Evaluation of current medical approaches for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

COVID-19 therapeutics: Clinical application of repurposed drugs and futuristic strategies for target-based drug discovery

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes the complicated disease COVID-19. Clinicians are continuously facing huge problems in the treatment of patients, as COVID-19-specific drugs are not available hence the principle of drug repurposing serves as a one-and-only hope. Globally, the repurposing of many drugs is underway; few of them are already approved by the regulatory bodies for their clinical use and most of them are in different phases of clinical trials. Here in this review, our main aim is to discuss in detail the up-to-date information on the target-based pharmacological classification of repurposed drugs, the potential mechanism of actions, and the current clinical trial status of various drugs which are under repurposing since early 2020. At last, we briefly proposed the probable pharmacological and therapeutic drug targets that may be preferred as a futuristic drug discovery approach in the development of effective medicines.

Hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Hyperimmune immunoglobulin (hIVIG) contains polyclonal antibodies, which can be prepared from large amounts of pooled convalescent plasma or prepared from animal sources through immunisation. They are being investigated as a potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This review was previously part of a parent review addressing convalescent plasma and hIVIG for people with COVID-19 and was split to address hIVIG and convalescent plasma separately.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of hIVIG therapy for the treatment of people with COVID-19, and to maintain the currency of the evidence using a living systematic review approach.

SEARCH METHODS

To identify completed and ongoing studies, we searched the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Research Database, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, the Epistemonikos COVID-19 L*OVE Platform and Medline and Embase from 1 January 2019 onwards. We carried out searches on 31 March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated hIVIG for COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. We excluded studies that included populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)), as well as studies that evaluated standard immunoglobulin.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used RoB 2. We rated the certainty of evidence, using the GRADE approach, for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, improvement and worsening of clinical status (for individuals with moderate to severe disease), quality of life, adverse events, and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five RCTs with 947 participants, of whom 688 received hIVIG prepared from humans, 18 received heterologous swine glyco-humanised polyclonal antibody, and 241 received equine-derived processed and purified F(ab')2 fragments. All participants were hospitalised with moderate-to-severe disease, most participants were not vaccinated (only 12 participants were vaccinated). The studies were conducted before or during the emergence of several SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. There are no data for people with COVID-19 with no symptoms (asymptomatic) or people with mild COVID-19. We identified a further 10 ongoing studies evaluating hIVIG. Benefits of hIVIG prepared from humans We included data on one RCT (579 participants) that assessed the benefits and harms of hIVIG 0.4 g/kg compared to saline placebo. hIVIG may have little to no impact on all-cause mortality at 28 days (risk ratio (RR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 1.44; absolute effect 77 per 1000 with placebo versus 61 per 1000 (33 to 111) with hIVIG; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on worsening of clinical status at day 7 (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.23; very low-certainty evidence). It probably has little to no impact on improvement of clinical status on day 28 (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.08; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify any studies that reported quality-of-life outcomes, so we do not know if hIVIG has any impact on quality of life. Harms of hIVIG prepared from humans hIVIG may have little to no impact on adverse events at any grade on day 1 (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.18; 431 per 1000; 1 study 579 participants; low-certainty evidence). Patients receiving hIVIG probably experience more adverse events at grade 3-4 severity than patients who receive placebo (RR 4.09, 95% CI 1.39 to 12.01; moderate-certainty evidence). hIVIG may have little to no impact on the composite outcome of serious adverse events or death up to day 28 (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence). We also identified additional results on the benefits and harms of other dose ranges of hIVIG, not included in the summary of findings table, but summarised in additional tables. Benefits of animal-derived polyclonal antibodies We included data on one RCT (241 participants) to assess the benefits and harms of receptor-binding domain-specific polyclonal F(ab´)2 fragments of equine antibodies (EpAbs) compared to saline placebo. EpAbs may reduce all-cause mortality at 28 days (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.37; absolute effect 114 per 1000 with placebo versus 68 per 1000 (30 to 156) ; low-certainty evidence). EpAbs may reduce worsening of clinical status up to day 28 (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.18; absolute effect 203 per 1000 with placebo versus 136 per 1000 (77 to 240); low-certainty evidence). It may have some effect on improvement of clinical status on day 28 (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.17; low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any studies that reported quality-of-life outcomes, so we do not know if EpAbs have any impact on quality of life. Harms of animal-derived polyclonal antibodies EpAbs may have little to no impact on the number of adverse events at any grade up to 28 days (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.31; low-certainty evidence). Adverse events at grade 3-4 severity were not reported. Individuals receiving EpAbs may experience fewer serious adverse events than patients receiving placebo (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.19; low-certainty evidence). We also identified additional results on the benefits and harms of other animal-derived polyclonal antibody doses, not included in the summary of findings table, but summarised in additional tables.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We included data from five RCTs that evaluated hIVIG compared to standard therapy, with participants with moderate-to-severe disease. As the studies evaluated different preparations (from humans or from various animals) and doses, we could not pool them. hIVIG prepared from humans may have little to no impact on mortality, and clinical improvement and worsening. hIVIG may increase grade 3-4 adverse events. Studies did not evaluate quality of life. RBD-specific polyclonal F(ab´)2 fragments of equine antibodies may reduce mortality and serious adverse events, and may reduce clinical worsening. However, the studies were conducted before or during the emergence of several SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and prior to widespread vaccine rollout. As no studies evaluated hIVIG for participants with asymptomatic infection or mild disease, benefits for these individuals remains uncertain. This is a living systematic review. We search monthly for new evidence and update the review when we identify relevant new evidence.

