Adverse outcomes and mortality in users of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2: A Danish nationwide cohort study

NSAIDs for early management of acute respiratory infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the rationale for and the potential clinical benefits of an early approach to viral acute respiratory infections with NSAIDs to switch off the inflammatory cascade before the inflammatory process becomes complicated.

RECENT FINDINGS

It has been shown that in COVID-19 as in other viral respiratory infections proinflammatory cytokines are produced, which are responsible of respiratory and systemic symptoms. There have been concerns that NSAIDs could increase susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection or aggravate COVID-19. However, recent articles reviewing experimental research, observational clinical studies, randomized clinical trials, and meta-analyses conclude that there is no basis to limit the use of NSAIDs, which may instead represent effective self-care measures to control symptoms.

SUMMARY

The inflammatory response plays a pivotal role in the early phase of acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs); a correct diagnosis of the cause and a prompt therapeutic approach with NSAIDs may have the potential to control the pathophysiological mechanisms that can complicate the condition, while reducing symptoms to the benefit of the patient. A timely treatment with NSAIDs may limit the inappropriate use of other categories of drugs, such as antibiotics, which are useless when viral cause is confirmed and whose inappropriate use is responsible for the development of resistance.

Effect of Aspirin Use on the Adverse Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) triggers multiple components of the immune system and causes inflammation of endothelial walls across vascular beds, resulting in respiratory failure, arterial and venous thrombosis, myocardial injury, and multi-organ failure leading to death. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, aspirin was suggested for the treatment of symptomatic individuals, given its analgesic, antipyretic, anti-inflammatory, anti-thrombotic, and antiviral effects. This study aimed to evaluate the association of aspirin use with various clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Methods

This was a retrospective study involving patients aged ≥ 18 years and hospitalized for COVID-19 from March 2020 to October 2020. Primary outcomes were acute cardiovascular events (ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), type 1 non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), acute congestive heart failure (CHF), and acute stroke) and death. Secondary outcomes were respiratory failure, need for mechanical ventilation, and acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT)/pulmonary embolism (PE).

Results

Of 376 patients hospitalized for COVID-19, 128 were taking aspirin. Significant proportions of native Americans were hospitalized for COVID-19 in both aspirin (22.7%) and non-aspirin (24.6%) groups. Between aspirin and non-aspirin groups, no significant differences were found with regard to mechanical ventilator support (21.1% vs. 15.3%, P = 0.16), acute cardiovascular events (7.8% vs. 5.2%, P = 0.32), acute DVT/PE (3.9% vs. 5.2%, P = 0.9), readmission rate (13.3% vs. 12.9%, P = 0.91) and mortality (23.4% vs. 20.2%, P = 0.5); however, the median duration of mechanical ventilation was significantly shorter (7 vs. 9 days, P = 0.04) and median length of hospitalization was significantly longer (5.5 vs. 4 days, P = 0.01) in aspirin group compared to non-aspirin group.

Conclusion

No significant differences were found in acute cardiovascular events, acute DVT/PE, mechanical ventilator support, and mortality rate between hospitalized COVID-19 patients who were taking aspirin compared to those not taking aspirin. However, larger studies are required to confirm our findings.

The impact of COVID-19 on analgesic prescribing in an urban emergency department

BACKGROUND

Providers across the country have significantly decreased opioid prescribing over the past decade to prevent opioid misuse. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a disruption of the healthcare system and changes in the relationships between patients and providers. Consequently, we sought to investigate whether the pandemic had any impact on analgesic prescribing in an urban emergency department.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single center study analyzing pharmacy records of patients that were treated with analgesics between January 2019 and May 2021. The most common analgesics utilized were tallied by month. Utilization of specific analgesics were compared between T1-pre-COVID-19 (1/2019-1/2020) and T2-post-COVID 19 (5/2020-5/2021). Analgesics were also categorized into broader categories (such as IV, oral, opioid, and non-opioid) and compared. Comparisons were analyzed using the t-test, Mann-Whitney u test, or chi-squared difference of proportions tests, as applicable.

