Clinical and Scientific Rationale for the "MATH+" Hospital Treatment Protocol for COVID-19

Effect of Higher-Dose Ivermectin for 6 Days vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

It is unknown whether ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 μg/kg, shortens symptom duration or prevents hospitalization among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19.

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of ivermectin at a maximum targeted dose of 600 μg/kg daily for 6 days, compared with placebo, for the treatment of early mild to moderate COVID-19.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The ongoing Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines 6 (ACTIV-6) platform randomized clinical trial was designed to evaluate repurposed therapies among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. A total of 1206 participants older than 30 years with confirmed COVID-19 experiencing at least 2 symptoms of acute infection for less than or equal to 7 days were enrolled at 93 sites in the US from February 16, 2022, through July 22, 2022, with follow-up data through November 10, 2022.

Interventions

Participants were randomly assigned to receive ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 μg/kg (n = 602) daily, or placebo (n = 604) for 6 days.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery, defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms. The 7 secondary outcomes included a composite of hospitalization, death, or urgent/emergent care utilization by day 28.

Results

Among 1206 randomized participants who received study medication or placebo, the median (IQR) age was 48 (38-58) years, 713 (59.1%) were women, and 1008 (83.5%) reported receiving at least 2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses. The median (IQR) time to sustained recovery was 11 (11-12) days in the ivermectin group and 11 (11-12) days in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (posterior probability of benefit) for improvement in time to recovery was 1.02 (95% credible interval, 0.92-1.13; P = .68). Among those receiving ivermectin, 34 (5.7%) were hospitalized, died, or had urgent or emergency care visits compared with 36 (6.0%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 1.0 [95% credible interval, 0.6-1.5]; P = .53). In the ivermectin group, 1 participant died and 4 were hospitalized (0.8%); 2 participants (0.3%) were hospitalized in the placebo group and there were no deaths. Adverse events were uncommon in both groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 μg/kg daily for 6 days, compared with placebo did not improve time to sustained recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530.

Effect of Ivermectin 600 μg/kg for 6 days vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients with Mild to Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

Whether ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 μg/kg, shortens symptom duration or prevents hospitalization among outpatients with mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unknown. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of ivermectin, dosed at 600 μg/kg, daily for 6 days compared with placebo for the treatment of early mild to moderate COVID-19.

Methods

ACTIV-6, an ongoing, decentralized, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, platform trial, was designed to evaluate repurposed therapies in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. A total of 1206 participants age ≥30 years with confirmed COVID-19, experiencing ≥2 symptoms of acute infection for ≤7 days, were enrolled from February 16, 2022, through July 22, 2022, with follow-up data through November 10, 2022, at 93 sites in the US. Participants were randomized to ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 μg/kg (n=602), daily vs. placebo daily (n=604) for 6 days. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery, defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms. The 7 secondary outcomes included a composite of hospitalization, death, or urgent/emergent care utilization by day 28.

Results

Among 1206 randomized participants who received study medication or placebo, median (interquartile range) age was 48 (38-58) years; 713 (59%) were women; and 1008 (84%) reported ≥2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses. Median time to recovery was 11 (11-12) days in the ivermectin group and 11 (11-12) days in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (HR) (95% credible interval [CrI], posterior probability of benefit) for improvement in time to recovery was 1.02 (0.92-1.13; P[HR>1]=0.68). In those receiving ivermectin, 34 (5.7%) were hospitalized, died, or had urgent or emergency care visits compared with 36 (6.0%) receiving placebo (HR 1.0, 0.6- 1.5; P[HR<1]=0.53). In the ivermectin group, 1 participant died and 4 were hospitalized (0.8%); 2 participants (0.3%) were hospitalized in the placebo group and there were no deaths. Adverse events were uncommon in both groups.

Conclusions

Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 μg/kg daily for 6 days, compared with placebo did not improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530 .

