Effect of aspirin on short-term outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Dysregulated platelet function in patients with postacute sequelae of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC), also referred to as "Long COVID", sometimes follows COVID-19, a disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. Although SARS-CoV-2 is well known to promote a prothrombotic state, less is known about the thrombosis risk in PASC. Our objective was to evaluate platelet function and thrombotic potential in patients following recovery from SARS-CoV-2, but with clear symptoms of patients with PASC.

METHODS

patients with PASC and matched healthy controls were enrolled in the study on average 15 months after documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Platelet activation was evaluated by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and flow cytometry in response to platelet surface receptor agonists. Thrombosis in platelet-deplete plasma was evaluated by Factor Xa activity. A microfluidics system assessed thrombosis in whole blood under shear stress conditions.

RESULTS

A mild increase in platelet aggregation in patients with PASC through the thromboxane receptor was observed, and platelet activation through the glycoprotein VI (GPVI) receptor was decreased in patients with PASC compared to age- and sex-matched healthy controls. Thrombosis under shear conditions as well as Factor Xa activity were reduced in patients with PASC. Plasma from patients with PASC was an extremely potent activator of washed, healthy platelets - a phenomenon not observed when stimulating healthy platelets after incubation with plasma from healthy individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

patients with PASC show dysregulated responses in platelets and coagulation in plasma, likely caused by a circulating molecule that promotes thrombosis. A hitherto undescribed protective response appears to exist in patients with PASC to counterbalance ongoing thrombosis that is common to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Platelet activation and coronavirus disease 2019 mortality: Insights from coagulopathy, antiplatelet therapy and inflammation

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with an inflammatory cytokine burst and a prothrombotic coagulopathy. Platelets may contribute to microthrombosis, and constitute a therapeutic target in COVID-19 therapy.

AIM

To assess if platelet activation influences mortality in COVID-19.

METHODS

We explored two cohorts of patients with COVID-19. Cohort A included 208 ambulatory and hospitalized patients with varying clinical severities and non-COVID patients as controls, in whom plasma concentrations of the soluble platelet activation biomarkers CD40 ligand (sCD40L) and P-selectin (sP-sel) were quantified within the first 48hours following hospitalization. Cohort B was a multicentre cohort of 2878 patients initially admitted to a medical ward. In both cohorts, the primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

In cohort A, median circulating concentrations of sCD40L and sP-sel were only increased in the 89 critical patients compared with non-COVID controls: sP-sel 40,059 (interquartile range 26,876-54,678)pg/mL; sCD40L 1914 (interquartile range 1410-2367)pg/mL (P<0.001 for both). A strong association existed between sP-sel concentration and in-hospital mortality (Kaplan-Meier log-rank P=0.004). However, in a Cox model considering biomarkers of immunothrombosis, sP-sel was no longer associated with mortality, in contrast to coagulopathy evaluated with D-dimer concentration (hazard ratio 4.86, 95% confidence interval 1.64-12.50). Moreover, in cohort B, a Cox model adjusted for co-morbidities suggested that prehospitalization antiplatelet agents had no significant impact on in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.80-1.37; P=0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Although we observed an association between excessive biomarkers of platelet activation and in-hospital mortality, our findings rather suggest that coagulopathy is more central in driving disease progression, which may explain why prehospitalization antiplatelet drugs were not a protective factor against mortality in our multicentre cohort.

Arterial Thrombotic Events in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Short Review and Meta-Analysis

It is well established that the risk of venous thromboembolism is high in coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). The frequency of arterial thromboembolic events (ATEs) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is unclear, as is the magnitude of these events in comparison with other infections. We searched MEDLINE from February 2020 to February 2022 for prospective or retrospective cohort studies and randomized clinical trials that reported the number of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), acute ischemic stroke (AIS), acute limb ischemia (ALI), or other ATE as defined by the original authors in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The pooled frequencies were calculated through meta-analysis using random effects model with logit transformation and presented with relative 95% prediction intervals (95% PI). We retrieved a total of 4,547 studies, 36 of which (28 retrospective cohorts, five prospective cohorts and three randomized trials) were finally included in our analysis. The resulting cohort counted 100,949 patients, 2,641 (2.6%) of whom experienced ATE. The pooled ATE frequency was 2.0% (95% PI, 0.4-9.6%). The pooled ATE frequency for AMI, AIS, ALI, and other ATE was 0.8% (95% PI, 0.1-8.1%), 0.9% (95% PI, 0.3-2.9%), 0.2% (95% PI, 0.0-4.2%), and 0.5% (95% PI, 0.1-3.0%), respectively. In comparison with the ATE incidence reported in three studies on non-COVID viral pneumonia, we did not detect a significant difference from the results in our analysis. In conclusion, we found a non-negligible proportion of ATE in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Our results are similar to those found in hospitalized patients with influenza or with non-COVID viral pneumonia.