Prevalence of parents' non-intention to vaccinate their children and adolescents against COVID-19: A comparative analysis in Colombia and Peru

•

About 9 out of 10 parents in Colombia and Peru intend to vaccinate their children and adolescents against COVID-19.

•

Colombia: being vaccinated, 35 to 54 years old, maintaining physical distance, using masks, having economic insecurity, anxiety, and comorbidities increased the intention of vaccinating children and adolescents.

•

Peru: being vaccinated, female, maintaining physical distancing, using a mask, having economic insecurity, comorbidities, and have had COVID-19 increased the intention to vaccinate children and adolescents.

•

Peru: living in a town, village or rural area was associated with reducing the intention to vaccinate children and adolescents.

We aimed to estimate the prevalence and factors associated with parents’ non-intention to vaccinate their children and adolescents against COVID-19 in Colombia and Peru. We performed a secondary analysis using a database generated by the University of Maryland and Facebook (Facebook, Inc). We Included adult (18 and over) Facebook users residing in LAC who responded to the survey between May 20, and November 5, 2021. We Included sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, mental health, economic and food insecurity, compliance with mitigation strategies against COVID-19, and practices related to vaccination against this disease. We estimated crude (cPR) and adjusted (aPR) prevalence ratios with their respective 95 %CI. We analyzed a sample of 44,678 adults from Colombia and 24,302 from Peru. The prevalence of parents' non-intention to vaccinate their children and adolescents against COVID-19 was 7.41 % (n = 3,274) for Colombia and 6.64 % (n = 1,464) for Peru. In Colombia, age above 35 years old, compliance with physical distancing, use of masks, having economic insecurity, anxiety symptoms, having a chronic condition or more comorbidities, and being vaccinated were associated with a higher probability of vaccinating children and adolescents against COVID-19. In Peru, female gender, compliance with physical distancing, use of masks, having economic insecurity, anxiety symptoms, having a chronic condition or more comorbidities, having had COVID-19, and being vaccinated were associated with a higher probability of vaccinating children against COVID-19. Living in a town, a village, or a rural area was associated with a higher prevalence of non-intention to vaccinate children and adolescents against COVID-19. About 9 out of 10 parents in Colombia and Peru intend to vaccinate their children and adolescents against COVID-19. This intention is associated with some factors which are similar between the two countries, as well as other factors and variations among the different regions of each country.

Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Treatment Using Convalescent Plasma Transfusion: Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

This study investigated the efficacy and safety of convalescent plasma (CP) transfusion against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) via a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A total of 5467 articles obtained from electronic databases were assessed; however, only 34 RCTs were eligible after manually screening and eliminating unnecessary studies. The beneficial effect was addressed by assessing the risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) of the meta-analysis. It was demonstrated that CP therapy is not effective in improving clinical outcomes, including reducing mortality with an RR of 0.88 [0.76; 1.03] (I² = 68% and p = 0.10) and length of hospitalization with SMD of -0.47 [-0.95; 0.00] (I² = 99% and p = 0.05). Subgroup analysis provided strong evidence that CP transfusion does not significantly reduce all-cause mortality compared to standard of care (SOC) with an RR of 1.01 [0.99; 1.03] (I² = 70% and p = 0.33). In addition, CP was found to be safe for and well-tolerated by COVID-19 patients as was the SOC in healthcare settings. Overall, the results suggest that CP should not be applied outside of randomized trials because of less benefit in improving clinical outcomes for COVID-19 treatment.