Impact of COVID 19 on erectile function

Purpose: COVID-19, a novel infection, presented with several complications, including socioeconomical and reproductive health challenges such as erectile dysfunction (ED). The present review summarizes the available shreds of evidence on the impact of COVID-19 on ED.Materials and methods: All published peer-reviewed articles from the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak to date, relating to ED, were reviewed. Results: Available pieces of evidence that ED is a consequence of COVID-19 are convincing. COVID-19 and ED share common risk factors such as disruption of vascular integrity, cardiovascular disease (CVD), cytokine storm, diabetes, obesity, and chronic kidney disease (CKD). COVID-19 also induces impaired pulmonary haemodynamics, increased ang II, testicular damage and low serum testosterone, and reduced arginine-dependent NO bioavailability that promotes reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and endothelial dysfunction, resulting in ED. In addition, COVID-19 triggers psychological/mental stress and suppresses testosterone-dependent dopamine concentration, which contributes to incident ED.Conclusions: In conclusion, COVID-19 exerts a detrimental effect on male reproductive function, including erectile function. This involves a cascade of events from multiple pathways. As the pandemic dwindles, identifying the long-term effects of COVID-19-induced ED, and proffering adequate and effective measures in militating against COVID-19-induced ED remains pertinent.

Biased, wrong and counterfeited evidences published during the COVID-19 pandemic, a systematic review of retracted COVID-19 papers

In 2020 COVID-19 led to an unprecedented stream of papers being submitted to journals. Scientists and physicians all around the globe were in need for information about this new disease. In this climate, many articles were accepted after extremely fast peer-reviews to provide the scientific community with the latest discoveries and knowledge. Unfortunately, this also led to articles retraction due to authors' misconduct or errors in methodology and/or conclusions. The aim of this study is to investigate the number and characteristics of retracted papers, and to explore the main causes that led to retraction. We conducted a systematic review on retracted articles, using PubMed as data source. Our inclusion criteria were the following: English-language retracted articles that reported original data, results, opinions or hypotheses on COVID-19 and Sars-CoV-2. Twenty-seven retracted articles were identified, mainly reporting observational studies and opinion pieces. Many articles published during the first year of the pandemic have been retracted, mainly due to the authors' scientific misconduct. Duplications, plagiarism, frauds and absence of consent, were the main reasons for retractions. In modern medicine, researchers are required to publish frequently, and, especially during situations like the COVID-19 pandemic, when articles were rapidly published, gaps in peer-reviews system and in the path to scientific publication arose.

Effect of Ivermectin vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients With Mild to Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The effectiveness of ivermectin to shorten symptom duration or prevent hospitalization among outpatients in the US with mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 is unknown.

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin, 400 μg/kg, daily for 3 days compared with placebo for the treatment of early mild to moderate COVID-19.

Design, Setting, and Participants

ACTIV-6, an ongoing, decentralized, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled platform trial, was designed to evaluate repurposed therapies in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. A total of 1591 participants aged 30 years and older with confirmed COVID-19, experiencing 2 or more symptoms of acute infection for 7 days or less, were enrolled from June 23, 2021, through February 4, 2022, with follow-up data through May 31, 2022, at 93 sites in the US.

Interventions

Participants were randomized to receive ivermectin, 400 μg/kg (n = 817), daily for 3 days or placebo (n = 774).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Time to sustained recovery, defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms. There were 7 secondary outcomes, including a composite of hospitalization or death by day 28.

Results

Among 1800 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 48 [12] years; 932 women [58.6%]; 753 [47.3%] reported receiving at least 2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine), 1591 completed the trial. The hazard ratio (HR) for improvement in time to recovery was 1.07 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.96-1.17; posterior P value [HR >1] = .91). The median time to recovery was 12 days (IQR, 11-13) in the ivermectin group and 13 days (IQR, 12-14) in the placebo group. There were 10 hospitalizations or deaths in the ivermectin group and 9 in the placebo group (1.2% vs 1.2%; HR, 1.1 [95% CrI, 0.4-2.6]). The most common serious adverse events were COVID-19 pneumonia (ivermectin [n = 5]; placebo [n = 7]) and venous thromboembolism (ivermectin [n = 1]; placebo [n = 5]).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530.

