Clinical Outcomes Associated With Methylprednisolone in Mechanically Ventilated Patients With COVID-19

The role of methylprednisolone in severe COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis

Background

The purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness of methylprednisolone in severe COVID-19.

Methods

PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for literatures comparing methylprednisolone and control treatment in severe COVID-19 patients. Statistical pooling was reported as risk ratio (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). The outcomes of interest in the literature survey were mortality and adverse events.

Results

A total of 13 studies were included, including 3,138 patients with severe COVID-19, of which 1,634 patients were treated with methylprednisolone and 1,504 patients were treated with control treatment. Five of the 13 studies reported severe adverse events. Our meta-analysis indicates that methylprednisolone treatment in COVID-19 patients is associated with a significant reduction in mortality (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.85, p = 0.003) compared to control treatment, without an increased risk of adverse events (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.92-1.56, p = 0.17). Moreover, high-dose methylprednisolone treatment (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.40-0.82, p = 0.003) and short-course methylprednisolone treatment (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.38-0.89, p = 0.01) found to significantly reduce mortality. Additionally, it was found that younger severe COVID-19 patients (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.20-0.80, p = 0.01) had better outcomes to methylprednisolone than older patients.

Conclusion

Methylprednisolone was correlated with lower mortality compared with control treatment in severe COVID-19 patients without increasing serious adverse reactions. Furthermore, high-doses and short-term of methylprednisolone treatment were linked with better younger COVID-19 reported higher benefit from methylprednisolone than older COVID-19 patients.

COVID-19-Associated Sepsis: Potential Role of Phytochemicals as Functional Foods and Nutraceuticals

The acute manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) exhibit the hallmarks of sepsis-associated complications that reflect multiple organ failure. The inflammatory cytokine storm accompanied by an imbalance in the pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory host response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection leads to severe and critical septic shock. The sepsis signature in severely afflicted COVID-19 patients includes cellular reprogramming and organ dysfunction that leads to high mortality rates, emphasizing the importance of improved clinical care and advanced therapeutic interventions for sepsis associated with COVID-19. Phytochemicals of functional foods and nutraceutical importance have an incredible impact on the healthcare system, which includes the prevention and/or treatment of chronic diseases. Hence, in the present review, we aim to explore the pathogenesis of sepsis associated with COVID-19 that disrupts the physiological homeostasis of the body, resulting in severe organ damage. Furthermore, we have summarized the diverse pharmacological properties of some potent phytochemicals, which can be used as functional foods as well as nutraceuticals against sepsis-associated complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The phytochemicals explored in this article include quercetin, curcumin, luteolin, apigenin, resveratrol, and naringenin, which are the major phytoconstituents of our daily food intake. We have compiled the findings from various studies, including clinical trials in humans, to explore more into the therapeutic potential of each phytochemical against sepsis and COVID-19, which highlights their possible importance in sepsis-associated COVID-19 pathogenesis. We conclude that our review will open a new research avenue for exploring phytochemical-derived therapeutic agents for preventing or treating the life-threatening complications of sepsis associated with COVID-19.

[Current Status of Research on COVID-19 Patients With Concomitant Hyperglycemia and the Management Strategies of Hyperglycemia]

The global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) poses a serious threat to human health, leading to a relatively high mortality in patients with severe or critical conditions in particular. Hyperglycemia is one of the high-risk factors for poor prognosis in these patients. Patients with COVID-19 are more likely to develop hyperglycemia, regardless of whether there is a previous history of diabetes mellitus. Glucocorticoid therapy is an important part of the anti-inflammatory regimen for COVID-19. However, the use of glucocorticoid significantly increases the occurrence of hyperglycemic events in COVID-19 patients, ultimately leading to poor prognosis. Timely monitoring of blood glucose and early intervention for hyperglycemia contribute to the improvement in the outcome of COVID-19 patients. In this paper, we comprehensively reviewed the potential mechanisms of COVID-19 and concomitant hyperglycemia. We reviewed the latest findings on the blood glucose management strategies for COVID-19 patients with concomitant hyperglycemia, aiming to optimize the management of hyperglycemia in COVID-19 patients and improve the outcome of the disease.

Fighting cytokine storm and immunomodulatory deficiency: By using natural products therapy up to now

A novel coronavirus strain (COVID-19) caused severe illness and mortality worldwide from 31 December 2019 to 21 March 2023. As of this writing, 761,071,826 million cases have been diagnosed worldwide, with 6,879,677 million deaths accorded by WHO organization and has spread to 228 countries. The number of deaths is closely connected to the growth of innate immune cells in the lungs, mainly macrophages, which generate inflammatory cytokines (especially IL-6 and IL-1β) that induce "cytokine storm syndrome" (CSS), multi-organ failure, and death. We focus on promising natural products and their biologically active chemical constituents as potential phytopharmaceuticals that target virus-induced pro-inflammatory cytokines. Successful therapy for this condition is currently rare, and the introduction of an effective vaccine might take months. Blocking viral entrance and replication and regulating humoral and cellular immunity in the uninfected population are the most often employed treatment approaches for viral infections. Unfortunately, no presently FDA-approved medicine can prevent or reduce SARS-CoV-2 access and reproduction. Until now, the most important element in disease severity has been the host's immune response activation or suppression. Several medicines have been adapted for COVID-19 patients, including arbidol, favipiravir, ribavirin, lopinavir, ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, dexamethasone, and anti-inflammatory pharmaceutical drugs, such as tocilizumab, glucocorticoids, anakinra (IL-1β cytokine inhibition), and siltuximab (IL-6 cytokine inhibition). However, these synthetic medications and therapies have several side effects, including heart failure, permanent retinal damage in the case of hydroxyl-chloroquine, and liver destruction in the case of remdesivir. This review summarizes four strategies for fighting cytokine storms and immunomodulatory deficiency induced by COVID-19 using natural product therapy as a potential therapeutic measure to control cytokine storms.

Impact of systemic corticosteroids on length of hospitalization among patients with COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome. MéTHOD: We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team.

RESULTS

A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median=3 [interquartile range=0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p=0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤4 days than >4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised >4 days [p<0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

Race and Remdesivir: Examination of Clinical Outcomes in a Racially and Ethnically Diverse Cohort in New York City

Objective

To compare clinical characteristics and examine in-hospital length of stay (LOS) differences for COVID-19 patients who received remdesivir, by race or ethnicity.

Design

Retrospective descriptive analysis comparing cumulative LOS as a proxy of recovery time.

Setting

A large academic medical center serving a minoritized community in Northern Manhattan, New York City.

Participants

Inpatients (N=1024) who received remdesivir from March 30, 2020-April 20, 2021.

