Randomized Trial of Metformin, Ivermectin, and Fluvoxamine for Covid-19

Assessing the effect of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in the prevention of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19

Background

Post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) produce significant morbidity, prompting evaluation of interventions that might lower risk. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) potentially could modulate risk of PASC via their central, hypothesized immunomodulatory, and/or antiplatelet properties although clinical trial data are lacking.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study was conducted leveraging real-world clinical data within the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) to evaluate whether SSRIs with agonist activity at the sigma-1 receptor (S1R) lower the risk of PASC, since agonism at this receptor may serve as a mechanism by which SSRIs attenuate an inflammatory response. Additionally, determine whether the potential benefit could be traced to S1R agonism. Presumed PASC was defined based on a computable PASC phenotype trained on the U09.9 ICD-10 diagnosis code.

Results

Of the 17,908 patients identified, 1521 were exposed at baseline to a S1R agonist SSRI, 1803 to a non-S1R agonist SSRI, and 14,584 to neither. Using inverse probability weighting and Poisson regression, relative risk (RR) of PASC was assessed.A 29% reduction in the RR of PASC (0.704 [95% CI, 0.58-0.85]; P = 4 ×10-4) was seen among patients who received an S1R agonist SSRI compared to SSRI unexposed patients and a 21% reduction in the RR of PASC was seen among those receiving an SSRI without S1R agonist activity (0.79 [95% CI, 0.67 - 0.93]; P = 0.005).Thus, SSRIs with and without reported agonist activity at the S1R were associated with a significant decrease in the risk of PASC.

SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with intestinal permeability, systemic inflammation, and microbial dysbiosis in hospitalized patients

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its associated severity have been linked to uncontrolled inflammation and may be associated with changes in the microbiome of mucosal sites including the gastrointestinal tract and oral cavity. These sites play an important role in host-microbe homeostasis, and disruption of epithelial barrier integrity during COVID-19 may potentially lead to exacerbated inflammation and immune dysfunction. Outcomes in COVID-19 are highly disparate, ranging from asymptomatic to fatal, and the impact of microbial dysbiosis on disease severity is unclear. Here, we obtained plasma, rectal swabs, oropharyngeal swabs, and nasal swabs from 86 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and 12 healthy volunteers. We performed 16S rRNA sequencing to characterize the microbial communities in the mucosal swabs and measured concentrations of circulating cytokines, markers of gut barrier integrity, and fatty acids in the plasma samples. We compared these plasma concentrations and microbiomes between healthy volunteers and COVID-19 patients, some of whom had unfortunately died by the end of the study enrollment, and performed a correlation analysis between plasma variables and bacterial abundances. Rectal swabs of COVID-19 patients had reduced abundances of several commensal bacteria including Faecalibacterium prausnitzii and an increased abundance of the opportunistic pathogens Eggerthella lenta and Hungatella hathewayi. Furthermore, the oral pathogen Scardovia wiggsiae was more abundant in the oropharyngeal swabs of COVID-19 patients who died. The abundance of both H. hathewayi and S. wiggsiae correlated with circulating inflammatory markers including IL-6, highlighting the possible role of the microbiome in COVID-19 severity and providing potential therapeutic targets for managing COVID-19.IMPORTANCEOutcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are highly disparate and are associated with uncontrolled inflammation; however, the individual factors that lead to this uncontrolled inflammation are not fully understood. Here, we report that severe COVID-19 is associated with systemic inflammation, microbial translocation, and microbial dysbiosis. The rectal and oropharyngeal microbiomes of COVID-19 patients were characterized by a decreased abundance of commensal bacteria and an increased abundance of opportunistic pathogens, which positively correlated with markers of inflammation and microbial translocation. These microbial perturbations may, therefore, contribute to disease severity in COVID-19 and highlight the potential for microbiome-based interventions in improving COVID-19 outcomes.

[The Impact of Antidepressants on COVID-19 and Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome: A Scoping-Review Update]

Introduction Preclinically, fluvoxamine and other antidepressants (AD) exerted antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties also against SARS-COV-2. Therfore, It makes sense to test the clinical effect of AD against COVID-19 and Long COVID.

METHODS

On May 20, 2024, this systematic scoping review in PUBMED identified 1016 articles related to AD and COVID-19, Long COVID and SARS-COV-2. These included 10 retrospective "large scale" studies (> 20000 chart reviews), 8 prospective clinical trials (plus 4 regarding Long COVID), 11 placebo-controlled randomized (RCT) (plus 2 regarding Long COVID) and 15 meta-analyses.

RESULTS

COVID-19: Retrospective studies with cohorts taking AD primarily for psychiatric comorbidities or chronic pain conditions directly prior to SARS-COV-2 infection described that this substance class (most studied: Selective Serotonin Re-Uptake Inhibitors (SSRI) and Selective Serotonin Noradrenaline Re-Uptake Inhibitors (SSNRI)) were associated with (i) significantly fewer SARS-COV-2 infections and (ii) a milder course of COVID-19 ("COVID-19 protection"). Ten of the 11 RCTs found regarding COVID-19 tested fluvoxamine, as this old AD appeared suitable as a prophylactic agent against severe COVID-19, taking into account its in vitro potency against the progression of intracellular sepsis cascades. Therefore, most (12 out of 15) meta-analyses also referred to fluvoxamine. They found (iii) a significant (40-70% reduction) in mortality, intubation and hospitalization rates when fluvoxamine was used as an add-on to standard therapy for mild to moderate COVID-19. When this AD was used in the early stages of the disease, it was more successful than when it was given later in advanced, severe COVID-19 (e.g. severe pneumonia, final sepsis stages). A dose dependency was observed: 2x50 mg fluvoxamine over 15 days was less effective than 2x100 or even 3x100 mg with an adverse event profile still at the placebo level. Direct comparisons with drugs approved for COVID-19 do not yet exist. A first indirect meta-analytical comparison showed an advantage of paxlovid or molnupiravir versus fluvoxamine against the development of severe COVID-19: risk reduction of 95% (I2 = N/A, but only one study) or 78% (I2=0) versus 5+-5% (I2=48). However, an add-on of fluvoxamine was still significantly more efficacious than symptom-oriented standard therapy alone. Long COVID: A common Long COVID phenotype with dominant anxiety and depression symptoms, which responds to AD, relaxation therapy and/or psychotherapy, has now been identified. Casuistics report positive effects of AD on fatigue, cognitive and autonomic dysfunctions. A first large prospective open-label RCT has just shown significantly more favourable courses, less viral load and less pro-inflammatory cytokines in the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 with fluvoxamine versus standard treatment, also with regard to the subsequent development of neuropsychiatric and pulmonary Long COVID or fatigue.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there is promising evidence of a preventive effect of AD (especially fluvoxamine) against progression to severe COVID-19 and against the development of Long COVID. It is likely, that the entire AD substance class could be effective here. This assumption is based on the results of retrospective large scale studies, but awaits verification by better controlled studies. The potential effectiveness/efficacy (currently low and moderate confidence of the evidence for the entire substance class and specifically fluvoxamine, respectively) of fluvoxamine as an add-on against COVID-19 and possibly also directly against Long COVID could stimulate similar projects in other infectious diseases that also have the potential to pose a lasting threat to the health of those affected. We consider the evidence to date to be sufficient to be able to emphasize a possible positive effect of these substances in the psychoeducation of patients with COVID-19 or Long COVID who are already receiving AD for other conditions - especially also against the symptoms associated with the viral disease or its consequences. In regions where neither vaccines nor antiviral agents currently approved for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 are available, AD and in particular fluvoxamine would be a cost-effective alternative to protect against a severe course, even if this AD appears to have a smaller effect against COVID-19 than the currently approved antiviral agents, but with presumably better tolerability. A direct comparative clinical trial with approved antiviral agents is still pending and should be positive to further open the door for a guideline-based recommendation of fluvoxamine (or perhaps even AD) for COVID-19 or its aftermath.

Preadmission Metformin Use Is Associated with Reduced Mortality in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus Hospitalized with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Observational studies have reported an association between metformin and improved outcomes in COVID-19, but most have been small and with significant limitations.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between preadmission metformin exposure and mortality in patients with diabetes mellitus hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort analysis using electronic health records extracted from the American Heart Association COVID-19 Registry.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults (n = 11,993) with diabetes mellitus but without chronic kidney disease (CKD) or need for hemodialysis who were hospitalized with COVID-19 between January 25, 2020, and February 9, 2022.