Ivermectin for Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 in the Outpatient Setting: A Decentralized, Placebo-controlled, Randomized, Platform Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of ivermectin to shorten symptom duration or prevent hospitalization among outpatients in the United States with mild-to-moderate symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the efficacy of ivermectin 400 µg/kg daily for 3 days compared with placebo for the treatment of early mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

METHODS

ACTIV-6 is an ongoing, decentralized, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled platform trial to evaluate repurposed therapies in outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Non-hospitalized adults age ≥30 years with confirmed COVID-19, experiencing ≥2 symptoms of acute infection for ≤7 days were randomized to receive ivermectin 400 µg/kg daily for 3 days or placebo. The main outcome measure was time to sustained recovery, defined as achieving at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms. Secondary outcomes included a composite of hospitalization or death by day 28.

RESULTS

Of the 3457 participants who consented to be evaluated for inclusion in the ivermectin arm, 1591 were eligible for this study arm, randomized to receive ivermectin 400 µg/kg (n=817) or placebo (n=774), and received study drug. Of those enrolled, 47% reported receiving at least 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The posterior probability for any improvement in time to recovery was 0.91 (hazard ratio 1.07, 95% credible interval 0.96-1.17). The posterior probability of this benefit exceeding 24 hours was less than 0.01, as measured by the difference in mean time unwell. Hospitalizations or deaths were uncommon (ivermectin [n=10]; placebo [n=9]). Ivermectin at 400 µg/kg was safe and without serious adverse events as compared with placebo (ivermectin [n=10]; placebo [n=9]).

CONCLUSIONS

Ivermectin dosed at 400 µg/kg daily for 3 days resulted in less than one day of shortening of symptoms and did not lower incidence of hospitalization or death among outpatients with COVID-19 in the United States during the delta and omicron variant time periods.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530 .

Glucocorticoid therapy in respiratory illness: bench to bedside

Each year, hundreds of millions of individuals are affected by respiratory disease leading to approximately 4 million deaths. Most respiratory pathologies involve substantially dysregulated immune processes that either fail to resolve the underlying process or actively exacerbate the disease. Therefore, clinicians have long considered immune-modulating corticosteroids (CSs), particularly glucocorticoids (GCs), as a critical tool for management of a wide spectrum of respiratory conditions. However, the complex interplay between effectiveness, risks and side effects can lead to different results, depending on the disease in consideration. In this comprehensive review, we present a summary of the bench and the bedside evidence regarding GC treatment in a spectrum of respiratory illnesses. We first describe here the experimental evidence of GC effects in the distal airways and/or parenchyma, both in vitro and in disease-specific animal studies, then we evaluate the recent clinical evidence regarding GC treatment in over 20 respiratory pathologies. Overall, CS remain a critical tool in the management of respiratory illness, but their benefits are dependent on the underlying pathology and should be weighed against patient-specific risks.