Methods

We conducted descriptive analyses among patients who received remdesivir. Patients were described by proxies of social determinants of health (SDOH): race and ethnicity, residence, insurance coverage, and clinical characteristics. We calculated median hospital LOS as the cumulative incidence of hospitalized patients who were discharged alive, and tested differences between groups by using the Gray test. Patients who died or were discharged to hospice were censored at 29 days.

Main Outcome Measures

The primary outcome was hospital LOS. The secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

Results

Median LOS was 11.9 days (95% CI, 10.8-13.2) overall, with Black patients having the shortest (10.0 days, 95% CI, 8.0-13.2) and Asian patients having the longest (16.2 days, 95% CI, 8.3-27.2) LOS. A total of 214 patients (21%) died or were discharged to hospice, ranging from 16.5% to 23.7% of patients who identified as Black and Other (multiracial, biracial, declined), respectively.

Conclusions

COVID-19 has disproportionately burdened communities of color. We observed no difference in median LOS between racial or ethnic groups, which supports the notion that the heterogeneous effect of remdesivir in the literature may be explained in part by underrecruitment or participation of Black, Hispanic, and Asian patients in clinical trials.

Impact of systemic corticosteroids on hospital length of stay among patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome.

METHODS

We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team.

RESULTS

A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median = 3 [interquartile range = 0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p = 0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤ 4 days than > 4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤ 4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised > 4 days [p < 0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

Comparison of a Target Trial Emulation Framework vs Cox Regression to Estimate the Association of Corticosteroids With COVID-19 Mortality

IMPORTANCE

Communication and adoption of modern study design and analytical techniques is of high importance for the improvement of clinical research from observational data.

OBJECTIVE

To compare a modern method for statistical inference, including a target trial emulation framework and doubly robust estimation, with approaches common in the clinical literature, such as Cox proportional hazards models.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study used longitudinal electronic health record data for outcomes at 28-days from time of hospitalization within a multicenter New York, New York, hospital system. Participants included adult patients hospitalized between March 1 and May 15, 2020, with COVID-19 and not receiving corticosteroids for chronic use. Data were analyzed from October 2021 to March 2022.

EXPOSURES

Corticosteroid exposure was defined as more than 0.5 mg/kg methylprednisolone equivalent in a 24-hour period. For target trial emulation, exposures were corticosteroids for 6 days if and when a patient met criteria for severe hypoxia vs no corticosteroids. For approaches common in clinical literature, treatment definitions used for variables in Cox regression models varied by study design (no time frame, 1 day, and 5 days from time of severe hypoxia).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was 28-day mortality from time of hospitalization. The association of corticosteroids with mortality for patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 was assessed using the World Health Organization (WHO) meta-analysis of corticosteroid randomized clinical trials as a benchmark.

RESULTS

A total of 3298 patients (median [IQR] age, 65 [53-77] years; 1970 [60%] men) were assessed, including 423 patients who received corticosteroids at any point during hospitalization and 699 patients who died within 28 days of hospitalization. Target trial emulation analysis found corticosteroids were associated with a reduced 28-day mortality rate, from 32.2%; (95% CI, 30.9%-33.5%) to 25.7% (95% CI, 24.5%-26.9%). This estimate is qualitatively identical to the WHO meta-analysis odds ratio of 0.66 (95% CI, 0.53-0.82). Hazard ratios using methods comparable with current corticosteroid research range in size and direction, from 0.50 (95% CI, 0.41-0.62) to 1.08 (95% CI, 0.80-1.47).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that clinical research based on observational data can be used to estimate findings similar to those from randomized clinical trials; however, the correctness of these estimates requires designing the study and analyzing the data based on principles that are different from the current standard in clinical research.

Comparison of a Target Trial Emulation Framework to Cox Regression to Estimate the Effect of Corticosteroids on COVID-19 Mortality

Importance

Communication and adoption of modern study design and analytical techniques is of high importance for the improvement of clinical research from observational data.

Objective

To compare (1) a modern method for causal inference including a target trial emulation framework and doubly robust estimation to (2) approaches common in the clinical literature such as Cox proportional hazards models. To do this, we estimate the effect of corticosteroids on mortality for moderate-to-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We use the World Health Organization's (WHO) meta-analysis of corticosteroid randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as a benchmark.

Design

Retrospective cohort study using longitudinal electronic health record data for 28 days from time of hospitalization.

Settings

Multi-center New York City hospital system.

Participants

Adult patients hospitalized between March 1-May 15, 2020 with COVID-19 and not on corticosteroids for chronic use.

Intervention

Corticosteroid exposure defined as >0.5mg/kg methylprednisolone equivalent in a 24-hour period. For target trial emulation, interventions are (1) corticosteroids for six days if and when patient meets criteria for severe hypoxia and (2) no corticosteroids. For approaches common in clinical literature, treatment definitions used for variables in Cox regression models vary by study design (no time frame, one-, and five-days from time of severe hypoxia).

Main outcome

28-day mortality from time of hospitalization.

Results

3,298 patients (median age 65 (IQR 53-77), 60% male). 423 receive corticosteroids at any point during hospitalization, 699 die within 28 days of hospitalization. Target trial emulation estimates corticosteroids to reduce 28-day mortality from 32.2% (95% CI 30.9-33.5) to 25.7% (24.5-26.9). This estimate is qualitatively identical to the WHO's RCT meta-analysis odds ratio of 0.66 (0.53-0.82)). Hazard ratios using methods comparable to current corticosteroid research range in size and direction from 0.50 (0.41-0.62) to 1.08 (0.80-1.47).

Conclusion and Relevance

Clinical research based on observational data can unveil true causal relationships; however, the correctness of these effect estimates requires designing the study and analyzing the data based on principles which are different from the current standard in clinical research.

Effect of corticosteroid therapy on mortality in COVID-19 patients-A systematic review and meta-analysis

The effect of corticosteroid therapy is still controversial on prevention of mortality in coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19). The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of corticosteroids on mortality. This systematic review was performed as per preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses guidelines. A systematic search was performed at different databases namely Medline/PubMed, Cochrane and Google scholar on 10 February 2022. A pooled estimate for effect of corticosteroid therapy on mortality was calculated as outcome of study. Risk bias analysis and Newcastle Ottawa Scale were used to assess the quality of randomized control trial (RCT) and cohort studies, respectively. Cochran's Q test and the I² statistic were conducted for heterogeneity and accordingly study model was applied. A total 43 studies were included, having sample size of 96,852 patients. Amongst them, 19,426 and 77,426 patients received corticosteroid therapy (intervention group) or standard treatment without corticosteroid (control group), respectively. Mortality observed in the intervention and control group was 14.2% (2749) and 7.1% (5459), respectively. The pooled estimate 2.173 (95% CI: 2.0690–2.2820) showed significantly increased mortality in intervention as compared to control. The pooled estimate of methyprednisolone 1.206 (95% CI: 1.0770–1.3500) showed significantly increased mortality while the pooled estimate of dexamethasone 1.040 (95% CI: 0.9459–1.1440) showed insignificantly increased mortality as compared to control. In conclusion, corticosteroid therapy produced a negative prognosis as depicted by increased mortality among COVID‐19 patients. The possible reasons might be delay in virus clearance and secondary infections due to corticosteroids initiated at high dose in the early stage of infection.