Thromboprophylaxis in Pregnant Women with COVID-19: An Unsolved Issue

SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant women is of growing interest due to controversy over the use of antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant drugs during pregnancy and postpartum. Pregnant women are susceptible to develop severe forms of viral infections due to pregnancy-related immune alterations, changes in lung functions, and hypercoagulability. The association of pregnancy with SARS-CoV-2 infection can cause an increased incidence of thrombotic complications, especially in the case of patients with some genetic variants that favor inflammation and thrombosis. Compared to the general population, pregnant women may be at increased risk of thrombotic complications related to COVID-19. The lack of extensive clinical trials on thromboprophylaxis and extrapolating data from non-pregnant patients lead to major discrepancies in treating pregnant women with COVID-19. Currently, a multidisciplinary team should determine the dose and duration of prophylactic anticoagulant therapy for these patients, depending on the disease severity, the course of pregnancy, and the estimated due date. This narrative review aims to evaluate the protective effect of thromboprophylaxis in pregnant women with COVID-19. It is unknown at this time whether antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy initiated at the beginning of pregnancy for various diseases (preeclampsia, intrauterine growth restriction, thrombophilia) offers a degree of protection. The optimal scheme for thromboprophylaxis in pregnant women with COVID-19 must be carefully established through an individualized decision concerning gestational age and the severity of the infection.

Cerebrovascular Manifestations of SARS-CoV-2: A Comprehensive Review

Purpose of review

The risks of cerebrovascular manifestations due to SARS-CoV-2 infection are significantly increased within the first 6 months of the infection. Our work aims to give an update on current clinical aspects of diagnosis and treatment of cerebrovascular manifestations during acute and long-term SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Recent findings

The incidence of acute ischemic stroke and haemorrhagic stroke during acute SARS-CoV-2 patients is estimated at 0.9 to 4.6% and 0.5-0.9%, respectively, and were associated with increased mortality. The majority presented with hemiparesis, dysarthria, sensory deficits, and a NIHSS score within 5-15. In addition, beyond the first 30 days of infection people with COVID-19 exhibited increased risk of stroke. During acute phase, age, hypertension, diabetes, and medical history of vascular disease were increased in patients with COVID-19 with new onset of cerebrovascular manifestations, while during long-COVID-19, the risk of cerebrovascular manifestations were found increased regardless of these factors. The management of patients with large-vessel ischemic stroke fulfilling the intravenous thrombolysis criteria are successfully treated according to the guidelines, while hyperosmolar therapy is typically administered in 4- to 6-h intervals. In addition, prophylaxis of anticoagulation therapy is associated with a better prognosis and low mortality during acute and post hospital discharge of patients with COVID-19.

Summary

In this work, we provide a comprehensive review of the current literature on acute and post-acute COVID-19 cerebrovascular sequelae, symptomatology, and its pathophysiology mechanisms. Moreover, we discuss therapeutic strategies for these patients during acute and long-term care and point populations at risk. Our findings suggest that older patients with risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, and medical history of vascular disease are more likely to develop cerebrovascular complications.

Antiplatelet therapy for patients with COVID-19: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials

Background

Hyperinflammation and coagulopathy are hallmarks of COVID-19 and synergistically contribute to illness progression. Antiplatelet agents have been proposed as candidate drugs for COVID-19 treatment on the basis of their antithrombotic and anti-inflammatory properties. A systematic review and meta-analysis that included early observational studies and recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to summarize and compare evidence on this issue.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched to identify studies published up to Nov 7, 2021, and the results of registered clinical trials were followed up to Mar 30, 2022. We included RCTs and observational studies assessing the effect of antiplatelet therapy in adult patients with COVID-19. Data on baseline patient characteristics, interventions, controls, and outcomes were extracted by two independent reviewers. The primary outcome was mortality. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

Results

Twenty-seven studies were included, of which 23 observational studies were pooled in a meta-analysis, and the remaining four RCTs (ACTIV-4B, RECOVERY, ACTIV-4a, and REMAP-CAP) were narratively synthesized. Based on 23 observational studies of 87,824 COVID-19 patients, antiplatelet treatment favors a lower risk of mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61–0.85; I² = 87.0%, P < 0.01]. The narrative synthesis of RCTs showed conflicting evidence, which did not support adding antiplatelet therapy to the standard care, regardless of the baseline illness severity and concomitant anticoagulation intensity.