RESULTS

There were significant decreases in the amount of IV (7.2% vs. 6.5; p = 0.039) and oral opioid (2.6% vs. 2.1%; p = 0.001) administered during COVID-19. There were also decreases in the percent of patients given opioids (T1: 6.7 vs. T2: 4.6, p < 0.001). During COVID, there was an increase in the amount of non-opioid analgesics given per patient (p = 0.013). Particularly, there was an increase in the amount of oral non-opioid administrations per patient (p = 0.005). There was a decrease in utilization of ibuprofen between the two time periods (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the pandemic, providers continued to decrease opioid prescribing and increase non-opioid prescribing.

Evaluating NSAIDs in SARS-CoV-2: Immunomodulatory mechanisms and future therapeutic strategies

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely recognized for their analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties. Amidst the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the role of NSAIDs in modulating viral and bacterial infections has become a critical area of research, sparking debates and necessitating a thorough review. This review examines the multifaceted interactions between NSAIDs, immune responses, and infections. Focusing on the immunomodulatory mechanisms of NSAIDs in SARS-CoV-2 and their implications for other viral and bacterial infections, we aim to provide clarity and direction for future therapeutic strategies. NSAIDs demonstrate a dual role in infectious diseases. They reduce inflammation by decreasing neutrophil recruitment and cytokine release, yet potentially compromise antiviral defense mechanisms. They also modulate cytokine storms in SARS-CoV-2 and exhibit the potential to enhance anti-tumor immunity by inhibiting tumor-induced COX-2/PGE2 signaling. Specific NSAIDs have shown efficacy in inhibiting viral replication. The review highlights NSAIDs' synergy with other medications, like COX inhibitors and immunotherapy agents, in augmenting therapeutic effects. Notably, the World Health Organization's analysis found no substantial link between NSAIDs and the worsening of viral respiratory infections. The findings underscore NSAIDs' complex role in infection management. Understanding these interactions is crucial for optimizing therapeutic approaches in current and future pandemics. However, their dual nature warrants cautious application, particularly in vulnerable populations. NSAIDs present a paradoxical impact on immune responses in viral and bacterial infections. While offering potential benefits, their usage in infectious diseases, especially SARS-CoV-2, demands a nuanced understanding to balance therapeutic advantages against possible adverse effects.

NSAID prescribing and adverse outcomes in common infections: a population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Infections in primary care are often treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). This study evaluates whether NSAID prescribing is associated with adverse outcomes for respiratory (RTIs) or urinary track (UTI) infections.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether there is an association between NSAID prescribing and the rate of adverse outcomes for infections for individual consulting in primary care.

DESIGN

Cohort study of electronic health records.

SETTING

87 general practices in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD.

PARTICIPANTS

142 925 patients consulting with RTI or UTI.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Repeat consultations, hospitalisation or death within 30 days of the initial consultation for RTI or UTI. Poisson models estimated the associations between NSAID exposure and outcome. Rate ratios were adjusted for gender, age, ethnicity, deprivation, antibiotic use, seasonal influenza vaccination status, comorbidities and general practice. Since prescribing variations by practice are not explained by case mix-hence, less impacted by confounding by indication-both individual-level and practice-level analyses are included.

RESULTS

There was an increase in hospital admission/death for acute NSAID prescriptions (RR 2.73, 95% CI 2.10 to 3.56) and repeated NSAID prescriptions (6.47, 4.46-9.39) in RTI patients, and for acute NSAID prescriptions for UTI (RR 3.03; 1.92 to 4.76). Practice-level analysis, controlling for practice population characteristics, found that for each percentage point increase in NSAID prescription, the percentages of hospital admission/death within 30 days increased by 0.32 percentage points (95% CI 0.16 to 0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

In this non-randomised study, prescription of NSAIDs at consultations for RTI or UTIs in primary care is infrequent but may be associated with increased risk of hospital admission. This supports other observational and limited trial data that NSAID prescribing might be associated with worse outcomes following acute infection and should be prescribed with caution.

COVID-19 as a polymorphic inflammatory spectrum of diseases: a review with focus on the brain

There appear to be huge variations and aberrations in the reported data in COVID-19 2 years now into the pandemic. Conflicting data exist at almost every level and also in the reported epidemiological statistics across different regions. It is becoming clear that COVID-19 is a polymorphic inflammatory spectrum of diseases, and there is a wide range of inflammation-related pathology and symptoms in those infected with the virus. The host's inflammatory response to COVID-19 appears to be determined by genetics, age, immune status, health status and stage of disease. The interplay of these factors may decide the magnitude, duration, types of pathology, symptoms and prognosis in the spectrum of COVID-19 disorders, and whether neuropsychiatric disorders continue to be significant. Early and successful management of inflammation reduces morbidity and mortality in all stages of COVID-19.

