizing primarily IFN-α and/or IFN-ω. These findings are consistent with virological studies showing that multiple SARS-CoV-2 proteins interfere with pathways of induction of, or response to, type I interferons. They are also congruent with cellular studies and mouse models that found that type I interferons can limit SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro and in vivo, while their absence or diminution unleashes viral growth. Collectively, these findings point to insufficient type I interferon during the first days of infection as a general mechanism underlying critical COVID-19 pneumonia, with implications for treatment and directions for future research.

Drug-Induced Acute Pancreatitis in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, is a systemic disease that affects not only the respiratory system, but also other systems, including gastrointestinal. A great number of different drugs have been used on hospitalized patients for the management of COVID-19, and acute pancreatitis (AP) has been reported as a complication or side effect of these drugs. The development of drug-induced acute pancreatitis (DIAP) follows a complex of pathophysiological mechanisms, and particular risk factors play a key role. Diagnosis of DIAP depends on specific criteria, and based on these, a drug may be characterized as having a definite, probable or possible connection with AP. The aim of this review is to present the medications that are used for COVID-19 management and are associated with AP in hospitalized patients. The list of these drugs mainly includes corticosteroids, glucocorticoids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antiviral agents, antibiotics, monoclonal antibodies, estrogens and anesthetic agents. Moreover, the prevention of the development of DIAP is vital, especially for critically ill patients who may receive multiple drugs. DIAP management is mainly non-invasive and the first step concerns the exception of the suspicious drug from patients therapy.

Evolution of SARS-CoV-2 Variants: Implications on Immune Escape, Vaccination, Therapeutic and Diagnostic Strategies

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 is associated with a lower fatality rate than its SARS and MERS counterparts. However, the rapid evolution of SARS-CoV-2 has given rise to multiple variants with varying pathogenicity and transmissibility, such as the Delta and Omicron variants. Individuals with advanced age or underlying comorbidities, including hypertension, diabetes and cardiovascular diseases, are at a higher risk of increased disease severity. Hence, this has resulted in an urgent need for the development of better therapeutic and preventive approaches. This review describes the origin and evolution of human coronaviruses, particularly SARS-CoV-2 and its variants as well as sub-variants. Risk factors that contribute to disease severity and the implications of co-infections are also considered. In addition, various antiviral strategies against COVID-19, including novel and repurposed antiviral drugs targeting viral and host proteins, as well as immunotherapeutic strategies, are discussed. We critically evaluate strategies of current and emerging vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and their efficacy, including immune evasion by new variants and sub-variants. The impact of SARS-CoV-2 evolution on COVID-19 diagnostic testing is also examined. Collectively, global research and public health authorities, along with all sectors of society, need to better prepare against upcoming variants and future coronavirus outbreaks.

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.

Immune-Based Therapy for Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 and Risk of Secondary Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Immune-based therapies are standard-of-care treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients requiring hospitalization. However, safety concerns related to the potential risk of secondary infections may limit their use.

Methods

We searched OVID Medline, Ovid EMBASE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, and PROSPERO in October 2020 and updated the search in November 2021. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Pairs of reviewers screened abstracts and full studies and extracted data in an independent manner. We used RevMan to conduct a meta-analysis using random-effects models to calculate the pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI for the incidence of infection. Statistical heterogeneity was determined using the I 2 statistic. We assessed risk of bias for all studies and rated the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. We conducted a meta-regression using the R package to meta-explore whether age, sex, and invasive mechanical ventilation modified risk of infection with immune-based therapies. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021229406).

Results

This was a meta-analysis of 37 RCTs including 32 621 participants (mean age, 60 years; 64% male). The use of immune-based therapy for COVID-19 conferred mild protection for the occurrence of secondary infections (711/15 721, 4.5%, vs 616/16 900, 3.6%; RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.95; P = .008; I 2 = 28%). A subgroup analysis did not identify any subgroup effect by type of immune-based therapies (P = .85). A meta-regression revealed no impact of age, sex, or mechanical ventilation on the effect of immune-based therapies on risk of infection.

Conclusions

We identified moderate-certainty evidence that the use of immune-based therapies in COVID-19 requiring hospitalization does not increase the risk of secondary infections.