The efficacy and safety of combined chinese herbal medicine and western medicine therapy for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) with and without Western medicine (WM) for different severity of COVID-19.

METHODS

CNKI, PubMed, Wanfang Database, ClinicalTrails.gov, Embase, ChiCTR and ICTRP were searched from 01 Jan, 2020 to 30 Jun, 2021. Two authors independently assessed all the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for trial inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software (RevMan 5.4.1). Evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes included total effectiveness rate. Secondary outcomes included improvements in symptom improvement and total adverse event rate. Different severity of COVID-19 patients was assessed in subgroup analysis. This study was registered with INPLASY, INPLASY202210072.

RESULTS

22 high quality RCTs involving 1789 participants were included. There were no trial used CHM alone nor compare placebo or no treatment. Compared with WM, combined CHM and WM (CHM-WM) treatment showed higher total effectiveness rate, lower symptom scores of fever, cough, fatigue, dry throat and pharyngalgia, shorter mean time to viral conversion, better Computerized Tomography (CT) image and blood results, fewer total adverse events and worse conditions (P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis showed that the total effectiveness rate of combined CHM-WM group was significantly higher than WM group, especially for mild and moderate patients. No significant differences in mortality and adverse events were found between combined CHM-WM and WM treatment. No serious adverse events and long-term outcomes were reported.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence supported the therapeutic effects and safety of combined CHM-WM treatment on COVID-19, especially for patients with mild and moderate symptoms. Long-term effects of therapy are worthy in further study.

Remdesivir: an overview of patenting trends, clinical evidence on COVID-19 treatment, pharmacology and chemistry

By December 2021, the COVID-19 caused approximately 6.1 million deaths around the world. Several vaccines have been approved, but there is still a need for non-prophylactic treatments for COVID-19. Remdesivir is an antiviral drug approved for emergency use against COVID-19 in several countries, but one of the first clinical trials was inconclusive about the mortality reduction, although the drug showed a reduction in the recovery time of hospitalized patients. Thus, the present investigation revisits the clinical evidence of using remdesivir for COVID-19 treatment, patent status, pharmacology and chemistry. We found 184 families of patents in the Cortellis database, and concerning the clinical evidence, we retrieved 14 systematic reviews with meta-analysis involving remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19, discussing the reduction of adverse events, hospitalization days, mortality rate and the mechanical ventilation period.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody changes in patients receiving COVID-19 convalescent plasma from normal and vaccinated donors

Vaccination has been shown to stimulate remarkably high antibody levels in donors who have recovered from COVID-19. Our objective was to measure patient antibody levels before and after transfusion with COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma (CCP) and compare the antibody levels following transfusion of CCP from vaccinated and nonvaccinated donors. Plasma samples before and after transfusion were obtained from 25 recipients of CCP and COVID-19 antibody levels measured. Factors that effect changes in antibody levels were examined. In the 21 patients who received CCP from nonvaccinated donors, modest increases in antibody levels were observed. Patients who received two units were more likely to seroconvert than those receiving just one unit. The strongest predictor of changes in patient antibody level was the CCP dose, calculated by the unit volume multiplied by the donor antibody level. Using patient plasma volume and donor antibody level, the post-transfusion antibody level could be predicted with reasonable accuracy(R²> 0.90). In contrast, the 4 patients who received CCP from vaccinated donors all had dramatic increases in antibody levels following transfusion of a single unit. In this subset of recipients, antibody levels observed after transfusion of CCP were comparable to those seen in donors who had fully recovered from COVID-19. If available, CCP from vaccinated donors with very high antibody levels should be used. One unit of CCP from vaccinated donors increases patient antibody levels much more than 1 or 2 units of CCP from unvaccinated donors.

The pill of recovery; Molnupiravir for treatment of COVID-19 patients; a systematic review

Background

Throughout the time of the global pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 virus, there has been a compelling necessity for the development of effective antiviral agents and prophylactic vaccines to limit the virus spread, disease burden, hospitalization, and mortality. Until mid of 2021, the NIH treatment guideline declared no single oral therapy was proven to treat mild to moderate cases. A new hope arose when a repurposed direct acting oral anti-viral agent “Molnupiravir” was shown to be effective in decreasing mortality and need for hospitalization in mild to moderate cases with relatively good safety profile; exhibiting a significant reduction in virus titers only after two days from administration. Molnupiravir recently granted the FDA emergency use authorization to treat mild to moderate COVID-19 patients with at least one risk factor for progression.