MAIN MEASURES

We used propensity score modeling to address differences between metformin and non-metformin users prior to multivariable log-binomial models to examine the association between metformin use at time of hospital admission for COVID-19 infection and in-hospital death; composite of in-hospital death or discharge to hospice; composite of in-hospital death, discharge to hospice, or ICU admission; and composite of in-hospital death, discharge to hospice, ICU admission, or mechanical ventilation.

KEY RESULTS

Compared to metformin non-use, pre-admission metformin use was associated with lower risk of in-hospital death (risk ratio (RR) 0.81 [95% CI 0.75-0.90]); composite of in-hospital death or discharge to hospice (RR 0.79 [95% CI 0.74-0.87]); composite of in-hospital death, discharge to hospice, or ICU admission (RR 0.90 [95% CI 0.86-0.95]); and composite of in-hospital death, discharge to hospice, ICU admission, or mechanical ventilation (RR 0.9 [95% CI 0.84-0.98]). Metformin use was also associated with lower risk of death due to respiratory cause (RR 0.86 [95% CI 0.74-0.97]) but not cardiovascular (RR 0.84 [95% CI 0.58-1.2]) or other (RR 0.78 [95% CI 0.60-1.0]) causes.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-admission metformin use was associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality and markers of disease severity among adults with diabetes mellitus without CKD and not requiring hemodialysis who were hospitalized with COVID-19 infection.

Unlocking the potential of signature-based drug repurposing for anticancer drug discovery

Cancer is the leading cause of death worldwide and is often associated with tumor relapse even after chemotherapeutics. This reveals malignancy is a complex process, and high-throughput omics strategies in recent years have contributed significantly in decoding the molecular mechanisms of these complex events in cancer. Further, the omics studies yield a large volume of cancer-specific molecular signatures that promote the discovery of cancer therapy drugs by a method termed signature-based drug repurposing. The drug repurposing method identifies new uses for approved drugs beyond their intended initial therapeutic use, and there are several approaches to it. In this review, we discuss signature-based drug repurposing in cancer, how cancer omics have revolutionized this method of drug discovery, and how one can use the cancer signature data for repurposed drug identification by providing a step-by-step procedural handout. This modern approach maximizes the use of existing therapeutic agents for cancer therapy or combination therapy to overcome chemotherapeutics resistance, making it a pragmatic and efficient alternative to traditional resource-intensive and time-consuming methods.

COVID-19 and Cancer Care: A Review and Practical Guide to Caring for Cancer Patients in the Era of COVID-19

COVID-19, a novel infectious disease caused by the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in 2020, has had a profound impact on healthcare, both at the individual and population level. The impact at the population level was felt most acutely during the emergency phase of the pandemic, with hospital capacity issues leading to widespread disruptions and delays in the delivery of healthcare services such as screening programs and elective surgeries. While hospitals are no longer being acutely overwhelmed by COVID-19 patients, the impact of the virus on vulnerable patient populations such as cancer patients continues to be of ongoing consequence. Cancer patients remain at high risk of hospitalization, ICU admission, and death due to COVID-19, even in the era of vaccination. Infection prevention and risk mitigation strategies such air quality control, masking, testing, vaccination, and treatment should therefore be integrated into the usual care and counseling of cancer patients moving forward to avoid preventable morbidity and mortality from this infection and ensure the safety of this vulnerable cohort as they navigate their cancer diagnosis and treatment in the era of COVID-19.

Framework of the strengths and challenges of clinically integrated trials: An expert panel report

The limitations of the explanatory clinical trial framework include the high expense of implementing explanatory trials, restrictive entry criteria for participants, and redundant logistical processes. These limitations can result in slow evidence generation that is not responsive to population health needs, yielding evidence that is not generalizable. Clinically integrated trials, which integrate clinical research into routine care, represent a potential solution to this challenge and an opportunity to support learning health systems. The operational and design features of clinically integrated trials include a focused scope, simplicity in design and requirements, the leveraging of existing data structures, and patient participation in the entire trial process. These features are designed to minimize barriers to participation and trial execution and reduce additional research burdens for participants and clinicians alike. Broad adoption and scalability of clinically integrated trials are dependent, in part, on continuing regulatory, healthcare system, and payer support. This analysis presents a framework of the strengths and challenges of clinically integrated trials and is based on a multidisciplinary expert "Think Tank" panel discussion that included representatives from patient populations, academia, non-profit funding agencies, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and industry.

Repurposing existing drugs for the treatment ofCOVID-19/SARS-CoV-2: A review of pharmacological effects and mechanism of action

Following the coronavirus disease-2019 outbreak caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2), there is an ongoing need to seek drugs that target COVID-19. First off, novel drugs have a long development cycle, high investment cost, and are high risk. Second, novel drugs must be evaluated for activity, efficacy, safety, and metabolic performance, contributing to the development cycle, investment cost, and risk. We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (including PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and medRxiv), Web of Science (Science Citation Index, Emerging Citation Index), and WHO COVID-19 Coronaviral Disease Global Literature to identify completed and ongoing studies as of February 20, 2024. We evaluated the pharmacological effects, in vivo and in vitro data of the 16 candidates in the paper. The difficulty of studying these candidates in clinical trials involving COVID-19 patients, dosage of repurposed drugs, etc. is discussed in detail. Ultimately, Metformin is more suitable for prophylactic administration or mildly ill patients; the combination of Oseltamivir, Tamoxifen, and Dexamethasone is suitable for moderately and severely ill patients; and more clinical trials are needed for Azvudine, Ribavirin, Colchicine, and Cepharanthine to demonstrate efficacy.

Favorable Antiviral Effect of Metformin on SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Metformin has antiviral activity against RNA viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The mechanism appears to be suppression of protein translation via targeting the host mechanistic target of rapamycin pathway. In the COVID-OUT randomized trial for outpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), metformin reduced the odds of hospitalizations/death through 28 days by 58%, of emergency department visits/hospitalizations/death through 14 days by 42%, and of long COVID through 10 months by 42%.

METHODS

COVID-OUT was a 2 × 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial that assessed metformin, fluvoxamine, and ivermectin; 999 participants self-collected anterior nasal swabs on day 1 (n = 945), day 5 (n = 871), and day 10 (n = 775). Viral load was quantified using reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

The mean SARS-CoV-2 viral load was reduced 3.6-fold with metformin relative to placebo (-0.56 log10 copies/mL; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.05 to -.06; P = .027). Those who received metformin were less likely to have a detectable viral load than placebo at day 5 or day 10 (odds ratio [OR], 0.72; 95% CI, .55 to .94). Viral rebound, defined as a higher viral load at day 10 than day 5, was less frequent with metformin (3.28%) than placebo (5.95%; OR, 0.68; 95% CI, .36 to 1.29). The metformin effect was consistent across subgroups and increased over time. Neither ivermectin nor fluvoxamine showed effect over placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial of outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2, metformin significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2 viral load, which may explain the clinical benefits in this trial. Metformin is pleiotropic with other actions that are relevant to COVID-19 pathophysiology.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT04510194.