Robustness of Significant Dichotomous Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials in the Treatment of Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Analysis

Purpose

Significant results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should be properly weighed. This study adopted fragility index (FI) to evaluate the robustness of significant dichotomous outcomes from RCTs on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment.

Materials and methods

ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed were searched from inception to July 31, 2021. FIs were calculated and their distribution was depicted. FI's categorical influential factors were analyzed. Spearman correlation coefficient (r _s) was reported for the relationship between FI and the continuous characteristics of RCTs.

Results

Fifty RCTs with 120 outcomes in 7869 patients were included. The FI distribution was abnormal with median 3 (interquartile range 1-7, P = 0.0001). The FIs and robustness were affected by the outcomes of interest, various patient populations, and interventions (T = 18.215,16.667, 23.107; P = 0.02,0.0001, 0.001, respectively). A cubic relationship between the FIs and absolute difference of events between groups with R square of 0.848 (T = 215.828, P = 0.0001, R square = 0.865) was observed. A strong negative logarithmic relationship existed between FI and the P value with R square = - 0.834.

Conclusion

The robustness of significant dichotomous outcomes of COVID-19 treatments was fragile and affected by the outcomes of interest, patients, interventions, P value, and absolute difference of events between the groups. FI was an useful quantitative metric for the binary significant outcomes on COVID-19 treatments.

Registration

PROSPERO (CRD42021272455).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44231-022-00027-y.

Efficacy and safety of oral melatonin in patients with severe COVID-19: a randomized controlled trial

Patients with COVID-19 have shown melatonin deficiency. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of administration oral melatonin in patients with COVID-19-induced pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive melatonin plus standard treatment or standard treatment alone. The primary outcomes were mortality rate and requirement of IMV. The clinical status of patients was recorded at baseline and every day over hospitalization based on seven-category ordinal scale from 1 (discharged) to 7 (death). A total of 226 patients (109 in the melatonin group and 117 in the control group) were enrolled (median age; in melatonin group: 54.60 ± 11.51, in control group: 54.69 ± 13.40). The mortality rate was 67% in the melatonin group and 94% in the control group (OR; 7.75, 95% CI, 3.27-18.35, P < 0.001). The rate of IMV requirement was 51.4% in the melatonin group and 70.9% in the control group, for an OR of 2.31 (95% CI, 1.34-4.00, P < 0.001). The median number of days to hospital discharge was 15 days (13-17) in the melatonin group and 21 days (14-24) in the control group (OR; 5.00, 95% CI, 0.15-9.84, P = 0.026). Time to clinical status improvement by ≥ 2 on the ordinal scale in was 12 days (9-13) in the melatonin group and 16 days (10-19) in the control group (OR; 3.92, 95% CI, 1.69-6.14, P = 0.038). Melatonin significantly improved clinical status with a safe profile in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Clinical efficacy and safety of interferon (Type I and Type III) therapy in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Interferon (IFN) has been highlighted in several randomized controlled trials as an attractive therapeutic candidate based plausible mode of action, suppressed response in severe COVID-19, and inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 replication. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of IFN in patients with COVID-19 according to clinical severity. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of IFN (systemic or inhaled IFN-α, -β, and -λ) treatment in adult patients with COVID-19 were identified by systematically searching electronic databases until January 2023. Risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, meta-analysis, and certainty of evidence grading were followed for the systematic review. We included 11 trials comprising 6,124 patients. Compared with exclusive standard care or placebo, IFN therapy did not provide significant clinical benefits for mortality at day 28 (pooled risk ratio [RR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-1.18, 9 studies, low-certainty evidence) and progression to mechanical ventilation (pooled RR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.81-1.43, 6 studies, low-certainty evidence) in patients with COVID-19. IFN therapy resulted in significantly increased hospital discharge on day 14 relative to the control arm (pooled RR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.04-1.59). These results were inconsistent compared to other comparable outcomes such as recovery at day 14 and time to clinical improvement. The IFN-treated arm was as safe as the control arm, regardless of clinical severity (pooled RR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.64-1.19, 9 studies, low-certainty evidence). In conclusion, IFN therapy was safe but did not demonstrate favorable outcomes for major clinical indices in patients with COVID-19, particularly those with higher than moderate severity. IFN therapy was not associated with worsening outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19. Future clinical trials should evaluate the clinical efficacy of IFN therapy in patients with mild COVID-19 or at an earlier stage. Trial registration: The protocol for this review was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the registration number CRD42022301413.