Ibuprofen, other NSAIDs and COVID-19: a narrative review

At the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (March 2020), there was speculation that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as ibuprofen, used to manage some of the symptoms of COVID-19, could increase the susceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and negatively impact clinical outcomes. In the absence of any robust mechanistic and clinical evidence, this speculation led to confusion about the safety of ibuprofen, contributing to the so-called 'infodemic' surrounding COVID-19. A wealth of evidence has been generated in subsequent years, and this narrative review aims to consider the body of in vitro and in vivo research, observational studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the use of NSAIDs, including ibuprofen, in COVID-19. Overall, the direction of evidence supports that NSAIDs do not increase susceptibility to infection, nor worsen disease outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Neither do they impact the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines. There is no basis to limit the use of NSAIDs, and doing so may deprive patients of effective self-care measures to control symptoms.

Characteristics associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes in people with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis: data from the COVID-19 PsoProtect and Global Rheumatology Alliance physician-reported registries

OBJECTIVES

To investigate factors associated with severe COVID-19 in people with psoriasis (PsO), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

METHODS

Demographic data, clinical characteristics and COVID-19 outcome severity of adults with PsO, PsA and axSpA were obtained from two international physician-reported registries. A three-point ordinal COVID-19 severity scale was defined: no hospitalisation, hospitalisation (and no death) and death. ORs were estimated using multivariable ordinal logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 5045 cases, 18.3% had PsO, 45.5% PsA and 36.3% axSpA. Most (83.6%) were not hospitalised, 14.6% were hospitalised and 1.8% died. Older age was non-linearly associated with COVID-19 severity. Male sex (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.83), cardiovascular, respiratory, renal, metabolic and cancer comorbidities (ORs 1.25-2.89), moderate/high disease activity and/or glucocorticoid use (ORs 1.39-2.23, vs remission/low disease activity and no glucocorticoids) were associated with increased odds of severe COVID-19. Later pandemic time periods (ORs 0.42-0.52, vs until 15 June 2020), PsO (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.65, vs PsA) and baseline exposure to TNFi, IL17i and IL-23i/IL-12+23i (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.73; OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.87; OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.98; respectively; vs no disease-modifying antirheumatic drug) were associated with reduced odds of severe COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Older age, male sex, comorbidity burden, higher disease activity and glucocorticoid intake were associated with more severe COVID-19. Later pandemic time periods, PsO and exposure to TNFi, IL17i and IL-23i/IL-12+23i were associated with less severe COVID-19. These findings will enable risk stratification and inform management decisions for patients with PsO, PsA and axSpA during COVID-19 waves or similar future respiratory pandemics.

Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with COPD from the United States, South Korea, and Europe

Background: Characterization studies of COVID-19 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are limited in size and scope. The aim of the study is to provide a large-scale characterization of COVID-19 patients with COPD. Methods: We included thirteen databases contributing data from January-June 2020 from North America (US), Europe and Asia. We defined two cohorts of patients with COVID-19 namely a 'diagnosed' and 'hospitalized' cohort. We followed patients from COVID-19 index date to 30 days or death. We performed descriptive analysis and reported the frequency of characteristics and outcomes among COPD patients with COVID-19. Results: The study included 934,778 patients in the diagnosed COVID-19 cohort and 177,201 in the hospitalized COVID-19 cohort. Observed COPD prevalence in the diagnosed cohort ranged from 3.8% (95%CI 3.5-4.1%) in French data to 22.7% (95%CI 22.4-23.0) in US data, and from 1.9% (95%CI 1.6-2.2) in South Korean to 44.0% (95%CI 43.1-45.0) in US data, in the hospitalized cohorts. COPD patients in the hospitalized cohort had greater comorbidity than those in the diagnosed cohort, including hypertension, heart disease, diabetes and obesity. Mortality was higher in COPD patients in the hospitalized cohort and ranged from 7.6% (95%CI 6.9-8.4) to 32.2% (95%CI 28.0-36.7) across databases. ARDS, acute renal failure, cardiac arrhythmia and sepsis were the most common outcomes among hospitalized COPD patients.   Conclusion: COPD patients with COVID-19 have high levels of COVID-19-associated comorbidities and poor COVID-19 outcomes. Further research is required to identify patients with COPD at high risk of worse outcomes.