Conclusion

While the rationale for using antiplatelet treatment in COVID-19 patients is compelling and was supported by the combined result of early observational studies, evidence from RCTs did not confirm this approach. Several factors that could explain this inconsistency were highlighted alongside perspectives on future research directions.

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.

Prescription for COVID-19 by non-medical professionals during the pandemic in Colombia: a cross-sectional study

Background:

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an increase in the behavior of self-medication (SM). Given the massive release of misleading information during the pandemic, some pharmacies recommend drugs such as ivermectin, azithromycin, and hydroxychloroquine that are not useful for preventing or treating COVID-19 and could expose patients to unnecessary adverse drug reactions (ADRs), drug-drug interactions (DDIs), disease masking, and antibiotic resistance.

Rationale:

SM with drugs advertised for COVID-19 can have consequences, and people should be aware of approved uses, potential contraindications, and ADRs. Thus, the aim of this study was to know the drug therapies including natural products and homeopathic drugs offered by Colombian pharmaceutical establishments for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, as well as the information provided on the safe use of the product.

Methods:

An observational, cross-sectional mystery shopping study was carried out to determine the pharmaceutical alternatives for the management of COVID-19 offered by pharmaceutical establishments (drugstores, pharmacies, homeopathic pharmacies, and nutritional supplements stores) in Colombia, and information related to the safe use of the product. The study included 482 pharmaceutical establishments from 16 Colombian departments. Data collection was done through telephone calls to each of the establishments following an interview protocol pretending to be a patient who presents symptoms related to COVID-19.

Results:

About 57.3% (276) of the establishments recommended a product for the treatment of COVID-19 infection, 66.6% (321) asked whether the caller had COVID-19 symptoms and what they are, and 44.2% (213) suggested taking a COVID-19 test. Of 59 drugs suggested by pharmacies, the most recommended were azithromycin, ivermectin, acetaminophen, ibuprofen, and ASA (aspirin). From the establishments that recommended a product, dosage was indicated in 85.5% (236) of the pharmaceutical establishments and 14.5% (40) of the establishments reported the most common adverse effects of this substance. About 9.4% (26) of the establishments reported possible interactions of the recommended drugs and substances with food, beverages, or supplements.Conclusion: Pharmaceutical establishments in Colombia seem to have significantly contributed to self-medication for COVID-19 in Colombia during the pandemic. This behavior is inappropriate, since the mild forms of the disease do not have a specific treatment.

Plain Language Summary

Self-medication induced by pharmaceutical establishments in Colombia during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an increase in the behavior of self-medication (SM). Given the massive release of misleading information during the pandemic, some pharmacies recommend drugs such as ivermectin, azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine among others, which are not useful for preventing or treating COVID-19 and could expose patients to unnecessary side effects and interactions with other medications. People should be aware of the approved and non-approved uses, and potential side effects of these drugs. Rationale: The aim of this study was to know the drugs, including natural products and homeopathic drugs, offered by Colombian pharmaceutical establishments for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, as well as the information provided on the safe use of the product. Methods: The study was done using the mystery shopping method, collecting data through telephone calls to each of the establishments by a trained individual pretending to be a patient with COVID-19 symptoms. The study included 482 pharmaceutical establishments from 16 Colombian departments. Results: Of 59 drugs suggested by pharmacies, the most recommended were azithromycin, ivermectin, acetaminophen, ibuprofen, and aspirin. The recommended dose was indicated in 85.5% (236) of the pharmaceutical establishments, and 14.5% (40) of them reported the most common adverse effects of the recommended product. About 9.4% (26) of the establishments reported possible interactions of the recommended drugs and substances with food, beverages, or supplements. Conclusion: The majority of the pharmaceutical establishments included in the study promoted inadequate self-medication for COVID-19 in Colombia during the pandemic.