Immune correlates of protection for SARS-CoV-2, Ebola and Nipah virus infection

Correlates of protection (CoP) are biological parameters that predict a certain level of protection against an infectious disease. Well-established correlates of protection facilitate the development and licensing of vaccines by assessing protective efficacy without the need to expose clinical trial participants to the infectious agent against which the vaccine aims to protect. Despite the fact that viruses have many features in common, correlates of protection can vary considerably amongst the same virus family and even amongst a same virus depending on the infection phase that is under consideration. Moreover, the complex interplay between the various immune cell populations that interact during infection and the high degree of genetic variation of certain pathogens, renders the identification of immune correlates of protection difficult. Some emerging and re-emerging viruses of high consequence for public health such as SARS-CoV-2, Nipah virus (NiV) and Ebola virus (EBOV) are especially challenging with regards to the identification of CoP since these pathogens have been shown to dysregulate the immune response during infection. Whereas, virus neutralising antibodies and polyfunctional T-cell responses have been shown to correlate with certain levels of protection against SARS-CoV-2, EBOV and NiV, other effector mechanisms of immunity play important roles in shaping the immune response against these pathogens, which in turn might serve as alternative correlates of protection. This review describes the different components of the adaptive and innate immune system that are activated during SARS-CoV-2, EBOV and NiV infections and that may contribute to protection and virus clearance. Overall, we highlight the immune signatures that are associated with protection against these pathogens in humans and could be used as CoP.

Association between the expression of toll-like receptors, cytokines, and homeostatic chemokines in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity

The recent identification of the involvement of the immune system response in the severity and mortality of acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection highlights the importance of cytokines and chemokines as important factors in the clinical outcomes of COVID-19. However, the impact and roles of the BAFF/APRIL cytokine system, homeostatic chemokines (CXCL12, CXCL13, CCL19, and CCL21), as well as Toll-like receptor (TLR)-3/4 in COVID-19, have not been investigated. We sought to assess the expression levels and roles of TLR3/4, BAFF, APRIL, IFN-β, homeostatic chemokines (CXCL12, CXCL13, CCL19, and CCL21), SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies in patients with critical (ICU) and non-ICU (mild) COVID-19 and their association with mortality and disease severity. Significant high levels of TLR-4 mRNA, IFN-β, APRIL, CXCL13, and IgM and IgG antibodies were observed in ICU patients with severe COVID-19 compared to non-ICU COVID-19 patients and healthy controls. On the other hand, BAFF and CCL21 expression were significantly upregulated in non-ICU patients with COVID-19 compared with that in critical COVID-19 patients. The two groups did not differ in TLR-3, CXCL12, and CCL19 levels. Our findings show high expression levels of some inflammatory chemokines in ICU patients with COVID-19. These findings highlight the potential utility of chemokine antagonists as an immune-based treatment for the severe form of COVID-19. We also believe that selective targeting of TLR/spike protein interactions might lead to the development of a new COVID-19 therapy.

Thrombotic storm in coronavirus disease 2019: from underlying mechanisms to its management

Introduction. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) identified in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, is associated with high mortality rates worldwide.

Hypothesis/Gap Statement. Thrombotic problems, such as coagulopathy, are common in COVID-19 patients. Despite anticoagulation, thrombosis is more common in patients in the intensive care unit and patients with more severe disease. Although the exact mechanisms of coagulopathy in COVID-19 patients are still unclear, studies showed that overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS), cytokine storm, endothelial damage, formation of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs), and also extracellular vesicles (EVs) in response to COVID-19 induced inflammation can lead to systemic coagulation and thrombosis.

Aim. The management of COVID-19 patients requires the use of basic and readily available laboratory markers, both on admission and during hospitalization. Because it is critical to understand the pathophysiology of COVID-19 induced coagulopathy and treatment strategies, in this review we attempt to explain the underlying mechanism of COVID-19 coagulopathy, its diagnosis, and the associated successful treatment strategies.

