Cardiovascular drugs and COVID-19 clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Impact of prior antihypertensive treatment on COVID-19 outcomes, by active ingredient

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of prior chronic treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/ angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), both as a group and by active ingredient, on severity (risk of hospitalization and mortality), progression of and susceptibility to COVID-19.

METHODS

We conducted a multiple population-based case-control study in Galicia (north-west Spain). The study data were sourced from medical, administrative and clinical databases. We assessed: (1) risk of hospitalization, by selecting all patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 with PCR + as cases, and a random sample of subjects without a PCR + as controls; (2) COVID-19 mortality risk; (3) risk of disease progression; and (4) susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2, considering all patients with PCR + as cases, and the same subjects used in the previous model as controls. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were calculated.

RESULTS

ACEIs and ARBs were shown to decrease the risk of hospitalization (aOR = 0.78 [95%CI 0.69-0.89] and aOR = 0.80 [95%CI 0.72-0.90] respectively), risk of mortality (aOR = 0.71 [95%CI 0.52-0.98] and aOR = 0.69 [95%CI 0.52-0.91] respectively), and susceptibility to the virus (aOR = 0.88 [95%CI 0.82-0.94] and aOR = 0.92 [95%CI 0.86-0.97] respectively). By active ingredient: use of enalapril was associated with a significantly lower risk of hospitalization (aOR = 0.72 [95%CI 0.61-0.85]), mortality (aOR = 0.59 [95%CI 0.38-0.92]) and susceptibility to COVID-19 (aOR = 0.86 [95%CI 0.79-0.94]); and use of candesartan was associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization (aOR = 0.76 [95%CI 0.60-0.95]), mortality (aOR = 0.36 [95%CI 0.17-0.75]) and disease progression (aOR = 0.73 [95%CI 0.56-0.95]).

CONCLUSION

This large-scale real-world data study suggest that enalapril and candesartan are associated with a considerable reduction in risk of severe COVID19 outcomes.

The risk of common hypoglycemic and antihypertensive medications and COVID-19: A 2-sample Mendelian randomization study

BACKGROUND

It has been reported that diabetes and hypertension increase the adverse outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Aside from the inherent factors of diabetes and hypertension, it remains unclear whether antidiabetic or antihypertensive medications contribute to the increased adverse outcomes of COVID-19. The effect of commonly used antidiabetic and antihypertensive medications on COVID-19 outcomes has been inconsistently concluded in existing observational studies. Conducting a systematic study on the causal relationship between these medications and COVID-19 would be beneficial in guiding their use during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We employed the 2-sample Mendelian randomization approach to assess the causal relationship between 5 commonly used antidiabetic medications (SGLT-2 inhibitors, Sulfonylureas, Insulin analogues, Thiazolidinediones, GLP-1 analogues) and 3 commonly used antihypertensive medications (calcium channel blockers [CCB], ACE inhibitors, β-receptor blockers [BB]), and COVID-19 susceptibility, hospitalization, and severe outcomes. The genetic variations in the drug targets of the 5 antidiabetic medications and 3 antihypertensive medications were utilized as instrumental variables. European population-specific genome-wide association analysis (GWAS) data on COVID-19 from the Host Genetics Initiative meta-analyses were obtained, including COVID-19 susceptibility (n = 2597,856), COVID-19 hospitalization (n = 2095,324), and COVID-19 severity (n = 1086,211). The random-effects inverse variance-weighted estimation method was employed as the primary assessment technique, with various sensitivity analyses conducted to evaluate heterogeneity and pleiotropy.

RESULTS

There were no potential associations between the genetic variations in the drug targets of the 5 commonly used antidiabetic medications (SGLT-2 inhibitors, Sulfonylureas, Insulin analogues, Thiazolidinediones, GLP-1 analogues) and the 3 commonly used antihypertensive medications (CCBs, ACE inhibitors, BBs) with COVID-19 susceptibility, hospitalization, and severity (all P > .016).

CONCLUSION

The findings from this comprehensive Mendelian randomization analysis suggest that there may be no causal relationship between the 5 commonly used antidiabetic medications (SGLT-2 inhibitors, Sulfonylureas, Insulin analogues, Thiazolidinediones, GLP-1 analogues) and the 3 commonly used antihypertensive medications (CCBs, ACE inhibitors, BBs) with COVID-19 susceptibility, hospitalization, and severity.