Methods

We performed a computer-based literature search of (PubMed, Science direct, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, Cochrane COVID study register, EU registry, and CTRI registry) till February 15th, 2022. The following keywords were used in our search (“Molnupiravir”, “NHC”, “EIDD-2807”, “MK-4482” or “EIDD-1931”).

Results

We identified from the initial search a total of 279 articles; 246 articles (BioRxiv and MedRxiv N = 186, PubMed N = 33, Science direct N = 27) and 33 Clinical trials from the following registries (ISCTRN (N = 1), Clinical Trials.gov (N = 6), CTRI (N = 12), Cochrane (N = 14)). Through screening phases, 21 records were removed as duplicates and 198 irrelevant records were also excluded. The included studies in this systematic review were (N = 60) included 39 published papers and 21 clinical trials. After Manual addition (N = 4), the qualitative assessment included (N = 64).

Conclusion

Based on the cumulative evidence from preclinical and clinical studies, Molnupiravir is proven to be a well tolerated, direct acting oral anti-viral agent to halt the disease progression in mild to moderate COVID-19 cases; in terms of mortality and hospitalization rates.

A Peek into Pandora’s Box: COVID-19 and Neurodegeneration

Ever since it was first reported in Wuhan, China, the coronavirus-induced disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has become an enigma of sorts with ever expanding reports of direct and indirect effects of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on almost all the vital organ systems. Along with inciting acute pulmonary complications, the virus attacks the cardiac, renal, hepatic, and gastrointestinal systems as well as the central nervous system (CNS). The person-to-person variability in susceptibility of individuals to disease severity still remains a puzzle, although the comorbidities and the age/gender of a person are believed to play a key role. SARS-CoV-2 needs angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor for its infectivity, and the association between SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2 leads to a decline in ACE2 activity and its neuroprotective effects. Acute respiratory distress may also induce hypoxia, leading to increased oxidative stress and neurodegeneration. Infection of the neurons along with peripheral leukocytes’ activation results in proinflammatory cytokine release, rendering the brain more susceptible to neurodegenerative changes. Due to the advancement in molecular biology techniques and vaccine development programs, the world now has hope to relatively quickly study and combat the deadly virus. On the other side, however, the virus seems to be still evolving with new variants being discovered periodically. In keeping up with the pace of this virus, there has been an avalanche of studies. This review provides an update on the recent progress in adjudicating the CNS-related mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its potential to incite or accelerate neurodegeneration in surviving patients. Current as well as emerging therapeutic opportunities and biomarker development are highlighted.

Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ).

METHODS

In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.

Mapping SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Epitopes in COVID-19 Patients with a Multi-Coronavirus Protein Microarray

The rapid worldwide spread of SARS-CoV-2 has accelerated research and development for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. A multi-coronavirus protein microarray was created containing full-length proteins, overlapping protein fragments of various lengths, and peptide libraries from SARS-CoV-2 and four other human coronaviruses. Sera from confirmed COVID-19 patients as well as unexposed individuals were applied to multicoronavirus arrays to identify specific antibody reactivity. High-level IgG, IgM, and IgA reactivity to structural proteins S, M, and N of SARS-CoV-2, as well as accessory proteins such as ORF3a and ORF7a, were observed that were specific to COVID-19 patients. Antibody reactivity against overlapping 100-, 50-, and 30-amino acid fragments of SARS-CoV-2 proteins was used to identify antigenic regions. Numerous proteins of SARS-CoV, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and the endemic human coronaviruses HCoV-NL63 and HCoV-OC43 were also more reactive with IgG, IgM, and IgA in COVID-19 patient sera than in unexposed control sera, providing further evidence of immunologic cross-reactivity between these viruses. Whereas unexposed individuals had minimal reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 proteins that poorly correlated with reactivity against HCoV-NL63 and HCoV-OC43 S2 and N proteins, COVID-19 patient sera had higher correlation between SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV responses, suggesting that de novo antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 cross-react with HCoV epitopes. Array responses were compared with validated spike protein-specific IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), showing agreement between orthologous methods. SARS-CoV-2 microneutralization titers were low in the COVID-19 patient sera but correlated with array responses against S and N proteins. The multi-coronavirus protein microarray is a useful tool for mapping antibody reactivity in COVID-19 patients.