Unlocking insights: Navigating COVID-19 challenges and Emulating future pandemic Resilience strategies with strengthening natural immunity

The original COVID-19 vaccines, developed against SARS-CoV-2, initially mitigated hospitalizations. Bivalent vaccine boosters were used widely during 2022-23, but the outbreaks persisted. Despite this, hospitalizations, mortality, and outbreaks involving dominant mutants like Alpha and Delta increased during winters when the population's vitamin D levels were at their lowest. Notably, 75 % of human immune cell/system functions, including post-vaccination adaptive immunity, rely on adequate circulatory vitamin D levels. Consequently, hypovitaminosis compromises innate and adaptive immune responses, heightening susceptibility to infections and complications. COVID-19 vaccines primarily target SARS-CoV-2 Spike proteins, thus offering only a limited protection through antibodies. mRNA vaccines, such as those for COVID-19, fail to generate secretory/mucosal immunity-like IgG responses, rendering them ineffective in halting viral spread. Additionally, mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 binding domain reduce immune recognition by vaccine-derived antibodies, leading to immune evasion by mutant viruses like Omicron variants. Meanwhile, the repeated administration of bivalent boosters intended to enhance efficacy resulted in the immunoparesis of recipients. As a result, relying solely on vaccines for outbreak prevention, it became less effective. Dominant variants exhibit increased affinity to angiotensin-converting enzyme receptor-2, enhancing infectivity but reducing virulence. Meanwhile, spike protein-related viral mutations do not impact the potency of widely available, repurposed early therapies, like vitamin D and ivermectin. With the re-emergence of COVID-19 and impending coronaviral pandemics, regulators and health organizations should proactively consider approval and strategic use of cost-effective adjunct therapies mentioned above to counter the loss of vaccine efficacy against emerging variants and novel coronaviruses and eliminate vaccine- and anti-viral agents-related serious adverse effects. Timely implementation of these strategies could reduce morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs and provide a rational approach to address future epidemics and pandemics. This perspective critically reviews relevant literature, providing insights, justifications, and viewpoints into how the scientific community and health authorities can leverage this knowledge cost-effectively.

Generating the Evidence Base for Convalescent Plasma Use for a New Infectious Disease

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) swept across the world in the waning months of 2019 and emerged as the cause of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic in early 2020. The use of convalescent plasma (CP) for prior respiratory pandemics provided a strong biological rationale for the rapid deployment of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) in early 2020 when no validated treatments or prior immunity existed. CCP is an antiviral agent, with its activity against SARS-CoV-2 stemming from specific antibodies elicited by the virus. Early efforts to investigate the efficacy of CCP in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that targeted hospitalized patients with COVID-19 did not demonstrate the overall efficacy of CCP despite signals of benefit in certain subgroups, such as those treated earlier in disease. In contrast, studies adhering to the principles of antibody therapy in their study design, choice of patient population, and product qualification, i.e., those that administered high levels of specific antibody during the viral phase of disease in immunocompromised or very early in immunocompetent individuals, demonstrated benefits. In this chapter, we leverage the knowledge gained from clinical studies of CCP for COVID-19 to propose a framework for future studies of CP for a new infectious disease. This framework includes obtaining high-quality CP and designing clinical studies that adhere to the principles of antibody therapy to generate a robust evidence base for using CP.

Efficacy and safety of ivermectin for treatment of non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 randomized controlled trials with 7,035 participants

INTRODUCTION

We systematically assessed benefits and harms of the use of ivermectin in non-hospitalized patients with early COVID-19.

METHODS

Five databases were searched until October 17, 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients with COVID-19 treated with ivermectin against standard of care (SoC), placebo, or active drug. Primary outcomes were hospitalization, all-cause mortality, and adverse events (AEs). Secondary outcomes included mechanical ventilation (MV), clinical improvement, clinical worsening, viral clearance, and severe adverse events (SAEs). Random effects meta-analyses were performed, with quality of evidence (QoE) evaluated using GRADE methods. Pre-specified subgroup analyses (ivermectin dose, control type, risk of bias, follow-up, and country income) and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs (n = 7,035) were included. The controls were placebo in nine RCTs, SoC in two RCTs, and placebo or active drug in one RCT. Ivermectin did not reduce hospitalization (relative risk [RR], 0.81, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.64-1.03; 8 RCTs, low QoE), all-cause mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.73-1.33; 9 RCTs, low QoE), or AEs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75-1.07; 9 RCTs, very low QoE) vs. controls. Ivermectin did not reduce MV, clinical worsening, or SAEs and did not increase clinical improvement and viral clearance vs. controls (very low QoE for secondary outcomes). Subgroup analyses were mostly consistent with main analyses, and TSA-adjusted risk for hospitalization was similar to main analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients, ivermectin did not have effect on clinical, non-clinical or safety outcomes versus controls. Ivermectin should not be recommended as treatment in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Computational Approaches to Drug Repurposing: Methods, Challenges, and Opportunities

Drug repurposing refers to the inference of therapeutic relationships between a clinical indication and existing compounds. As an emerging paradigm in drug development, drug repurposing enables more efficient treatment of rare diseases, stratified patient populations, and urgent threats to public health. However, prioritizing well-suited drug candidates from among a nearly infinite number of repurposing options continues to represent a significant challenge in drug development. Over the past decade, advances in genomic profiling, database curation, and machine learning techniques have enabled more accurate identification of drug repurposing candidates for subsequent clinical evaluation. This review outlines the major methodologic classes that these approaches comprise, which rely on (a) protein structure, (b) genomic signatures, (c) biological networks, and (d) real-world clinical data. We propose that realizing the full impact of drug repurposing methodologies requires a multidisciplinary understanding of each method's advantages and limitations with respect to clinical practice.

Northwestern University resource and education development initiatives to advance collaborative artificial intelligence across the learning health system

Introduction

The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare has exposed the unmet need for growing a multidisciplinary workforce that can collaborate effectively in the learning health systems. Maximizing the synergy among multiple teams is critical for Collaborative AI in Healthcare.

Methods

We have developed a series of data, tools, and educational resources for cultivating the next generation of multidisciplinary workforce for Collaborative AI in Healthcare. We built bulk-natural language processing pipelines to extract structured information from clinical notes and stored them in common data models. We developed multimodal AI/machine learning (ML) tools and tutorials to enrich the toolbox of the multidisciplinary workforce to analyze multimodal healthcare data. We have created a fertile ground to cross-pollinate clinicians and AI scientists and train the next generation of AI health workforce to collaborate effectively.

Results

Our work has democratized access to unstructured health information, AI/ML tools and resources for healthcare, and collaborative education resources. From 2017 to 2022, this has enabled studies in multiple clinical specialties resulting in 68 peer-reviewed publications. In 2022, our cross-discipline efforts converged and institutionalized into the Center for Collaborative AI in Healthcare.

Conclusions

Our Collaborative AI in Healthcare initiatives has created valuable educational and practical resources. They have enabled more clinicians, scientists, and hospital administrators to successfully apply AI methods in their daily research and practice, develop closer collaborations, and advanced the institution-level learning health system.

A Comparison of Recruitment Methods for a Remote, Nationwide Clinical Trial for COVID-19 Treatment

This study describes decentralized recruitment and enrollment for a COVID-19 treatment trial, while comparing 5 primary recruitment methods: search engine ads, paid advertising within a national testing company, paid advertising within a regional testing company, electronic health record messages, and word of mouth. These are compared across patient demographics, efficiency, and cost.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT04510194.

The Effect of Antihyperglycemic Medications on COVID-19: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review from Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Diabetes, a chronic disease worldwide, may be associated with a poorer prognosis in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). While some antihyperglycemic medications may be beneficial, others may increase the risk of adverse clinical outcomes of COVID-19. We aimed to analyze the effect of antihyperglycemic medications on COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched the Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, and Scopus databases from December 2019 to June 2022 to identify literature related to patients with COVID-19 and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with antihyperglycemic medications.

RESULTS

56 studies were included in the analysis. Metformin (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.58-0.74; p < 0.05), Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1ra) (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.59-0.91; p < 0.05), and sodium-dependent glucose transporters 2 inhibitor (SGLT 2i) (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.69-0.87; p < 0.05) were associated with lower mortality risk, while insulin was associated with increased mortality risk (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.26-1.55; p < 0.05). Meanwhile, metformin (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.50-0.85; p < 0.05) and GLP-1ra (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.76-0.94; p < 0.05) were significantly associated with decreased severe manifestation risk. What's more, metformin (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62-0.96; p < 0.05), GLP-1ra (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.81-0.92; p < 0.05), and SGLT 2i (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.79-0.97; p < 0.05) were also associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization, but insulin were associated with an increased risk of hospitalization (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.12-1.52; p < 0.05). Nevertheless, the results of the subgroup analyses showed that the effects of different glucose-lowering agents on COVID-19 may be related to in-hospital use or out-hospital use, elderly or non-elderly patients use, and different geography.

CONCLUSION

Metformin, GLP-1ra, and SGLT 2i have shown a positive effect on clinical outcomes in COVID-19, particularly in non-elderly individuals. However, insulin use may pose a higher risk, especially in elderly patients, so need with caution. Meanwhile, DPP-4i, TZD, α-GLUi, and sulfonylureas appeared to have a neutral effect. These results need to be validated in future clinical studies.