Efficacy and Outcome of Remdesivir and Tocilizumab Combination Against Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Severe COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: In this study, we investigated the efficacy and safety of remdesivir and tocilizumab combination therapy against dexamethasone for the management of severe COVID-19 patients. Methods: This was a multicenter study. Cases were randomly chosen and divided into two groups using an odd-even ratio of 1:1 applied to the hospital registration number. Group A received remdesivir [5 mg/kg (<40 kg) or 200 mg (>40 kg) on day 1 and then 2.5 mg/kg (<40 kg) or 100 mg (>40 kg) daily] + tocilizumab [8 mg/kg up to 800 mg highest 12 h apart], and group B was the control and received dexamethasone 6 mg/day. In addition, a broad-spectrum antibiotic and other essential treatments were received by all patients. To evaluate the mortality risk, the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score was calculated on day-1. Treatment outcomes were measured as time to clinical improvement; mortality rate; duration of ICU stay; total period of hospitalization; the rate of (Supplementary Material) oxygen use; time to clinical failure; National Early Warning Score-2 (NEWS), and the percentage of lung recovery on CT of chest on discharge. Clinical trial registration ID: NCT04678739. Results: Remdesivir-Tocilizumab group had a lower mortality rate (25.49%) than the control (30.77%). The time to clinical improvement (Group A-9.41; B-14.21 days), NEWS-2 on discharge (Group A-0.89; B-1.2), duration of ICU stay (Group A-7.68; B-10.58), and duration of hospitalization (Group A-9.91; B-14.68) were less in the treatment group. Group A had a better percentage of lung recovery on chest CT than the control (Group A-22.13; B-11.74). All these differences were statistically significant (p= <0.05) in a t-test. However, no significant survival benefit was found among the study groups in Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, p = 0.739. Conclusion: The remdesivir-tocilizumab combination had preferable outcomes compared to the dexamethasone therapy for the treatment of severe COVID-19 concerning mortality rate and clinical and pulmonary improvement, although it did not demonstrate a significant survival benefit. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04678739.

Endothelial glycocalyx damage in patients with severe COVID-19 on mechanical ventilation - a prospective observational pilot study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) associated endotheliopathy and microvascular dysfunction are of concern.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present single-center observational pilot study was to compare endothelial glycocalyx (EG) damage and endotheliopathy in patients with severe COVID-19 (COVID-19 group) with patients with bacterial pneumonia with septic shock (non-COVID group).

METHODS

Biomarkers of EG damage (syndecan-1), endothelial cells (EC) damage (thrombomodulin), and activation (P-selectin) were measured in blood on three consecutive days from admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). The sublingual microcirculation was studied by Side-stream Dark Field (SDF) imaging with automatic assessment.

RESULTS

We enrolled 13 patients in the non-COVID group (mean age 70 years, 6 women), and 15 in the COVID-19 group (64 years old, 3 women). The plasma concentrations of syndecan-1 were significantly higher in the COVID-19 group during all three days. Differences regarding other biomarkers were not statistically significant. The assessment of the sublingual microcirculation showed improvement on Day 2 in the COVID-19 group. Plasma levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) were significantly higher on the first two days in the COVID-19 group. Plasma syndecan-1 and CRP were higher in patients suffering from severe COVID-19 pneumonia compared to bacterial pneumonia patients.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the role of EG injury in the microvascular dysfunction in COVID-19 patients who require ICU.

COVID-19 and Micronutrient Deficiency symptoms – is there some overlap?

Background & aims

COVID-19 is highly inflammatory and when it affects the elderly who have multiple comorbidities, the risk of malnutrition is high. The aim of this review is to highlight the evidence for COVID-19 and risk for malnutrition (macro- and micro-nutrient deficiency) sharing two case reports.

Methods

We report two cases of patients with COVID-19. The first case includes a 75-year-old male with increasing confusion, delirium and malnutrition once he had clinically resolved from his COVID-19 diagnosis. The patient had a number of comorbidities and was treated with diuretics before and after his hospital admission. He was treated with intravenous thiamine and enteral nutrition. The second case includes a 77-year-old male with diabetes who presented with suspected vitamin C deficiency likely due to chronic aspirin use nearly two weeks prior to being diagnosed with pneumonia and COVID-19. The patient recovered from his COVID-19 diagnosis but continued to decline nutritionally and was readmitted sixty days later with failure to thrive.

Results

The first case had significant improvements in his appetite and neurological conditions following thiamine infusion and enteral nutrition and was discharged to home after a 19-day hospital stay. The second case presented with a vitamin C deficiency before testing positive for COVID-19. Although he did recover from COVID-19 he struggled to meet nutritional needs post-COVID and passed away 60 days after his COVID-19 diagnosis with pneumonia and failure to thrive.