IMPORTANCE With novel mutant SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern on the rise, knowledge of immune specificities against SARS-CoV-2 proteins is increasingly important for understanding the impact of structural changes in antibody-reactive protein epitopes on naturally acquired and vaccine-induced immunity, as well as broader topics of cross-reactivity and viral evolution. A multi-coronavirus protein microarray used to map the binding of COVID-19 patient antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 proteins and protein fragments as well as to the proteins of four other coronaviruses that infect humans has shown specific regions of SARS-CoV-2 proteins that are highly reactive with patient antibodies and revealed cross-reactivity of these antibodies with other human coronaviruses. These data and the multi-coronavirus protein microarray tool will help guide further studies of the antibody response to COVID-19 and to vaccination against this worldwide pandemic.

Safety and Efficacy of Convalescent Plasma in COVID-19: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Convalescent plasma (CP) from patients recovered from COVID-19 is one of the most studied anti-viral therapies against SARS-COV-2 infection. The aim of this study is to summarize the evidence from the available systematic reviews on the efficacy and safety of CP in COVID-19 through an overview of the published systematic reviews (SRs). A systematic literature search was conducted up to August 2021 in Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane and Medrxiv databases to identify systematic reviews focusing on CP use in COVID-19. Two review authors independently evaluated reviews for inclusion, extracted data and assessed quality of evidence using AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Reviews) and GRADE tools. The following outcomes were analyzed: mortality, viral clearance, clinical improvement, length of hospital stay, adverse reactions. In addition, where possible, subgroup analyses were performed according to study design (e.g., RCTs vs. non-RCTs), CP neutralizing antibody titer and timing of administration, and disease severity. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the checklist for systematic reviews AMSTAR-2 and the GRADE assessment. Overall, 29 SRs met the inclusion criteria based on 53 unique primary studies (17 RCT and 36 non-RCT). Limitations to the methodological quality of reviews most commonly related to absence of a protocol (11/29) and funding sources of primary studies (27/29). Of the 89 analyses on which GRADE judgements were made, effect estimates were judged to be of high/moderate certainty in four analyses, moderate in 38, low in 38, very low in nine. Despite the variability in the certainty of the evidence, mostly related to the risk of bias and inconsistency, the results of this umbrella review highlight a mortality reduction in CP over standard therapy when administered early and at high titer, without increased adverse reactions.

Efficacy of arbidol in COVID-19 patients: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

To date, no treatment has proven to be absolutely effective for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, and further research is necessary. As a traditional antiviral drug, arbidol was widely used in Wuhan at the beginning of the COVID-19 epidemic and is of increasing interest for treating COVID-19 based on in vitro data suggesting activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Although arbidol has been widely used in China to treat COVID-19 patients, clinical trials to date have not clearly substantiated this approach.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of arbidol for COVID-19.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 132 moderate and severe COVID-19 patients admitted to Jinyintan Hospital and Huoshenshan Hospital (officially designated for COVID-19 treatment) from February to March 2020 in Wuhan, China. This study mainly evaluated the efficacy of arbidol in patients with COVID-19 in the early stage of the SARS coronavirus 2 epidemic. Arbidol was administered at a dose of 200 mg, three times a day, with a 10-d course to adults not receiving any other drugs. Due to the shortage of beds at the time, not every patient could be admitted immediately. We looked for the early stages of the sudden outbreak, places of limited medical resources, limited ward beds, and delayed admission; thus, some patients naturally fit into the control group who did not receive any antiviral drugs. Out of the 132 patients, 72 received arbidol treatment, and 60 did not. We compared the disease course of the two groups and explored the predictors of extended disease duration.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients commenced arbidol, and 60 patients did not receive arbidol treatment. The disease duration in the former group was shorter (23.42 ± 6.92 vs 29.60 ± 6.49, P < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the risk of a prolonged course of disease increased by 7.158 times in the non-arbidol treatment group. Ferritin > 483.0 ng/mL and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) > 237.5 U/L were found to be independent risk factors for protracted cases, with the risk of an extended disease duration increasing to 2.852 times and 5.946 times, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The duration course of moderate and severe COVID-19 patients is reduced by 6.183 d when arbidol is administered. Ferritin > 486.5 ng/mL and LDH > 239.5 U/L are independent risk factors for delayed recovery from COVID-19. Early oral administration of arbidol 200 mg t.i.d. with a 10-d course of treatment may be an effective management strategy in COVID-19 patients, particularly those with increased serum ferritin or elevated LDH.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Remdesivir Treatment in COVID-19 Patients Requiring Low-Flow Oxygen Therapy: Payer Perspective in Turkey

Introduction

This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of remdesivir compared to other existing therapies (SoC) in Turkey to treat COVID-19 patients hospitalized with < 94% saturation and low-flow oxygen therapy (LFOT) requirement.

