Inhibitors of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System and Covid-19

Epidemiological topology data analysis links severe COVID-19 to RAAS and hyperlipidemia associated metabolic syndrome conditions

MOTIVATION

The emergence of COVID-19 (C19) created incredible worldwide challenges but offers unique opportunities to understand the physiology of its risk factors and their interactions with complex disease conditions, such as metabolic syndrome. To address the challenges of discovering clinically relevant interactions, we employed a unique approach for epidemiological analysis powered by redescription-based topological data analysis (RTDA).

RESULTS

Here, RTDA was applied to Explorys data to discover associations among severe C19 and metabolic syndrome. This approach was able to further explore the probative value of drug prescriptions to capture the involvement of RAAS and hypertension with C19, as well as modification of risk factor impact by hyperlipidemia (HL) on severe C19. RTDA found higher-order relationships between RAAS pathway and severe C19 along with demographic variables of age, gender, and comorbidities such as obesity, statin prescriptions, HL, chronic kidney failure, and disproportionately affecting Black individuals. RTDA combined with CuNA (cumulant-based network analysis) yielded a higher-order interaction network derived from cumulants that furthered supported the central role that RAAS plays. TDA techniques can provide a novel outlook beyond typical logistic regressions in epidemiology. From an observational cohort of electronic medical records, it can find out how RAAS drugs interact with comorbidities, such as hypertension and HL, of patients with severe bouts of C19. Where single variable association tests with outcome can struggle, TDA's higher-order interaction network between different variables enables the discovery of the comorbidities of a disease such as C19 work in concert.

AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION

Code for performing TDA/RTDA is available in https://github.com/IBM/Matilda and code for CuNA can be found in https://github.com/BiomedSciAI/Geno4SD/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Association of ACE1 I/D polymorphism and susceptibility to COVID-19 in Egyptian children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Given the sparse data on the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) and its biological effector molecules ACE1 and ACE2 in pediatric COVID-19 cases, we investigated whether the ACE1 insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism could be a genetic marker for susceptibility to COVID-19 in Egyptian children and adolescents.

METHODS

This was a case-control study included four hundred sixty patients diagnosed with COVID-19, and 460 well-matched healthy control children and adolescents. The I/D polymorphism (rs1799752) in the ACE1 gene was genotyped by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), meanwhile the ACE serum concentrations were assessed by ELISA.

RESULTS

The ACE1 D/D genotype and Deletion allele were significantly more represented in patients with COVID-19 compared to the control group (55% vs. 28%; OR = 2.4; [95% CI: 1.46-3.95]; for the DD genotype; P = 0.002) and (68% vs. 52.5%; OR: 1.93; [95% CI: 1.49-2.5] for the D allele; P = 0.032). The presence of ACE1 D/D genotype was an independent risk factor for severe COVID-19 among studied patients (adjusted OR: 2.6; [95% CI: 1.6-9.7]; P < 0.001.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACE1 insertion/deletion polymorphism may confer susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection in Egyptian children and adolescents.

IMPACT

Recent studies suggested a crucial role of renin-angiotensin system and its biological effector molecules ACE1 and ACE2 in the pathogenesis and progression of COVID-19. To our knowledge, ours is the first study to investigate the association of ACE1 I/D polymorphism and susceptibility to COVID-19 in Caucasian children and adolescents. The presence of the ACE1 D/D genotype or ACE1 Deletion allele may confer susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and being associated with higher ACE serum levels; may constitute independent risk factors for severe COVID-19. The ACE1 I/D genotyping help design further clinical trials reconsidering RAS-pathway antagonists to achieve more efficient targeted therapies.

Acute and Post-Acute COVID-19 Cardiovascular Complications: A Comprehensive Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The risk of cardiovascular complications due to SARS-CoV-2 are significantly increased within the first 6 months of the infection. Patients with COVID-19 have an increased risk of death, and there is evidence that many may experience a wide range of post-acute cardiovascular complications. Our work aims to provide an update on current clinical aspects of diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular manifestations during acute and long-term COVID-19.

RECENT FINDINGS

SARS-CoV-2 has been shown to be associated with increased incidence of cardiovascular complications such as myocardial injury, heart failure, and dysrhythmias, as well as coagulation abnormalities not only during the acute phase but also beyond the first 30 days of the infection, associated with high mortality and poor outcomes. Cardiovascular complications during long-COVID-19 were found regardless of comorbidities such as age, hypertension, and diabetes; nevertheless, these populations remain at high risk for the worst outcomes during post-acute COVID-19. Emphasis should be given to the management of these patients. Treatment with low-dose oral propranolol, a beta blocker, for heart rate management may be considered, since it was found to significantly attenuate tachycardia and improve symptoms in postural tachycardia syndrome, while for patients on ACE inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), under no circumstances should these medications be withdrawn. In addition, in patients at high risk after hospitalization due to COVID-19, thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban 10 mg/day for 35 days improved clinical outcomes compared with no extended thromboprophylaxis. In this work we provide a comprehensive review on acute and post-acute COVID-19 cardiovascular complications, symptomatology, and pathophysiology mechanisms. We also discuss therapeutic strategies for these patients during acute and long-term care and highlight populations at risk. Our findings suggest that older patients with risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, and medical history of vascular disease have worse outcomes during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and are more likely to develop cardiovascular complications during long-COVID-19.

How Dexamethasone Used in Anti-COVID-19 Therapy Influenced Antihypertensive Treatment in Patients with SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic period, in the treatment approved by the WHO, along with antivirals, antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and anticoagulants, dexamethasone was always used. This study started from the professional concern related to the vasopressor effect of cortisone on blood pressure (BP).

METHODS

The study group was achieved by selecting, from a total of 356 patients hospitalized in the clinic, the patients with known hypertensive status at admission for SARS-CoV-2. Dexamethasone was part of the anti-COVID-19 treatment, with an administration of 4-6-8 mg/day, depending on bodyweight, for 10 days. All patients with hypertension received antihypertensive treatment in adjusted doses according to the recorded BP values.

RESULTS

Monitoring of BP in hospitalized patients was performed daily, in the morning and evening. If on the 2nd day of treatment, 84% of the patients partially responded to the treatment with a moderate decrease in BP, on the 3rd therapy day, the situation clearly improved: more than 75% of the patients had values of BP that can be classified as high-normal (38.23%) and normal (40.03%).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone for treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection did not have a notable influence on increasing BP, because the doses were low-moderate and prescribed for a short time.

A Meta-Analysis of Remote Ischemic Preconditioning in Lung Surgery and Its Potential Role in COVID-19

Purpose: To determine the effects of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) on pulmonary gas exchange in people undergoing pulmonary surgery and discuss a potential role of RIPC in COVID-19. Method: A search for studies examining the effects of RIPC after pulmonary surgery was performed. RevMan was used for statistical analyses examining measures of A-ado2, Pao2/Fio2, respiratory index (RI), a/A ratio and Paco2 obtained earlier after surgery (i.e., 6-8 hours) and later after surgery (i.e., 18-24 hours). Results: Four trials were included (N = 369 participants). Significant (p < 0.05) overall effects of RIPC were observed early after surgery on A-ado2 and RI (SMD -0.84 and SMD -1.23, respectively), and later after surgery on RI, Pao2/Fio2, and a/A ratio (SMD -0.39, 0.72, and 1.15, respectively) with the A-ado2 approaching significance (p = 0.05; SMD -0.45). Significant improvements in inflammatory markers and oxidative stress after RIPC were also observed. Conclusions: RIPC has the potential to improve pulmonary gas exchange, inflammatory markers, and oxidative stress in people with lung disease undergoing lung surgery and receiving mechanical ventilation. These potential improvements may be beneficial for people with COVID-19, but further investigation is warranted.