Pathogenic mechanisms of cardiovascular damage in COVID-19

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is a new infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2). Since the outbreak in December 2019, it has caused an unprecedented world pandemic, leading to a global human health crisis. Although SARS CoV-2 mainly affects the lungs, causing interstitial pneumonia and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, a number of patients often have extensive clinical manifestations, such as gastrointestinal symptoms, cardiovascular damage and renal dysfunction.

PURPOSE

This review article discusses the pathogenic mechanisms of cardiovascular damage in COVID-19 patients and provides some useful suggestions for future clinical diagnosis, treatment and prevention.

METHODS

An English-language literature search was conducted in PubMed and Web of Science databases up to 12th April, 2024 for the terms "COVID-19", "SARS CoV-2", "cardiovascular damage", "myocardial injury", "myocarditis", "hypertension", "arrhythmia", "heart failure" and "coronary heart disease", especially update articles in 2023 and 2024. Salient medical literatures regarding the cardiovascular damage of COVID-19 were selected, extracted and synthesized.

RESULTS

The most common cardiovascular damage was myocarditis and pericarditis, hypertension, arrhythmia, myocardial injury and heart failure, coronary heart disease, stress cardiomyopathy, ischemic stroke, blood coagulation abnormalities, and dyslipidemia. Two important pathogenic mechanisms of the cardiovascular damage may be direct viral cytotoxicity as well as indirect hyperimmune responses of the body to SARS CoV-2 infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiovascular damage in COVID-19 patients is common and portends a worse prognosis. Although the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of cardiovascular damage related to COVID-19 are not completely clear, two important pathogenic mechanisms of cardiovascular damage may be the direct damage of the SARSCoV-2 infection and the indirect hyperimmune responses.

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.

A systematic review and meta-analysis, investigating dose and time of fluvoxamine treatment efficacy for COVID-19 clinical deterioration, death, and Long-COVID complications

There have been 774,075,242 cases of COVID-19 and 7,012,986 deaths worldwide as of January 2024. In the early stages of the pandemic, there was an urgent need to reduce the severity of the disease and prevent the need for hospitalization to avoid stress on healthcare systems worldwide. The repurposing of drugs to prevent clinical deterioration of COVID-19 patients was trialed in many studies using many different drugs. Fluvoxamine (an SSRI and sigma-1 receptor agonist) was initially identified to potentially provide beneficial effects in COVID-19-infected patients, preventing clinical deterioration and the need for hospitalization. Fourteen clinical studies have been carried out to date, with seven of those being randomized placebo-controlled studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis covers the literature from the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 in late 2019 until January 2024. Search terms related to fluvoxamine, such as its trade names and chemical names, along with words related to COVID-19, such as SARS-CoV-2 and coronavirus, were used in literature databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and the ClinicalTrials.gov database from NIH, to identify the trials used in the subsequent analysis. Clinical deterioration and death data were extracted from these studies where available and used in the meta-analysis. A total of 7153 patients were studied across 14 studies (both open-label and double-blind placebo-controlled). 681 out of 3553 (19.17%) in the standard care group and 255 out of 3600 (7.08%) in the fluvoxamine-treated group experienced clinical deterioration. The estimated average log odds ratio was 1.087 (95% CI 0.200 to 1.973), which differed significantly from zero (z = 2.402, p = 0.016). The seven placebo-controlled studies resulted in a log odds ratio of 0.359 (95% CI 0.1111 to 0.5294), which differed significantly from zero (z = 3.103, p = 0.002). The results of this study identified fluvoxamine as effective in preventing clinical deterioration, and subgrouping analysis suggests that earlier treatment with a dose of 200 mg or above provides the best outcomes. We hope the outcomes of this study can help design future studies into respiratory viral infections and potentially improve clinical outcomes.

Metformin: Past, Present, and Future

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides the most recent update of metformin, a biguanide oral antihyperglycemic drug used as a first-line treatment in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

RECENT FINDINGS

Metformin continues to dominate in the world of antidiabetics, and its use will continue to rise because of its high efficiency and easy availability. Apart from type 2 diabetes, research is exploring its potential in other conditions such as cancer, memory loss, bone disorders, immunological diseases, and aging. Metformin is the most prescribed oral antidiabetic worldwide. It has been in practical use for the last six decades and continues to be the preferred drug for newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus. It reduces glucose levels by decreasing hepatic glucose production, reducing intestinal glucose absorption, and increasing insulin sensitivity. It can be used as monotherapy or combined with other antidiabetics like sulfonylureas, DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT-2 inhibitors, or insulin, improving its efficacy. Metformin can be used once or twice daily, depending on requirements. Prolonged usage of metformin may lead to abdominal discomfort, deficiency of Vitamin B12, or lactic acidosis. It should be used carefully in patients with renal impairment. Recent studies have explored additional benefits of metformin in polycystic ovarian disease, gestational diabetes mellitus, cognitive disorders, and immunological diseases. However, more extensive studies are needed to confirm these additional benefits.

Estimating the effect of realistic improvements of metformin adherence on COVID-19 mortality using targeted machine learning

Background

Type 2 diabetes elevates the risk of severe outcomes in COVID-19 patients, with multiple studies reporting higher case fatality rates. Metformin is a widely used medication for glycemic management. We hypothesize that improved adherence to metformin may lower COVID-19 post-infection mortality risk in this group. Utilizing data from the Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS), we investigate the relationship between metformin adherence and mortality following COVID-19 infection in patients with chronic metformin prescriptions.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study consisting of 61,180 IMSS beneficiaries who received a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or rapid test for SARS-CoV-2 and had at least two consecutive months of metformin prescriptions prior to the positive test. The hypothetical intervention is improved adherence to metformin, measured by proportion of days covered (PDC), with the comparison being the observed metformin adherence values. The primary outcome is all-cause mortality following COVID-19 infection. We defined the causal parameter using shift intervention, an example of modified treatment policies. We used the targeted learning framework for estimation of the target estimand.

Findings

Among COVID-19 positive patients with chronic metformin prescriptions, we found that a 5% and 10% absolute increase in metformin adherence is associated with a respective 0.26% (95% CI: -0.28%, 0.79%) and 1.26% (95% CI: 0.72%, 1.80%) absolute decrease in mortality risk.

Interpretation

Subject to the limitations of a real-world data study, our results indicate a causal association between improved metformin adherence and reduced COVID-19 post-infection mortality risk.

Efficacy and safety of ivermectin in patients with mild COVID-19 in Japan and Thailand

BACKGROUND

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug administered to hundreds of millions of people worldwide. Fundamental research suggests that ivermectin is effective against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); therefore, we investigated the efficacy and safety of ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment option.

METHODS

This multi-regional (Japan and Thailand), multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, Phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ivermectin in patients with mild COVID-19 (IVERMILCO Study). The participants took a specified number of the investigational product (ivermectin or placebo) tablets of, adjusted to a dose of 0.3-0.4 mg/kg, orally on an empty stomach once daily for three days. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time at which clinical symptoms first showed an improving trend by 168 h after investigational product administration.

RESULTS

A total of 1030 eligible participants were assigned to receive the investigational product; 502 participants received ivermectin and 527 participants received a placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was approximately 96 h (approximately four days) for both ivermectin and placebo groups, which did not show statistically significant difference (stratified log-rank test, p = 0.61). The incidence of adverse events and adverse drug reactions did not show statistically significant differences between the ivermectin and placebo groups (chi-square test, p = 0.97, p = 0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that ivermectin (0.3-0.4 mg/kg), as a treatment for patients with mild COVID-19, is ineffective; however, its safety has been confirmed for participants, including minor participants of 12 years or older (IVERMILCO Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05056883.).

Risk of Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC) Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus on Anti-Hyperglycemic Medications

Background

Observed activity of metformin in reducing the risk of severe COVID-19 suggests a potential use of the anti-hyperglycemic in the prevention of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). We assessed the 3-month and 6-month risk of PASC among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) comparing metformin users to sulfonylureas (SU) or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) users.