Home as the new frontier for the treatment of COVID-19: the case for anti-inflammatory agents

COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, is characterised by a broad spectrum of symptom severity that requires varying amounts of care according to the different stages of the disease. Intervening at the onset of mild to moderate COVID-19 symptoms in the outpatient setting would provide the opportunity to prevent progression to a more severe illness and long-term complications. As early disease symptoms variably reflect an underlying excessive inflammatory response to the viral infection, the use of anti-inflammatory drugs, especially non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), in the initial outpatient stage of COVID-19 seems to be a valuable therapeutic strategy. A few observational studies have tested NSAIDs (especially relatively selective COX-2 inhibitors), often as part of multipharmacological protocols, for early outpatient treatment of COVID-19. The findings from these studies are promising and point to a crucial role of NSAIDs for the at-home management of people with initial COVID-19 symptoms.

Sex differences among users of NSAIDs and opioids during COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Sex-based inequalities in healthcare have been exposed and amplified during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, few studies have reported sex differences in medication utilization and no studies have examined sex differences in prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids utilization.

AIM

To compare the utilization patterns of prescribed NSAIDs and opioids between males and females in Manitoba, Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHOD

A cohort of incident and prevalent users of prescribed NSAIDs and opioids was created. Interrupted times series analysis using autoregressive models were used to evaluate the quarterly change in the prevalent and incident users before and after COVID-19 restrictions were applied (first quarter of 2020).

RESULTS

COVID-19 restrictions were associated with a significant decrease in the utilization of prescribed NSAIDs and opioids in all users, followed by a revert to the pre-pandemic trends. Among female prevalent and incident NSAIDs users, there was a significant change in trend after COVID-19 restrictions were introduced (β₃ = 0.087 and 0.078, P = 0.023 and 0.028, respectively). However, there was non-significant change in trend among male prevalent and incident NSAIDs and opioids users during the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

In this study, a significant sharp decline in the use of prescribed NSAIDs and opioids was shown in both sexes at the onset of the pandemic. However, a significant upward trend is observed in female NSAIDs users as restrictions began to be lifted.

Home as the new frontier for the treatment of COVID-19: the case for anti-inflammatory agents

COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, is characterised by a broad spectrum of symptom severity that requires varying amounts of care according to the different stages of the disease. Intervening at the onset of mild to moderate COVID-19 symptoms in the outpatient setting would provide the opportunity to prevent progression to a more severe illness and long-term complications. As early disease symptoms variably reflect an underlying excessive inflammatory response to the viral infection, the use of anti-inflammatory drugs, especially non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), in the initial outpatient stage of COVID-19 seems to be a valuable therapeutic strategy. A few observational studies have tested NSAIDs (especially relatively selective COX-2 inhibitors), often as part of multipharmacological protocols, for early outpatient treatment of COVID-19. The findings from these studies are promising and point to a crucial role of NSAIDs for the at-home management of people with initial COVID-19 symptoms.

Pain management recommendations during the progression of SARS-CoV-2 infection

COVID-19, an infection caused by SARS-CoV-2, had a devastating impact on people's lives. The pandemic placed a heavy burden on healthcare systems and impacted the care of patients, including those with pain. This narrative review aims to highlight the challenges in managing pain and fever resulting from COVID-19 and pre-existing conditions, and to discuss the role of over the counter analgesics as a key part of the COVID-19 treatment regimen. As most patients with COVID-19 are being managed in the outpatient setting, lifestyle interventions and over the counter analgesics are readily available options to effectively treat pain and fever, which can help to decrease the burden on the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Validity of Algorithm for Classification of In- and Outpatient Hospital Contacts in the Danish National Patient Registry

Purpose

Following the implementation of the 3rd version of the Danish National Patient Register (DNPR-3), information on whether hospitalizations were inpatient, outpatient, or emergency room (ER) contacts was no longer readily available. This study examined the positive predictive values (PPV) of a common algorithm to characterize hospitalizations as inpatient, outpatient, or emergency room (ER) contacts in both DNPR-2 and DNPR-3.