Systems biology models to identify the influence of SARS-CoV-2 infections to the progression of human autoimmune diseases

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been circulating since 2019, and its global dominance is rising. Evidences suggest the respiratory illness SARS-CoV-2 has a sensitive affect on causing organ damage and other complications to the patients with autoimmune diseases (AD), posing a significant risk factor. The genetic interrelationships and molecular appearances between SARS-CoV-2 and AD are yet unknown. We carried out the transcriptomic analytical framework to delve into the SARS-CoV-2 impacts on AD progression. We analyzed both gene expression microarray and RNA-Seq datasets from SARS-CoV-2 and AD affected tissues. With neighborhood-based benchmarks and multilevel network topology, we obtained dysfunctional signaling and ontological pathways, gene disease (diseasesome) association network and protein-protein interaction network (PPIN), uncovered essential shared infection recurrence connectivities with biological insights underlying between SARS-CoV-2 and AD. We found a total of 77, 21, 9, 54 common DEGs for SARS-CoV-2 and inflammatory bowel disorder (IBD), SARS-CoV-2 and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), SARS-CoV-2 and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and SARS-CoV-2 and type 1 diabetes (T1D). The enclosure of these common DEGs with bimolecular networks revealed 10 hub proteins (FYN, VEGFA, CTNNB1, KDR, STAT1, B2M, CD3G, ITGAV, TGFB3). Drugs such as amlodipine besylate, vorinostat, methylprednisolone, and disulfiram have been identified as a common ground between SARS-CoV-2 and AD from drug repurposing investigation which will stimulate the optimal selection of medications in the battle against this ongoing pandemic triggered by COVID-19.

The roles of methylprednisolone treatment in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The roles of methylprednisolone in treatment of patients with COVID-19 remain unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone in treatment of COVID-19 patients. PubMed, Cochrane and Web of Science were searched for studies comparing methylprednisolone and no glucocorticoids treatment in patients with COVID-19. Statistical pooling was reported as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95 % confidence interval (CI). Thirty-three studies were eligible, including 5 randomized trials and 28 observational studies. Meta-analysis showed that compared with no glucocorticoids, methylprednisolone in treatment of COVID-19 patients was associated with reduced short-term mortality (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.60-0.89), less need for ICU admission (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.66-0.91) and mechanical ventilation (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.57-0.84), increased 28-day ventilator-free days (MD 2.81; 95% CI 2.64-2.97), without increasing risk of secondary infections (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.82-1.32), but could prolong duration of viral shedding (MD 1.03; 95% CI 0.25-1.82). Subgroup analyses revealed that low-dose (≤2mg/kg/day) methylprednisolone treatment for ≤ 7 days in severe COVID-19 patients was associated with relatively better clinical outcomes, without increasing duration of viral shedding. Compared with no glucocorticoids, methylprednisolone treatment in COVID-19 patients is associated with reduced short-term mortality and better clinical outcomes, without increasing secondary infections, but could slightly prolong duration of viral shedding. Patients with severe COVID-19 are more likely to benefit from short-term low-dose methylprednisolone treatment (1-2 mg/kg/day for ≤ 7 days).

Efficacy and safety of corticosteroid regimens for the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis

Aim

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids for treating hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Materials & methods

Efficacy outcomes included time to negative SARS-CoV-2 tests, length of stay, duration and incidence of intensive unit care stay, incidence of mortality and duration and incidence of mechanical ventilation. Safety outcomes included the incidence of adverse events and severe adverse events, incidence of hyperglycemia and incidence of nosocomial infections.

Results

Ninety-five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (n = 42,205) were included. Corticosteroids were associated with increased length of stay (based on RCT only), increased time to negative tests, decreased length of mechanical ventilation and increased odds of hyperglycemia.

Conclusion

Corticosteroids should be considered in patients requiring mechanical ventilation, and glycemic monitoring may be needed when administering corticosteroids.

Upper gastrointestinal system bleedings in COVID-19 patients: Risk factors and management/a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal system bleeding (UGIB) that occurs with the effect of coagulopathy due to COVID-19 disease itself and drugs such as LMWH and steroids used in the treatment negatively affects the outcomes. In this study, we aimed to examine the frequency of gastrointestinal system bleeding in COVID-19 patients, risk factors, effect on outcomes, and management.

METHODS

Institutional center (a third-level pandemic center) database was searched for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 11, 2020, and December 17, 2020, retrospectively. Patients with UGIB symptoms/signs were included in the study. Age, gender, body mass index (kg/m2), hospital department where bleeding was diagnosed, previous bleeding history, comorbidities, and medication were steroid, anticoagulant, low weight molecule heparin, and proton-pomp inhibitor, endoscopic findings/treatment, transfusion, and mortality rates were evaluated. Patients were divided into two groups as survivors and non-survivors and parameters were compared.

RESULTS

Forty-five of a total 5484 patients under COVID-19 treatment had upper gastrointestinal bleeding (0.8%). The average age of the patients was 70.1 years and 73% bleeders were male. Nineteen patients (44%) underwent endoscopy. The most common etiologies of bleeding were gastric/duodenal ulcer (n=9), erosive gastritis (n=4), and hemorrhagic gastritis (n=3). Active bleeding re-quiring intervention was detected in only one patient; therapeutic band ligation was applied to only 1 (2%) of all patients. The most common etiologies of bleeding were gastric/duodenal ulcer (n=9), erosive gastritis (n=4), and hemorrhagic gastritis (n=3). In terms of statistical significance, it was observed that the rate of steroid treatment (77% vs. 39%) and the number of days of steroid treatment were higher in non-survivor group.

CONCLUSION

UGIB is less common in COVID-19 patients compared to other hospitalized patients. However, it significantly increases mortality. Mortality risk increases even more in patients using steroids. These risks should be considered in patients under COVID-19 treatment. The majority of the bleeding patients does not require endoscopic treatment and should be managed conser-vatively. It is worth considering reducing unnecessary endoscopies in the pandemic.