Methods

We used de-identified patient level electronic health record data from the National Covid Cohort Collaborative (N3C) between October 2021 and April 2023. Participants were adults ≥ 18 years with T2DM who had at least one outpatient healthcare encounter in health institutions in the United States prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. The outcome of PASC was defined based on the presence of a diagnosis code for the illness or using a predicted probability based on a machine learning algorithm. We estimated the 3-month and 6-month risk of PASC and calculated crude and weighted risk ratios (RR), risk differences (RD), and differences in mean predicted probability.

Results

We identified 5596 (mean age: 61.1 years; SD: 12.6) and 1451 (mean age: 64.9 years; SD 12.5) eligible prevalent users of metformin and SU/DPP4i respectively. We did not find a significant difference in risk of PASC at 3 months (RR = 0.86 [0.56; 1.32], RD = -3.06 per 1000 [-12.14; 6.01]), or at 6 months (RR = 0.81 [0.55; 1.20], RD = -4.91 per 1000 [-14.75, 4.93]) comparing prevalent users of metformin to prevalent users of SU/ DPP4i. Similar observations were made for the outcome definition using the ML algorithm.

Conclusion

The observed estimates in our study are consistent with a reduced risk of PASC among prevalent users of metformin, however the uncertainty of our confidence intervals warrants cautious interpretations of the results. A standardized clinical definition of PASC is warranted for thorough evaluation of the effectiveness of therapies under assessment for the prevention of PASC.

Antidepressant-induced membrane trafficking regulates blood-brain barrier permeability

As the most prescribed psychotropic drugs in current medical practice, antidepressant drugs (ADs) of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class represent prime candidates for drug repurposing. The mechanisms underlying their mode of action, however, remain unclear. Here, we show that common SSRIs and selected representatives of other AD classes bidirectionally regulate fluid-phase uptake at therapeutic concentrations and below. We further characterize membrane trafficking induced by a canonical SSRI fluvoxamine to show that it involves enhancement of clathrin-mediated endocytosis, endosomal system, and exocytosis. RNA sequencing analysis showed few fluvoxamine-associated differences, consistent with the effect being independent of gene expression. Fluvoxamine-induced increase in membrane trafficking boosted transcytosis in cell-based blood-brain barrier models, while a single injection of fluvoxamine was sufficient to enable brain accumulation of a fluid-phase fluorescent tracer in vivo. These findings reveal modulation of membrane trafficking by ADs as a possible cellular mechanism of action and indicate their clinical repositioning potential for regulating drug delivery to the brain.

Long COVID and cardiovascular disease: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) or cardiovascular risk factors have been associated with an increased risk of complications following hospitalisation with COVID-19, but their impact on the rate of recovery following discharge is not known.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the rate of patient-perceived recovery following hospitalisation with COVID-19 was affected by the presence of CVD or cardiovascular risk factors.

METHODS

In a multicentre prospective cohort study, patients were recruited following discharge from the hospital with COVID-19 undertaking two comprehensive assessments at 5 months and 12 months. Patients were stratified by the presence of either CVD or cardiovascular risk factors prior to hospitalisation with COVID-19 and compared with controls with neither. Full recovery was determined by the response to a patient-perceived evaluation of full recovery from COVID-19 in the context of physical, physiological and cognitive determinants of health.

RESULTS

From a total population of 2545 patients (38.8% women), 472 (18.5%) and 1355 (53.2%) had CVD or cardiovascular risk factors, respectively. Compared with controls (n=718), patients with CVD and cardiovascular risk factors were older and more likely to have had severe COVID-19. Full recovery was significantly lower at 12 months in patients with CVD (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89) and cardiovascular risk factors (aOR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.86).

CONCLUSION

Patients with CVD or cardiovascular risk factors had a delayed recovery at 12 months following hospitalisation with COVID-19. Targeted interventions to reduce the impact of COVID-19 in patients with cardiovascular disease remain an unmet need.

TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN10980107.

Prevalence, Predictors, and Outcomes of Type 2 NSTEMI in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Data on the incidence of type 2 non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (T2MI) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been limited to single-center studies. Given that certain characteristics, such as obesity and type 2 diabetes, have been associated with higher mortality in COVID-19 infections, we aimed to define the incidence of T2MI in a national cohort and identify pre-hospital patient characteristics associated with T2MI in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the national American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Quality Improvement Registry, we performed a retrospective 4:1 matched (age, sex, race, and body mass index) analysis of controls versus cases with T2MI. We performed (1) conditional multivariable logistic regression to identify predictive pre-hospital patient characteristics of T2MI for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and (2) stratified proportional hazards regression to investigate the association of T2MI with morbidity and mortality. From January 2020 through May 2021, there were 709 (2.2%) out of 32 015 patients with T2MI. Five hundred seventy-nine cases with T2MI were matched to 2171 controls (mean age 70; 43% female). Known coronary artery disease, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, hypertension, payor source, and presenting heart rate were associated with higher odds of T2MI. Anti-hyperglycemic medication and anti-coagulation use before admission were associated with lower odds of T2MI. Those with T2MI had higher morbidity and mortality (hazard ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.13-1.74]; P=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, those with a T2MI compared with those without had higher morbidity and mortality. Outpatient anti-hyperglycemic and anti-coagulation use were the only pre-admission factors associated with reduced odds of T2MI.

Effects of different treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus on mortality of coronavirus disease from 2019 to 2021 in China: a multi-institutional retrospective study

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has continued for 5 years. Sporadic cases continue to occur in different locations. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with a high risk of a poor prognosis in patients with COVID-19. Successful control of blood glucose levels can effectively decrease the risks of severe infections and mortality. However, the effects of different treatments were reported differently and even adversely. This retrospective study included 4,922 patients who have been diagnosed as COVID-19 and T2DM from 138 Hubei hospitals. The clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared and calculated their risk for death using multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier curves. After adjustment of age, sex, comorbidities, and in-hospital medications, metformin and alpha-glucosidase inhibitor (AGI) use performed lower all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-0.71; p = 0.001 for metformin; 0.53, 0.35-0.80, p = 0.002 for AGIs), while insulin use was associated with increased all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 2.07, 95% CI, 1.61-2.67, p < 0.001). After propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis, adjusted HRs for insulin, metformin, and AGIs associated with all-cause mortality were 1.32 (95% CI, 1.03-1.81; p = 0.012), 0.48 (95% CI, 0.23-0.83, p = 0.014), and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.35-0.98, p = 0.05). Therefore, metformin and AGIs might be more suitable for patients with COVID-19 and T2DM while insulin might be used with caution.

The efficacy and safety of fluvoxamine in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Recently, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of fluvoxamine have been successfully conducted for the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluvoxamine in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for RCTs which were performed to evaluate fluvoxamine and placebo up to January 31, 2024. Review Manager 5.3 was used to perform meta-analysis. The risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) was analyzed and calculated with a random effect model.

RESULTS

We pooled 4,711 participants from six RCTs (2,382 in the fluvoxamine group and 2,329 in the placebo group). Compared to the placebo group, the fluvoxamine group had a significantly lower rate of clinical deterioration (RR, 0.73; P = 0.004; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.90; I2 = 0%) and hospitalization (RR, 0.76; P = 0.04; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.99; I2 = 0%). In the meantime, compared with the placebo group, fluvoxamine group did not show any higher risk of AEs (P = 0.13 and 0.91, respectively) in safety outcomes analysis. The subgroup analysis showed that fluvoxamine treatment performed more than 200 mg daily appears to be more effective than those performed less than 200 mg daily in reducing clinical deterioration and hospitalization risks, while not exhibiting higher AE and SAE risks than placebo group.

CONCLUSION

Fluvoxamine for patients with COVID-19, especially those who take 200 mg or more daily, is superior to the placebo group in reducing clinical deterioration and hospitalization, and did not show any higher risk of AEs and SAEs in safety concerns, which might be a promising intervention for COVID-19.

The relationship between viral clearance rates and disease progression in early symptomatic COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

Effective antiviral drugs accelerate viral clearance in acute COVID-19 infections; the relationship between accelerating viral clearance and reducing severe clinical outcomes is unclear.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antiviral therapies in early symptomatic COVID-19, where viral clearance data were available. Treatment benefit was defined clinically as the relative risk of hospitalization/death during follow-up (≥14 days), and virologically as the SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance rate ratio (VCRR). The VCRR is the ratio of viral clearance rates between the intervention and control arms. The relationship between the clinical and virological treatment effects was assessed by mixed-effects meta-regression.