Conclusion

Elderly patients with chronic diseases who use nutrient depleting medications are particularly high risk for micronutrient deficiency when they also experience the inflammatory insult of COVID-19. Patients who continue to have poor nutrition intake even after they appear to be clinically resolved from the virus should be closely monitored.

Effect of a Nutritional Support System to Increase Survival and Reduce Mortality in Patients with COVID-19 in Stage III and Comorbidities: A Blinded Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

The COVID-19 evolution depends on immunological capacity. The global hospital mortality rate is 15–20%, but in México it is 46%. There are several therapeutic protocols, however, integral nutrition is not considered. In this study, a Nutritional Support System (NSS) was employed to increase survival and reduce mortality in patients with stage III COVID-19. A randomized, blinded, controlled clinical trial was performed. Eighty patients (aged 30 to 75 years, both sexes) were assigned to (1) “Control Group” (CG) hospital diet and medical treatment or (2) “Intervention Group” (IG) hospital diet, medical treatment, and the NSS (vitamins, minerals, fiber, omega-3, amino acids, B-complex, and probiotics). IG significantly increased survival and reduced mortality compared to CG (p = 0.027). IG decreased progression to Mechanical Ventilation Assistance (MVA) by 10%, reduced the intubation period by 15 days, and increased survival in intubated patients by 38% compared to CG. IG showed improvement compared to CG in decrease in supplemental oxygen (p = 0.014), the qSOFA test (p = 0.040), constipation (p = 0.014), the PHQ-9 test (p = 0.003), and in the follow-up, saturation with oxygen (p = 0.030). The NSS increases survival and decreases mortality in patients with stage III COVID-19.

Efficacy and Outcome of Remdesivir and Tocilizumab Combination Against Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Severe COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: In this study, we investigated the efficacy and safety of remdesivir and tocilizumab combination therapy against dexamethasone for the management of severe COVID-19 patients. Methods: This was a multicenter study. Cases were randomly chosen and divided into two groups using an odd-even ratio of 1:1 applied to the hospital registration number. Group A received remdesivir [5 mg/kg (<40 kg) or 200 mg (>40 kg) on day 1 and then 2.5 mg/kg (<40 kg) or 100 mg (>40 kg) daily] + tocilizumab [8 mg/kg up to 800 mg highest 12 h apart], and group B was the control and received dexamethasone 6 mg/day. In addition, a broad-spectrum antibiotic and other essential treatments were received by all patients. To evaluate the mortality risk, the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score was calculated on day-1. Treatment outcomes were measured as time to clinical improvement; mortality rate; duration of ICU stay; total period of hospitalization; the rate of (Supplementary Material) oxygen use; time to clinical failure; National Early Warning Score-2 (NEWS), and the percentage of lung recovery on CT of chest on discharge. Clinical trial registration ID: NCT04678739. Results: Remdesivir-Tocilizumab group had a lower mortality rate (25.49%) than the control (30.77%). The time to clinical improvement (Group A-9.41; B-14.21 days), NEWS-2 on discharge (Group A-0.89; B-1.2), duration of ICU stay (Group A-7.68; B-10.58), and duration of hospitalization (Group A-9.91; B-14.68) were less in the treatment group. Group A had a better percentage of lung recovery on chest CT than the control (Group A-22.13; B-11.74). All these differences were statistically significant (p= <0.05) in a t-test. However, no significant survival benefit was found among the study groups in Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, p = 0.739. Conclusion: The remdesivir-tocilizumab combination had preferable outcomes compared to the dexamethasone therapy for the treatment of severe COVID-19 concerning mortality rate and clinical and pulmonary improvement, although it did not demonstrate a significant survival benefit. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04678739.