Global landscape of COVID-19 research: a visualization analysis of randomized clinical trials

The emergence of COVID-19 in 2019 has resulted in a significant global health crisis. Consequently, extensive research was published to understand and mitigate the disease. In particular, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been considered the benchmark for assessing the efficacy and safety of interventions. Hence, the present study strives to present a comprehensive overview of the global research landscape pertaining to RCTs and COVID-19. A bibliometric analysis was performed using the Scopus database. The search parameters included articles published from 2020 to 2022 using keywords specifically related to COVID-19 and RCTs. The data were analyzed using various bibliometric indicators. The volume of publications, contributions of countries and institutions, funding agencies, active journals, citation analysis, co-occurrence analysis, and future research direction analysis were specifically analyzed. A total of 223,480 research articles concerning COVID-19 were published, with 3,727 of them related to RCTs and COVID-19. The ten most productive countries collectively produced 75.8% of the documents, with the United States leading the way by contributing 31.77%, followed by the UK with 14.03% (n = 523), China with 12.96% (n = 483) and Canada with 7.16% (n = 267). Trials (n = 173, 4.64%), BMJ Open (n = 81, 2.17%), PLOS One (n = 73, 1.96%) and JAMA Network Open (n = 53, 1.42%) were the most active journals in publishing articles related to COVID-19 RCTs. The co-occurrence analysis identified four clusters of research areas: the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines, mental health strategies to cope with the impact of the pandemic, the use of monoclonal antibodies to treat patients with COVID-19, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses of COVID-19 research. This paper offers a detailed examination of the global research environment pertaining to RCTs and their use in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The comprehensive body of research findings was found to have been generated by the collaborative efforts of multiple countries, institutions, and funding organizations. The predominant research areas encompassed COVID-19 vaccines, strategies for mental health, monoclonal antibodies, and systematic reviews. This information has the potential to aid researchers, policymakers, and funders in discerning areas of weakness and establishing areas of priority.

Regional moderate hyperthermia for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 (TherMoCoV study): a randomized controlled trial

Background

To prevent COVID-19 progression, low-cost alternatives that are available to all patients are needed. Diverse forms of thermotherapy have been proposed to prevent progression to severe/critical COVID-19.

Objective

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of local thermotherapy to prevent disease progression in hospitalized adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

Methods

A multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, randomized, adaptive trial is used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of local thermotherapy to prevent disease progression in hospitalized adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Eligible hospitalized adult patients with symptoms of COVID-19 with ≤5 days from symptom onset, meeting criteria for mild or moderate COVID-19, were randomly assigned to the intervention consisting of local thermotherapy via an electric heat pad in the thorax (target temperature range 39.5–42°C) continuously for 90 min, twice daily, for 5 days, or standard care. The main outcome was the proportion of patients who progressed to severe-to-critical COVID-19 or death. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio through a centralized computer-generated sequence of minimization with a random component of 20%. Participants and medical staff were not blinded to the intervention.

Results

One-hundred and five participants (thermotherapy n = 54, control n = 51) with a median age of 53 (IQR: 41–64) years were included for analysis after the early cessation of recruitment due to the closure of all temporal COVID-19 units (target sample size = 274). The primary outcome of disease progression occurred in 31.4% (16/51) of patients in the control group vs. 25.9% (14/54) of those receiving thermotherapy (risk difference = 5.5%; 95%CI: −11.8–22.7, p = 0.54). Thermotherapy was well tolerated with a median total duration of thermotherapy of 900 (IQR: 877.5–900) min. Seven (13.7%) patients in the control group and seven (12.9%) in the thermotherapy group had at least one AE (p = 0.9), none of which were causally attributed to the intervention. No statistically significant differences in serum cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-17, and IFN-γ) were observed between day 5 and baseline among groups.

Conclusion

Local thermotherapy was safe and well-tolerated. A non-statistically significant lower proportion of patients who experienced disease progression was found in the thermotherapy group compared to standard care. Local thermotherapy could be further studied as a strategy to prevent disease progression in ambulatory settings.

Clinical Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT04363541.

Overreactive macrophages in SARS-CoV-2 infection: The effects of ACEI

Among various factors influencing the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans, macrophage overactivation is considered the main cause of the cytokine storm that leads to severe complications of COVID-19. Moreover, the increased expression of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), an obligatory entry receptor of the coronavirus, caused by treatment with ACE inhibitors (ACEI) lowered overall confidence in the safety of these drugs. However, analysis of the course of coronavirus infection in patients treated with ACEI does not support these concerns. Instead, the beneficial effect of ACEI on macrophages has increasingly been emphasized. This includes their anti-inflammatory activation and the consequent reduction in the risk of severe disease and life-threatening complications. Herein, we summarize the current knowledge and understanding of the dual role of macrophages in SARS-CoV-2 infection, with a special focus on the postulated mechanisms underlying the beneficial effects of macrophage targeting by ACEI. These seem to involve the stimulation of macrophage angiotensin II type 2 and Mas receptors by angiotensin 1-7, intensively produced due to the up-regulation of ACE2 expression on macrophages, as well as the direct inhibition of macrophage hyper-responsiveness by ACEI. The impact of ACEI on macrophages may also lead to the activation of an effective antiviral response due to the increased expression of ACE2.