RESULTS

From 57 potentially eligible RCTs, VCRRs were derived for 44 (52 384 participants); 32 had ≥1 clinical endpoint in each arm. Overall, 9.7% (R2) of the variation in clinical benefit was explained by variation in VCRRs with an estimated linear coefficient of -0.92 (95% CI: -1.99 to 0.13; P = 0.08). However, this estimate was highly sensitive to the inclusion of the recent very large PANORAMIC trial. Omitting this outlier, half the variation in clinical benefit (R2 = 50.4%) was explained by variation in VCRRs [slope -1.47 (95% CI -2.43 to -0.51); P = 0.003], i.e. higher VCRRs were associated with an increased clinical benefit.

CONCLUSION

Methods of determining viral clearance in COVID-19 studies and the relationship to clinical outcomes vary greatly. As prohibitively large sample sizes are now required to show clinical treatment benefit in antiviral therapeutic assessments, viral clearance is a reasonable surrogate endpoint.

Bile acids and coronavirus disease 2019

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has been significantly alleviated. However, long-term health effects and prevention strategy remain unresolved. Thus, it is essential to explore the pathophysiological mechanisms and intervention for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Emerging research indicates a link between COVID-19 and bile acids, traditionally known for facilitating dietary fat absorption. The bile acid ursodeoxycholic acid potentially protects against SARS-CoV-2 infection by inhibiting the farnesoid X receptor, a bile acid nuclear receptor. The activation of G-protein-coupled bile acid receptor, another membrane receptor for bile acids, has also been found to regulate the expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, the receptor through which the virus enters human cells. Here, we review the latest basic and clinical evidence linking bile acids to SARS-CoV-2, and reveal their complicated pathophysiological mechanisms.

A randomized trial to assess the acceleration of viral clearance by the combination Favipiravir/Ivermectin/Niclosamide in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 adult patients (FINCOV)

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of the viral clearance and clinical outcomes of favipiravir (FPV) in outpatients being treated for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Ivermectin (IVM), niclosamide (NCL), and FPV demonstrated synergistic effects in vitro for exceed 78% inhibiting severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication.

METHODS

A phase 2, open-label, 1:1, randomized, controlled trial was conducted on Thai patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who received either combination FPV/IVM/NCL therapy or FPV alone to assess the rate of viral clearance among individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

RESULTS

Sixty non-high-risk comorbid patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 were randomized; 30 received FPV/IVM/NCL, and 30 received FPV alone. Mixed-effects multiple linear regression analysis of the cycle threshold value from SARS-CoV-2 PCR demonstrated no statistically significant differences in viral clearance rates between the combined FPV/IVM/NCL therapy group and the FPV-alone group. World Health Organization Clinical Progression scores and symptomatic improvement did not differ between arms on days 3, 6, and 10, and no adverse events were reported. No patients required hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, or supplemental oxygen or died within 28 days. C-reactive protein on day 3 was lower in the FPV/IVM/NCL group.

CONCLUSION

Viral clearance rates did not differ significantly between the FPV/IVM/NCL combination therapy and FPV-alone groups of individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, although the combined regimen demonstrated a synergistic effect in vitro. No discernible clinical benefit was observed. Further research is required to explore the potential benefits of FVP beyond its antiviral effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TCTR20230403007, Registered 3 April 2023 - Retrospectively registered,https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=TCTR20230403007.

Why Certain Repurposed Drugs Are Unlikely to Be Effective Antivirals to Treat SARS-CoV-2 Infections

Most repurposed drugs have proved ineffective for treating COVID-19. We evaluated median effective and toxic concentrations (EC50, CC50) of 49 drugs, mostly from previous clinical trials, in Vero cells. Ratios of reported unbound peak plasma concentrations, (Cmax)/EC50, were used to predict the potential in vivo efficacy. The 20 drugs with the highest ratios were retested in human Calu-3 and Caco-2 cells, and their CC50 was determined in an expanded panel of cell lines. Many of the 20 drugs with the highest ratios were inactive in human Calu-3 and Caco-2 cells. Antivirals effective in controlled clinical trials had unbound Cmax/EC50 ≥ 6.8 in Calu-3 or Caco-2 cells. EC50 of nucleoside analogs were cell dependent. This approach and earlier availability of more relevant cultures could have reduced the number of unwarranted clinical trials.

Review: The Landscape of Antiviral Therapy for COVID-19 in the Era of Widespread Population Immunity and Omicron-Lineage Viruses

The goals of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) antiviral therapy early in the pandemic were to prevent severe disease, hospitalization, and death. As these outcomes have become infrequent in the age of widespread population immunity, the objectives have shifted. For the general population, COVID-19-directed antiviral therapy should decrease symptom severity and duration and minimize infectiousness, and for immunocompromised individuals, antiviral therapy should reduce severe outcomes and persistent infection. The increased recognition of virologic rebound following ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (NMV/r) and the lack of randomized controlled trial data showing benefit of antiviral therapy for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection for standard-risk, vaccinated individuals remain major knowledge gaps. Here, we review data for selected antiviral agents and immunomodulators currently available or in late-stage clinical trials for use in outpatients. We do not review antibody products, convalescent plasma, systemic corticosteroids, IL-6 inhibitors, Janus kinase inhibitors, or agents that lack Food and Drug Administration approval or emergency use authorization or are not appropriate for outpatients.

Case Report on High Dose Lithium Treatment for Post-COVID Depression, Recurrent Fevers, and Skin Lesions

This is a case of a 35-year-old woman who presented with an 18-month history of post (long)-COVID depression and exhaustion along with recurrent fevers and treatment-resistant skin boils, all of which abated with lithium treatment at a serum level of 1.14 mmol/L, and all of which worsened when the lithium serum level was lowered to 0.8. This paper illustrates Lithium's effectiveness in the treatment of post (long)-COVID syndrome, though a higher serum concentration may be required.

Ivermectin for COVID-19 in adults in the community (PRINCIPLE): An open, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial of short- and longer-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

The evidence for whether ivermectin impacts recovery, hospital admissions, and longer-term outcomes in COVID-19 is contested. The WHO recommends its use only in the context of clinical trials.

METHODS

In this multicentre, open-label, multi-arm, adaptive platform randomised controlled trial, we included participants aged ≥18 years in the community, with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and symptoms lasting ≤14 days. Participants were randomised to usual care, usual care plus ivermectin tablets (target 300-400 μg/kg per dose, once daily for 3 days), or usual care plus other interventions. Co-primary endpoints were time to first self-reported recovery, and COVID-19 related hospitalisation/death within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models. Recovery at 6 months was the primary, longer term outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN86534580.

FINDINGS

The primary analysis included 8811 SARS-CoV-2 positive participants (median symptom duration 5 days), randomised to ivermectin (n = 2157), usual care (n = 3256), and other treatments (n = 3398) from June 23, 2021 to July 1, 2022. Time to self-reported recovery was shorter in the ivermectin group compared with usual care (hazard ratio 1·15 [95% Bayesian credible interval, 1·07 to 1·23], median decrease 2.06 days [1·00 to 3·06]), probability of meaningful effect (pre-specified hazard ratio ≥1.2) 0·192). COVID-19-related hospitalisations/deaths (odds ratio 1·02 [0·63 to 1·62]; estimated percentage difference 0% [-1% to 0·6%]), serious adverse events (three and five respectively), and the proportion feeling fully recovered were similar in both groups at 6 months (74·3% and 71·2% respectively (RR = 1·05, [1·02 to 1·08]) and also at 3 and 12 months.

INTERPRETATION

Ivermectin for COVID-19 is unlikely to provide clinically meaningful improvement in recovery, hospital admissions, or longer-term outcomes. Further trials of ivermectin for SARS-Cov-2 infection in vaccinated community populations appear unwarranted.

FUNDING

UKRI/National Institute of Health Research (MC_PC_19079).