Methods

We compared remdesivir as the treatment for COVID-19 with the treatments in the Turkish treatment guidelines. Analyses were performed using data from 78 hospitalized COVID-19 patients with SpO₂ < 94% who received LFOT in a tertiary healthcare facility. COVID-19 episode costs were calculated for 78 patients considering the cost of modeled remdesivir treatment in the same group from the payer’s perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was calculated for remdesivir versus the SoC for the population identified. For Turkey, a reimbursement threshold value between USD 8599 (1 × per capita gross domestic product—GDP) and USD 25.797 (3 × GDP) per QALY was used.

Results

In the remdesivir arm, the length of hospital stay (LOS) was 3 days shorter than the SOC. The low ventilator requirement in the remdesivir arm was one factor that decreased the QALY disutility value. In patients who were transferred to intensive care unit (ICU) from the ward, the mean LOS was 17.3 days (SD 13.6), and the mean cost of stay was USD 155.3/day (SD 168.0), while in patients who were admitted to ICU at baseline, the mean LOS was 13.1 days (SD 13.7), and the mean cost of stay was USD 207.9/day (SD 133.6). The mean cost of episode per patient was USD 3461.1 (SD 2259.8) in the remdesivir arm and USD 3538.9 (SD 3296.0) in the SOC arm. Incremental QALYs were estimated at 0.174. Remdesivir treatment was determined to be cost saving vs. SoC.

Conclusions

Remdesivir, which results in shorter LOS and lower rates of intubation requirements in ICU patients than existing therapies, is associated with higher QALYs and lower costs, dominating SoC in patients with SpO₂ < 94% who require oxygen support.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01874-9.

Remdesivir for the treatment of COVID 19: review of the pharmacological properties, safety and clinical effectiveness

INTRODUCTION

Remdesivir is a nucleoside analog that inhibits viral RNA replication by blocking RNA-dependent RNA polymerase. First developed and tested during the Ebola epidemic, repurposed, and gained prominence during the Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Based on data from three major trials, remdesivir became the first and only medication to obtain approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat patients hospitalized with COVID-19 disease.

AREAS COVERED

The purpose of the article is to review available preclinical, clinical, and post-marketing data to assess the safety and efficacy of remdesivir in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. We performed a comprehensive literature review of articles published on remdesivir until January 2021.

EXPERT OPINION

The substantial evidence of its effectiveness in a few trials together with the favorable safety profile makes remdesivir a primary therapeutic candidate for treatment in adult and pediatric patients who are hospitalized with COVID-19 and requiring oxygen supplementation. While remdesivir does not improve mortality, it has been shown to reduce the recovery time and increase the odds for clinical improvement, specifically in patients with early presentation and moderate COVID-19 disease. Remdesivir is well tolerated and has an acceptable safety profile in the pediatric and adult populations.

Asymptomatic COVID-19 infection: diagnosis, transmission, population characteristics

A novel coronavirus first discovered in late December 2019 has spread to many countries around the world. An increasing number of asymptomatic patients have been reported and their ability to spread the virus has been proven. This brings major challenges to the control of the transmission. The discovery and control of asymptomatic patients with COVID-19 are the key issues in future epidemic prevention and recovery. In this narrative review, we summarise the existing knowledge about asymptomatic patients and put forward detection methods that are suitable for finding such patients. Besides, we compared the characteristics and transmissibility of asymptomatic patients in different populations in order to find the best screening, diagnosis and control measures for different populations. Comprehensive preventive advice is also provided to prevent the spread of infection from asymptomatic patients.