Patients and Methods

All hospital contacts in North Denmark Region were identified in the DNPR within a 1-year window of the implementation of DNPR-3 in early 2019. An algorithm based upon proportion of overnight (±50%) and elective (±50%) contacts for each hospital department was developed. Next, PPVs of these categorizations were computed using manual characterization of all departments and clinics by two experienced clinicians as reference. Second, the reliability of various time intervals to join department contacts and subsequent categorization of overnight hospital stays as proxies for inpatient contacts was explored.

Results

The algorithm yielded PPVs of 91% and 89% for hospital units and related contacts categorized as inpatient in DNPR-2 and 100% for both parameters in DNPR-3. In outpatient units, the PPVs were 99% in both DNPR-2 and DNPR-3, whereas the corresponding PPVs were 99.6% and 99% on the contact level. In contrast, the PPV for ERs was 33% in DNPR-2 and 56% in DNPR-3, primarily due to misclassification of outpatient clinics. Still, the proportion of correctly categorized ER contacts was 87% in DNPR-2 and 85% in DNPR-3. Using time intervals from 0 to 12 hours to join department contacts showed that overnight hospitalizations comprised inpatient contacts in 97% in DNPR-2 and 98% in DNPR-3. However, the sensitivity was moderate at 76-78% for all inpatient hospitalizations in DNPR-2 and DNPR-3.

Conclusion

This algorithm accurately categorized hospitalizations as inpatient, outpatient, or ER contacts in both DNPR-2 and DNPR-3.

Prevalence of NSAID use among people with COVID-19 and the association with COVID-19-related outcomes: Systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

Recent reports of potential harmful effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in treating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have raised great concern.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and MedRxiv databases to examine the prevalence of NSAID use and associated COVID-19 risk, outcomes and safety.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies with a total of 101 215 COVID-19 patients were included. Prevalence of NSAID use among COVID-19 patients was 19% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14-23%, no. of studies [n] = 22) and NSAID use prior to admission or diagnosis of COVID-19 was not associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.93, 95% CI 0.82-1.06, I2  = 34%, n = 3), hospitalization (aOR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.76-1.48, I2  = 81%, n = 5), mechanical ventilation (aOR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.47-1.06, I2  = 38%, n = 4) or length of hospital stay. Moreover, prior use of NSAIDs was associated with a decreased risk of severe COVID-19 (aOR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89, I2  = 0%, n = 7) and death (aOR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89, I2  = 85%, n = 10). Prior NSAID administration might also be associated with an increased risk of stroke (aOR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.04-5.2, I2  = 0%, n = 2), but not myocardial infarction (aOR = 1.49, 95% CI 0.25-8.92, I2  = 0, n = 2) and composite thrombotic events (aOR = 1.56, 95% CI 0.66-3.69, I2  = 52%, n = 2).

CONCLUSION

Based on current evidence, NSAID use prior to admission or diagnosis of COVID-19 was not linked with increased odds or exacerbation of COVID-19. NSAIDs might provide a survival benefit, although they might potentially increase the risk of stroke. Controlled trials are still required to further assess the clinical benefit and safety (e.g., stroke and acute renal failure) of NSAIDs in treating patients with COVID-19.

Efficacy and safety profile of corticosteroids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in COVID-19 management: A narrative review

Due to the fact that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still prevalent, and current reports show that some parts of the world have seen increase in incidence, it is relevant that health professionals and scientists know about recent or novel trends, especially drug treatments. Additionally, the safety profiles of these drug treatments need to be documented and shared with the public. Some studies have demonstrated the clinical benefits of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and corticosteroids in COVID-19 treatment. On the contrary, others have also reported that NSAIDs and corticosteroids may worsen symptoms associated with COVID-19. While some researchers have suggested that corticosteroids may be helpful if used in the early stages of COVID-19, there are still some conflicting findings regarding the use of corticosteroids in certain viral infections. Our review suggests that methylprednisolone, dexamethasone, and ibuprofen have therapeutic potential in reducing mortality due to COVID-19 among hospitalized patients. This review also highlights the fact that the use of NSAIDs is not associated with adverse outcomes of COVID-19. In reality, evidence suggests that NSAIDs do not increase the risk of COVID-19 infections. Also, the literature reviewed suggests that corticosteroid treatment in COVID-19 was linked with a decrease in all-cause mortality and disease progression, without increase in adverse events when compared to no corticosteroid treatment.