Specific adverse outcomes associated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors use in COVID-19 patients might be potentiated by remdesivir use

BACKGROUND

Due to non-consistent reports in the literature, there are uncertainties about the potential benefits and harms of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

AIM

To investigate associations of SSRIs with clinical characteristics and unwanted outcomes among real-life severe and critical COVID-19 patients and their relationship with remdesivir (RDV) use.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study evaluated a total of 1558 COVID-19 patients of the white race treated in a tertiary center institution, among them 779 patients treated with RDV and 779 1:1 case-matched patients.

RESULTS

A total of 78 (5%) patients were exposed to SSRIs during hospitalization, similarly distributed among patients treated with RDV and matched patients (5.1 and 4.9%). No significant associations of SSRI use with age, sex, comorbidity burden, and COVID-19 severity were present in either of the two cohorts (p > 0.05 for all analyses). In multivariate analyses adjusted for clinically meaningful variables, SSRI use was significantly associated with higher mortality among RDV (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.0, p = 0.049) and matched patients (aOR 2.22, p = 0.044) and with higher risk for mechanical-ventilation (aOR 2.57, p = 0.006), venous-thromboembolism (aOR 3.69, p = 0.007), and bacteremia (aOR 2.22, p = 0.049) among RDV treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Adverse outcomes associated with SSRI use in COVID-19 patients might be potentiated by RDV use, and clinically significant interactions between these two drug classes might exist. Although our findings raise important considerations for clinical practice, they are limited by retrospective nature of the study, lack of ethnic diversity, and the potential for unmeasured confounding factors. Future studies exploring underlying biological mechanisms are needed.

Ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The effect of ivermectin (IVM) in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still controversial, yet the drug has been widely used in the world. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the clinical outcomes of IVM in patients with COVID-19. From inception to June 22, 2023, the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science (WOS), and scopus databases were searched for relevant observational studies on the risk of RA in migraineurs. We searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and bioRxiv to collect all relevant publications from inception to June 22, 2023. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality rate, mechanical ventilation (MV) requirement, PCR negative conversion, and adverse events (AEs). Revman 5.4 was used to assess the risk of bias (RoB) and quality of evidence. Thirty-three RCTs (n = 10,489) were included. No significant difference in all-cause mortality rates or PCR negative conversion between IVM and controls. There were significant differences in MV requirement (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.96) and AEs (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95) between the two groups. Ivermectin could reduce the risk of MV requirement and AEs in patients with COVID-19, without increasing other risks. In the absence of a better alternative, clinicians could use it with caution.

Is Metformin Use Associated with a More Favorable COVID-19 Course in People with Diabetes?

Background: Diabetes Mellitus (DM) has been associated with a higher Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) mortality, both in hospitalized patients and in the general population. A possible beneficial effect of metformin on the prognosis of COVID-19 has been reported in some observational studies, whereas other studies disagree. Methods: To investigate the possible effect of metformin on COVID-19 in-hospital mortality, we performed a retrospective study that included all SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with DM who were admitted to two Italian hospitals. In order to adjust for possible confounders accounting for the observed reduction of mortality in metformin users, we adopted the COVID-19 Mortality Risk Score (COVID-19 MRS) as a covariate. Results: Out of the 524 included patients, 33.4% died. A binomial logistic regression showed that metformin use was associated with a significant reduction in case fatality (OR 0.67 [0.45-0.98], p = 0.039), with no significant effect on the need for ventilation (OR 0.75 [0.5-1.11], p = 0.146). After adjusting for COVID-19 MRS, metformin did not retain a significant association with in-hospital mortality [OR 0.795 (0.495-1.277), p = 0.342]. Conclusions: A beneficial effect of metformin on COVID-19 was not proven after adjusting for confounding factors. The use of validated tools to stratify the risk for COVID-19 severe disease and death, such as COVID-19 MRS, may be useful to better explore the potential association of medications and comorbidities with COVID-19 prognosis.

The effect of intravenous lipid emulsion (ILE) on the pharmacokinetic/toxicokinetic dispositions of ivermectin and carprofen in rabbits

Intravenous lipid emulsion (ILE) has been widely used as an effective antidote in both veterinary and human medicine for the treatment of acute intoxications caused by drugs and pesticides with high lipid solubility. This study was conducted to investigate the effect of ILE co-administration on the kinetic dispositions of ivermectin (IVM) and carprofen (CRP) following intravenous bolus administration at subtoxic doses in rabbits.Twenty-four male New Zealand rabbits weighing 2.78 ± 0.2 kg were used in this study. Rabbits were divided into four groups (Group 1: IVM and Group 2: IVM + ILE or Group 3: CRP and Group 4: CRP + ILE), each group consisting of 6 animals. In the IVM study, Group 1 received IVM (0.6 mg/kg) alone while Group 2 received IVM (0.6 mg/kg) and ILE (2.5 ml/kg). In the CRP study, Group 3 received CRP (12 mg/kg) alone while Group 4 received CRP (12 mg/kg) and ILE (2.5 ml/kg). In both drug groups, ILE was administered 3 times as an i.v. bolus at the 10th min and repeated 4th and 8th h after the drug administration. Blood samples were collected from the auricular vein at various times after drug administration. The drug concentrations in plasma samples were determined by high-pressure liquid chromatography. Kinetic parameters were calculated using a non-compartmental model for both CRP and IVM.The C0 and area under the concentration-time curve from zero up to ∞ (AUC0-∞) values were significantly greater with ILE co-administration (2136 ng/ml and 360.84 ng.d/ml) compared to the IVM alone (1340.63 ng/ml and 206 ng.d/ml), respectively. Moreover, the volume of distribution (Vdss) and clearance (Cl) of IVM were reduced by approximately 42% and 46% with ILE co-administration compared to IVM alone resulting in a reduction of the distribution and slower elimination, respectively. Similar differences in C0, and Vdss values were also observed in CRP with ILE co-administration compared to CRP alone. ILE co-administration changed significantly the kinetic profile of both IVM and CRP in rabbits, supporting the lipid sink theory in which highly lipid-soluble compounds are absorbed into the lipid phase of plasma from peripheral organs such as the heart and brain affected by the acute toxicity of the compounds.

Network analysis-guided drug repurposing strategies targeting LPAR receptor in the interplay of COVID, Alzheimer's, and diabetes

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has greatly affected global health. Emerging evidence suggests a complex interplay between Alzheimer's disease (AD), diabetes (DM), and COVID-19. Given COVID-19's involvement in the increased risk of other diseases, there is an urgent need to identify novel targets and drugs to combat these interconnected health challenges. Lysophosphatidic acid receptors (LPARs), belonging to the G protein-coupled receptor family, have been implicated in various pathological conditions, including inflammation. In this regard, the study aimed to investigate the involvement of LPARs (specifically LPAR1, 3, 6) in the tri-directional relationship between AD, DM, and COVID-19 through network analysis, as well as explore the therapeutic potential of selected anti-AD, anti-DM drugs as LPAR, SPIKE antagonists. We used the Coremine Medical database to identify genes related to DM, AD, and COVID-19. Furthermore, STRING analysis was used to identify the interacting partners of LPAR1, LPAR3, and LPAR6. Additionally, a literature search revealed 78 drugs on the market or in clinical studies that were used for treating either AD or DM. We carried out docking analysis of these drugs against the LPAR1, LPAR3, and LPAR6. Furthermore, we modeled the LPAR1, LPAR3, and LPAR6 in a complex with the COVID-19 spike protein and performed a docking study of selected drugs with the LPAR-Spike complex. The analysis revealed 177 common genes implicated in AD, DM, and COVID-19. Protein-protein docking analysis demonstrated that LPAR (1,3 & 6) efficiently binds with the viral SPIKE protein, suggesting them as targets for viral infection. Furthermore, docking analysis of the anti-AD and anti-DM drugs against LPARs, SPIKE protein, and the LPARs-SPIKE complex revealed promising candidates, including lupron, neflamapimod, and nilotinib, stating the importance of drug repurposing in the drug discovery process. These drugs exhibited the ability to bind and inhibit the LPAR receptor activity and the SPIKE protein and interfere with LPAR-SPIKE protein interaction. Through a combined network and targeted-based therapeutic intervention approach, this study has identified several drugs that could be repurposed for treating COVID-19 due to their expected interference with LPAR(1, 3, and 6) and spike protein complexes. In addition, it can also be hypothesized that the co-administration of these identified drugs during COVID-19 infection may not only help mitigate the impact of the virus but also potentially contribute to the prevention or management of post-COVID complications related to AD and DM.