Comparing the efficacy of tocilizumab with corticosteroid therapy in treating COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Tocilizumab has shown equivocal outcomes in reducing mortality in COVID-19. The corticosteroids appear to be an affordable alternative to tocilizumab. This study aims to estimate the efficacy of tocilizumab and the corticosteroids particularly dexamethasone and methylprednisolone and to identify possible determinants of their efficacy.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were searched for studies involving tocilizumab, dexamethasone, and methylprednisolone in treating COVID-19. We included case-control and randomized or partially randomized trials. Meta-regression for patient baseline characteristics, co-medications, and tocilizumab dose regimens was performed to identify contributing factors to drug efficacy.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and twenty-four case-control studies were included in our meta-analysis involving 18,702 patients. Meta-analysis among the RCTs showed that a summary estimate favoring mortality reduction (OR 0.71, 95%CI 0.55 - 0.92) contributed mainly by tocilizumab and dexamethasone. Among case-control studies, meta-analysis showed mortality reduction (OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.36 - 0.75) contributed by tocilizumab and tocilizumab-methylprednisolone combination. Methylprednisolone alone did not reduce mortality except for one study involving high dose pulse therapy. Meta-analysis also found that all three drugs did not significantly reduce mechanical ventilation (OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.32 - 1.60).

CONCLUSION

Tocilizumab and dexamethasone emerge as viable options in reducing mortality in severe COVID-19 patients. A tocilizumab-corticosteroid combination strategy may improve therapeutic outcome in cases where single therapy fails.

Role of Dexamethasone and Methylprednisolone Corticosteroids in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalized Patients: A Review

The WHO announced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic disease globally on March 11, 2020, after it emerged in China. The emergence of COVID-19 has lasted over a year, and despite promising vaccine reports that have been produced, we still have a long way to go until such remedies are accessible to everyone. The immunomodulatory strategy has been kept at the top priority for the research agenda for COVID-19. Corticosteroids have been used to modulate the immune response in a wide range of diseases for the last 70 years. These drugs have been shown to avoid and reduce inflammation in tissues and the bloodstream through non-genomic and genomic effects. Now, the use of corticosteroids increased the chance of survival and relief by combating the viral strong inflammatory impacts and has moved to the forefront in the management of patients seeking supplemental oxygen. The goal of this review is to illuminate dexamethasone and methylprednisolone, i.e., in terms of their chemical and physical properties, role in COVID-19 patients suffering from pneumonia, the proposed mode of action in COVID-19, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical outcomes in immunocompromised populations with COVID-19, interaction with other drugs, and contradiction to explore the trends and perspectives for future research. Literature was searched from scientific databases such as Science Direct, Wiley, Springer, PubMed, and books for the preparation of this review. The RECOVERY trial, a massive, multidisciplinary, randomized, and open-label trial, is mainly accountable for recommendations over the usage of corticosteroids in COVID-19 patients. The corticosteroids such as dexamethasone and methylprednisolone in the form of medication have anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and anti-allergic characteristics, including the ability to inhibit the immune system. These drugs are also recommended for treating symptoms of multiple ailments such as rheumatic and autoimmune diseases, leukemia, multiple myeloma, and Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma along with other drugs. Toxicology studies proved them safe usually at low dosage via oral or other routes.

Comparison between methylprednisolone infusion and dexamethasone in COVID-19 ARDS mechanically ventilated patients

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causing severe acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) still has no solid effective therapy.From previous studies, dexamethasone has led to a decrease in mortality in patients who required oxygen supplementation mainly invasive mechanical ventilation; at the same time, it is unknown if another corticosteroid can be effective when used and what is the optimal dose and its duration, to achieve improvement in clinical outcome.The cornerstone of the study was to compare the differences in clinical outcome and laboratory results in intensive care patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia treated with dexamethasone 6 mg/day: doses versus those treated with methylprednisolone 2 mg/kg/day infusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective cohort study with a survival analysis of 414 patients diagnosed with severe COVID-19 pneumonia confirmed by polymerase chain reaction, for SARS-CoV-2 according to the Berlin definition of ARDS, who were admitted in the intensive care unit in the Helwan University Hospitals; the duration is from June 2020 till October 2021.Patients included in the study were mechanically ventilated with radiological confirmation of pneumonia by chest tomography; patients were included in the study according to the Berlin definition of ARDS and met the inclusion criteria of the study; 222 patients were treated with methylprednisolone infusion with a dose of 2 mg/kg/day versus 192 patients treated with dexamethasone 6 mg/day; both groups were treated for 10 days and were mechanically ventilated; the clinical out come and differences in the laboratory results were evaluated during the 10-day course for each group.

RESULTS

Four hundred fourteen patients had COVID-19 pneumonia, diagnosed and confirmed by ground glass opacities in chest tomography and arterial partial pressure of oxygen/inspired oxygen and fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F ratio) less than 300.Two hundred twenty-two patients received methylprednisolone infusion at a dose of 2 mg/kg/day, and 192 patients received dexamethasone 6 mg daily; both groups were treated for 10 days.Inflammatory markers for cytokine storm were improved in the methylprednisolone group in comparison to the patients who were given dexamethasone when comparing the on-admission markers to the results of the inflammatory markers after 10 days, like ferritin after 10 days in methylprednisolone group 292.26 ± 330.10 versus the dexa group 648.10 ± 329.09 (p value < 0.001).D-dimer in the methylprednisolone group was 1301.75 ± 1515.51 versus 2523.78 ± 843.18 in the dexa group (p value < 0.001); CRP was 49.65 ± 19.91 in the methylprednisolone group versus 100.54 ± 36.75 (p value < 0.001) in the dexa group; LDH after 10 days in methylprednisolone group was 345.09 ± 128.31, and in the dexa group, it was 731.87 ± 195.09 (p value < 0.001); neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (N:L ratio) after 10 days of treatment in the methylprednisolone group was 17.27 ± 5.09 versus 26.68 ± 7.19 (p value < 0.001) in the dexa group; also, the length of stay was shorter in the methylprednisolone group (7.33 ± 1.71) versus in the dexa group (19.43 ± 5.42) (p value < 0.001), together with mechanical ventilation MV days which are 3.82 ± 1.14 in the methyl group versus 16.57 ± 4.71 in the dexa group (p value < 0.001).Also, the radiological findings are improved in the methyl group (20.3%) versus the dexa group (73.4%) with p value < 0.001, and discharge from ICU in the methyl group was 79.7% versus 26.6% in the dexa group with p value < 0.001.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia, Patients who were mechanically ventilated with methylprednisolone infusion 2 mg/kg/day for 10 days versus dexamethasone 6 mg for 10 days showed a statistically significant improvement in the MV days and length of stay in the intensive care unit, together with the overall mortality and severity inflammatory markers of cytokine storm c-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer, ferritin, LDH, and N:L ratio.