A naturopathic treatment approach for mild and moderate COVID-19: A retrospective chart review

OBJECTIVES

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to significant morbidity and mortality. Although COVID-19 vaccination is available, therapeutic options are still needed. The goal of the present manuscript is to report on a treatment strategy used in a naturopathic medical practice for mild and moderate COVID-19.

DESIGN

A retrospective chart review was conducted of 30 consecutive patients diagnosed with mild and moderate COVID-19 who were provided multi-nutrient, herbal, and probiotic treatment in a rural, out-patient, naturopathic primary care setting.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The primary outcome was treatment safety; secondary outcomes included changes in symptoms, progression to severe COVID-19, incidence of long COVID, and recovery time.

RESULTS

No side effects or adverse events were reported from treatment and all patients experienced resolution of symptoms presumed to be associated with COVID-19 infection. One patient who had been ill for 28 days prior to presentation was hospitalized. Five patients had an illness duration of more than one month. Time to treatment was correlated with duration of illness post-treatment (r = 0.63, p < 0.001) and more symptoms at presentation was correlated with a longer duration of illness (r = 0.52, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective chart review, a multi-nutrient, herbal, and probiotic therapeutic approach for mild and moderate COVID-19 appeared to be well-tolerated. Delay in seeking treatment after symptom onset, as well as more symptoms at presentation, were correlated with a longer duration of illness. This treatment strategy may have clinical benefit, warranting prospective clinical trials with confirmed COVID-19 cases.

The Ichikado CT score as a prognostic tool for coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The relationship between computed tomography (CT) and prognosis of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia remains unclear. We hypothesized that the Ichikado CT score, obtained in the first 24 h of hospital admission, is an independent predictor for all-cause mortality during hospitalization in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Methods

Single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted at our institution between March 20th, 2020 and October 31st, 2020. Patients were enrolled if, within 24 h of admission, a chest CT scan, an arterial blood gas, a complete blood count, and a basic metabolic panel were performed. Two independent radiologists, who were blinded to clinical data, retrospectively evaluated the chest CT scans following a previously described qualitative and quantitative CT scoring system. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality or survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes were new requirements for invasive mechanical ventilation and hospital length of stay. Cox regression models were used to test the association between potential independent predictors and all-cause mortality.

Results

Two hundred thirty-five patients, 197 survivors and 38 nonsurvivors, were studied. The median Ichikado CT score for nonsurvivors was significantly higher than survivors (P < 0.001). An Ichikado CT score of more than 172 enabled prediction of mortality, with a sensitivity of 84.2% and a specificity of 79.7%. Multivariate analysis identified Ichikado CT score (HR, 7.772; 95% CI, 3.164–19.095; P < 0.001), together with age (HR, 1.030; 95% CI, 1.030–1.060; P = 0.043), as independent predictors of all-cause in-hospital mortality.

Conclusions

Ichikado CT score is an independent predictor of both requiring invasive mechanical ventilation and all-cause mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. Further prospective evaluation is necessary to confirm these findings.

Trial registration: The WCG institutional review board approved this retrospective study and patient consent was waived due to its non-interventional nature (Identifier: 20210799).

Application of an evidence-based, out-patient treatment strategy for COVID-19: Multidisciplinary medical practice principles to prevent severe disease

The COVID-19 pandemic has devastated individuals, families, and institutions throughout the world. Despite the breakneck speed of vaccine development, the human population remains at risk of further devastation. The decision to not become vaccinated, the protracted rollout of available vaccine, vaccine failure, mutational forms of the SARS virus, which may exhibit mounting resistance to our molecular strike at only one form of the viral family, and the rapid ability of the virus(es) to hitch a ride on our global transportation systems, means that we are will likely continue to confront an invisible, yet devastating foe. The enemy targets one of our human physiology's most important and vulnerable life-preserving body tissues, our broncho-alveolar gas exchange apparatus. Notwithstanding the fear and the fury of this microbe's potential to raise existential questions across the entire spectrum of human endeavor, the application of an early treatment intervention initiative may represent a crucial tool in our defensive strategy. This strategy is driven by evidence-based medical practice principles, those not likely to become antiquated, given the molecular diversity and mutational evolution of this very clever "world traveler".