Conclusion. The exact mechanisms behind COVID-19-related coagulopathy are still unclear, but several studies revealed some mechanisms. More research is needed to determine the best anticoagulant regimen and to study other therapeutic options.

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.

A Comprehensive Review on the Efficacy of Several Pharmacologic Agents for the Treatment of COVID-19

SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), and the cause of the pandemic is extremely contagious among people and has spread around the world. Antivirals, immunomodulators, and other medications, such as antibiotics, stem cells, and plasma therapy, have all been utilized in the treatment of COVID-19. To better understand the clinical efficacy of these agents and to aid in the selection of effective COVID-19 therapies in various countries, this study reviewed the effectiveness of the various pharmacologic agents that have been used for COVID-19 therapy globally by summarizing the clinical outcomes that have been obtained from the clinical trials published on each drug related to COVID-19 infection. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has authorized the use of remdesivir, paxlovid, molnupiravir, baricitinib, tixagevimab-cilgavimab, and bebtelovimab for the management of COVID-19. On the other hand, most research advises against using chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 patients because they are not beneficial. Although the FDA has given emergency use authorization for some monoclonal antibodies, including bamlanivimab, etesevimab, casirivimab, and imdevimab for managing COVID-19, they are not currently approved for use because the Omicron variant has significantly reduced their in vitro susceptibility. In this study, we also included a wide range of alternative therapy strategies that effectively treat COVID-19 patients, although further randomized studies are necessary to support and assess their applicability.

Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for severe COVID-19 patients: An updated network meta-analysis of 48 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To date, there has been little agreement on what drug is the "best" drug for treating severe COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of different medications available at present for severe COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to February 28, 2022, with no language restrictions, of medications recommended for patients (aged 16 years or older) with severe COVID-19 infection. We extracted data on trials and patient characteristics, and the following primary outcomes: all-cause mortality (ACM), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

RESULTS

We identified 4021 abstracts and of these included 48 RCTs comprising 9147 participants through database searches and other sources. For decrease in ACM, we found that ivermectin/doxycycline, C-IVIG (i.e., a hyperimmune anti-COVID-19 intravenous immunoglobulin), methylprednisolone, interferon-beta/standard-of-care (SOC), interferon-beta-1b, convalescent plasma, remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, immunoglobulin gamma, high dosage sarilumab (HS), auxora, and imatinib were effective when compared with placebo or SOC group. We found that colchicine and interferon-beta/SOC were only associated with the TEAEs of severe COVID-19 patients.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that ivermectin/doxycycline, C-IVIG, methylprednisolone, interferon-beta/SOC, interferon-beta-1b, convalescent plasma (CP), remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, immunoglobulin gamma, HS, auxora, and imatinib were efficacious for treating severe COVID-19 patients. We found that most medications were safe in treating severe COVID-19. More large-scale RCTs are still needed to confirm the results of this study.

Managing endothelial dysfunction in COVID-19 with statins, beta blockers, nicorandil, and oral supplements: A pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with endothelial dysfunction. Pharmacologically targeting the different mechanisms of endothelial dysfunction may improve clinical outcomes and lead to reduced morbidity and mortality. In this pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial, we assigned patients who were admitted to the hospital with mild, moderate, or severe COVID-19 infection to receive, on top of optimal medical therapy, either an endothelial protocol consisting of (Nicorandil, L-arginine, folate, Nebivolol, and atorvastatin) or placebo for up to 14 days. The primary outcome was time to recovery, measured by an eight category ordinal scale and defined by the time to being discharged from the hospital or hospitalized for infection-control or other nonmedical reasons. Secondary outcomes included the composite outcome of intensive care unit (ICU) admission or the need for mechanical ventilation, all-cause mortality, and the occurrence of side effects. Of 42 randomized patients, 37 were included in the primary analysis. The mean age of the patients was 57 years; the mean body mass index of study participants was 29.14. History of hypertension was present in 27% of the patients, obesity in 45%, and diabetes mellitus in 21.6%. The median (interquartile range) time to recovery was not significantly different between the endothelial protocol group (6 [4-12] days) and the placebo group (6 [5-8] days; p value = 0.854). Furthermore, there were no statistically significant differences in the need for mechanical ventilation or ICU admission, all-cause mortality, or the occurrence of side effects between the endothelial protocol group and the placebo group. Among patients hospitalized with mild, moderate, or severe COVID-19 infection, targeting endothelial dysfunction by administering Nicorandil, L-arginine, Folate, Nebivolol, and Atorvastatin on top of optimal medical therapy did not decrease time to recovery. Based on this study's findings, targeting endothelial dysfunction did not result in a clinically significant improvement in outcome and, as such, larger trials targeting this pathway are not recommended.