TREATMENT OF MYASTHENIA GRAVIS PATIENTS WITH COVID-19: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the late 2019 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), causes a respiratory disease which could put myasthenia gravis (MG) patients at a greater risk of developing severe disease course, since infections and some drugs are a well-recognized trigger of symptom exacerbation in MG patients. Out of ten most commonly used past and present drugs used in COVID-19 treatment, two (quinolone derivatives and azithromycin) are known to worsen MG symptoms, whereas another two (tocilizumab and eculizumab) might have positive effect on MG symptoms. Colchicine, remdesivir, lopinavir, ritonavir and favipiravir seem to be safe to use, while data are insufficient for bamlanivimab, although it is also probably safe to use. Considering MG treatment options in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, acetylcholine esterase inhibitors are generally safe to use with some preliminary studies even demonstrating therapeutic properties in regard to COVID-19. Corticosteroids are in general safe to use, even recommended in specific circumstances, whereas other immunosuppressive medications (mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate) are probably safe to use. The only exception is rituximab since the resulting B cell depletion can lead to more severe COVID-19 disease. Concerning plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulins, both can be used in COVID-19 while taking into consideration thromboembolic properties of the former and hemodynamic disturbances of the latter. As current data suggest, all known COVID-19 vaccines are safe to use in MG patients.

Effects of corticosteroids on Covid-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis on clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Covid-19 disease is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Although corticosteroids have shown some promising results in Covid-19 patients, their effectiveness remains controversial. In this systematic review, we evaluated the effect of corticosteroids in mortality, Hospitalization, ICU admission, intubation, and mechanical ventilation in Covid-19 patients.

METHODS

We searched major databases from March-2020 to Jan-2021. Twenty-nine studies were included after evaluating the eligibility of the literature. The extracted data for mortality, hospitalization, admission to the ICU, intubation, and mechanical ventilation were analyzed with RevMan® 5.4. Categorical variables are presented with odds ratios (OR), and numerical variables are shown with the mean difference.

RESULT

Corticosteroid treatment had no impact on mortality in 18,190 covid patients with OR = 1.12[0.83-1.50]. When we include the randomized controlled trials, corticosteroids reduced the mortality by 20% (OR = 0.80 [0.73, 0.88]; P < 0.001). Additionally, the risk of admission to the ICU, the need for endotracheal intubation, and mechanical ventilation were comparable between patients receiving corticosteroids and controls. The duration of hospitalization was also similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Corticosteroid therapy may not be effective for reducing mortality, length of hospitalization, the likelihood of intubation and mechanical ventilation, and ICU admission in patients suffering from Covid-19 pneumonia.

Comparison of Low-Versus High-Dose Steroids in the Clinical Outcome of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

(1) Objectives: Patients with COVID-19 infection have been given various formulations and dosages of steroids over the last year and a half. This study aims to compare the effects of different formulations and doses of steroids on the 30 day in-hospital clinical outcome of patients with severe COVID-19 infection. (2) Material and Methods: An analysis of a retrospective cohort was carried out on patients with severe COVID-19 infection in a high-dependency unit (HDU) between February and July 2021. In total, 557 patients were included in this study. Patients who did not receive steroids (124) were excluded. Patients were divided into three groups based on dosages of steroids (Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day, Dexamethasone > 6 mg/day, and Methylprednisolone = 500 mg/day), given for 10 days. First, clinical outcome was evaluated on the 10th day of steroid administration in relation to mode of oxygen delivery. Then, Kaplan-Meier analysis was employed to determine 30 day in-hospital survival in relation to the use of steroid. (3) Results: Three groups were statistically equal according to biochemical characteristics. After 10 days of Methylprednisolone = 500 mg/day vs. Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day, 10.9% vs. 6.2% of patients required invasive ventilation (p = 0.01). The 30 day in-hospital mortality was lowest, 3%, in individuals receiving Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day, compared to 3.9% in individuals receiving Dexamethasone > 6 mg/day and 9.9% in individuals receiving Methylprednisolone = 500 mg/day, respectively. The median elapsed time was longer than 28 days between admission and outcome for Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day, compared to 18 days for Dexamethasone > 6 mg/day and 17 days for Methylprednisolone = 500 mg/day (p = < 0.0001). Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day was found to be a positive predictor of clinical outcome in COVID-19 patients on regression analysis. (4) Conclusions: Low-dose Dexamethasone (6 mg/day) is more effective than high-dose Dexamethasone and Methylprednisolone in improving the survival outcome of severe COVID-19 cases.

Use of steroids in COVID-19 patients: A meta-analysis

Background

Emerging reports have shown the benefits of steroids in hospitalized COVID-19 patients as life-saving drugs. However, the use of steroids in COVID-19 patients is confusing among many physicians.

Aim

The aim of the current study was to find out the exact association of steroids in the deaths of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

The relevant studies were searched in PubMed, Google scholar, and Clinical trials registries till May 25, 2021 and sorted out based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of studies was assessed using a standard scale. The pooled odds ratio was calculated with a 95% confidence interval. The sensitivity and sub-group analyses were also done. The publication bias was assessed qualitatively. The Rev Man 5 was used for all analyses with a random-effect model.

Results

The quantitative analysis was done with 9922 patients (6265-male and 3657-females) from 21 relevant studies. The pooled estimate results i.e. 0.52 [0.34, 0.80] have shown a significant reduction in deaths of COVID-19 patients in the steroidal group as compared to the non-steroidal group. The sensitivity analyses did not alter our conclusions. In subgroup analysis, methylprednisolone has shown a significant reduction in deaths of COVID-19 patients as compared to the non-steroidal group, however, more clinical evidence is required for dexamethasone and hydrocortisone.

Conclusion

The use of steroids in hospitalized COVID-19 patients is useful to reduce deaths.

Efficacy and Safety of Corticosteroid Use in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

We conducted a comprehensive literature review to synthesize evidence for the relationship between corticosteroid use and mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

The PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to March 13, 2021. We searched and analyzed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OSs) that examined corticosteroid use in patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, while the secondary outcome was the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) and serious adverse events.

Results

A total of 11 RCTs and 44 OSs involving 7893 and 41,164 patients with COVID-19 were included in the study. Corticosteroid use was associated with lower COVID-19 mortality in RCTs, but was not statistically significant (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77–1.07; I² = 63.4%). The subgroup analysis of pulse dose corticosteroid showed survival benefit statistically (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.15–0.56). Moreover, the corticosteroid use may reduce the need for MV (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51–0.90; I² = 7.5%) with no significant increase in serious adverse reactions (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.30–2.37; I² = 33.3%). In addition, the included OSs showed that the pulse dose (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45–0.95; I² = 30.8%) might lower the mortality in patients with COVID-19. The pulse dose of methylprednisolone (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45–0.80; I² = 0%) had a beneficial effect on survival. It was especially significant when the duration of pulse methylprednisolone use was less than 7 days (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43–0.80; I² = 0%).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis indicated that corticosteroid use might cause a slight reduction in COVID-19 mortality. However, it could significantly reduce the MV requirement in patients with COVID-19 and restrict serious adverse events. Additionally, the pulse dose of methylprednisolone for less than 7 days may be a good treatment choice for patients with COVID-19.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-021-00518-3.