NSAID use and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients: a 38-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to reduce pain, fever, and inflammation but have been associated with complications in community-acquired pneumonia. Observations shortly after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 suggested that ibuprofen was associated with an increased risk of adverse events in COVID-19 patients, but subsequent observational studies failed to demonstrate increased risk and in one case showed reduced risk associated with NSAID use.

METHODS

A 38-center retrospective cohort study was performed that leveraged the harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record data of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative. A propensity-matched cohort of 19,746 COVID-19 inpatients was constructed by matching cases (treated with NSAIDs at the time of admission) and 19,746 controls (not treated) from 857,061 patients with COVID-19 available for analysis. The primary outcome of interest was COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients, which was classified as: moderate, severe, or mortality/hospice. Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury (AKI), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), invasive ventilation, and all-cause mortality at any time following COVID-19 diagnosis.

RESULTS

Logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased COVID-19 severity (OR: 0.57 95% CI: 0.53-0.61). Analysis of secondary outcomes using logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (OR 0.51 95% CI: 0.47-0.56), invasive ventilation (OR: 0.59 95% CI: 0.55-0.64), AKI (OR: 0.67 95% CI: 0.63-0.72), or ECMO (OR: 0.51 95% CI: 0.36-0.7). In contrast, the odds ratios indicate reduced risk of these outcomes, but our quantitative bias analysis showed E-values of between 1.9 and 3.3 for these associations, indicating that comparatively weak or moderate confounder associations could explain away the observed associations.

CONCLUSIONS

Study interpretation is limited by the observational design. Recording of NSAID use may have been incomplete. Our study demonstrates that NSAID use is not associated with increased COVID-19 severity, all-cause mortality, invasive ventilation, AKI, or ECMO in COVID-19 inpatients. A conservative interpretation in light of the quantitative bias analysis is that there is no evidence that NSAID use is associated with risk of increased severity or the other measured outcomes. Our results confirm and extend analogous findings in previous observational studies using a large cohort of patients drawn from 38 centers in a nationally representative multicenter database.

Chronic use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or acetaminophen and relationship with mortality among United States Veterans after testing positive for COVID-19

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen are among the most-frequently used medications. Although these medications have different mechanisms of action, they have similar indications and treatment duration has been positively correlated with cardiovascular risk although the degree of risk varies by medication. Our objective was to study treatment effects of chronic use of individual NSAID medications and acetaminophen on all-cause mortality among patients who tested positive for COVID-19 while accounting for adherence. We used the VA national datasets in this retrospective cohort study to differentiate between sporadic and chronic medication use: sporadic users filled an NSAID within the last year, but not recently or regularly. Using established and possible risk factors for severe COVID-19, we used propensity scores analysis to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between treatment groups. Then, we used multivariate logistic regression incorporating inverse propensity score weighting to assess mortality. The cohort consisted of 28,856 patients. Chronic use of aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen, meloxicam, celecoxib, diclofenac or acetaminophen was not associated with significant differences in mortality at 30 days (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.95-1.00; OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98-1.00; OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.98-1.01; OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98-1.00; OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.98-1.01; OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.97-1.01; and OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.99-1.02, respectively) nor at 60 days (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95-1.00; OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.99-1.01; OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98-1.01; OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.97-1.00; OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.97-1.01; OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.97-1.01; and OR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99-1.02, respectively). Although the study design cannot determine causality, the study should assure patients as it finds no association between mortality and chronic use of these medications compared with sporadic NSAID use among those infected with COVID-19.

Drug safety of frequently used drugs and substances for self-medication in COVID-19

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the behavior of self-medication has increased. The dissemination of misleading information regarding the efficacy of certain drugs or substances for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 has been the major contributing factor for this phenomenon. Alongside with the increase in self-medication behavior, the inherent risks to this act such as drug-drug interactions, adverse events, drug toxicity, and masking of symptoms have also increased. Self-medication in the context of COVID-19 has led to drug misuse leading in some cases to the development of fatal adverse drug reactions. It is important that during this ongoing pandemic drugs with potential clinical efficacy against COVID-19 are adequately analyzed regarding their efficacy, safety, and monitoring. The aim of this review is to describe the available evidence regarding the efficacy, safety, and monitoring of the drugs and substances that have been shown to be frequently used for self-medication in patients with COVID-19 (hydroxychloroquine, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, ivermectin, azithromycin, vitamins, aspirin, and chlorine dioxide) to adequately characterize their risks, safe use, monitoring strategies, and to reinforce the concept that these substances should not be used for self-medication and require a medical prescription.

