Efficacy of short-course colchicine treatment in hospitalized patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia and hyperinflammation: a randomized clinical trial

COVID-19 therapeutics

SUMMARYSince the emergence of COVID-19 in 2020, an unprecedented range of therapeutic options has been studied and deployed. Healthcare providers have multiple treatment approaches to choose from, but efficacy of those approaches often remains controversial or compromised by viral evolution. Uncertainties still persist regarding the best therapies for high-risk patients, and the drug pipeline is suffering fatigue and shortage of funding. In this article, we review the antiviral activity, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and safety of COVID-19 antiviral therapies. Additionally, we summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the various COVID-19 antivirals and discuss unmet needs which should be addressed.

Colchicine for the treatment of patients with COVID-19: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of colchicine treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to January 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy of colchicine treatment in patients with COVID-19 as compared with placebo or standard of care were included. There were no language restrictions. Studies that used colchicine prophylactically were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We extracted all information relating to the study characteristics, such as author names, location, study population, details of intervention and comparator groups, and our outcomes of interest. We conducted our meta-analysis by using RevMan V.5.4 with risk ratio (RR) and mean difference as the effect measures.

RESULTS

We included 23 RCTs (28 249 participants) in this systematic review. Colchicine did not decrease the risk of mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; I2=0%; 20 RCTs, 25 824 participants), with the results being consistent among both hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients. There were no significant differences between the colchicine and control groups in other relevant clinical outcomes, including the incidence of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18; p=0.22; I2=40%; 8 RCTs, 13 262 participants), intensive care unit admission (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.22; p=0.27; I2=0%; 6 RCTs, 961 participants) and hospital admission (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16; p=0.19; I2=70%; 3 RCTs, 8572 participants).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis do not support the use of colchicine as a treatment for reducing the risk of mortality or improving other relevant clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, RCTs investigating early treatment with colchicine (within 5 days of symptom onset or in patients with early-stage disease) are needed to fully elucidate the potential benefits of colchicine in this patient population.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022369850.

Biomarkers to guide immunomodulatory treatment: where do we stand?

INTRODUCTION

This review summarizes current progress in the development of biomarkers to guide immunotherapy in oncology, rheumatology, and critical illness.

AREAS COVERED

An extensive literature search was performed about biomarkers classifying patients' immune responses to guide immunotherapy in oncology, rheumatology, and critical illness. Surface markers, such as programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), genetic biomarkers, such as tumor mutation load, and circulating tumor DNA are biomarkers associated with the effectiveness of immunotherapy in oncology. Genomics, metabolomics, and proteomics play a crucial role in selecting the most suitable therapeutic options for rheumatologic patients. Phenotypes and endotypes are a promising approach to detect critically ill patients with hyper- or hypo-inflammation. Sepsis trials using biomarkers such as ferritin, lymphopenia, HLA-DR expression on monocytes and PD-L1 to guide immunotherapy have been already conducted or are currently ongoing. Immunotherapy in COVID-19 pneumonia, guided by C-reactive protein and soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) has improved patient outcomes globally. More research is needed into immunotherapy in other critical conditions.

EXPERT OPINION

Targeted immunotherapy has improved outcomes in oncology and rheumatology, paving the way for precision medicine in the critically ill. Transcriptomics will play a crucial role in detecting the most suitable candidates for immunomodulation.

Plausibility of natural immunomodulators in the treatment of COVID-19-A comprehensive analysis and future recommendations

The COVID-19 pandemic has inflicted millions of deaths worldwide. Despite the availability of several vaccines and some special drugs approved for emergency use to prevent or treat this disease still, there is a huge concern regarding their effectiveness, adverse effects, and most importantly, their efficacy against the new variants. A cascade of immune-inflammatory responses is involved with the pathogenesis and severe complications with COVID-19. People with dysfunctional and compromised immune systems display severe complications, including acute respiratory distress syndrome, sepsis, multiple organ failure etc., when they get infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Plant-derived natural immune-suppressant compounds, such as resveratrol, quercetin, curcumin, berberine, luteolin, etc., have been reported to inhibit pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines. Therefore, natural products with immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory potential could be plausible targets to treat this contagious disease. This review aims to delineate the clinical trials status and outcomes of natural compounds with immunomodulatory potential in COVID-19 patients along with the outcomes of their in-vivo studies. In clinical trials several natural immunomodulators resulted in significant improvement of COVID-19 patients by diminishing COVID-19 symptoms such as fever, cough, sore throat, and breathlessness. Most importantly, they reduced the duration of hospitalization and the need for supplemental oxygen therapy, improved clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19, especially weakness, and eliminated acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome. This paper also discusses many potent natural immunomodulators yet to undergo clinical trials. In-vivo studies with natural immunomodulators demonstrated reduction of a wide range of proinflammatory cytokines. Natural immunomodulators that were found effective, safe, and well tolerated in small-scale clinical trials are warranted to undergo large-scale trials to be used as drugs to treat COVID-19 infections. Alongside, compounds yet to test clinically must undergo clinical trials to find their effectiveness and safety in the treatment of COVID-19 patients.