Impact of early corticosteroids on 60-day mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A multicenter cohort study of the OUTCOMEREA network

Objectives

In severe COVID-19 pneumonia, the appropriate timing and dosing of corticosteroids (CS) is not known. Patient subgroups for which CS could be more beneficial also need appraisal. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of early CS in COVID-19 pneumonia patients admitted to the ICU on the occurrence of 60-day mortality, ICU-acquired-bloodstream infections(ICU-BSI), and hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia(HAP-VAP).

Methods

We included patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to 11 ICUs belonging to the French OutcomeRea^TM network from January to May 2020. We used survival models with ponderation with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW).

Results

The study population comprised 303 patients having a median age of 61.6 (53–70) years of whom 78.8% were male and 58.6% had at least one comorbidity. The median SAPS II was 33 (25–44). Invasive mechanical ventilation was required in 34.8% of the patients. Sixty-six (21.8%) patients were in the Early-C subgroup. Overall, 60-day mortality was 29.4%. The risks of 60-day mortality (_IPTWHR = 0.86;95% CI 0.54 to 1.35, p = 0.51), ICU-BSI and HAP-VAP were similar in the two groups. Importantly, early CS treatment was associated with a lower mortality rate in patients aged 60 years or more (_IPTWHR, 0.53;95% CI, 0.3–0.93; p = 0.03). In contrast, CS was associated with an increased risk of death in patients younger than 60 years without inflammation on admission (_IPTWHR = 5.01;95% CI, 1.05, 23.88; p = 0.04).

Conclusion

For patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, early CS treatment was not associated with patient survival. Interestingly, inflammation and age can significantly influence the effect of CS.

Combination therapy of Tocilizumab and steroid for management of COVID-19 associated cytokine release syndrome: A single center experience from Pune, Western India

ABSTRACT

Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) or cytokine storm is thought to be the cause of inflammatory lung damage, worsening pneumonia and death in patients with COVID-19. Steroids (Methylprednislone or Dexamethasone) and Tocilizumab (TCZ), an interleukin-6 receptor antagonist, are approved for treatment of CRS in India. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy of TCZ and steroid in COVID-19 associated CRS.This retrospective cohort study was conducted at Noble hospital and Research Centre (NHRC), Pune, India between April 2 and November 2, 2020. All patients administered TCZ and steroids during this period were included. The primary endpoint was incidence of all cause mortality. Secondary outcomes studied were need for mechanical ventilation and incidence of systemic and infectious complications. Baseline and time dependent risk factors significantly associated with death were identified by Relative risk estimation.Out of 2831 admitted patients, 515 (24.3% females) were administered TCZ and steroids. There were 135 deaths (26.2%), while 380 patients (73.8%) had clinical improvement. Mechanical ventilation was required in 242 (47%) patients. Of these, 44.2% (107/242) recovered and were weaned off the ventilator. Thirty seven percent patients were managed in wards and did not need intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Infectious complications like hospital acquired pneumonia, blood stream bacterial and fungal infections were observed in 2.13%, 2.13% and 0.06% patients respectively. Age ≥ 60 years (P = .014), presence of co-morbidities like hypertension (P = .011), IL-6 ≥ 100 pg/ml (P = .002), D-dimer ≥ 1000 ng/ml (P < .0001), CT severity index ≥ 18 (P < .0001) and systemic complications like lung fibrosis (P = .019), cardiac arrhythmia (P < .0001), hypotension (P < .0001) and encephalopathy (P < .0001) were associated with increased risk of death.Combination therapy of TCZ and steroids is likely to be safe and effective in management of COVID-19 associated cytokine release syndrome. Efficacy of this anti-inflammatory combination therapy needs to be validated in randomized controlled trials.

Clinical Efficacy of Corticosteroids in the Early Stages of Deterioration in COVID-19 Pneumonia

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO) strongly suggests using corticosteroids in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Similarly, a large randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) in the UK found that dexamethasone effectively reduced the mortality rate in severe COVID-19 patients. However, the safety profile of corticosteroids has been a controversial area of study.

Case Description

A case of a COVID-19 patient is described and the clinical characteristics are observed as the mildly symptomatic patient progresses into a critically ill patient and during their dramatic improvement with corticosteroid therapy in the early stage of the deterioration process with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Conclusion

The most suitable timing and dosage for the use of corticosteroids to maximize its effect during the worsening of COVID-19 pneumonia are discussed. One of the main pathophysiological hypotheses for severe COVID-19 patients is related to cytokine storm and virus load, which can be effectively treated with corticosteroid therapy.

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

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

A short course of corticosteroids reduces the risk of mechanical ventilation and death in patients with moderate to severe COVID 19 pneumonia: results of a retrospective monocentric cohort

Background

Reduced mortality at 28 days in patients treated with corticosteroids was demonstrated, but this result was not confirmed by certain large epidemiological studies. Our aim was to determine whether corticosteroids improve the outcomes of our patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Methods

Our retrospective, single centre cohort study included consecutive patients hospitalized for moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia between March 15 and April 15 2020. An early short course of corticosteroids was given during the second phase of the study. The primary composite endpoint was the need for mechanical ventilation or mortality within 28 days of admission. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to estimate the propensity score, i.e. the probability of each patient receiving corticosteroid therapy based on the initial variables.

Results

About 120 consecutive patients were included, 39 in the “corticosteroids group”, 81 in the “no corticosteroids group”; their mean ages (±SD) were 66.4 ± 14.1 and 66.1 ± 15.2 years, respectively. Mechanical ventilation-free survival at 28 days was higher in the “corticosteroids group” than in the “no corticosteroids group” (71% and 29% of cases, respectively, p < .0001). The effect of corticosteroids was confirmed with HR .28 (95%CI .10–.79), p = .02. In older and comorbid patients who were not eligible for intensive care, the effect of corticosteroid therapy was also beneficial (HR .36 (95%CI .16–.80), p = .01).

Conclusion

A short course of corticosteroids reduced the risks of death or mechanical ventilation in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia in all patients and also in older and comorbid patients not eligible for intensive care.

Severity and Mortality Associated with Steroid Use among Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

There are controversial suggestions about steroid use to treat patients infected with COVID-19. Conclusive evidence regarding the use of steroids to treat COVID-19 is still lacking. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the mortality and severity associated with corticosteroid therapy compared to noncorticosteroid treatment in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

The information was collected from electronic databases: PubMed, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, and Google scholar through January 30, 2021. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed using random effect models. Endnote citation manager software version X9 for Windows was utilized to collect and organize search outcomes (into relevant and irrelevant studies) and to remove duplicate articles.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies were included in the meta-analysis, including 14,659 COVID-19 patients. No significant differences in mortality between the steroid and nonsteroid treatment groups (RR = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.80-1.13; p = 0.57). There was no significant reduction in mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients treated with corticosteroid (RR = 0.89; 95% CI: 0.62-1.27; p = 0.52). Significant differences were observed in severe disease conditions between the steroid and nonsteroid treatment groups (RR = 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the steroid and nonsteroid treatment users' of COVID-19 patients. There was no significant reduction of all-cause mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients treated with corticosteroids.