Plain Language Summary

Drug safety of frequently used drugs and substances for self-medication in COVID-19 Dissemination of information about potential COVID-19 treatments has led individuals to self-medicate and expose themselves to risks such as drug-drug interactions, side effects, antibiotic resistance, and misdiagnosis. There is a need to review the medical literature to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the drugs and substances commonly used by the population for the treatment and prevention of SARS CoV-2 infection. In this review, we included drugs that are frequently used for self-medication and commonly advertised such as ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, chlorine dioxide, azithromycin, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, among others. A brief introduction of the drug and its mechanism of action, followed by a summary of the efficacy in COVID-19 and safety, will be described for each drug in order to promote their responsible use.

Platelets in Viral Infections - Brave Soldiers or Trojan Horses

Viral infections are often associated with platelet activation and haemostatic complications. In line, low platelet counts represent a hallmark for poor prognosis in many infectious diseases. The underlying cause of platelet dysfunction in viral infections is multifaceted and complex. While some viruses directly interact with platelets and/or megakaryocytes to modulate their function, also immune and inflammatory responses directly and indirectly favour platelet activation. Platelet activation results in increased platelet consumption and degradation, which contributes to thrombocytopenia in these patients. The role of platelets is often bi-phasic. Initial platelet hyper-activation is followed by a state of platelet exhaustion and/or hypo-responsiveness, which together with low platelet counts promotes bleeding events. Thereby infectious diseases not only increase the thrombotic but also the bleeding risk or both, which represents a most dreaded clinical complication. Treatment options in these patients are limited and new therapeutic strategies are urgently needed to prevent adverse outcome. This review summarizes the current literature on platelet-virus interactions and their impact on viral pathologies and discusses potential intervention strategies. As pandemics and concomitant haemostatic dysregulations will remain a recurrent threat, understanding the role of platelets in viral infections represents a timely and pivotal challenge.

[The effect of antiplatelet therapy on the course of COVID-19]

Numerous studies demonstrate that a new coronavirus infection is associated with an increased risk of thrombosis, which underlies many of the complications of COVID-19. At the same time, many elderly patients with COVID-19 and with concomitant cordial pathology receive antiplatelet therapy to prevent recurrent ischemic events. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effect of antiplatelet therapy on the risk of thrombotic complications and disease course in SARS-COV-2 infected patients. We carried out the search of the articles published from 2019 to 2021 with the keywords «antiplatelet therapy» and «COVID-19» in the PubMed database. A total of 209 articles were retrieved out of which 16 which were included in the review. According to majority of retrospective studies (7 out of 10 studies, more than 30.000 patients), antiplatelet therapy is associated with a statistically significant and prominent reduction in overall mortality. Several studies showed that antiplatelet therapy positively influences the risks of severe respiratory disorders, need of invasive lung ventilation and decreases the probability of thrombotic events. However the only prospective randomized placebo-controlled study did not show a benefit of antiplatelet therapy in symptomatic patients with mild stable COPD-19. None of the studies reported a negative effect of antiplatelet therapy on the course of a new coronavirus infection. Therefore, to date there is no conclusive evidence based on prospective randomized trials, of a positive effect of antiplatelet therapy on the course of COVID-19. Further research on this issue using the double-blind method is needed. However, there are no reports of significant adverse effects of antiplatelet agents, who have previously been given antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention.