Crosstalk between SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Type II Diabetes

Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China, triggered by severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in late November 2019, spreading to more than 200 countries of the world, the ensuing pandemic to an enormous loss of lives, mainly the older population with comorbidities, like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obesity, and hypertension. Amongst these immune-debilitating diseases, SARS-CoV-2 infection is the most common in patients with diabetes due to the absence of a normal active immune system to fight the COVID-19. Recovery of patients having a history of diabetes from COVID-19 encounters several complications, and their management becomes cumbersome. For control of coronavirus, antiviral medications, glucose-lowering agents, and steroids have been carefully evaluated. In the present review, we discuss the crosstalk between SARS-CoV-2 infection and patients with a history of diabetes. We mainly emphasize the molecular factors that are involved in diabetic individuals recently infected by SARS-CoV-2 and developed COVID-19 disease. Lastly, we examine the medications available for the long-term management of diabetic patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Real-world studies: bridging the gap between trial-assessed efficacy and routine care

Even though randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have been accepted as the gold standard for official assessment of novel interventions, there is a substantial gap between the efficacy observed in RCTs and the impact on clinical practice and in terms of patient benefit. While real-world studies (RWS) are emerging to confer valuable complementing evidence in this regard and beyond, the evolving role of RWS is yet to be agreed. This article delineates an updated profile of RWS covering effectiveness verification, rare adverse effects discovery, indication repurposing, to name a few. RWS tends not only to improve the efficiency of clinical investigations for regulatory approval, but also optimizes the whole-life cycle evaluation of biomedical/pharmaceutical products.

Comorbidities and laboratory parameters associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection severity in patients from the southeast of Mexico: a cross-sectional study

Background. Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the etiological agent of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Among the risk factors associated with the severity of this disease is the presence of several metabolic disorders. For this reason, the aim of this research was to identify the comorbidities and laboratory parameters among COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), comparing the patients who required invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with those who did not require IMV, in order to determine the clinical characteristics associated with the COVID-19 severity.

Methods. We carried out a cross-sectional study among 152 patients who were admitted to the ICU from April 1 ^st to July 31 ^st, 2021, in whom the comorbidities and laboratory parameters associated with the SARS-CoV-2 infection severity were identified. The data of these patients was grouped into two main groups: “patients who required IMV” and “patients who did not require IMV”. The nonparametric Mann–Whitney U test for continuous data and the χ2 test for categorical data were used to compare the variables between both groups.

Results. Of the 152 COVID-19 patients who were admitted to the ICU, 66 required IMV and 86 did not require IMV. Regarding the comorbidities found in these patients, a higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), hypertension and obesity was observed among patients who required IMV vs. those who did not require IMV ( p<0.05). Concerning laboratory parameters, only glucose, Interleukin 6 (IL-6), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were significantly higher among patients who required IMV than in those who did not require IMV ( p<0.05).

Conclusion. This study performed in a Mexican population indicates that comorbidities such as: T2DM, hypertension and obesity, as well as elevated levels of glucose, IL-6, LDH and CRP are associated with the COVID-19 severity.

Impact of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibition on mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients with pre-existing hypertension: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The influence of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the critically ill COVID-19 patients with pre-existing hypertension remains uncertain. This study examined the impact of previous use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) on the critically ill COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

Data from an international, prospective, observational cohort study involving 354 hospitals spanning 54 countries were included. A cohort of 737 COVID-19 patients with pre-existing hypertension admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in 2020 were targeted. Multi-state survival analysis was performed to evaluate in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay up to 90 days following ICU admission.

RESULTS

A total of 737 patients were included-538 (73%) with pre-existing hypertension had received ACEi/ARBs before ICU admission, while 199 (27%) had not. Cox proportional hazards model showed that previous ACEi/ARB use was associated with a decreased hazard of in-hospital death (HR, 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.94). Sensitivity analysis adjusted for propensity scores showed similar results for hazards of death. The average length of hospital stay was longer in ACEi/ARB group with 21.2 days (95% CI 19.7-22.8 days) in ICU and 6.7 days (5.9-7.6 days) in general ward compared to non-ACEi/ARB group with 16.2 days (14.1-18.6 days) and 6.4 days (5.1-7.9 days), respectively. When analysed separately, results for ACEi or ARB patient groups were similar for both death and discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

In critically ill COVID-19 patients with comorbid hypertension, use of ACEi/ARBs prior to ICU admission was associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital mortality following adjustment for baseline characteristics although patients with ACEi/ARB showed longer length of hospital stay. Clinical trial registration The registration number: ACTRN12620000421932; The date of registration: 30, March 2020; The URL of the registration: https://www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au/anzctr/trial/ACTRN12620000421932 .

A Case-Control of Patients with COVID-19 to Explore the Association of Previous Hospitalisation Use of Medication on the Mortality of COVID-19 Disease: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Data from several cohorts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suggest that the most common comorbidities for severe COVID-19 disease are the elderly, high blood pressure, and diabetes; however, it is not currently known whether the previous use of certain drugs help or hinder recovery. This study aims to explore the association of previous hospitalisation use of medication on the mortality of COVID-19 disease. A retrospective case-control from two hospitals in Madrid, Spain, included all patients aged 18 years or above hospitalised with a diagnosis of COVID-19. A Propensity Score matching (PSM) analysis was performed. Confounding variables were considered to be age, sex, and the number of comorbidities. Finally, 3712 patients were included. Of these, 687 (18.5%) patients died (cases). The 22,446 medicine trademarks used previous to admission were classified according to the ATC, obtaining 689 final drugs; all of them were included in PSM analysis. Eleven drugs displayed a reduction in mortality: azithromycin, bemiparine, budesonide-formoterol fumarate, cefuroxime, colchicine, enoxaparin, ipratropium bromide, loratadine, mepyramine theophylline acetate, oral rehydration salts, and salbutamol sulphate. Eight final drugs displayed an increase in mortality: acetylsalicylic acid, digoxin, folic acid, mirtazapine, linagliptin, enalapril, atorvastatin, and allopurinol. Medication associated with survival (anticoagulants, antihistamines, azithromycin, bronchodilators, cefuroxime, colchicine, and inhaled corticosteroids) may be candidates for future clinical trials. Drugs associated with mortality show an interaction with the underlying conditions.