Effects of Immune System-Related Medications on COVID-19 Outcome in a Cohort of Iranian Patients: Preliminary Report of a Data Mining Study

BACKGROUND

Regulation of the immune system is critical for fighting against viral infections. Both suppression and hyperactivity of the immune system result in failure of treatment. The present study was designed to show the effects of immune system-related medications on mortality and length of stay (LOS) in a cohort of Iranian patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

A data mining study was performed on 6417 cases of COVID-19 covered by 17 educational hospitals of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran. Association of a researcher-designed drug list with death and LOS was studied. For death outcome, logistic regression was used reporting odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). For LOS, right censored Poisson regression was used reporting incidence rate ratio (IRR) with 95% CI.

RESULTS

Among the corticosteroids, prednisolone was a risk factor on death (OR = 1.41, 95%CI = 1.03 - 1.94). This association was increased after adjustment of age interactions (OR = 3.45, 95%CI = 1.01 - 11.81) and was removed after adjustment of ICU admission interactions (OR = 2.64, 95%CI = 0.70 - 9.92). Hydroxychloroquine showed a protecting effect on death (OR = 0.735, 95%CI = 0.627 - 0.862); however, this association was removed after adjustment of age interactions (OR = 0.76, 95%CI = 0.41 - 1.40). Among the antivirals, oseltamivir showed a protecting effect on death (OR = 0.628, 95%CI = 0.451 - 0.873); however, this association was removed after adjustment of age interactions (OR = 0.45, 95%CI = 0.11 - 1.82). For reduction of LOS, the only significant association was for hydroxychloroquine (IRR = 0.85, 95%CI = 0.79 - 0.92).

CONCLUSION

The results of such data mining studies can be used in clinics until completing the evidence. Hydroxychloroquine may reduce mortality in some specific groups; however, its association may be confounded by some latent variables and unknown interactions. Administration of corticosteroids should be based on the conditions of each case.

Phase 1 randomized trial of a plant-derived virus-like particle vaccine for COVID-19

Several severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines are being deployed, but the global need greatly exceeds the supply, and different formulations might be required for specific populations. Here we report Day 42 interim safety and immunogenicity data from an observer-blinded, dose escalation, randomized controlled study of a virus-like particle vaccine candidate produced in plants that displays the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein (CoVLP: NCT04450004). The co-primary outcomes were the short-term tolerability/safety and immunogenicity of CoVLP formulations assessed by neutralizing antibody (NAb) and cellular responses. Secondary outcomes in this ongoing study include safety and immunogenicity assessments up to 12 months after vaccination. Adults (18–55 years, n = 180) were randomized at two sites in Quebec, Canada, to receive two intramuscular doses of CoVLP (3.75 μg, 7.5 μg, and 15 μg) 21 d apart, alone or adjuvanted with AS03 or CpG1018. All formulations were well tolerated, and adverse events after vaccination were generally mild to moderate, transient and highest in the adjuvanted groups. There was no CoVLP dose effect on serum NAbs, but titers increased significantly with both adjuvants. After the second dose, NAbs in the CoVLP + AS03 groups were more than tenfold higher than titers in Coronavirus 2019 convalescent sera. Both spike protein-specific interferon-γ and interleukin-4 cellular responses were also induced. This pre-specified interim analysis supports further evaluation of the CoVLP vaccine candidate.

Safety and immunogenicity results in humans of a two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccine made from plants support further assessment of potential efficacy.

Therapeutic strategies to fight COVID-19: Which is the status artis?

COVID‐19 is a complex disease, and many difficulties are faced today especially in the proper choice of pharmacological treatments. The role of antiviral agents for COVID‐19 is still being investigated and evidence for immunomodulatory and anti‐inflammatory drugs is quite conflicting, whereas the use of corticosteroids is supported by robust evidence. The use of heparins in hospitalized critically ill patients is preferred over other anticoagulants. There are conflicting data on the use of convalescent plasma and vitamin D. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), many vaccines are in Phase III clinical trials, and some of them have already received marketing approval in European countries and in the United States. In conclusion, drug repurposing has represented the main approach recently used in the treatment of patients with COVID‐19. At this moment, analysis of efficacy and safety data of drugs and vaccines used in real‐life context is strongly needed.

Exponential increase in neutralizing and spike specific antibodies following vaccination of COVID-19 convalescent plasma donors

Background

With the recent approval of COVID‐19 vaccines, recovered COVID‐19 subjects who are vaccinated may be ideal candidates to donate COVID‐19 convalescent plasma (CCP).