Neutralizing Type I Interferon Autoantibodies in Japanese Patients with Severe COVID-19

PURPOSE

Autoantibodies (aAbs) to type I interferons (IFNs) have been found in less than 1% of individuals under the age of 60 in the general population, with the prevalence increasing among those over 65. Neutralizing autoantibodies (naAbs) to type I IFNs have been found in at least 15% of patients with life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia in several cohorts of primarily European descent. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of aAbs and naAbs to IFN-α2 or IFN-ω in Japanese patients who suffered from COVID-19 as well as in the general population.

METHODS

Patients who suffered from COVID-19 (n = 622, aged 0-104) and an uninfected healthy control population (n = 3,456, aged 20-91) were enrolled in this study. The severities of the COVID-19 patients were as follows: critical (n = 170), severe (n = 235), moderate (n = 112), and mild (n = 105). ELISA and ISRE reporter assays were used to detect aAbs and naAbs to IFN-α2 and IFN-ω using E. coli-produced IFNs.

RESULTS

In an uninfected general Japanese population aged 20-91, aAbs to IFNs were detected in 0.087% of individuals. By contrast, naAbs to type I IFNs (IFN-α2 and/or IFN-ω, 100 pg/mL) were detected in 10.6% of patients with critical infections, 2.6% of patients with severe infections, and 1% of patients with mild infections. The presence of naAbs to IFNs was significantly associated with critical disease (P = 0.0012), age over 50 (P = 0.0002), and male sex (P = 0.137). A significant but not strong correlation between aAbs and naAbs to IFN-α2 existed (r =  - 0.307, p value < 0.0001) reinforced the importance of measuring naAbs in COVID-19 patients, including those of Japanese ancestry.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we revealed that patients with pre-existing naAbs have a much higher risk of life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia in Japanese population.

Low baseline IFN-γ response could predict hospitalization in COVID-19 patients

The SARS-CoV-2 infection has spread rapidly around the world causing millions of deaths. Several treatments can reduce mortality and hospitalization. However, their efficacy depends on the choice of the molecule and the precise timing of its administration to ensure viral clearance and avoid a deleterious inflammatory response. Here, we investigated IFN-γ, assessed by a functional immunoassay, as a predictive biomarker for the risk of hospitalization at an early stage of infection or within one month prior to infection. Individuals with IFN-γ levels below 15 IU/mL were 6.57-times more likely to be hospitalized than those with higher values (p<0.001). As confirmed by multivariable analysis, low IFN-γ levels, age >65 years, and no vaccination were independently associated with hospitalization. In addition, we found a significant inverse correlation between low IFN-γ response and high level of IL-6 in plasma (Spearman’s rho=-0.38, p=0.003). Early analysis of the IFN-γ response in a contact or recently infected subject with SARS-CoV-2 could predict hospitalization and thus help the clinician to choose the appropriate treatment avoiding severe forms of infection and hospitalization.

Identification of Suitable Drug Combinations for Treating COVID-19 Using a Novel Machine Learning Approach: The RAIN Method

Simple Summary

This study follows an improved approach to systematic reviews, called the Systematic Review and Artificial Intelligence Network Meta-Analysis (RAIN), registered within PROSPERO (CRD42021256797), in which, the PRISMA criterion is still considered. Drugs used in the treatment of COVID-19 were searched in the databases of ScienceDirect, Web of Science (WoS), ProQuest, Embase, Medline (PubMed), and Scopus. In addition, using artificial intelligence and the measurement of the p-value between human genes affected by COVID-19 and drugs that have been suggested by clinical experts, and reported within the identified research papers, suitable drug combinations are proposed for the treatment of COVID-19. During the systematic review process, 39 studies were selected. Our analysis shows that most of the reported drugs, such as azithromycin and hydroxyl-chloroquine on their own, do not have much of an effect on the recovery of COVID-19 patients. Based on the result of the new artificial intelligence, on the other hand, at a significance level of less than 0.05, the combination of the two drugs therapeutic corticosteroid + camostat with a significance level of 0.02, remdesivir + azithromycin with a significance level of 0.03, and interleukin 1 receptor antagonist protein + camostat with a significance level 0.02 are considered far more effective for the treatment of COVID-19 and are therefore recommended.