Triple jeopardy in ageing: COVID-19, co-morbidities and inflamm-ageing

Covid-19 endangers lives, has disrupted normal life, changed the way medicine is practised and is likely to alter our world for the foreseeable future. Almost two years on since the presumptive first diagnosis of COVID-19 in China, more than two hundred and fifty million cases have been confirmed and more than five million people have died globally, with the figures rising daily. One of the most striking aspects of COVID-19 illness is the marked difference in individuals' experiences of the disease. Some, most often younger groups, are asymptomatic, whereas others become severely ill with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), pneumonia or proceed to fatal organ disease. The highest death rates are in the older and oldest age groups and in people with co-morbidities such as diabetes, heart disease and obesity. Three major questions seem important to consider. What do we understand about changes in the immune system that might contribute to the older person's risk of developing severe COVID-19? What factors contribute to the higher morbidity and mortality in older people with COVID-19? How could immunocompetence in the older and the frailest individuals and populations be supported and enhanced to give protection from serious COVID-19 illness?

Inpatient use of metformin and acarbose is associated with reduced mortality of COVID-19 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Aims

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a strong risk factor for complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). The effect of T2DM medications on COVID‐19 outcomes remains unclear. In a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 131 patients with T2DM hospitalized for COVID‐19 in Wuhan, we have previously found that metformin use prior to hospitalization is associated with reduced mortality. The current study aims to investigate the effects of inpatient use of T2DM medications, including metformin, acarbose, insulin and sulfonylureas, on the mortality of COVID‐19 patients with T2DM during hospitalization.

Methods

We continue to carry out a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 131 patients with T2DM hospitalized for COVID‐19 and treated with different combinations of diabetes medications.

Results

We found that patients using metformin (p = .02) and acarbose (p = .04), alone or both together (p = .03), after admission were significantly more likely to survive than those who did not use either metformin or acarbose. 37 patients continued to take metformin after admission and 35 (94.6%) survived. Among the 57 patients who used acarbose after admission, 52 survived (91.2%). A total of 20 patients used both metformin and acarbose, while 57 used neither. Of the 20 dual‐use patients, 19 (95.0%) survived.

Conclusion

Our analyses suggest that inpatient use of metformin and acarbose together or alone during hospitalization should be studied in randomized trials.

Association of the patterns of use of medications with mortality of COVID-19 infection: a hospital-based observational study

OBJECTIVES

SARS-CoV-2 enters cells using the ACE2 receptor. Medications that affect ACE2 expression or function such as angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and ACE inhibitors (ACE-I) and metformin have the potential to counter the dysregulation of ACE2 by the virus and protect against viral injury. Here, we describe COVID-19 survival associated with ACE-I, ARB and metformin use.

DESIGN

This is a hospital-based observational study of patients with COVID-19 infection using logistic regression with correction for pre-existing conditions and propensity score weighted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate associations between medication use and mortality.

SETTING

Medical record data from the US Veterans Affairs (VA) were used to identify patients with a reverse transcription PCR diagnosis of COVID-19 infection, to classify patterns of ACE inhibitors (ACE-I), ARB, beta blockers, metformin, famotidine and remdesivir use, and, to capture mortality.

PARTICIPANTS

9532 hospitalised patients with COVID-19 infection followed for 60 days were analysed.

OUTCOME MEASURE

Death from any cause within 60 days of COVID-19 diagnosis was examined.

RESULTS

Discontinuation of ACE-I was associated with increased risk of death (OR: 1.4; 95% CI 1.2-1.7). Initiating (OR: 0.3; 95% CI 0.2-0.5) or continuous (OR: 0.6; 95% CI 0.5-0.7) ACE-I was associated with reduced risk of death. ARB and metformin associations were similar in direction and magnitude and also statistically significant. Results were unchanged when accounting for pre-existing morbidity and propensity score adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent randomised clinical trials support the safety of continuing ACE-I and ARB treatment in patients with COVID-19 where indicated. Our study extends these findings to suggest a possible COVID-19 survival benefit for continuing or initiating ACE-I, ARB and metformin medications. Randomised trials are appropriate to confirm or refute the therapeutic potential for ACE-I, ARBs and metformin.

Glucocorticoid excess and COVID-19 disease

The pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), a disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is causing high and rapid morbidity and mortality. Immune system response plays a crucial role in controlling and resolving the viral infection. Exogenous or endogenous glucocorticoid excess is characterized by increased susceptibility to infections, due to impairment of the innate and adaptive immune system. In addition, diabetes, hypertension, obesity and thromboembolism are conditions overrepresented in patients with hypercortisolism. Thus patients with chronic glucocorticoid (GC) excess may be at high risk of developing COVID-19 infection with a severe clinical course. Care and control of all comorbidities should be one of the primary goals in patients with hypercortisolism requiring immediate and aggressive treatment. The European Society of Endocrinology (ESE), has recently commissioned an urgent clinical guidance document on management of Cushing's syndrome in a COVID-19 period. In this review, we aim to discuss and expand some clinical points related to GC excess that may have an impact on COVID-19 infection, in terms of both contagion risk and clinical outcome. This document is addressed to all specialists who approach patients with endogenous or exogenous GC excess and COVID-19 infection.

Lung Cancer Models Reveal Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2-Induced Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition Contributes to Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pathophysiology

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease 2019 is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which enters host cells through the cell surface proteins ACE2 and TMPRSS2.

METHODS

Using a variety of normal and malignant models and tissues from the aerodigestive and respiratory tracts, we investigated the expression and regulation of ACE2 and TMPRSS2.

RESULTS

We find that ACE2 expression is restricted to a select population of epithelial cells. Notably, infection with SARS-CoV-2 in cancer cell lines, bronchial organoids, and patient nasal epithelium induces metabolic and transcriptional changes consistent with epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT), including up-regulation of ZEB1 and AXL, resulting in an increased EMT score. In addition, a transcriptional loss of genes associated with tight junction function occurs with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The SARS-CoV-2 receptor, ACE2, is repressed by EMT through the transforming growth factor-β, ZEB1 overexpression, and onset of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance. This suggests a novel model of SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis in which infected cells shift toward an increasingly mesenchymal state, associated with a loss of tight junction components with acute respiratory distress syndrome-protective effects. AXL inhibition and ZEB1 reduction, as with bemcentinib, offer a potential strategy to reverse this effect.

CONCLUSIONS

These observations highlight the use of aerodigestive and, especially, lung cancer model systems in exploring the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses and offer important insights into the potential mechanisms underlying the morbidity and mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 in healthy patients and patients with cancer alike.

Inconsistent and incomplete retraction of published research: A cross-sectional study on Covid-19 retractions and recommendations to mitigate risks for research, policy and practice

BACKGROUND

Retraction of published research can reduce the dissemination of incorrect or misleading information, but concerns have been raised about the clarity and rigor of the retraction process. Failure to clearly and consistently retract research has several risks, for example discredited or erroneous research may inform health research studies (e.g. clinical trials), policies and practices, potentially rendering these unreliable.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate consistency and clarity of research retraction, based on a case study of retracted Covid-19 research.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional study of retracted Covid-19 articles reporting empirical research findings, based on searches of Medline, Embase and Scopus on 10th July and 19th December 2020.