Reduced sensitivity of the SARS-CoV-2 Lambda variant to monoclonal antibodies and neutralizing antibodies induced by infection and vaccination

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants have continued to emerge in diverse geographic locations with a temporal distribution. The Lambda variant containing multiple mutations in the spike protein, has thus far appeared mainly in South America. The variant harbours two mutations in the receptor binding domain, L452Q and F490S, which may change its infectivity and antigenicity to neutralizing antibodies. In this study, we constructed 10 pseudoviruses to study the Lambda variant and each individual amino acid mutation's effect on viral function, and used eight cell lines to study variant infectivity. In total, 12 monoclonal antibodies, 14 convalescent sera, and 23 immunized sera induced by mRNA vaccines, inactivated vaccine, and adenovirus type 5 vector vaccine were used to study the antigenicity of the Lambda variant. We found that compared with the D614G reference strain, Lambda demonstrated enhanced infectivity of Calu-3 and LLC-MK2 cells by 3.3-fold and 1.6-fold, respectively. Notably, the sensitivity of the Lambda variant to 5 of 12 neutralizing monoclonal antibodies, 9G11, AM180, R126, X593, and AbG3, was substantially diminished. Furthermore, convalescent- and vaccine-immunized sera showed on average 1.3-2.5-fold lower neutralizing titres against the Lambda variant. Single mutation analysis revealed that this reduction in neutralization was caused by L452Q and F490S mutations. Collectively, the reduced neutralization ability of the Lambda variant suggests that the efficacy of monoclonal antibodies and vaccines may be compromised during the current pandemic.

Effect of the Duration of NSAID Use on COVID-19

Background and Objectives: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to control pain and fever. However, their effect on COVID-19 infected patients has not been fully studied. In this study, we investigated the effect of the duration of NSAIDs use on COVID-19 infection and clinical outcomes. Materials and Methods: In South Korea, 25,739 eligible patients who received COVID-19 testing between 1 January and 31 July 2020, were included in this retrospective observational cohort analysis. Based on the date of the first COVID-19 test for each patient, NSAID prescription dates were used to separate patients into two groups (short-term group: <2 weeks; long-term group: 8−12 weeks). COVID-19 infectivity and clinical outcomes were analyzed. We used the propensity score-matching (PSM) method. Results: Of the 580 patients who had taken NSAIDs before the date of COVID-19 test, 534 and 46 patients were grouped in the short- and long-term NSAID-use groups, respectively. We did not find a statistically significant increased risk of COVID-19 infection (adjustment for age and sex, p = 0.413; adjustment for age, sex, region of residence, comorbidity, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and current use of medication, p = 0.259) or change in clinical outcomes, including conventional oxygen therapy, admission of intensive care unit, artificial ventilation, or death, between the two groups in which the PSM method was applied. Conclusions: The duration of NSAIDs use did not have a statistically significant effect on COVID-19 infectivity or clinical outcomes. However, further studies looking at clinical presentation and laboratory test results in a large number of people should be performed.

COVID-19 Molecular Pathophysiology: Acetylation of Repurposing Drugs

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) induces immune-mediated type 1 interferon (IFN-1) production, the pathophysiology of which involves sterile alpha motif and histidine-aspartate domain-containing protein 1 (SAMHD1) tetramerization and the cytosolic DNA sensor cyclic-GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS)-stimulator of interferon genes (STING) signaling pathway. As a result, type I interferonopathies are exacerbated. Aspirin inhibits cGAS-mediated signaling through cGAS acetylation. Acetylation contributes to cGAS activity control and activates IFN-1 production and nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) signaling via STING. Aspirin and dapsone inhibit the activation of both IFN-1 and NF-κB by targeting cGAS. We define these as anticatalytic mechanisms. It is necessary to alleviate the pathologic course and take the lag time of the odds of achieving viral clearance by day 7 to coordinate innate or adaptive immune cell reactions.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19