Clinical efficacy of N-acetylcysteine for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The association between N-acetylcysteine (NAC) and COVID-19 remains undetermined; therefore, this meta-analysis assessed the clinical efficacy of NAC in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.

Methods

This study searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published from their inception to December 17, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the clinical efficacy of NAC for patients with COVID-19 were included.

Results

Five RCTs involving 651 patients were included. There was no significant difference in mortality between the study group receiving NAC and the control group (15.6 % [50/320] vs. 32.3 %, [107/331]; risk ratio [RR]: 0.58; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-1.40). In addition, the two groups did not differ with respect to the incidence of invasive mechanical ventilation (RR: 0.93; 95 % CI: 0.65-1.33), the risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (RR: 0.86; 95 % CI: 0.62-1.21), the length of hospital stay (mean difference [MD]: 0.17 days; 95 % CI: -0.67-1.01), and the length of ICU stay (MD: -0.77 days; 95 % CI: -2.97-1.42).

Conclusions

The administration of NAC did not improve the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19; its routine use is not recommended for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections.

A Dual Pharmacological Strategy against COVID-19: The Therapeutic Potential of Metformin and Atorvastatin

Metformin (MET) and atorvastatin (ATO) are promising treatments for COVID-19. This review explores the potential of MET and ATO, commonly prescribed for diabetes and dyslipidemia, respectively, as versatile medicines against SARS-CoV-2. Due to their immunomodulatory and antiviral capabilities, as well as their cost-effectiveness and ubiquitous availability, they are highly suitable options for treating the virus. MET's effect extends beyond managing blood sugar, impacting pathways that can potentially decrease the severity and fatality rates linked with COVID-19. It can partially block mitochondrial complex I and stimulate AMPK, which indicates that it can be used more widely in managing viral infections. ATO, however, impacts cholesterol metabolism, a crucial element of the viral replicative cycle, and demonstrates anti-inflammatory characteristics that could modulate intense immune reactions in individuals with COVID-19. Retrospective investigations and clinical trials show decreased hospitalizations, severity, and mortality rates in patients receiving these medications. Nevertheless, the journey from observing something to applying it in a therapeutic setting is intricate, and the inherent diversity of the data necessitates carefully executed, forward-looking clinical trials. This review highlights the requirement for efficacious, easily obtainable, and secure COVID-19 therapeutics and identifies MET and ATO as promising treatments in this worldwide health emergency.

Mortality-related risk factors of inpatients with diabetes and COVID-19: A multicenter retrospective study in Belgium

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We describe mortality-related risk factors of inpatients with diabetes and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Belgium.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective study from March to May, 2020, in 8 Belgian centers. Data on admission of patients with diabetes and COVID-19 were collected. Survivors were compared to non-survivors to identify prognostic risk factors for in-hospital death using multivariate analysis in both the total population and in the subgroup of patients admitted in the intensive care unit (ICU).

RESULTS

The study included 375 patients. The mortality rate was 26.4% (99/375) in the total population and 40% (27/67) in the ICU. Multivariate analysis identified older age (HR 1.05 [CI 1.03-1.07], P<0.0001) and male gender (HR 2.01 [1.31-3.07], P=0.0013) as main independent risk factors for in-hospital death in the total population. Metformin (HR 0.51 [0.34-0.78], P=0.0018) and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers (HR 0.56 [0.36-0.86], P=0.0088) use before admission were independent protective factors. In the ICU, chronic kidney disease (CKD) was identified as an independent risk factor for death (HR 4.96 [2.14-11.5], P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

In-hospital mortality due to the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium was high in patients with diabetes. We found that advanced age and male gender were independent risk factors for in-hospital death. We also showed that metformin use before admission was associated with a significant reduction of COVID-19-related in-hospital mortality. Finally, we showed that CKD is a COVID-19-related mortality risk factor in patients with diabetes admitted in the ICU.

Is antiviral treatment at the acute phase of COVID-19 effective for decreasing the risk of long-COVID? A systematic review

PURPOSE

Preliminary evidence suggests a potential effect of antiviral medication used during the acute COVID-19 phase for preventing long-COVID. This review investigates if having received pharmacological treatment during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection may reduce the risk of long-COVID.

METHODS

MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science databases, as well as medRxiv/bioRxiv preprint servers were searched up to July 15th, 2023. Articles comparing the presence of long-COVID symptoms between individuals who received or not a specific medication, particularly antivirals, during the acute phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale or Cochrane's Risk of Bias (Rob) tool.

RESULTS

From 517 studies identified, 6 peer-reviewed studies and one preprint met all inclusion criteria. The sample included 2683 (n = 4) hospitalized COVID-19 survivors and 307,409 (n = 3) non-hospitalized patients. The methodological quality was high in 71% of studies (n = 5/7). Two studies investigating the effects of Nirmaltrevir/Ritonavir and three studies the effect of Remdesivir reported conflicting results on effectiveness for preventing long-COVID. Three studies investigating the effects of other medication such as Dexamethasone (n = 2) or Metformin (n = 1) found positive results of these medications for preventing long-COVID.

CONCLUSION

Available evidence about the effect of medication treatment with antivirals during acute COVID-19 and reduced risk of developing long-COVID is conflicting. Heterogeneous evidence suggests that Remdesivir or Nirmaltrevir/Ritonavir could have a potential protective effect for long-COVID. A limited number of studies demonstrated a potential benefit of other medications such as Dexamethasone or Metformin, but more studies are needed.

Sertraline modulates hippocampal plasticity and learning via sigma 1 receptors, cellular stress and neurosteroids

In addition to modulating serotonin transport, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have multiple other effects that may contribute to clinical effects, and some of these latter actions prompt repurposing of SSRIs for non-psychiatric indications. We recently observed that the SSRIs fluvoxamine and fluoxetine prevent the acute adverse effects of pro-inflammatory stimulation on long-term potentiation (LTP) in the CA1 hippocampal region. Sertraline showed markedly different effects, acutely inhibiting LTP at a low micromolar concentration through inverse agonism of sigma 1 receptors (S1Rs). In the present studies, we pursued mechanisms contributing to sertraline modulation of LTP in rat hippocampal slices. We found that sertraline partially inhibits synaptic responses mediated by N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDARs) via effects on NMDARs that express GluN2B subunits. A selective S1R antagonist (NE-100), but not an S1R agonist (PRE-084) blocked effects on NMDARs, despite the fact that both S1R ligands were previously shown to prevent LTP inhibition. Both NE-100 and PRE-084, however, prevented adverse effects of sertraline on one-trial learning. Because of the important role that S1Rs play in modulating endoplasmic reticulum stress, we examined whether inhibitors of cellular stress alter effects of sertraline. We found that two stress inhibitors, ISRIB and quercetin, prevented LTP inhibition, as did inhibitors of the synthesis of endogenous neurosteroids, which are homeostatic regulators of cellular stress. These studies highlight complex effects of sertraline, S1Rs and neurosteroids on hippocampal function and have relevance for understanding therapeutic and adverse drug actions.

Extensive therapeutic effects, underlying molecular mechanisms and disease treatment prediction of Metformin: a systematic review

Metformin (Met), a first-line management for type 2 diabetes mellitus, has been expansively employed and studied with results indicating its therapeutic potential extending beyond glycemic control. Beyond its established role, this therapeutic drug demonstrates a broad spectrum of action encompassing over 60 disorders, encompassing metabolic conditions, inflammatory disorders, carcinomas, cardiovascular diseases, and cerebrovascular pathologies. There is clear evidence of Met's action targeting specific nodes in the molecular pathways of these diseases and, intriguingly, interactions with the intestinal microbiota and epigenetic processes have been explored. Furthermore, novel Met derivatives with structural modifications tailored to diverse diseases have been synthesized and assessed. This manuscript proffers a comprehensive thematic review of the diseases amenable to Met treatment, elucidates their molecular mechanisms, and employs informatics technology to prospect future therapeutic applications of Met. These data and insights gleaned considerably contribute to enriching our understanding and appreciation of Met's far-reaching clinical potential and therapeutic applicability.