KEY RESULTS

We included 46 retracted Covid-19 articles. The number eligible for inclusion nearly doubled, from 26 to 46, in five months. Most articles (67%) were retracted from scientific journals and the remainder from preprint servers. Key findings: (1) reasons for retraction were not reported in 33% (15/46) of cases; (2) time from publication to retraction could not be determined in 43% (20/46) of cases; (3) More than half (59%) of retracted Covid-19 articles (27/46) remained available as original unmarked electronic documents after retraction (33% as full text and 26% as an abstract only). Sources of articles post-retraction were preprint servers, ResearchGate and, less commonly, websites including PubMed Central and the World Health Organization. A retracted journal article which controversially claimed a link between 5G technology and Covid-19 remains available in its original full text from at least 60 different websites.

CONCLUSIONS

The retraction process is inconsistent and often ambiguous, with more than half of retracted Covid-19 research articles remaining available, unmarked, from a wide range of online sources. There is an urgent need to improve guidance on the retraction process and to extend this to cover preprint servers. We provide structured recommendations to address these concerns and to reduce the risks that arise when retracted research is inappropriately cited.

The Crosstalk between SARS-CoV-2 Infection and the RAA System in Essential Hypertension-Analyses Using Systems Approach

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), responsible for the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, has affected and continues to affect millions of people across the world. Patients with essential arterial hypertension and renal complications are at particular risk of the fatal course of this infection. In our study, we have modeled the selected processes in a patient with essential hypertension and chronic kidney disease (CKD) suffering from COVID-19, emphasizing the function of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone (RAA) system. The model has been built in the language of Petri nets theory. Using the systems approach, we have analyzed how COVID-19 may affect the studied organism, and we have checked whether the administration of selected anti-hypertensive drugs (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and/or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs)) may impact the severity of the infection. Besides, we have assessed whether these drugs effectively lower blood pressure in the case of SARS-CoV-2 infection affecting essential hypertensive patients. Our research has shown that neither the ACEIs nor the ARBs worsens the course infection. However, when assessing the treatment of hypertension in the active SARS-CoV-2 infection, we have observed that ARBs might not effectively reduce blood pressure; they may even have the slightly opposite effect. On the other hand, we have confirmed the effectiveness of arterial hypertension treatment in patients receiving ACEIs. Moreover, we have found that the simultaneous use of ARBs and ACEIs averages the effects of taking both drugs, thus leading to only a slight decrease in blood pressure. We are a way from suggesting that ARBs in all hypertensive patients with COVID-19 are ineffective, but we have shown that research in this area should still be continued.

Insights into the association of ACEIs/ARBs use and COVID-19 prognosis: a multistate modelling study of nationwide hospital surveillance data from Belgium

OBJECTIVES

The widespread use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) by patients with chronic conditions raised early concerns on the potential exacerbation of COVID-19 severity and fatality. Previous studies addressing this question have used standard methods that may lead to biased estimates when analysing hospital data because of the presence of competing events and event-related dependency. We investigated the association of ACEIs/ARBs' use with COVID-19 disease outcomes using time-to-event data in a multistate setting to account for competing events and minimise bias.

SETTING

Nationwide surveillance data from 119 Belgian hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Medical records of 10 866 patients hospitalised from 14 March 2020to 14 June 2020 with a confirmed SARS-CoV-19 infection and information about ACEIs/ARBs' use.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Multistate, multivariate Cox-Markov models were used to estimate the hazards of patients transitioning through health states from admission to discharge or death, along with transition probabilities calculated by combining the baseline cumulative hazard and regression coefficients.

RESULTS

After accounting for potential confounders, there was no discernable association between ACEIs/ARBs' use and transfer to intensive care unit (ICU). Contrastingly, for patients without ICU transfer, ACEIs/ARBs' use was associated with a modest increase in recovery (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.13, p=0.027) and reduction in fatality (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.93, p=0.001) transitions. For patients transferred to ICU admission, no evidence of an association between ACEIs/ARBs' use and recovery (HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.38, p=0.098) or in-hospital death (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.12, p=0.381) was observed. Male gender and older age were significantly associated with higher risk of ICU admission or death. Chronic cardiometabolic comorbidities were also associated with less recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

For the first time, a multistate model was used to address magnitude and direction of the association of ACEIs/ARBs' use on COVID-19 progression. By minimising bias, this study provided a robust indication of a protective, although modest, association with recovery and survival.

Discontinuation versus continuation of renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors in COVID-19 (ACEI-COVID): a prospective, parallel group, randomised, controlled, open-label trial

Background

SARS-CoV-2 entry in human cells depends on angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, which can be upregulated by inhibitors of the renin–angiotensin system (RAS). We aimed to test our hypothesis that discontinuation of chronic treatment with ACE-inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) mitigates the course o\f recent-onset COVID-19.

Methods

ACEI-COVID was a parallel group, randomised, controlled, open-label trial done at 35 centres in Austria and Germany. Patients aged 18 years and older were enrolled if they presented with recent symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and were chronically treated with ACEIs or ARBs. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to discontinuation or continuation of RAS inhibition for 30 days. Primary outcome was the maximum sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score within 30 days, where death was scored with the maximum achievable SOFA score. Secondary endpoints were area under the death-adjusted SOFA score (AUC_SOFA), mean SOFA score, admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, and death. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04353596.

Findings

Between April 20, 2020, and Jan 20, 2021, 204 patients (median age 75 years [IQR 66–80], 37% females) were randomly assigned to discontinue (n=104) or continue (n=100) RAS inhibition. Within 30 days, eight (8%) of 104 died in the discontinuation group and 12 (12%) of 100 patients died in the continuation group (p=0·42). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint between the discontinuation and continuation group (median [IQR] maximum SOFA score 0·00 (0·00–2·00) vs 1·00 (0·00–3·00); p=0·12). Discontinuation was associated with a significantly lower AUC_SOFA (0·00 [0·00–9·25] vs 3·50 [0·00–23·50]; p=0·040), mean SOFA score (0·00 [0·00–0·31] vs 0·12 [0·00–0·78]; p=0·040), and 30-day SOFA score (0·00 [10–90th percentile, 0·00–1·20] vs 0·00 [0·00–24·00]; p=0·023). At 30 days, 11 (11%) in the discontinuation group and 23 (23%) in the continuation group had signs of organ dysfunction (SOFA score ≥1) or were dead (p=0·017). There were no significant differences for mechanical ventilation (10 (10%) vs 8 (8%), p=0·87) and admission to intensive care unit (20 [19%] vs 18 [18%], p=0·96) between the discontinuation and continuation group.

Interpretation

Discontinuation of RAS-inhibition in COVID-19 had no significant effect on the maximum severity of COVID-19 but may lead to a faster and better recovery. The decision to continue or discontinue should be made on an individual basis, considering the risk profile, the indication for RAS inhibition, and the availability of alternative therapies and outpatient monitoring options.

Funding

Austrian Science Fund and German Center for Cardiovascular Research.