Aspirin in COVID-19: Pros and Cons

Since its emergence, the COVID-19 pandemic has been ravaging the medical and economic sectors even with the significant vaccination advances. In severe presentations, the disease of SARS-CoV-2 can manifest with life-threatening thromboembolic and multi-organ repercussions provoking notable morbidity and mortality. The pathogenesis of such burdensome forms has been under extensive investigation and is attributed to a state of immune dysfunction and hyperinflammation. In light of these extraordinary circumstances, research efforts have focused on investigating and repurposing previously available agents that target the inflammatory and hematological cascades. Aspirin, due to its well-known properties and multiple molecular targets, and ought to its extensive clinical use, has been perceived as a potential therapeutic agent for COVID-19. Aspirin acts at multiple cellular targets to achieve its anti-inflammatory and anti-platelet effects. Although initial promising clinical data describing aspirin role in COVID-19 has appeared, evidence supporting its use remains fragile and premature. This review explores the notion of repurposing aspirin in COVID-19 infection. It delves into aspirin as a molecule, along with its pharmacology and clinical applications. It also reviews the current high-quality clinical evidence highlighting the role of aspirin in SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and adverse outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are concerns that the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may increase the risk of adverse outcomes among patients with coronavirus COVID-19. This study aimed to synthesize the evidence on associations between the use of NSAIDs and adverse outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic search of WHO COVID-19 Database, Medline, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, China Biology Medicine disc, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database for all articles published from January 1, 2020, to November 7, 2021, as well as a supplementary search of Google Scholar. We included all comparative studies that enrolled patients who took NSAIDs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data extraction and quality assessment of methodology of included studies were completed by two reviewers independently. We conducted a meta-analysis on the main adverse outcomes, as well as selected subgroup analyses stratified by the type of NSAID and population (both positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or not).

FINDINGS

Forty comparative studies evaluating 4,867,795 adult cases were identified. Twenty-eight (70%) of the included studies enrolled patients positive to SARS-CoV-2 tests. The use of NSAIDs did not reduce mortality outcomes among people with COVID-19 (number of studies [N] = 29, odds ratio [OR] = 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75 to 1.14, I²  = 89%). Results suggested that the use of NSAIDs was not significantly associated with higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with or without COVID-19 (N = 10, OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.07, I²  = 78%; N = 8, aOR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.09, I²  = 26%), or an increased probability of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (N = 12, OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.75, I²  = 82% ; N = 4, aOR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.22, I²  = 60%), requiring mechanical ventilation (N = 11, OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.54, I²  = 63%; N = 5, aOR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.24, I²  = 66%), or administration of supplemental oxygen (N = 5, OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.24, I²  = 63%; N = 2, aOR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.12, I²  = 0%). The subgroup analysis revealed that, compared with patients not using any NSAIDs, the use of ibuprofen (N = 5, OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.50 to 2.39; N = 4, aOR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.16) and COX-2 inhibitor (N = 4, OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.35 to 1.11; N = 2, aOR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.18) were not associated with an increased risk of death.

INTERPRETATION

Data suggests that NSAIDs such as ibuprofen, aspirin and COX-2 inhibitor, can be used safely among patients positive to SARS-CoV-2. However, for some of the analyses the number of studies were limited and the quality of evidence was overall low, therefore more research is needed to corroborate these findings.

FUNDING

There was no funding source for this study.

Platelets and Antiplatelet Medication in COVID-19-Related Thrombotic Complications

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) induces a hypercoagulatory state that frequently leads to thromboembolic complications. Whereas anticoagulation is associated with reduced mortality, the role of antiplatelet therapy in COVID-19 is less clear. We retrospectively analyzed the effect of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy in 578 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and prospectively monitored 110 patients for circulating microthrombi and plasma markers of coagulation in the first week of admission. Moreover, we determined platelet shape change and also thrombi in postmortem lung biopsies in a subset of patients with COVID-19. We observed no association of antiplatelet therapy with COVID-19 survival. Adverse outcome in COVID-19 was associated with increased activation of the coagulation cascade, whereas circulating microthrombi did not increase in aggravated disease. This was in line with analysis of postmortem lung biopsies of patients with COVID-19, which revealed generally fibrin(ogen)-rich and platelet-low thrombi. Platelet spreading was normal in severe COVID-19 cases; however, plasma from patients with COVID-19 mediated an outcome-dependent inhibitory effect on naïve platelets. Antiplatelet medication disproportionally exacerbated this platelet impairment in plasma of patients with fatal outcome. Taken together, this study shows that unfavorable outcome in COVID-19 is associated with a profound dysregulation of the coagulation system, whereas the contribution of platelets to thrombotic complications is less clear. Adverse outcome may be associated with impaired platelet function or platelet exhaustion. In line, antiplatelet therapy was not associated with beneficial outcome.

