Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 prognosis with the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors: a systematic review

An umbrella review and meta-analysis of renin-angiotensin system drugs use and COVID-19 outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of extensive literature on the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) on COVID-19 outcomes, the evidence is still controversial. We aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of the effect of ACEIs/ARBs on COVID-19-related outcomes by summarising the currently available evidence.

METHODS

An umbrella review was conducted using Medline (OVID), Embase, Scopus, Cochrane library and medRxiv from inception to 1 February 2021. Systematic reviews with meta-analysis that evaluated the effect of ACEIs/ARBs on COVID-19-related clinical outcomes were eligible. Studies' quality was appraised using the AMSTAR 2 Critical Appraisal Tool. Data were analysed using the random-effects modelling including several subgroup analyses. Heterogenicity was assessed using I² statistic. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021233398) and reported using PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Overall, 47 reviews were eligible for inclusion. Out of the nine COVID-19 outcomes evaluated, there was significant associations between ACEIs/ARBs use and each of death (OR = 0.80, 95%CI = 0.75-0.86; I²  = 51.9%), death/ICU admission as composite outcome (OR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.80-0.92; I²  = 43.9%), severe COVID-19 (OR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.78-0.95; I²  = 68%) and hospitalisation (OR = 1.23, 95%CI = 1.04-1.46; I²  = 76.4%). The significant reduction in death/ICU admission, however, was higher among studies which presented adjusted measure of effects (OR = 0.63, 95%CI = 0.47-0.84) and were of moderate quality (OR = 0.74, 95%CI = 0.63-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Collective evidence from observational studies indicate a good quality evidence on the significant association between ACEIs/ARBs use and reduction in death and death/ICU admission, but poor-quality evidence on both reducing severe COVID-19 and increasing hospitalisation. Our findings further support the current recommendations of not discontinuing ACEIs/ARBs therapy in patients with COVID-19.

Risk Perception and Acceptability of the COVID-19 Vaccine in Nigeria

Objectives

Vaccines are anticipated to control the ongoing coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, however, their acceptance is critical for the desired benefit. This study assessed risk perceptions of COVID-19, acceptability of its vaccine and socio-demographic associations of its acceptability in Nigeria.

Materials and Methods

A cross-sectional web-based study was conducted among 420 participants in Nigeria's six geopolitical regions, using a three-part questionnaire. The questionnaire link was distributed via snowball method to consenting participants through online platforms. Study outcome measures were acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine, and risk perception of COVID-19 by study participants. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS version 24. p values ≤0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

A total of 410 respondents participated in the study and high-risk perception of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 infection (COVID-19) was seen in 127 (66.1%) respondents. Vaccine acceptance was high in 233 (56.8%) respondents and was significantly associated with geo-political region (p=0.028). A moderate positive relationship (r: 0.3) was found between risk perception and acceptability of COVID-19 vaccine and the correlation was statistically significant (p=0.000).

Conclusion

High-risk perception of COVID-19 was found in over half of the respondents, and COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate was a little more than 50%. However, the study noted regional association with vaccine acceptance among study participants. Therefore, strategic and targeted messaging on vaccine acceptance should be prioritized by stakeholders, to ensure successful vaccine implementation.

COVID-19-associated liver injury, role of drug therapy and management: a review

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is known to affect several body organs, including the liver. This results from several factors such as direct effect of SARS-CoV-2 on the liver, side effects of drug therapy and pre-existing liver diseases. Drug-induced liver injury can result from a range of drugs used in the treatment of COVID-19 such as antiviral drugs, anti-inflammatory drugs, antibiotics, herbal medications and vaccines. Metabolism of most drugs occurs in the liver, and this leaves the liver at risk of medication-induced liver damage. Being among pathologies from the disease, COVID-19 liver injury presents with abnormally high liver-related enzymes, such as aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphate (ALP), and gamma-glutamyl transferase. It is reversible, generally not severe and occurs more mildly in children. However, COVID-19-associated liver injury is worsened by chronic liver diseases and vice versa. There is a high risk of abnormal ALT and AST, in-hospital liver injury and prolonged SARS-CoV-2 shedding in COVID-19 patients with previously existing metabolic-associated fatty liver disease. COVID-19-associated liver injury also appears to be severe and significantly associated with life-threatening COVID-19 and mortality in persons with a history of liver transplant. Where necessary, only supportive management is usually indicated. This paper evaluates the aetiology, clinical and laboratory features, occurrence and management of COVID-19-associated liver injury. It also elaborated on the role of drug therapy in the development of COVID-19 liver injury.

Immunogenicity and clinical features relating to BNT162b2 messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S and ChAdOx1 adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review of non-interventional studies

Background

Vaccination against Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an important means of controlling the pandemic, however they are expected to stimulate immune responses when administered to confer immunity. In this review, we evaluated the clinical and laboratory features associated with BNT162b2 messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S and ChAdOx1 adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccines, to determine their immunogenicity. Demographic distribution of pathogenic autoimmune response and time interval between vaccination and onset of symptoms were also assessed. This was to identify; persons at risk of developing auto-immune reactions and  markers to enhanced occurrence of this event.

Main body

Using relevant keywords, search was conducted in the databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Google scholar from November 2020 to May 31, 2021. Additional article was also identified through hand-searching of reference lists, and the review was conducted in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines 2009. Study outcome measures were presence of antibodies after vaccination and evidence of autoimmune reactions, therefore studies relating these measures were considered eligible for this review. Studies showed stimulation of immune response with administration of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, ChAdOx1 and Ad26.COV2-S adenovirus vector-based vaccines. Aside SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies, elevated D-dimers, presence of PF4 and low fibrinogen were most commonly seen laboratory features in persons with autoimmune reactions following vaccination. In addition, thrombotic thrombocytopenia was the commonest clinical features observed with ChAdOx1 and Ad26.COV2-S adenovirus vector-based vaccines. Findings from this study also suggest higher susceptibility of women of 22-60 years to the pathogenic immunogenicity that may particular result from exposure to ChAdOx1 and Ad26.COV2-S adenovirus vector-based vaccines. Time interval of 4-37 days was mostly observed between vaccination and occurrence of a symptom.