Chronic Cardio-Metabolic Disease Increases the Risk of Worse Outcomes Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: A Multicenter, Retrospective, and Real-World Study

Background Although chronic cardio-metabolic disease is a common comorbidity among patients with COVID-19, its effects on the clinical characteristics and outcome are not well known. Methods and Results This study aimed to explore the association between underlying cardio-metabolic disease and mortality with COVID-19 among hospitalized patients. This multicenter, retrospective, and real-world study was conducted from January 22, 2020 to March 25, 2020 in China. Data between patients with and without 5 main cardio-metabolic diseases including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, and hyperlipidemia were compared. A total of 1303 hospitalized patients were included in the final analysis. Of them, 520 patients (39.9%) had cardio-metabolic disease. Compared with patients without cardio-metabolic disease, more patients with cardio-metabolic disease had COVID-related complications including acute respiratory distress syndrome (9.81% versus 3.32%; P<0.001), acute kidney injury (4.23% versus 1.40%; P=0.001), secondary infection (13.9% versus 9.8%; P=0.026), hypoproteinemia (12.1% versus 5.75%; P<0.001), and coagulopathy (19.4% versus 10.3%; P<0.001), had higher incidences of the severe type of COVID-19 (32.9% versus 16.7%; P<0.001), more were admitted to the intensive care unit (11.7% versus 7.92%; P=0.021), and required mechanical ventilation (9.8% versus 4.3%; P<0.001). When the number of the patients' cardio-metabolic diseases was 0, 1, and >2, the mortality was 4.2%, 11.1%, and 19.8%, respectively. The multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio of mortality among patients with cardio-metabolic disease was 1.80 (95% CI, 1.17-2.77). Conclusions Cardio-metabolic disease was a common condition among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and it was associated with higher risks of in-hospital mortality.

Hypertension delays viral clearance and exacerbates airway hyperinflammation in patients with COVID-19

In coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), hypertension and cardiovascular diseases are major risk factors for critical disease progression. However, the underlying causes and the effects of the main anti-hypertensive therapies-angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs)-remain unclear. Combining clinical data (n = 144) and single-cell sequencing data of airway samples (n = 48) with in vitro experiments, we observed a distinct inflammatory predisposition of immune cells in patients with hypertension that correlated with critical COVID-19 progression. ACEI treatment was associated with dampened COVID-19-related hyperinflammation and with increased cell intrinsic antiviral responses, whereas ARB treatment related to enhanced epithelial-immune cell interactions. Macrophages and neutrophils of patients with hypertension, in particular under ARB treatment, exhibited higher expression of the pro-inflammatory cytokines CCL3 and CCL4 and the chemokine receptor CCR1. Although the limited size of our cohort does not allow us to establish clinical efficacy, our data suggest that the clinical benefits of ACEI treatment in patients with COVID-19 who have hypertension warrant further investigation.

Platelet Activation and Plasma Levels of Furin Are Associated With Prognosis of Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and COVID-19

[Figure: see text].

The use of mechanistic reasoning in assessing coronavirus interventions

RATIONALE

Evidence-based medicine (EBM), the dominant approach to assessing the effectiveness of clinical and public health interventions, focuses on the results of association studies. EBM+ is a development of EBM that systematically considers mechanistic studies alongside association studies.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore examples of the importance of mechanistic evidence to coronavirus research.

METHODS

We have reviewed the mechanistic evidence in four major areas that are relevant to the management of COVID-19.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

(a) Assessment of combination therapy for MERS highlights the need for systematic assessment of mechanistic evidence. (b) That hypertension is a risk factor for severe disease in the case of SARS-CoV-2 suggests that altering hypertension treatment might alleviate disease, but the mechanisms are complex, and it is essential to consider and evaluate multiple mechanistic hypotheses. (c) Confidence that public health interventions will be effective requires a detailed assessment of social and psychological components of the mechanisms of their action, in addition to mechanisms of disease. (d) In particular, if vaccination programmes are to be effective, they must be carefully tailored to the social context; again, mechanistic evidence is crucial. We conclude that coronavirus research is best situated within the EBM+ evaluation framework.

Attacking COVID-19 Progression Using Multi-Drug Therapy for Synergetic Target Engagement

COVID-19 is a devastating respiratory and inflammatory illness caused by a new coronavirus that is rapidly spreading throughout the human population. Over the past 12 months, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for COVID-19, has already infected over 160 million (>20% located in United States) and killed more than 3.3 million people around the world (>20% deaths in USA). As we face one of the most challenging times in our recent history, there is an urgent need to identify drug candidates that can attack SARS-CoV-2 on multiple fronts. We have therefore initiated a computational dynamics drug pipeline using molecular modeling, structure simulation, docking and machine learning models to predict the inhibitory activity of several million compounds against two essential SARS-CoV-2 viral proteins and their host protein interactors-S/Ace2, Tmprss2, Cathepsins L and K, and Mpro-to prevent binding, membrane fusion and replication of the virus, respectively. All together, we generated an ensemble of structural conformations that increase high-quality docking outcomes to screen over >6 million compounds including all FDA-approved drugs, drugs under clinical trial (>3000) and an additional >30 million selected chemotypes from fragment libraries. Our results yielded an initial set of 350 high-value compounds from both new and FDA-approved compounds that can now be tested experimentally in appropriate biological model systems. We anticipate that our results will initiate screening campaigns and accelerate the discovery of COVID-19 treatments.

COVID-19 pathophysiology may be driven by an imbalance in the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system

SARS-CoV-2 uses ACE2, an inhibitor of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System (RAAS), for cellular entry. Studies indicate that RAAS imbalance worsens the prognosis in COVID-19. We present a consecutive retrospective COVID-19 cohort with findings of frequent pulmonary thromboembolism (17%), high pulmonary artery pressure (60%) and lung MRI perfusion disturbances. We demonstrate, in swine, that infusing angiotensin II or blocking ACE2 induces increased pulmonary artery pressure, reduces blood oxygenation, increases coagulation, disturbs lung perfusion, induces diffuse alveolar damage, and acute tubular necrosis compared to control animals. We further demonstrate that this imbalanced state can be ameliorated by infusion of an angiotensin receptor blocker and low-molecular-weight heparin. In this work, we show that a pathophysiological state in swine induced by RAAS imbalance shares several features with the clinical COVID-19 presentation. Therefore, we propose that severe COVID-19 could partially be driven by a RAAS imbalance.

COVID-19 pathophysiology may be driven by an imbalance in the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system

SARS-CoV-2 uses ACE2, an inhibitor of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System (RAAS), for cellular entry. Studies indicate that RAAS imbalance worsens the prognosis in COVID-19. We present a consecutive retrospective COVID-19 cohort with findings of frequent pulmonary thromboembolism (17%), high pulmonary artery pressure (60%) and lung MRI perfusion disturbances. We demonstrate, in swine, that infusing angiotensin II or blocking ACE2 induces increased pulmonary artery pressure, reduces blood oxygenation, increases coagulation, disturbs lung perfusion, induces diffuse alveolar damage, and acute tubular necrosis compared to control animals. We further demonstrate that this imbalanced state can be ameliorated by infusion of an angiotensin receptor blocker and low-molecular-weight heparin. In this work, we show that a pathophysiological state in swine induced by RAAS imbalance shares several features with the clinical COVID-19 presentation. Therefore, we propose that severe COVID-19 could partially be driven by a RAAS imbalance.

Renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

AIMS

We sought to evaluate the association of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or AT1 blockers (ARB) therapy with clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Electronic databases were searched to identify published studies that reported clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 who were or were not taking an ACEI/ARB. We studied all-cause mortality and/or severe disease outcomes. Fully adjusted effect estimates from individual studies were pooled using a random-effects model. In total, 34 (31 cohort-based and three case-control) studies met our eligibility criteria. Due to the inherent differences between cohort and case-control studies, we did not combine results of these studies but used them to identify the consistency of their results. The 31 cohort studies provided outcome data for 87 951 patients with COVID-19, of whom 22 383/83 963 (26.7%) were on ACEI/ARB therapy. In pooled analysis, we found no association between the use of ACEI/ARB and all-cause mortality/severe disease [relative risk: 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-1.03, I2 = 57%, P = 0.20] or occurrence of severe disease (relative risk: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.74-1.17, I2 = 56%, P = 0.55). Analysis of three population-based case-control studies identified no significant association between ACEI/ARB (pooled odds ratio: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.81-1.23, I2 = 0, P = 0.98) and all-cause mortality/severe disease. In 13 of the 31 cohort studies as well as in three case-control studies that reported outcomes separately for ACEI and ARB, there was no differential effect for mortality/severe disease outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In patients with COVID-19, we found no association between ACEI/ARB treatment and mortality/severe disease. ACEI/ARB should not be discontinued, unless clinically indicated.

Evaluating sources of bias in observational studies of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker use during COVID-19: beyond confounding

Concerns over ACE inhibitor or ARB use to treat hypertension during COVID-19 remain unresolved. Although studies using more robust methodologies provided some clarity, sources of bias persist and it remains critical to quickly address this question. In this review, we discuss pernicious sources of bias using a causal model framework, including time-varying confounder, collider, information, and time-dependent bias, in the context of recently published studies. We discuss causal inference methodologies that can address these issues, including causal diagrams, time-to-event analyses, sensitivity analyses, and marginal structural modeling. We discuss effect modification and we propose a role for causal mediation analysis to estimate indirect effects via mediating factors, especially components of the renin--angiotensin system. Thorough knowledge of these sources of bias and the appropriate methodologies to address them is crucial when evaluating observational studies to inform patient management decisions regarding whether ACE inhibitors or ARBs are associated with greater risk from COVID-19.

COVID-19 and Diabetic Ketoacidosis: Report of Eight Cases

Aim To describe the clinical characteristics and outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Methods We report eight cases of diabetic ketoacidosis in COVID-19 who presented to our institution in New Jersey, USA. COVID-19 was diagnosed by nasopharyngeal swab reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The patients' electronic medical records were reviewed. Data on patients' age, sex, ethnicity, laboratory values, glycosylated hemoglobin level, oral antihyperglycemic agents (OHAs), insulin, and clinical outcomes were collected. Results The median age of the patient was 42.5 years, and seven were males and one was female. Out of eight patients, five had type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), two had undiagnosed DM, and one had type 1 DM. Median value of initial glucose on presentation was 454 mg/dL. Median value of HbA1c on presentation was 11.4% and of anion gap was 26.5 mEq/L. Four patients had large ketonemia, one patient had moderate ketonemia, and three patients had small ketonemia. All the patients were started on standard treatment protocol for DKA with intravenous fluids and IV insulin infusion. Acute kidney injury (AKI) was seen in four patients, and one patient required renal replacement therapy. Out of eight patients, three required mechanical ventilation, and the same three patients died. Conclusion Our case series shows that COVID-19 infection can precipitate DKA in patients with known diabetes mellitus patients or as a first manifestation in undiagnosed DM patients; COVID-19 with DKA is associated with substantial mortality. Further studies are needed to characterize poor risk factors associated with mortality in these patients.

Inpatient Use of Metformin and Acarbose Is Associated with Reduced Mortality of COVID-19 Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a strong risk factor for complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The effect of T2DM medications on COVID-19 outcomes remains unclear. In a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 131 patients with T2DM hospitalized for COVID-19 in Wuhan, we have previously found that metformin use prior to hospitalization is associated with reduced mortality. Here we continue to investigate the effects of inpatient use of T2DM medications, including metformin, acarbose, insulin, and sulfonylureas, on the mortality of COVID-19 patients with T2DM during hospitalization. We found that patients using metformin and acarbose, alone or both together, after admission were significantly more likely to survive than those who did not use either metformin or acarbose. Thus, our analyses suggest that inpatient use of metformin and acarbose together or alone during hospitalization should be studied in randomized trials.

High-dose ACEi might be harmful in COVID-19 patients with serious respiratory distress syndrome by leading to excessive bradykinin receptor activation

PURPOSE

We aimed to critically review the available information on the potential contribution of excessive kallikrein-kinin systems (KKSs) activation to severe respiratory inflammation in SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the likely consequence of ACE inhibition in seriously affected patients.

METHODS

The literature related to the above topic was reviewed including papers that analysed the connections, actions, interactions, consequences and occasionally suggestions for rational interventions.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

Severe broncho-alveolar inflammation seems to be caused, at least in part, by upregulation of the KKS that increases plasma and/or local tissue concentrations of bradykinin (BK) in patients with COVID-19 infection. Besides KKS activation, suppression of ACE activity results in decreased bradykinin degradation, and these changes in concert can lead to excessive BK B1 and B2 receptor (BKB1R/BKB2R) activation. Aminopeptidase P (APP), and carboxypeptidase N also degrade bradykinin, but their protein expression and activity are unclear in COVID-19 infection. On the other hand, ACE2 expression is upregulated in patients with COVID-19 infection, so ACE2 activity is unlikely to be decreased despite blockade of part of ACE2 by the virus for entry into the cells. ACE2 cleaves lys-des-arginine9BK and arg-des-arginine9BK, the active metabolites of bradykinin, which stimulate the BKB1R receptor. Stimulation of BKB1R/BKB2R can exacerbate the pulmonary inflammatory response by causing vascular leakage and edema, vasodilation, smooth muscle spasm and stimulation of pain afferent nerves. Despite all uncertainties, it seems rational to treat comorbid COVID patients with serious respiratory distress syndrome with ARBs instead of high-dose ACE inhibitor (ACEi) that will further decrease bradykinin degradation and enhance BKB1R/BKB2R activation, but ACEi may not be contraindicated in patients with mild pulmonary symptoms.

Association of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers With the Risk of Hospitalization and Death in Hypertensive Patients With COVID-19

Background

Despite its clinical significance, the risk of severe infection requiring hospitalization among outpatients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection who receive angiotensin‐converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) remains uncertain.

Methods and Results

In a propensity score–matched outpatient cohort (January–May 2020) of 2263 Medicare Advantage and commercially insured individuals with hypertension and a positive outpatient SARS‐CoV‐2, we determined the association of ACE inhibitors and ARBs with COVID‐19 hospitalization. In a concurrent inpatient cohort of 7933 hospitalized with COVID‐19, we tested their association with in‐hospital mortality. The robustness of the observations was assessed in a contemporary cohort (May–August). In the outpatient study, neither ACE inhibitors (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 0.53–1.13, P=0.18) nor ARBs (HR, 0.88; 0.61–1.26, P=0.48) were associated with hospitalization risk. ACE inhibitors were associated with lower hospitalization risk in the older Medicare group (HR, 0.61; 0.41–0.93, P=0.02), but not the younger commercially insured group (HR, 2.14; 0.82–5.60, P=0.12; P‐interaction 0.09). Neither ACE inhibitors nor ARBs were associated with lower hospitalization risk in either population in the validation cohort. In the primary inpatient study cohort, neither ACE inhibitors (HR, 0.97; 0.81–1.16; P=0.74) nor ARBs (HR, 1.15; 0.95–1.38, P=0.15) were associated with in‐hospital mortality. These observations were consistent in the validation cohort.