Mortality in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19: a systematic review

Introduction: The use of mechanical ventilation associated with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, the most common complication in critically ill COVID-19 patients, defines a high risk population that requires specific consideration of outcomes and treatment practices.Areas covered: This review evaluates existing information about mortality rates and effectiveness of antiviral, immune-modulating, and anticoagulation treatments in COVID-19 patients who received mechanical ventilation. The mortality rate and follow-up periods in patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged widely. Antivirals, including remdesivir and convalescent plasma, have shown no definitive mortality benefit in this population despite positive results in other COVID-19 patients. Dexamethasone was associated with an absolute reduction in 28-day mortality by 12.3% (95% CI, 6.3 to 17.6), after adjusting for age. Reduced mortality has been demonstrated with tocilizumab use alongside corticosteroids. Evidence is inconclusive for therapeutic anticoagulation, and further studies are needed to determine the comparative benefit of prophylactic anticoagulation.Expert opinion: Significant variation and high mortality rates in mechanically ventilated patients necessitate more standardized outcome measurements, increased consideration of risk factors to reduce intubation, and improved treatment practices. Anticoagulation and dexamethasone should be incorporated in the treatment of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, while more rigorous studies are required for other potential treatments.

Methylprednisolone or dexamethasone, which one is superior corticosteroid in the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a triple-blinded randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although almost a year has passed since the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak and promising reports of vaccines have been presented, we still have a long way until these measures are available for all. Furthermore, the most appropriate corticosteroid and dose in the treatment of COVID-19 have remained uncertain. We conducted a study to assess the effectiveness of methylprednisolone treatment versus dexamethasone for hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

In this prospective triple-blinded randomized controlled trial, we enrolled 86 hospitalized COVID-19 patients from August to November 2020, in Shiraz, Iran. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups to receive either methylprednisolone (2 mg/kg/day; intervention group) or dexamethasone (6 mg/day; control group). Data were assessed based on a 9-point WHO ordinal scale extending from uninfected (point 0) to death (point 8).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the groups on admission. However, the intervention group demonstrated significantly better clinical status compared to the control group at day 5 (4.02 vs. 5.21, p = 0.002) and day 10 (2.90 vs. 4.71, p = 0.001) of admission. There was also a significant difference in the overall mean score between the intervention group and the control group, (3.909 vs. 4.873 respectively, p = 0.004). The mean length of hospital stay was 7.43 ± 3.64 and 10.52 ± 5.47 days in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p = 0.015). The need for a ventilator was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (18.2% vs 38.1% p = 0.040).

CONCLUSION

In hospitalized hypoxic COVID-19 patients, methylprednisolone demonstrated better results compared to dexamethasone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered with IRCT.IR (08/04/2020-No. IRCT20200204046369N1 ).

Concomitant use of dexamethasone and tetracyclines: a potential therapeutic option for the management of severe COVID-19 infection?

Introduction: The global coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed a critical challenge to the research community as well as to the healthcare systems. Severe COVID-19 patients are at a higher risk of developing serious complications and mortality. There is a dire need for safe and effective pharmacotherapy for addressing unmet needs of these patients. Concomitant use of dexamethasone and tetracyclines, by virtue of their immunomodulatory and other relevant pharmacological properties, offers a potential strategy for synergy aimed at improving clinical outcomes.Areas covered: Here we review the potential benefits of combining dexamethasone and tetracyclines (minocycline or doxycycline) for the management of severe COVID-19 patients. We have critically examined the evidence obtained from in silico, experimental, and clinical research. We have also discussed the plausible mechanisms, advantages, and drawbacks of this proposed combination therapy for managing severe COVID-19.Expert opinion: The concomitant use of dexamethasone and one of the tetracyclines among severe COVID-19 patients offers several advantages in terms of additive immunomodulatory effects, cost-effectiveness, wide-availability, and well-known pharmacological properties including adverse-effect profile and contraindications. There is an urgent need to facilitate pilot studies followed by well-designed and adequately-powered multicentric clinical trials to generate conclusive evidence related to utility of this approach.

A review on function and side effects of systemic corticosteroids used in high-grade COVID-19 to prevent cytokine storms

In December 2019, a cluster of pneumonia caused by a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), officially known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), emerged in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. Cytokine storm is an uncontrolled systemic inflammatory response resulting from the release of large amounts of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines that occurs at phase 3 of viral infection. Such emergence led to the development of many clinical trials to discover efficient drugs and therapeutic protocols to fight with this single-stranded RNA virus. Corticosteroids suppress inflammation of the lungs during the cytokine storm, weaken immune responses, and inhibit the elimination of pathogen. For this reason, in COVID-19 corticosteroid therapy, systemic inhibition of inflammation is observed with a wide range of side effects. The present review discusses the effectiveness of the corticosteroid application in COVID-19 infection and the related side effects of these agents. In summary, a number of corticosteroids, including and especially methylprednisolone and dexamethasone, have demonstrated remarkable efficacy, particularly for COVID-19 patients who underwent mechanical ventilation.

Effects of Methylprednisolone on Ventilator-Free Days in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and COVID-19: A Retrospective Study

Objectives: There are limited data regarding the efficacy of methylprednisolone in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. We aimed to determine whether methylprednisolone is associated with increases in the number of ventilator-free days (VFDs) among these patients. Design: Retrospective single-center study. Setting: Intensive care unit. Patients: All patients with ARDS due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation between 1 March and 29 May 2020 were included. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was ventilator-free days (VFDs) for the first 28 days. Defined as being alive and free from mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was analyzed with competing-risks regression based on Fine and Gray's proportional sub hazards model. Death before day 28 was considered to be the competing event. A total of 77 patients met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-two patients (41.6%) received methylprednisolone. The median dose was 1 mg·kg-1 (IQR: 1-1.3 mg·kg-1) and median duration for 5 days (IQR: 5-7 days). Patients who received methylprednisolone had a mean 18.8 VFDs (95% CI, 16.6-20.9) during the first 28 days vs. 14.2 VFDs (95% CI, 12.6-16.7) in patients who did not receive methylprednisolone (difference, 4.61, 95% CI, 1.10-8.12, p = 0.001). In the multivariable competing-risks regression analysis and after adjusting for potential confounders (ventilator settings, prone position, organ failure support, severity of the disease, tocilizumab, and inflammatory markers), methylprednisolone was independently associated with a higher number of VFDs (subhazards ratio: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.02-0.45, p = 0.003). Hospital mortality did not differ between the two groups (31.2% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.82). Hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the methylprednisolone group (24 days [IQR: 15-41 days] vs. 37 days [IQR: 23-52 days], p = 0.046). The incidence of positive blood cultures was higher in patients who received methylprednisolone (37.5% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.052). However, 81% of patients who received methylprednisolone also received tocilizumab. The number of days with hyperglycemia was similar in the two groups. Conclusions: Methylprednisolone was independently associated with increased VFDs and shortened hospital length of stay. The combination of methylprednisolone and tocilizumab was associated with a higher rate of positive blood cultures. Further trials are needed to evaluate the benefits and safety of methylprednisolone in moderate or severe COVID-19 ARDS.