Conclusion

Immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia and other PF4 dependent syndrome are likely associated with ChAdOx1 and Ad26.COV2.S adenovirus vector vaccines, mostly occurring in women usually within 4-37 days of first dose of vaccine. Enhanced knowledge about vaccine adverse effects and its distribution is crucial for effective vaccination strategies.

Risk factors for COVID-19 case fatality rate in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: A nationwide retrospective cohort study of 235,248 patients in the Russian Federation

THE AIM

To study the association of demographic, clinical, and laboratory factors and the use of glucose-lowering drugs and anti-coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination with the COVID-19-related case fatality rate (CFR) in diabetes mellitus (DM) patients.

METHODS

This study is a nationwide observational cohort study based on the data from the National Diabetes Register (NDR) that is the database containing online clinical information about the population with DM. The outcomes (death or recovery) for COVID-19 were registered in 235,248 patients with DM [type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), n = 11,058; type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), n = 224,190] from March 20, 2020, until November 25, 2021. The unadjusted odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to estimate the risk factors for CFR. Then the ranging of significant factors was performed and the most vulnerable groups of factors for the lethal outcome were chosen.

RESULTS

The CFR due to COVID-19 was 8.1% in T1DM and 15.3% in T2DM. Increased CFR was associated with the male population [OR = 1.25 (95% CI: 1.09-1.44) in T1DM and 1.18 (95% CI: 1.15-1.21) in T2DM], age ≥65 years [OR = 4.44 (95% CI: 3.75-5.24) in T1DM and 3.18 (95% CI: 3.09-3.26) in T2DM], DM duration ≥10 years [OR = 2.46 (95% CI: 2.06-2.95) in T1DM and 2.11 (95% CI: 2.06-2.16) in T2DM], body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m² [OR = 1.95 (95% CI: 1.52-2.50)] in T1DM, HbA1c ≥7% [OR = 1.35 (95% CI: 1.29-1.43)] in T2DM. The atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were associated with higher CFR in T1DM but not in T2DM. The pre-COVID-19 glucose-lowering therapy in T2DM was differently associated with CFR (OR): 0.61 (95% CI: 0.59-0.62) for metformin, 0.59 (95% CI: 0.57-0.61) for dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4 inhibitors), 0.46 (95% CI: 0.44-0.49) for sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, 0.38 (95% CI: 0.29-0.51) for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (arGLP-1), 1.34 (95% CI: 1.31-1.37) for sulfonylurea (SU), and 1.47 (95% CI: 1.43-1.51) for insulin. Anti-COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a lower fatality risk in both DM types: OR = 0.07 (95% CI: 0.03-0.20) in T1DM and OR = 0.19 (95% CI: 0.17-0.22) in T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study suggest that increased COVID-19-related fatality risk in both T1DM and T2DM patients associated with the male population, older age, longer DM duration, and absence of anti-COVID-19 vaccination. In T2DM, pre-COVID-19 glucose-lowering therapy with metformin, DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT2 inhibitors, and arGLP-1 had a positive effect on the risk of death. The most vulnerable combination of risk factors for lethal outcome in both DM types was vaccine absence + age ≥65 years + DM duration ≥10 years.

Does COVID-19 Cause Hypertension?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak remains a major public health challenge worldwide. The present study investigated the effect of COVID-19 on blood pressure (BP) during short term follow-up. A total of 211 consecutive COVID-19 patients who were admitted to Parkhayat Kutahya hospital were retrospectively screened. Information was obtained from the electronic medical records and National health data registry. The study outcome was new onset of hypertension according to the Eight Joint National Committee and European Society of Cardiology Guidelines. Finally, 153 confirmed COVID-19 patients (mean age 46.5 ± 12.7 years) were enrolled. Both systolic (120.9 ± 7.2 vs 126.5 ± 15.0 mmHg, P <.001) and diastolic BP (78.5 ± 4.4 vs 81.8 ± 7.4 mmHg, P <.001) were significantly higher in the post COVID-19 period than on admission. New onset hypertension was observed in 18 patients at the end of 31.6 ± 5.0 days on average (P <.001). These findings suggest that COVID-19 increases systolic and diastolic BP and may cause new onset hypertension.

COVID-19 and RAAS inhibitors: is there a final conclusion?

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the first pandemic caused by a human infecting coronavirus, has drawn global attention from the first time it appeared in Wuhan city of China in late December 2019. Detection of the responsible viral pathogen, named as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by WHO, and its possible pathogenesis lead to the forming of many hypotheses about the factors that may affect the patients' outcome. One of the SARS-CoV-2 infection concerns was the potential role of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) in COVID-19 patients' morbidity and mortality. Studies demonstrated that because SARS-CoV-2 uses human ACE2 cell receptors as an entry receptor to invade the cells, there might be an association between antihypertensive drugs such as RAAS inhibitors (specifically ACEIs and ARBs) and the COVID-19 disease. Data are scarce and conflicting regarding ACEI or ARB consumption and how it influences disease outcomes, and a single conclusion has not been reached yet. According to the literature review in our article, the most evidentially supported theory about the use of RAAS inhibitors in COVID-19 is that these medications, including ACEI/ARB, are not associated with the increased risk of infection, disease severity, and patient prognosis. However, further studies are needed to support the hypothesis.