Conclusions

ACE inhibitors and ARBs were not associated with COVID‐19 hospitalization or mortality. Despite early evidence for a potential association between ACE inhibitors and severe COVID‐19 prevention in older individuals, the inconsistency of this observation in recent data argues against a role for prophylaxis.

Why Is COVID-19 More Severe in Patients With Diabetes? The Role of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2, Endothelial Dysfunction and the Immunoinflammatory System

Meta-analyses have indicated that individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes are at increased risk of suffering a severe form of COVID-19 and have a higher mortality rate than the non-diabetic population. Patients with diabetes have chronic, low-level systemic inflammation, which results in global cellular dysfunction underlying the wide variety of symptoms associated with the disease, including an increased risk of respiratory infection. While the increased severity of COVID-19 amongst patients with diabetes is not yet fully understood, the common features associated with both diseases are dysregulated immune and inflammatory responses. An additional key player in COVID-19 is the enzyme, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), which is essential for adhesion and uptake of virus into cells prior to replication. Changes to the expression of ACE2 in diabetes have been documented, but they vary across different organs and the importance of such changes on COVID-19 severity are still under investigation. This review will examine and summarise existing data on how immune and inflammatory processes interplay with the pathogenesis of COVID-19, with a particular focus on the impacts that diabetes, endothelial dysfunction and the expression dynamics of ACE2 have on the disease severity.

COVID-19 alters thinking and management in metabolic diseases

Metabolic diseases emerged as important risk factors for severe COVID-19, but the mechanisms responsible remained unclear for some time. The severity of metabolic diseases was also associated with worse outcomes in patients with COVID-19, forcing clinicians to adjust their thinking on which patients with metabolic disease, but without COVID-19, to prioritize for treatment during and immediately after the pandemic.

Lung cancer models reveal SARS-CoV-2-induced EMT contributes to COVID-19 pathophysiology

COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, which enters host cells via the cell surface proteins ACE2 and TMPRSS2. Using a variety of normal and malignant models and tissues from the aerodigestive and respiratory tracts, we investigated the expression and regulation of ACE2 and TMPRSS2. We find that ACE2 expression is restricted to a select population of highly epithelial cells. Notably, infection with SARS-CoV-2 in cancer cell lines, bronchial organoids, and patient nasal epithelium, induces metabolic and transcriptional changes consistent with epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT), including upregulation of ZEB1 and AXL, resulting in an increased EMT score. Additionally, a transcriptional loss of genes associated with tight junction function occurs with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The SARS-CoV-2 receptor, ACE2, is repressed by EMT via TGFbeta, ZEB1 overexpression and onset of EGFR TKI inhibitor resistance. This suggests a novel model of SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis in which infected cells shift toward an increasingly mesenchymal state, associated with a loss of tight junction components with acute respiratory distress syndrome-protective effects. AXL-inhibition and ZEB1-reduction, as with bemcentinib, offers a potential strategy to reverse this effect. These observations highlight the utility of aerodigestive and, especially, lung cancer model systems in exploring the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses, and offer important insights into the potential mechanisms underlying the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 in healthy patients and cancer patients alike.

Effect of Discontinuing vs Continuing Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers on Days Alive and Out of the Hospital in Patients Admitted With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

It is unknown whether angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) have a positive, neutral, or negative effect on clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Objective

To determine whether discontinuation compared with continuation of ACEIs or ARBs changed the number of days alive and out of the hospital through 30 days.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A randomized clinical trial of 659 patients hospitalized in Brazil with mild to moderate COVID-19 who were taking ACEIs or ARBs prior to hospitalization (enrolled: April 9-June 26, 2020; final follow-up: July 26, 2020).

Interventions

Discontinuation (n = 334) or continuation (n = 325) of ACEIs or ARBs.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the number of days alive and out of the hospital through 30 days. Secondary outcomes included death, cardiovascular death, and COVID-19 progression.

Results

Among 659 patients, the median age was 55.1 years (interquartile range [IQR], 46.1-65.0 years), 14.7% were aged 70 years or older, 40.4% were women, and 100% completed the trial. The median time from symptom onset to hospital admission was 6 days (IQR, 4-9 days) and 27.2% of patients had an oxygen saturation of less than 94% of room air at baseline. In terms of clinical severity, 57.1% of patients were considered mild at hospital admission and 42.9% were considered moderate. There was no significant difference in the number of days alive and out of the hospital in patients in the discontinuation group (mean, 21.9 days [SD, 8 days]) vs patients in the continuation group (mean, 22.9 days [SD, 7.1 days]) and the mean ratio was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.90-1.01). There also was no statistically significant difference in death (2.7% for the discontinuation group vs 2.8% for the continuation group; odds ratio [OR], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.38-2.52]), cardiovascular death (0.6% vs 0.3%, respectively; OR, 1.95 [95% CI, 0.19-42.12]), or COVID-19 progression (38.3% vs 32.3%; OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 0.95-1.80]). The most common adverse events were respiratory failure requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (9.6% in the discontinuation group vs 7.7% in the continuation group), shock requiring vasopressors (8.4% vs 7.1%, respectively), acute myocardial infarction (7.5% vs 4.6%), new or worsening heart failure (4.2% vs 4.9%), and acute kidney failure requiring hemodialysis (3.3% vs 2.8%).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients hospitalized with mild to moderate COVID-19 and who were taking ACEIs or ARBs before hospital admission, there was no significant difference in the mean number of days alive and out of the hospital for those assigned to discontinue vs continue these medications. These findings do not support routinely discontinuing ACEIs or ARBs among patients hospitalized with mild to moderate COVID-19 if there is an indication for treatment.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04364893.

Novel therapeutics for the treatment of hypertension and its associated complications: peptide- and nonpeptide-based strategies

The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is responsible for maintaining blood pressure and vascular tone. Modulation of the RAAS, therefore, interferes with essential cellular processes and leads to high blood pressure, oxidative stress, inflammation, fibrosis, and hypertrophy. Consequently, these conditions cause fatal cardiovascular and renal complications. Thus, the primary purpose of hypertension treatment is to diminish or inhibit overactivated RAAS. Currently available RAAS inhibitors have proven effective in reducing blood pressure; however, beyond hypertension, they have failed to treat end-target organ injury. In addition, RAAS inhibitors have some intolerable adverse effects, such as hyperkalemia and hypotension. These gaps in the available treatment for hypertension require further investigation of the development of safe and effective therapies. Current research is focused on the combination of existing and novel treatments that neutralize the angiotensin II type I (AT1) receptor-mediated action of the angiotensin II peptide. Preclinical studies of peptide- and nonpeptide-based therapeutic agents demonstrate their conspicuous impact on the treatment of cardiovascular diseases in animal models. In this review, we will discuss novel therapeutic agents being developed as RAAS inhibitors that show prominent effects in both preclinical and clinical studies. In addition, we will also highlight the need for improvement in the efficacy of existing drugs in the absence of new prominent antihypertensive drugs.