Oxygen Saturation in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients and Its Relation to Colchicine Treatment: A Retrospective Cohort Study with an Updated Systematic Review

Background: Colchicine has been proposed as a cytokine storm-blocking agent for COVID-19 due to its efficacy as an anti-inflammatory drug. The findings of the studies were contentious on the role of colchicine in preventing deterioration in COVID-19 patients. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of colchicine in COVID-19-hospitalized patients. Design: A retrospective observational cohort study was carried out at three major isolation hospitals in Alexandria (Egypt), covering multiple centers. In addition, a systematic review was conducted by searching six different databases for published studies on the utilization of colchicine in patients with COVID-19 until March 2023. The primary outcome measure was to determine whether colchicine could decrease the number of days that the patient needed supplemental oxygen. The secondary outcomes were to evaluate whether colchicine could reduce the number of hospitalization days and mortality rate in these patients. Results: Out of 515 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, 411 were included in the survival analysis. After adjusting for the patients' characteristics, patients not receiving colchicine had a shorter length of stay (median: 7.0 vs. 6.0 days) and fewer days of supplemental oxygen treatment (median: 6.0 vs. 5.0 days), p < 0.05, but there was no significant difference in mortality rate. In a subgroup analysis based on oxygen equipment at admission, patients admitted on nasal cannula/face masks who did not receive colchicine had a shorter duration on oxygen supply than those who did [Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.76 (CI 0.59-0.97)]. Using cox-regression analysis, clarithromycin compared to azithromycin in colchicine-treated patients was associated with a higher risk of longer duration on oxygen supply [HR = 1.77 (CI 1.04-2.99)]. Furthermore, we summarized 36 published colchicine studies, including 114,878 COVID-19 patients. Conclusions: COVID-19-hospitalized patients who were given colchicine had poorer outcomes in terms of the duration of supplemental oxygen use and the length of their hospital stay. Therefore, based on these findings, the use of colchicine is not recommended for COVID-19-hospitalized adults.

Efficacy and safety of Ixekizumab vs. low-dose IL-2 vs. Colchicine vs. standard of care in the treatment of patients hospitalized with moderate-to-critical COVID-19: A pilot randomized clinical trial (STRUCK: Survival Trial Using Cytokine Inhibitors)

BACKGROUND

Cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring hospitalization continue to appear in vulnerable populations, highlighting the importance of novel treatments. The hyperinflammatory response underlies the severity of the disease, and targeting this pathway may be useful. Herein, we tested whether immunomodulation focusing on interleukin (IL)-6, IL-17, and IL-2, could improve the clinical outcomes of patients admitted with COVID-19.

METHODS

This multicenter, open-label, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted in Brazil. Sixty hospitalized patients with moderate-to-critical COVID-19 received in addition to standard of care (SOC): IL-17 inhibitor (ixekizumab 80 mg SC/week) 1 dose every 4 weeks; low-dose IL-2 (1.5 million IU per day) for 7 days or until discharge; or indirect IL-6 inhibitor (colchicine) orally (0.5 mg) every 8 hours for 3 days, followed by 4 weeks at 0.5 mg 2x/day; or SOC alone. The primary outcome was accessed in the "per protocol" population as the proportion of patients with clinical improvement, defined as a decrease greater or equal to two points on the World Health Organization's (WHO) seven-category ordinal scale by day 28.

RESULTS

All treatments were safe, and the efficacy outcomes did not differ significantly from those of SOC. Interestingly, in the colchicine group, all participants had an improvement of greater or equal to two points on the WHO seven-category ordinal scale and no deaths or patient deterioration were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Ixekizumab, colchicine, and IL-2 were demonstrated to be safe but ineffective for COVID-19 treatment. These results must be interpreted cautiously because of the limited sample size.

Failed clinical trials on COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome in hospitalized patients: common oversights and streamlining the development of clinically effective therapeutics

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put a strain on global healthcare systems. Despite admirable efforts to develop rapidly new pharmacotherapies, supportive treatments remain the standard of care. Multiple clinical trials have failed due to design issues, biased patient enrollment, small sample sizes, inadequate control groups, and lack of long-term outcomes monitoring.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review depicts the current situation around failed and success COVID-19 clinical trials and recommendations in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, oversights and streamlining of clinically effective therapeutics. PubMed, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, and WHO and NIH guidelines were searched for relevant literature up to 5 August 2022.

EXPERT OPINION

The WHO, NIH, and IDSA have issued recommendations to better clarify which drugs should be used during the different phases of the disease. Given the biases and high heterogeneity of published studies, interpretation of the current literature is difficult. Future clinical trials should be designed to standardize clinical approaches, with appropriate organization, patient selection, addition of control groups, and careful identification of disease phase to reduce heterogeneity and bias and should rely on the integration of scientific societies to promote a consensus on interpretation of the data and recommendations for optimal COVID-19 therapies.

What Next? New Drugs, Old Drugs, and New Challenges in Choosing Treatments for Covid-19

Much has changed since March 2020, when the World Health Organization declared Covid-19 a pandemic and clinicians around the world began desperately searching for therapies that could help afflicted patients. Barely 2.5 years after SARS-CoV-2 was discovered, we have solid evidence for the efficacy and safety of repurposed and novel agents for pre- and postexposure prophylaxis and for mild and severe disease, not to mention highly effective vaccines.