NSAID use and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients: A 38-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to reduce pain, fever, and inflammation but have been associated with complications in community-acquired pneumonia. Observations shortly after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 suggested that ibuprofen was associated with an increased risk of adverse events in COVID-19 patients, but subsequent observational studies failed to demonstrate increased risk and in one case showed reduced risk associated with NSAID use.

METHODS

A 38-center retrospective cohort study was performed that leveraged the harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record data of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative. A propensity-matched cohort of COVID-19 inpatients was constructed by matching cases (treated with NSAIDs) and controls (not treated) from 857,061 patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome of interest was COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients, which was classified as: moderate, severe, or mortality/hospice. Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury (AKI), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), invasive ventilation, and all-cause mortality at any time following COVID-19 diagnosis.

RESULTS

Logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased COVID-19 severity (OR: 0.57 95% CI: 0.53-0.61). Analysis of secondary outcomes using logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (OR 0.51 95% CI: 0.47-0.56), invasive ventilation (OR: 0.59 95% CI: 0.55-0.64), AKI (OR: 0.67 95% CI: 0.63-0.72), or ECMO (OR: 0.51 95% CI: 0.36-0.7). In contrast, the odds ratios indicate reduced risk of these outcomes, but our quantitative bias analysis showed E-values of between 1.9 and 3.3 for these associations, indicating that comparatively weak or moderate confounder associations could explain away the observed associations.

CONCLUSIONS

Study interpretation is limited by the observational design. Recording of NSAID use may have been incomplete. Our study demonstrates that NSAID use is not associated with increased COVID-19 severity, all-cause mortality, invasive ventilation, AKI, or ECMO in COVID-19 inpatients. A conservative interpretation in light of the quantitative bias analysis is that there is no evidence that NSAID use is associated with risk of increased severity or the other measured outcomes. Our findings are the largest EHR-based analysis of the effect of NSAIDs on outcome in COVID-19 patients to date. Our results confirm and extend analogous findings in previous observational studies using a large cohort of patients drawn from 38 centers in a nationally representative multicenter database.

Aspirin as an Adjunctive Pharmacologic Therapy Option for COVID-19: Anti-Inflammatory, Antithrombotic, and Antiviral Effects All in One Agent

Introduction

Pharmacologic therapy options for COVID-19 should include antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and anticoagulant agents. With the limited effectiveness, currently available virus-directed therapies may have a substantial impact on global health due to continued reports of mutant variants affecting repeated waves of COVID-19 around the world.

Methods

We searched articles pertaining to aspirin, COVID-19, acute lung injury and pharmacology in PubMed and provide a comprehensive appraisal of potential use of aspirin in the management of patients with COVID-19. The scope of this article is to provide an overview of the rationale and currently available clinical evidence that supports aspirin as an effective therapeutic option in COVID-19.

Results

Experimental and clinical evidence are available for the potential use of aspirin in patients with COVID-19.

Discussion

Aspirin targets the intracellular signaling pathway that is essential for viral replication, and resultant inflammatory responses, hypercoagulability, and platelet activation. With these multiple benefits, aspirin can be a credible adjunctive therapeutic option for the treatment of COVID-19. In addition, inhaled formulation with its rapid effects may enhance direct delivery to the lung, which is the key organ damaged in COVID-19 during the critical initial course of the disease, whereas the 150-325 mg/day can be used for long-term treatment to prevent thrombotic event occurrences. Being economical and widely available, aspirin can be exploited globally, particularly in underserved communities and remote areas of the world to combat the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Does admission acetylsalicylic acid uptake in hospitalized COVID-19 patients have a protective role? Data from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is widely used in the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disorders. Our objective is to evaluate its possible protective role, not only in mortality but also in other aspects such as inflammation, symptomatic thrombosis, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We realized an observational retrospective cohort study of 20,641 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia collected and followed-up from Mar 1st, 2020 to May 1st, 2021, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to determine whether treatment with ASA affected outcomes in COVID-19 patients. On hospital admission, 3291 (15.9%) patients were receiving ASA. After PSM, 3291 patients exposed to ASA and 2885 not-exposed patients were analyzed. In-hospital mortality was higher in the ASA group (30.4 vs. 16.9%, p < 0.001) in the global sample. After PSM, no differences were found between groups (30.4 vs. 30.3%, p = 0.938). There were no differences in inflammation, symptomatic thrombosis, or ICU admission. In conclusion, ASA intake is not associated with in-hospital mortality or any other health outcome evaluated after applying PSM analysis in a real-world large sample of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

NSAIDs and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been discouraged for the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, fearing that they could increase the risk of infection or the severity of SARS-CoV-2.