Case Series

Eleven recovered COVID‐19 patients were screened to donate CCP. All had molecularly confirmed COVID‐19, and all but one were antibody positive by chemiluminescence immunoassay (DiaSorin) prior to vaccination. All were tested again for antibodies 11–21 days after they were vaccinated (Pfizer/Moderna). All showed dramatic increases (~50‐fold) in spike‐specific antibody levels and had at least a 20‐fold increase in the IC50 neutralizing antibody titer based on plaque reduction neutralization testing (PRNT). The spike‐specific antibody levels following vaccination were significantly higher than those seen in any non‐vaccinated COVID‐19 subjects tested to date at our facility.

Conclusion

Spike‐specific and neutralizing antibodies demonstrated dramatic increases following a single vaccination after COVID‐19 infection, which significantly exceeded values seen with COVID‐19 infection alone. Recovered COVID‐19 subjects who are vaccinated may make ideal candidates for CCP donation.

Convalescent Plasma for the Treatment of Severe COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 is one of the worst catastrophic events in human history. Several non-specific antiviral drugs have been tried to defeat the SARS-CoV-2, with mixed results. Convalescent plasma from patients who have recovered from COVID-19 is one of the specific biologic therapies being considered to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection. Preliminary studies have shown that convalescent plasma, containing antibodies able to neutralize SARS-CoV-2, is promising in blocking viral replication and improving patients’ clinical symptoms. The results of several ongoing randomized controlled trials are, however, keenly awaited to definitively elucidate the safety and efficacy of this blood component in COVID-19. In this narrative review, we summarize the current evidence from the literature on the treatment of severe COVID-19 with convalescent plasma. A concise overview of the hypothesized mechanisms of action is also presented.

A review of COVID-19 convalescent plasma use in COVID-19 with focus on proof of efficacy

Convalescent plasma (CP) therapy is rapidly becoming an established consideration in the treatment of COVID-19 patients though there is a need to critically review this area for proof of efficacy. Neutralizing antibodies (NAb) present in CP generated in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection directed against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein are considered to play main role in viral clearance. CP infusion may also help in the modulation of immune response by its immunomodulatory effect. The FDA allows for administration of CP to COVID-19 patients. The present published literature in COVID-19 is limited to case series and randomised controlled trial where plasma therapy was used in moderate, severe and critically ill patients. Though multiple uncertainties exist regarding to its efficacy, appropriate donor selection and NAb titres, the efficacy data of CP use inCOVID-19 is limited having shown hope with early and severe to critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Chloroquine nasal drops in asymptomatic & mild COVID-19: An exploratory randomized clinical trial

Background & objectives

Chloroquine (CQN) administered as nasal drops has the potential to achieve much greater local tissue levels than with oral/systemic administration. This trial was undertaken to study the efficacy and safety profile of topical nasal administration of CQN drops in reducing viral load and preventing clinical progression in early COVID-19 infection.

Methods

This randomized clinical trial was done with a sample size of 60. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) confirmed asymptomatic patients or those with mild COVID-19 illness [National Early Warning Score (NEWS) ≤4] were included. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 manner. Control arm (standard supportive treatment, n=30) was compared with intervention arm (n=30) of standard treatment plus CQN eye drops (0.03%) repurposed as nasal drops administered six times daily (0.5 ml/dose) for 10 days. Outcome measures were adverse events and adherence; clinical progression and outcomes were measured by NEWS; sequential RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were also noted on days 0, 3, 7 and 10.

Results

Nasal CQN was associated with local irritation in seven and non-compliance in one of 30 patients. Eleven patients were excluded due to enrolment error (2 - recovered; 9 - false-positive referral), and 49 patients were analyzed as per modified intention-to-treat analysis. Clinical recovery was noted as similar with 100 per cent asymptomatic by day seven in both arms. Virological outcomes also indicated similarly improving Ct values in both arms, and similar proportion of patients transitioning to non-infectivity by day 10 (controls - 19/25; nasal CQN - 15/24). Nine false-positive patients with enrolment error and day 0 RT-PCR negative were initially uninfected but had continuing COVID-19 exposure and treatment as per randomization. Patients receiving nasal CQN (n=5) demonstrated stable Ct values from day 0 to 10, while patients with no nasal CQN (n=4) demonstrated significant dip in Ct value indicating to infection (Ct<35) and infectivity (Ct<33).

Interpretation & conclusions

The present study suggests to the potential of topical nasal CQN in the prevention of COVID-19 infection if administered before the infection is established. No significant differences in clinical or virological outcome were however, demonstrated in patients with mild but established illness.