Repurposing therapeutic agents against SARS-CoV-2 infection: most promising and neoteric progress

INTRODUCTION

The pathogenic and highly transmissible etiological agent, SARS-CoV-2, has caused a serious threat COVID-19 pandemic. WHO has declared the epidemic a public health emergency of international concern owing to its high contagiosity, mortality rate, and morbidity. Till now, there is no approved vaccine or drug to combat the COVID-19 and avert this global crisis.

AREAS COVERED

In this narrative review, we summarized the updated results (January to August 2020) of the most promising repurposing therapeutic candidates to treat the SARS-CoV-2 viral infection. The repurposed drugs classified under four headlines like antivirals, anti-parasitic, immune-modulating, and miscellaneous drugs were discussed with their in vitro efficacy to recent clinical advancements against COVID-19.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently, palliative care, ranging from outpatient management to intensive care, including oxygen administration, ventilator support, intravenous fluids therapy, with some repurposed drugs, are the primary weapons to fight against COVID-19. Until a safe and effective vaccine is developed, an evidence-based drug repurposing strategy might be the wisest option to save people from this catastrophe. Several existing drugs are now under clinical trials, and some of them are approved in different places of the world for emergency use or as adjuvant therapy in COVID-19 with standard of care.

Fallacies in medical practice: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibition and COVID-19 as a Paradigm

In emergency situations, such as during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, medical community looks for quick answers and guidance. Under these circumstances, experts instead of admitting ignorance, feel obliged to give an answer, often pressurized by political or other authorities, even when such an answer is unavailable. Under these circumstances, publications based on fallacious reasoning are virtually unavoidable. In the present review, we summarize examples underlying fallacious reasoning recommendations regarding treatment with Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone inhibitors (RAASi) in the COVID-19 context. Most scientific societies emphasize that RAASi use is safe and that these agents should not be discontinued, based mainly on the results of observational studies (OSs) and occasionally preprints, as relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are currently lacking. However, over the past 4 decades, results from successful RCTs have repeatedly proved that practices based on OSs were wrong. Lack of RCTs results in uncertainty. In this setting, the physician's wisdom and knowledge related to pathophysiologic mechanisms and effect of pharmacologic agents become even more important as they may limit fallacies. Based on these principles, in diseases (e.g., mild, or moderate arterial hypertension, etc.) where equally effective alternative therapies to RAASi are available, these therapies should be applied, whereas in diseases (e.g., heart failure, diabetic kidney disease, etc.), where equally effective alternative therapy compared to RAASi is not available, RAASi should be used. Admittedly this strategy, like all the other recommendations, is not based on solid evidence but is intended to be individualized and follows the Hippocratic "Primum non nocere".

Molecular basis for drug repurposing to study the interface of the S protein in SARS-CoV-2 and human ACE2 through docking, characterization, and molecular dynamics for natural drug candidates

A novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) identified in Wuhan state of China in 2019 is the causative agent of deadly disease COVID-19. It has spread across the globe (more than 210 countries) within a short period. Coronaviruses pose serious health threats to both humans and animals. A recent publication reported an experimental 3D complex structure of the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 showed that the ectodomain of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein binds to the peptidase domain (PD) of human ACE2 with a dissociation constant (Kd) of ~ 15 nM. In this study, we focused on inhibitors for ACE2: S protein complex using virtual screening and inhibition studies through molecular docking for over 200,000 natural compounds. Toxicity analysis was also performed for the best hits, and the final complex structures for four complexes were subjected to 400 ns molecular dynamics simulations for stability testing. We found two natural origin inhibitors for the S protein: human ACE2 complex (Andrographolide and Pterostilbene) which displayed better inhibition potential for ACE2 receptor and its binding with the S protein of SARS-CoV-2. Comparative studies were also performed to test and verify that these two drug candidates are also better than hydroxychloroquine which is known to inhibit this complex. However, we needed better potential drug candidates to overcome the side effects of hydroxychloroquine. Supplementary experimental studies need to be carried forward to corroborate the viability of these two new inhibitors for ACE2: S protein complex so as to curb down COVID-19.

A network medicine approach to investigation and population-based validation of disease manifestations and drug repurposing for COVID-19

The global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has led to unprecedented social and economic consequences. The risk of morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19 increases dramatically in the presence of coexisting medical conditions, while the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Furthermore, there are no approved therapies for COVID-19. This study aims to identify SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis, disease manifestations, and COVID-19 therapies using network medicine methodologies along with clinical and multi-omics observations. We incorporate SARS-CoV-2 virus-host protein-protein interactions, transcriptomics, and proteomics into the human interactome. Network proximity measurement revealed underlying pathogenesis for broad COVID-19-associated disease manifestations. Analyses of single-cell RNA sequencing data show that co-expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 is elevated in absorptive enterocytes from the inflamed ileal tissues of Crohn disease patients compared to uninflamed tissues, revealing shared pathobiology between COVID-19 and inflammatory bowel disease. Integrative analyses of metabolomics and transcriptomics (bulk and single-cell) data from asthma patients indicate that COVID-19 shares an intermediate inflammatory molecular profile with asthma (including IRAK3 and ADRB2). To prioritize potential treatments, we combined network-based prediction and a propensity score (PS) matching observational study of 26,779 individuals from a COVID-19 registry. We identified that melatonin usage (odds ratio [OR] = 0.72, 95% CI 0.56-0.91) is significantly associated with a 28% reduced likelihood of a positive laboratory test result for SARS-CoV-2 confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction assay. Using a PS matching user active comparator design, we determined that melatonin usage was associated with a reduced likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 positive test result compared to use of angiotensin II receptor blockers (OR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.54-0.92) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.90). Importantly, melatonin usage (OR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.31-0.75) is associated with a 52% reduced likelihood of a positive laboratory test result for SARS-CoV-2 in African Americans after adjusting for age, sex, race, smoking history, and various disease comorbidities using PS matching. In summary, this study presents an integrative network medicine platform for predicting disease manifestations associated with COVID-19 and identifying melatonin for potential prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

Mortality and use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in COVID 19 disease: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Interest exists concerning the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) in patients with COVID-19 disease.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to perform a systematic review on mortality associated to the use of ACEi in patients with COVID-19 disease.

METHODS

Search in Medline (PubMed), in ISI Web of Knowledge and in medRxiv database; use of other sources.

RESULTS

A total of 33 articles were evaluated. Concerning the papers used to produce the meta-analyses, 7 studies were selected, 5 of which were used. These 5 studies involved a total number of 944 patients treated with ACEi and 5173 not treated with ACEi. Increased mortality was seen in association to the use of ACEi in the context of COVID-19 disease (ACEi users vs nonusers; odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.15; P = .04). When compared to mortality in patients treated with angiotensin receptor blockers, mortality of patients treated with ACEi was not significantly different (odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.21; P = .74). Concerning the remaining reports, different types of data adjustments were used by several authors, after which increased mortality was not seen in association to the use of ACEi in this context.

CONCLUSIONS

ACEi use could act as a marker of increased mortality risk in some but not all COVID-19 disease settings. The data now presented do not prove a causal relation but argue in favor of carrying out clinical trials studying ACEi in COVID-19 patients, to establish the safety of ACEi use in this context.