Methods

Original studies providing information on exposure to NSAIDs and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes were retrieved and were included in a descriptive analysis and a meta-analysis with Cochrane Revue Manager (REVMAN 5.4), using inverse variance odds ratio (OR) with random- or fixed-effects models.

Results

Of 92,853 papers mentioning COVID-19, 266 mentioned NSAIDs and 61 mentioned ibuprofen; 19 papers had analysable data. Three papers described NSAID exposure and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 positivity, five papers described the risk of hospital admission in positive patients, 10 papers described death, and six papers described severe composite outcomes. Five papers studied exposure to ibuprofen and death. Using random-effects models, there was no excess risk of SARS-CoV-2 positivity (OR 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71–1.05). In SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, exposure to NSAIDs was not associated with excess risk of hospital admission (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80–1.17), death (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80–0.98), or severe outcomes (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.90–1.44). With ibuprofen, there was no increased risk of death (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78–1.13). Using a fixed-effect model did not modify the results, nor did the sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

The theoretical risks of NSAIDs or ibuprofen in SARS-CoV-2 infection are not confirmed by observational data.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40264-021-01089-5.

Acetylsalicylic Acid Compared with Enoxaparin for the Prevention of Thrombosis and Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, aspirin) is a well-known and frequently studied drug for primary and secondary prevention of disease due to its anti-inflammatory and coagulopathic effects. COVID-19 complications are attributed to the role of thrombo-inflammation. Studies regarding the use of low-dose ASA in COVID-19 are limited. For this reason, we propose that the use of low-dose ASA may have protective effects in COVID-19-related thromboembolism and lung injury. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy of low-dose ASA compared with enoxaparin, an anticoagulant, for the prevention of thrombosis and mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study on COVID-19-confirmed hospitalized patients at the Mansoura University Quarantine Hospital, outpatients, and home-isolated patients from September to December 2020 in Mansoura governorate, Egypt. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to assess the effect of ASA compared with enoxaparin on thromboembolism, and mechanical ventilation needs.

RESULTS

This study included 225 COVID-19 patients. Use of ASA-only (81-162 mg orally daily) was significantly associated with reduced thromboembolism (OR 0.163, p = 0.020), but both low-dose ASA and enoxaparin, and enoxaparin-only (0.5 mg/kg subcutaneously (SC) daily as prophylactic dose or 1 mg/kg SC every 12 hours as therapeutic dose) were more protective (odds ratio [OR] 0.010, OR 0.071, respectively, p < 0.001). Neither ASA-only nor enoxaparin-only were associated with a reduction in mechanical ventilation needs. Concomitant use of low-dose ASA and enoxaparin was associated with reduced mechanical ventilation (OR 0.032, 95% CI 0.004-0.226, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose ASA-only use may reduce the incidence of COVID-19-associated thromboembolism, but the reduction may be less than that of enoxaparin-only, and both ASA and enoxaparin. Concomitant use of ASA and enoxaparin demonstrates promising results with regard to the reduction of thrombotic events, and mechanical ventilation needs.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and glucocorticoids in COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is characterized by a wide spectrum of symptom severity, which is manifested at different phases of infection and demands different levels of care. Viral load, host innate-immune response to SARS-CoV-2, and comorbidities have a direct impact on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients and determine the diverse disease trajectories. The initial SARS-CoV-2 penetrance and replication in the host causes death of infected cells, determining the viral response. SARS-CoV-2 replication in the host triggers the activation of host antiviral immune mechanisms, determining the inflammatory response. While a healthy immune response is essential to eliminate infected cells and prevent spread of the virus, a dysfunctional immune response can result in a cytokine storm and hyperinflammation, contributing to disease progression.

Current therapies for COVID-19 target the virus and/or the host immune system and may be complicated in their efficacy by comorbidities. Here we review the evidence for use of two classes of anti-inflammatory drugs, glucocorticoids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the treatment of COVID-19. We consider the clinical evidence regarding the timing and efficacy of their use, their potential limitations, current recommendations and the prospect of future studies by these and related therapies.