Current Use of Ivermectin in Dermatology, Tropical Medicine, and COVID-19: An Update on Pharmacology, Uses, Proven and Varied Proposed Mechanistic Action

Ivermectin is a broad-spectrum antiparasitic drug with anti-inflammatory, anti-viral, anti-bacterial, and anti-tumor effects. In this review, we discuss the history, pharmacology, multimodal actions, indications in dermatology and tropical medicine, therapeutic and prophylactic use of ivermectin in COVID-19, safety, adverse effects, special considerations, and drug interactions of ivermectin.

Evaluation of thiamine as adjunctive therapy in COVID-19 critically ill patients: a two-center propensity score matched study

Background

Thiamine is a precursor of the essential coenzyme thiamine pyrophosphate required for glucose metabolism; it improves the immune system function and has shown to reduce the risk of several diseases. The role of thiamine in critically ill septic patient has been addressed in multiple studies; however, it’s role in COVID-19 patients is still unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of thiamine as an adjunctive therapy on mortality in COVID-19 critically ill patients.

Methods

This is a two-center, non-interventional, retrospective cohort study for critically ill patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID19. All patients aged 18 years or older admitted to ICUs between March 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, with positive PCR COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion. We investigated thiamine use as an adjunctive therapy on the clinical outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients after propensity score matching.

Results

A total of 738 critically ill patients with COVID-19 who had been admitted to ICUs were included in the study. Among 166 patients matched using the propensity score method, 83 had received thiamine as adjunctive therapy. There was significant association between thiamine use with in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.19–0.78; P value = 0.008) as well as the 30-day mortality (OR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.18–0.78; P value = 0.009). Moreover, patients who received thiamine as an adjunctive therapy were less likely to have thrombosis during ICU stay [OR (95% CI) 0.19 (0.04–0.88), P value = 0.03].

Conclusion

Thiamine use as adjunctive therapy may have potential survival benefits in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Additionally, it was associated with a lower incidence of thrombosis. Further interventional studies are required to confirm these findings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03648-9.

Evidence-based approach to early outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection

Misinformation and promotion of well-intended but disproved therapies for COVID-19 have plagued evidence-based shared decision-making throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. In times of crisis, clinicians may feel that their strong inclination to prescribe potentially harmful, unproven therapies on behalf of their patients is supported by beneficence. Clinicians should mindfully identify and avoid commission bias during this pandemic, especially as more data have accumulated to assist with clinically sound decision-making. We describe a more evidence-based approach to treatment of early outpatient COVID-19, stressing the availability of Food and Drug Administration emergency use authorization therapies and considering plausibly beneficial, nonprescription supplements that are generally regarded as safe.

Less Can Be More: The Hormesis Theory of Stress Adaptation in the Global Biosphere and Its Implications