Abstract

COVID-19 affects several human genes, each with its own p-value. The combination of drugs associated with these genes with small p-values may lead to an estimation of the combined p-value between COVID-19 and some drug combinations, thereby increasing the effectiveness of these combinations in defeating the disease. Based on human genes, we introduced a new machine learning method that offers an effective drug combination with low combined p-values between them and COVID-19. This study follows an improved approach to systematic reviews, called the Systematic Review and Artificial Intelligence Network Meta-Analysis (RAIN), registered within PROSPERO (CRD42021256797), in which, the PRISMA criterion is still considered. Drugs used in the treatment of COVID-19 were searched in the databases of ScienceDirect, Web of Science (WoS), ProQuest, Embase, Medline (PubMed), and Scopus. In addition, using artificial intelligence and the measurement of the p-value between human genes affected by COVID-19 and drugs that have been suggested by clinical experts, and reported within the identified research papers, suitable drug combinations are proposed for the treatment of COVID-19. During the systematic review process, 39 studies were selected. Our analysis shows that most of the reported drugs, such as azithromycin and hydroxyl-chloroquine on their own, do not have much of an effect on the recovery of COVID-19 patients. Based on the result of the new artificial intelligence, on the other hand, at a significance level of less than 0.05, the combination of the two drugs therapeutic corticosteroid + camostat with a significance level of 0.02, remdesivir + azithromycin with a significance level of 0.03, and interleukin 1 receptor antagonist protein + camostat with a significance level 0.02 are considered far more effective for the treatment of COVID-19 and are therefore recommended. Additionally, at a significance level of less than 0.01, the combination of interleukin 1 receptor antagonist protein + camostat + azithromycin + tocilizumab + oseltamivir with a significance level of 0.006, and the combination of interleukin 1 receptor antagonist protein + camostat + chloroquine + favipiravir + tocilizumab7 with corticosteroid + camostat + oseltamivir + remdesivir + tocilizumab at a significant level of 0.009 are effective in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 and are also recommended. The results of this study provide sets of effective drug combinations for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. In addition, the new artificial intelligence used in the RAIN method could provide a forward-looking approach to clinical trial studies, which could also be used effectively in the treatment of diseases such as cancer.

Cytokines and microRNAs in SARS-CoV-2: What do we know?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic constitutes a global health emergency. Currently, there are no completely effective therapeutic medications for the management of this outbreak. The cytokine storm is a hyperinflammatory medical condition due to excessive and uncontrolled release of pro-inflammatory cytokines in patients suffering from severe COVID-19, leading to the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) and even mortality. Understanding the pathophysiology of COVID-19 can be helpful for the treatment of patients. Evidence suggests that the levels of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin (IL)-1 and IL-6 are dramatically different between mild and severe patients, so they may be important contributors to the cytokine storm. Several serum markers can be predictors for the cytokine storm. This review discusses the cytokines involved in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, focusing on interferons (IFNs) and ILs, and whether they can be used in COVID-19 treatment. Moreover, we highlight several microRNAs that are involved in these cytokines and their role in the cytokine storm caused by COVID-19.

Inflammatory pathways in COVID-19: Mechanism and therapeutic interventions

The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has become a global crisis. In the immunopathogenesis of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 infection induces an excessive inflammatory response in patients, causing an inflammatory cytokine storm in severe cases. Cytokine storm leads to acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary and other multiorgan failure, which is an important cause of COVID-19 progression and even death. Among them, activation of inflammatory pathways is a major factor in generating cytokine storms and causing dysregulated immune responses, which is closely related to the severity of viral infection. Therefore, elucidation of the inflammatory signaling pathway of SARS-CoV-2 is important in providing otential therapeutic targets and treatment strategies against COVID-19. Here, we discuss the major inflammatory pathways in the pathogenesis of COVID-19, including induction, function, and downstream signaling, as well as existing and potential interventions targeting these cytokines or related signaling pathways. We believe that a comprehensive understanding of the regulatory pathways of COVID-19 immune dysregulation and inflammation will help develop better clinical therapy strategies to effectively control inflammatory diseases, such as COVID-19.