COVID-19-associated phlebopathy as a current problem of modern phlebology

Введение. SARS-CoV-2 сопровождается развитием дисфункции венозного эндотелия, которая может привести к развитию персистирующей флебопатии нижних конечностей, снижаю щей качество жизни пациентов.

Цель. Оценить эффективность фармакологической терапии пациентов с постковидной флебопатией.

Introduction. SARS-CoV-2 is accompanied by the development of venous endothelial dysfunction, which can lead to the development of persistent phlebopathy of the lower limbs, reducing the quality of life of patients.

Objective. To evaluate the efficacy of pharmacological therapy in patients with postcocclusive phlebopathy.

Materials and methods. 178 patients (125 women), mean age 34.8 ± 3.2 years, who underwent SARS-CoV-2, for their first veno-specific complaints received micronized purified flavonoid fraction (MPFF) 1,000 mg per day for 90 days. Complaints were monitored using a 10-cm visual analog scale and the CIVIQ-20 questionnaire. All patients underwent ultrasound examination of the venous system of both lower extremities and photoplethysmography. Laboratory biochemical examination with determination of endothelial dysfunction marker levels was performed in 30 patients before and after treatment.

Results. After 90 days of phlebotropic therapy, there was a significant reduction in the severity of all venous-specific complaints, except for intradermal vein dilation. The global quality of life index increased from 64.4 ± 11.2 to 86.6 ± 9.1% (p < 0.001). There was an improvement in photoplethysmography (PPG) scores. Return blood-flow time and tibial venous muscle pump strength increased significantly (p < 0.05) by 4.3 s and 3.5%, respectively. The 30 patients who underwent biochemical examination in the first blood samples obtained from the great saphenous vein showed a significant increase in IL-1 concentration (7.8 ± 0, 7 pg/ml), IL-6 (18.7 ± 1.8 pg/ml), VEGF (187.8 ± 11.6 pg/ml), TNF (7.8 ± 0.9 pg/ml), histamine (22.4 ± 11.4 nmol/L) and hsCRB (5.4 ± 0.3 mg/L), indicating that a proinflammatory phenotype of venous endothelium was formed. After 90 days of MOFF administration, these indices significantly decreased. The levels of IL-1 and IL-6 decreased by 3.2 and 10.4 pg/ml, respectively, the values of VEGF and TNF decreased by 114.6 pg/ml and 2.9 pg/ml. There was a gradual normalization of histamine and hsCRB to 6.1 ± 4.1 nmol/L and 1.1 ± 0.9 mg/L.

Conclusions. The data obtained indicate that the appearance of veno-specific symptoms and syndromes in patients who have undergone SARS-CoV-2 may be due to the development of phlebopathy, the correction of which requires the use of pharmacological drugs with relevant mechanisms of action.

Does aspirin have an effect on risk of death in patients with COVID-19? A meta-analysis

Purpose

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has shown unprecedented impact world-wide since the eruption in late 2019. Importantly, emerging reports suggest an increased risk of thromboembolism development in patients with COVID-19. Meanwhile, it is found that aspirin reduced mortality in critically ill patients with non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed to investigate the effects of aspirin on COVID-19 mortality.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in 10 electronic databases and 4 registries. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (Cis) to estimate the effect of aspirin on COVID-19 mortality. Relevant subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

Results

The results showed that aspirin use was associated with a reduction in COVID-19 mortality (adjusted RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.50–0.95; P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis found that the low-dose group was associated with a reduced COVID-19 mortality (adjusted RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.48–0.85; P < 0.01). Aspirin use was associated with reduced COVID-19 mortality in Europe and America (crude RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.52–0.98; P = 0.04), and results from cohort studies suggested that aspirin use was a protective factor for COVID-19 mortality (adjusted RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.52–0.99; P = 0.04). Meanwhile, aspirin use was not associated with bleeding risk (crude RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.80–1.87; P = 0.96).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis found that aspirin use was associated with a reduction in mortality in patients with COVID-19 and not with an increased risk of bleeding.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-022-03356-5.