The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has raised great concerns. The effect of NSAIDs on the clinical status of COVID-19 remains in question. Therefore, we performed a post-hoc analysis from the ORCHID trial. Patients with COVID-19 from the ORCHID trial were categorized into two groups according to NSAID use. The 28-day mortality, hospitalized discharge, and safety outcomes with NSAIDs for patients with COVID-19 were analyzed. A total of 476 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were included; 412 patients (86.5%) did not receive NSAIDs, while 64 patients (13.5%) took NSAIDs as regular home medication. Patients who took NSAIDs did not have a significant increase in the risk of 28-day mortality (fully adjusted: hazard ratio [HR]: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.52–2.42) in the Cox multivariate analysis. Moreover, NSAIDs did not decrease hospital discharge through 28 days (fully adjusted: HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.75–1.37). The results of a meta-analysis including 14 studies involving 48,788 patients with COVID-19 showed that the use of NSAIDs had a survival benefit (summary risk ratio [RR]: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54–0.91) and decreased the risk of severe COVID-19 (summary: RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.71–0.88). In conclusion, the use of NSAIDs is not associated with worse clinical outcomes, including 28-day mortality or hospital discharge in American adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Based on current evidence, the use of NSAIDs is safe and should not be cautioned against during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ongoing trials should further assess in-hospital treatment with NSAIDs for patients with COVID-19.

The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in COVID-19

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, anecdotal reports emerged suggesting non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may increase susceptibility to infection and adversely impact clinical outcomes. This narrative literature review (March 2020–July 2021) attempted to clarify the relationship between NSAID use and COVID-19 outcomes related to disease susceptibility or severity. Twenty-four relevant publications (covering 25 studies) reporting original research data were identified; all were observational cohort studies, and eight were described as retrospective. Overall, these studies are consistent in showing that NSAIDs neither increase the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection nor worsen outcomes in patients with COVID-19. This is reflected in current recommendations from major public health authorities across the world, which support NSAID use for analgesic or antipyretic treatment during COVID-19. Thus, there is no basis on which to restrict or prohibit use of these drugs by consumers or patients to manage their health conditions and symptoms during the pandemic.

COVID-19 Outcomes and Vaccination in Patients with Spondyloarthritis

The rapid transmission of the highly infectious severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), led to widespread infection throughout the world. Concerns and challenges regarding COVID-19 illness have emerged for patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, such as spondyloarthritis (SpA), who receive treatment with biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), because this population is vulnerable to infections and has a high prevalence of risk factors associated with severe COVID-19 illness. Available data on COVID-19 indicate that patients with SpA who are treated with DMARDs have SARS-CoV-2 infection rates comparable with those in the general population, with similar increased risk associated with older age and comorbidities. Novel vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are approved or authorized for emergency use by the US Food and Drug Administration, and others are in development to prevent infection and serious illness. This review provides an overview of SpA, the mechanism of action for the SARS-CoV-2 infection, the clinical course of COVID-19, and the vaccines approved for, or in development against, SARS-CoV-2. Detailed information on the use of established vaccines in patients with SpA receiving DMARDs is provided, along with recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination. Available evidence has shown COVID-19 vaccination in patients with SpA, among other rheumatic diseases, to be safe and effective with most DMARD use; however, there is evidence of potential interference with some therapies used in SpA. Healthcare providers should educate patients to provide the knowledge and confidence to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, since the potential benefit outweighs the low risk of vaccine-related adverse events.

COVID-19 and kidney disease: insights from epidemiology to inform clinical practice

Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous studies have aimed to address the challenges faced by patients with kidney disease and their caregivers. These studies addressed areas of concern such as the high infection and mortality risk of patients on in-centre haemodialysis and transplant recipients. However, the ability to draw meaningful conclusions from these studies has in some instances been challenging, owing to barriers in aspects of usual care, data limitations and problematic methodological practices. In many settings, access to SARS-CoV-2 testing differed substantially between patient groups, whereas the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection varied over time and place because of differences in viral prevalence, targeted public health policies and vaccination rates. The absence of baseline kidney function data posed problems in the classification of chronic kidney disease and acute kidney injury in some studies, potentially compromising the generalizability of findings. Study findings also require attentive appraisal in terms of the effects of confounding, collider bias and chance. As this pandemic continues and in the future, the implementation of sustainable and integrated research infrastructure is needed in settings across the world to minimize infection transmission and both prevent and plan for the short-term and long-term complications of infectious diseases. Registries can support the real-world evaluation of vaccines and therapies in patients with advanced kidney disease while enabling monitoring of rare complications.