A dose-response relationship to stressors, according to the hormesis theory, is characterized by low-dose stimulation and high-dose inhibition. It is non-linear with a low-dose optimum. Stress responses by cells lead to adapted vitality and fitness. Physical stress can be exerted through heat, radiation, or physical exercise. Chemical stressors include reactive species from oxygen (ROS), nitrogen (RNS), and carbon (RCS), carcinogens, elements, such as lithium (Li) and silicon (Si), and metals, such as silver (Ag), cadmium (Cd), and lead (Pb). Anthropogenic chemicals are agrochemicals (phytotoxins, herbicides), industrial chemicals, and pharmaceuticals. Biochemical stress can be exerted through toxins, medical drugs (e.g., cytostatics, psychopharmaceuticals, non-steroidal inhibitors of inflammation), and through fasting (dietary restriction). Key-lock interactions between enzymes and substrates, antigens and antibodies, antigen-presenting cells, and cognate T cells are the basics of biology, biochemistry, and immunology. Their rules do not obey linear dose-response relationships. The review provides examples of biologic stressors: oncolytic viruses (e.g., immuno-virotherapy of cancer) and hormones (e.g., melatonin, stress hormones). Molecular mechanisms of cellular stress adaptation involve the protein quality control system (PQS) and homeostasis of proteasome, endoplasmic reticulum, and mitochondria. Important components are transcription factors (e.g., Nrf2), micro-RNAs, heat shock proteins, ionic calcium, and enzymes (e.g., glutathion redox enzymes, DNA methyltransferases, and DNA repair enzymes). Cellular growth control, intercellular communication, and resistance to stress from microbial infections involve growth factors, cytokines, chemokines, interferons, and their respective receptors. The effects of hormesis during evolution are multifarious: cell protection and survival, evolutionary flexibility, and epigenetic memory. According to the hormesis theory, this is true for the entire biosphere, e.g., archaia, bacteria, fungi, plants, and the animal kingdoms.

A scoping review of the pathophysiology of COVID-19

COVID-19 is a highly heterogeneous and complex medical disorder; indeed, severe COVID-19 is probably amongst the most complex of medical conditions known to medical science. While enormous strides have been made in understanding the molecular pathways involved in patients infected with coronaviruses an overarching and comprehensive understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19 is lacking. Such an understanding is essential in the formulation of effective prophylactic and treatment strategies. Based on clinical, proteomic, and genomic studies as well as autopsy data severe COVID-19 disease can be considered to be the connection of three basic pathologic processes, namely a pulmonary macrophage activation syndrome with uncontrolled inflammation, a complement-mediated endothelialitis together with a procoagulant state with a thrombotic microangiopathy. In addition, platelet activation with the release of serotonin and the activation and degranulation of mast cells contributes to the hyper-inflammatory state. Auto-antibodies have been demonstrated in a large number of hospitalized patients which adds to the end-organ damage and pro-thrombotic state. This paper provides a clinical overview of the major pathogenetic mechanism leading to severe COVID-19 disease.

The History of Methylprednisolone, Ascorbic Acid, Thiamine, and Heparin Protocol and I-MASK+ Ivermectin Protocol for COVID-19

An alliance of established experts on critical care, Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), has published two protocols for treatment of COVID-19. The first one, methylprednisolone, ascorbic acid, thiamine, and heparin (MATH+), is intended for hospital and intensive care unit treatment of pulmonary phases of the disease. It is based on affordable, commonly available components: anti-inflammatory corticosteroids (methylprednisolone, "M"), high-dose vitamin C infusion (ascorbic acid, "A"), vitamin B1 (thiamine, "T"), anticoagulant heparin ("H"), antiparasitic agent ivermectin, and supplemental components ("+") including melatonin, vitamin D, elemental zinc, and magnesium.  The MATH+ protocol has received scarce attention due to the World Health Organization (WHO) advising against the use of corticosteroids in the beginning of the pandemic. In addition, randomized controlled clinical trials were required as a condition for adoption of the protocol. As the hospital mortality rate of MATH+ treated patients was approximately a quarter of the rate of patients receiving a standard of care, the authors of the protocol considered performing such trials unethical. Other parties have later performed clinical trials with corticosteroids and anticoagulants, which has led to a more widespread adoption of these components. In October 2020, ivermectin was upgraded from an optional component to an essential component of the protocol. According to the authors, ivermectin is considered the first agent effective for both prophylaxis (prevention) of COVID-19 and for treatment of all phases of COVID-19 including outpatient treatment of the early symptomatic phase. Therefore, at the end of October 2020, a separate ivermectin-based I-MASK+ protocol for prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment of COVID-19 was published.