Corticosteroid use in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis on clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

In the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there has been worldwide debate on the use of corticosteroids in COVID-19. In the recent RECOVERY trial, evaluating the effect of dexamethasone, a reduced 28-day mortality in patients requiring oxygen therapy or mechanical ventilation was shown. Their results have led to considering amendments in guidelines or actually already recommending corticosteroids in COVID-19. However, the effectiveness and safety of corticosteroids still remain uncertain, and reliable data to further shed light on the benefit and harm are needed.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of corticosteroids in COVID-19.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of RCTS and observational studies on adult patients was performed across Medline/PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from December 1, 2019, until October 1, 2020, according to the PRISMA guidelines. Primary outcomes were short-term mortality and viral clearance (based on RT-PCR in respiratory specimens). Secondary outcomes were: need for mechanical ventilation, need for other oxygen therapy, length of hospital stay and secondary infections.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies were included, covering 20.197 patients. In twenty-two studies, the effect of corticosteroid use on mortality was quantified. The overall pooled estimate (observational studies and RCTs) showed a significant reduced mortality in the corticosteroid group (OR 0.72 (95%CI 0.57-0.87). Furthermore, viral clearance time ranged from 10 to 29 days in the corticosteroid group and from 8 to 24 days in the standard of care group. Fourteen studies reported a positive effect of corticosteroids on need for and duration of mechanical ventilation. A trend toward more infections and antibiotic use was present.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings from both observational studies and RCTs confirm a beneficial effect of corticosteroids on short-term mortality and a reduction in need for mechanical ventilation. And although data in the studies were too sparse to draw any firm conclusions, there might be a signal of delayed viral clearance and an increase in secondary infections.

Controlling Cytokine Storm Is Vital in COVID-19

Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a global outbreak and severely posed threat to people's health and social stability. Mounting evidence suggests that immunopathological changes, including diminished lymphocytes and elevated cytokines, are important drivers of disease progression and death in coronavirus infections. Cytokine storm not only limits further spread of virus in the body but also induces secondary tissue damage through the secretion of large amounts of active mediators and inflammatory factors. It has been determined that cytokine storm is a major cause of deaths in COVID-19; therefore, in order to reverse the deterioration of severe and critically ill patients from this disease, the cytokine storm has become a key therapeutic target. Although specific mechanisms of the occurrences of cytokine storms in COVID-19 have not been fully illuminated, hyper-activated innate immune responses, and dysregulation of ACE2 (angiotensin converting enzyme 2) expression and its downstream pathways might provide possibilities. Tailored immunoregulatory therapies have been applied to counteract cytokine storms, such as inhibition of cytokines, corticosteroids, blood purification therapy, and mesenchymal stem cell therapy. This review will summarize advances in the research of cytokine storms induced by COVID-19, as well as potential intervention strategies to control cytokine storms.

Efficacy and safety of steroid therapy in COVID-19: A rapid systematic review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Although the use of steroids in the management of COVID-19 has been addressed by a few systematic review and meta-analysis, however, they also used data from "SARS-CoV" and "MERS-CoV." Again, most of these studies addressed only one severity category of patients or addressed only one efficacy endpoint (mortality). In this context, we conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of steroid therapy among all severity categories of patients with COVID-19 (mild to moderate and severe to critical category) in terms of "mortality," "requirement of mechanical ventilation," "requirement of ICU" and clinical cure parameters.

METHODS

11 databases were screened. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or high quality (on the basis of risk of bias analysis) comparative-observational studies were included in the analysis. RevMan5.3 was used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies (3 RCT and 12 comparative-observational studies) were included. In the mechanically-ventilated COVID-19 population, treatment with dexamethasone showed significant protection against mortality (single study). Among severe and critically ill combined population, steroid administration was significantly associated with lowered mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.83 [0.76-0.910]), lowered requirement of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.59 [0.51-0.69]), decreased requirement of intensive care unit (ICU) (RR 0.62 [0.45-0.86]), lowered length of ICU stay (single-study) and decreased duration of mechanical ventilation (two-studies). In mild to moderate population, steroid treatment was associated with a higher "duration of hospital stay," while no difference was seen in other domains. In patients at risk of progression to "acute respiratory distress syndrome," steroid administration was associated with "reduced requirement of mechanical ventilation" (single-study).

CONCLUSION

This study guides the use of steroid across patients with different severity categories of COVID-19. Among mechanically ventilated patients, steroid therapy may be beneficial in terms of reduced mortality. Among "severe and critical" patients; steroid therapy was associated with lowered mortality, decreased requirement of mechanical ventilation, and ICU. However, no benefit was observed in "mild to moderate" population. To conclude, among properly selected patient populations (based-upon clinical severity and biomarker status), steroid administration may prove beneficial in patients with COVID-19.

Updated guidance on the management of COVID-19: from an American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society coordinated International Task Force (29 July 2020)

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2. Consensus suggestions can standardise care, thereby improving outcomes and facilitating future research.

METHODS

An International Task Force was composed and agreement regarding courses of action was measured using the Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations and Evidence (CORE) process. 70% agreement was necessary to make a consensus suggestion.

RESULTS

The Task Force made consensus suggestions to treat patients with acute COVID-19 pneumonia with remdesivir and dexamethasone but suggested against hydroxychloroquine except in the context of a clinical trial; these are revisions of prior suggestions resulting from the interim publication of several randomised trials. It also suggested that COVID-19 patients with a venous thromboembolic event be treated with therapeutic anticoagulant therapy for 3 months. The Task Force was unable to reach sufficient agreement to yield consensus suggestions for the post-hospital care of COVID-19 survivors. The Task Force fell one vote shy of suggesting routine screening for depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

The Task Force addressed questions related to pharmacotherapy in patients with COVID-19 and the post-hospital care of survivors, yielding several consensus suggestions. Management options for which there is insufficient agreement to formulate a suggestion represent research priorities.