ZBP1-dependent inflammatory cell death, PANoptosis, and cytokine storm disrupt IFN therapeutic efficacy during coronavirus infection

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), continues to cause substantial morbidity and mortality in the ongoing global pandemic. Understanding the fundamental mechanisms that govern innate immune and inflammatory responses during SARS-CoV-2 infection is critical for developing effective therapeutic strategies. Whereas interferon (IFN)-based therapies are generally expected to be beneficial during viral infection, clinical trials in COVID-19 have shown limited efficacy and potential detrimental effects of IFN treatment during SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, the underlying mechanisms responsible for this failure remain unknown. In this study, we found that IFN induced Z-DNA-binding protein 1 (ZBP1)-mediated inflammatory cell death, PANoptosis, in human and murine macrophages and in the lungs of mice infected with β-coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2 and mouse hepatitis virus (MHV). In patients with COVID-19, expression of the innate immune sensor ZBP1 was increased in immune cells from those who succumbed to the disease compared with those who recovered, further suggesting a link between ZBP1 and pathology. In mice, IFN-β treatment after β-coronavirus infection increased lethality, and genetic deletion of Zbp1 or its Zα domain suppressed cell death and protected the mice from IFN-mediated lethality during β-coronavirus infection. Overall, our results identify that ZBP1 induced during coronavirus infection limits the efficacy of IFN therapy by driving inflammatory cell death and lethality. Therefore, inhibiting ZBP1 activity may improve the efficacy of IFN therapy, paving the way for the development of new and critically needed therapeutics for COVID-19 as well as other infections and inflammatory conditions where IFN-mediated cell death and pathology occur.

Clinical implications of host genetic variation and susceptibility to severe or critical COVID-19

Since the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, important insights have been gained into virus biology and the host factors that modulate the human immune response against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). COVID-19 displays a highly variable clinical picture that ranges from asymptomatic disease to lethal pneumonia. Apart from well-established general risk factors such as advanced age, male sex and chronic comorbidities, differences in host genetics have been shown to influence the individual predisposition to develop severe manifestations of COVID-19. These differences range from common susceptibility loci to rare genetic variants with strongly predisposing effects, or proven pathogenic variants that lead to known or novel inborn errors of immunity (IEI), which constitute a growing group of heterogeneous Mendelian disorders with increased susceptibility to infectious disease, auto-inflammation, auto-immunity, allergy or malignancies. The current genetic findings point towards a convergence of common and rare genetic variants that impact the interferon signalling pathways in patients with severe or critical COVID-19. Monogenic risk factors that impact IFN-I signalling have an expected prevalence between 1 and 5% in young, previously healthy individuals (<60 years of age) with critical COVID-19. The identification of these IEI such as X-linked TLR7 deficiency indicates a possibility for targeted genetic screening and personalized clinical management. This review aims to provide an overview of our current understanding of the host genetic factors that predispose to severe manifestations of COVID-19 and focuses on rare variants in IFN-I signalling genes and their potential clinical implications.

Defying convention in the time of COVID-19: Insights into the role of γδ T cells

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). COVID-19 is a complex disease which immune response can be more or less potent. In severe cases, patients might experience a cytokine storm that compromises their vital functions and impedes clearance of the infection. Gamma delta (γδ) T lymphocytes have a critical role initiating innate immunity and shaping adaptive immune responses, and they are recognized for their contribution to tumor surveillance, fighting infectious diseases, and autoimmunity. γδ T cells exist as both circulating T lymphocytes and as resident cells in different mucosal tissues, including the lungs and their critical role in other respiratory viral infections has been demonstrated. In the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection, γδ T cell responses are understudied. This review summarizes the findings on the antiviral role of γδ T cells in COVID-19, providing insight into how they may contribute to the control of infection in the mild/moderate clinical outcome.

Interferon induction, evasion, and paradoxical roles during SARS-CoV-2 infection

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has caused millions of deaths in the past two years. Although initially little was understood about this virus, recent research has significantly advanced and landed interferons (IFNs) in the spotlight. While Type I and III IFN have long been known as central to antiviral immunity, in the case of COVID-19 their role was initially controversial. However, the protective function of IFN is now well supported by the identification of human deficiencies in IFN responses as a predictor of disease severity. Here, we will review the cell types and pathways that lead to IFN production as well as the importance of IFN timing and location for disease outcome. We will further discuss the mechanisms that SARS-CoV-2 uses to evade IFN responses, and the current efforts to implement IFNs as therapeutics in the treatment of COVID-19. It is essential to understand the relationships between SARS-CoV-2 and IFN to better inform treatments that exploit IFN functions to alleviate COVID-19.

Lessons from SARS‑CoV‑2 and its variants (Review)

COVID-19 has swept through mainland China by human-to-human transmission. The rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, including the currently prevalent Omicron strain, pose a serious threat worldwide. The present review summarizes epidemiological investigation and etiological analysis of genomic, epidemiological, and pathological characteristics of the original strain and its variants, as well as progress in diagnosis and treatment. Prevention and control measures used during the current Omicron pandemic are discussed to provide further knowledge of SARS-CoV-2.

Overview of Hydroxychloroquine and Remdesivir on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused the ongoing pandemic named COVID-19 which causes a serious emergency on public health hazards of international concern. In the face of a critical medical emergency, repositioning of drugs is one of the most authentic options to design an adequate treatment for infected patients immediately. In this strategy, Remdesivir (Veklury), Hydroxychloroquine appears to be the drug of choice and garnered unprecedented attention as potential therapeutic agents against the pandemic realized worldwide due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. These are the breathtaking instances of possible repositioning of drugs, whose pharmacokinetics and optimal dosage are familiar. In this review, we provide an overview of these medications, their synthesis, and the possible mechanism of action against SARS-CoV-2.

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.

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.

Effect of Casirivimab/Imdevimab Treatment on Serum Type I Interferon Levels in SARS-CoV-2 Infection

The effects of casirivimab and imdevimab (C/I) on the innate immune response against SARS-CoV-2 infection remain unclear. We evaluated the effect of C/I on type I interferon (IFN-I) and cytokines in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. This prospective observational study recruited consecutive patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Blood levels of IFN-I and cytokines before and after C/I administration were assessed using enzyme-linked immunoassay. The study enrolled 29 patients in the C/I group. In addition, 11 patients who received remdesivir and dexamethasone (R/D group) during the early phase (≤5 days after the onset of symptoms) were included as a comparator group. After treatment, IFN-α and IFN-β levels decreased significantly in both the C/I group and R/D group, whilst the post-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphoid ratio increased in the early C/I group but not the R/D group. In the C/I group, temporal temperature elevation and hypoxemia were observed after treatment in 58.6% and 41.4% of the cohort, respectively. However, most patients recovered by 5 days after treatment. This study could demonstrate the high therapeutic effect of C/I with an antibody-dependent enhancement-like response and decreased IFN-I production, which was likely due to the immediate induction of an antibody-dependent immune response against SARS-CoV-2.

Biologics in COVID-19 So Far: Systematic Review

This systematic review aimed to reevaluate the available evidence of the use of biologics as treatment candidates for the treatment of severe and advanced COVID-19 disease; what are the rationale for their use, which are the most studied, and what kind of efficacy measures are described? A search through Cochrane, Embase, Pubmed, Medline, medrxiv.org, and Google scholar was performed on the use of biologic interventions in COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 infection, viral pneumonia, and sepsis, until 11 January 2022. Throughout the research, we identified 4821 records, of which 90 were selected for qualitative analysis. Amongst the results, we identified five popular targets of use: IL6 and IL1 inhibitors, interferons, mesenchymal stem cells treatment, and anti-spike antibodies. None of them offered conclusive evidence of their efficacy with consistency and statistical significance except for some studies with anti-spike antibodies; however, Il6 and IL1 inhibitors as well as interferons show encouraging data in terms of increased survival and favorable clinical course that require further studies with better methodology standardization.