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.

COVID-19 Medical and Pharmacological Management in the European Countries Compared to Italy: An Overview

(1) Background: Italy accounts for more than 150,000 deaths due to the COVID-19 pandemic, leading the top rank in SARS-CoV-2-caused deceases in Europe. A survey on the different ways by which the COVID-19 pandemic emergency was managed in the foreign European countries compared to Italy is the purpose of this paper. (2) Methods: A literature search and various mathematical algorithms to approach a rank scoring scale were used to describe in detail the different approaches used by European countries to manage the COVID-19 pandemic emergency. (3) Results: The study showed that Italy stands at the bottom ranking for COVID-19 management due to its high mortality rate. Possible causes of the observed huge numbers of hospitalization and deaths were (a) the demographic composition of the European country; (b) its decentralized healthcare system organization; (c) the role of correct pharmacology in the early stages before hospitalization. Post-mortem examinations were of paramount importance to elucidate the etiopathogenesis of COVID-19 and to tailor a suitable and proper therapy in the early symptomatic stages of COVID-19, preventing hospitalization. (4) Conclusions: Factors such as the significant impact on elderly people, the public health organization prevalently state-owned and represented mainly by hospitals, and criticism of the home therapy approach toward SARS-CoV-2-infected people, may have concurred in increasing the number of COVID-19 deaths in Italy.

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.

Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with COPD from the United States, South Korea, and Europe

Background: Characterization studies of COVID-19 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are limited in size and scope. The aim of the study is to provide a large-scale characterization of COVID-19 patients with COPD. Methods: We included thirteen databases contributing data from January-June 2020 from North America (US), Europe and Asia. We defined two cohorts of patients with COVID-19 namely a 'diagnosed' and 'hospitalized' cohort. We followed patients from COVID-19 index date to 30 days or death. We performed descriptive analysis and reported the frequency of characteristics and outcomes among COPD patients with COVID-19. Results: The study included 934,778 patients in the diagnosed COVID-19 cohort and 177,201 in the hospitalized COVID-19 cohort. Observed COPD prevalence in the diagnosed cohort ranged from 3.8% (95%CI 3.5-4.1%) in French data to 22.7% (95%CI 22.4-23.0) in US data, and from 1.9% (95%CI 1.6-2.2) in South Korean to 44.0% (95%CI 43.1-45.0) in US data, in the hospitalized cohorts. COPD patients in the hospitalized cohort had greater comorbidity than those in the diagnosed cohort, including hypertension, heart disease, diabetes and obesity. Mortality was higher in COPD patients in the hospitalized cohort and ranged from 7.6% (95%CI 6.9-8.4) to 32.2% (95%CI 28.0-36.7) across databases. ARDS, acute renal failure, cardiac arrhythmia and sepsis were the most common outcomes among hospitalized COPD patients.   Conclusion: COPD patients with COVID-19 have high levels of COVID-19-associated comorbidities and poor COVID-19 outcomes. Further research is required to identify patients with COPD at high risk of worse outcomes.

Immunomodulatory effects of pharmaceutical opioids and antipyretic analgesics: Mechanisms and relevance to infection

Understanding how pharmaceutical opioids and antipyretic analgesics interact with the immune system potentially has major clinical implications for management of patients with infectious diseases and surgical and critical care patients. An electronic search was carried out on MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CENTRAL and the Cochrane library to identify reports describing the immunomodulatory effects of opioid analgesics and antipyretic analgesics, and their effects in infectious diseases. In adaptive immunity, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have divergent effects: augmenting cell-mediated immunity but inhibiting humoral immunity. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have demonstrated a beneficial role in Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection and histoplasmosis in animals, and may be plausible adjuvants to antimicrobial agents in these diseases. There is a need to evaluate these findings rigorously in human clinical trials. There is preliminary evidence demonstrating antiviral effects of indomethacin in SARS CoV-2 in vitro; however, uncertainty regarding its clinical benefit in humans needs to be resolved in large clinical trials. Certain opioid analgesics are associated with immunosuppressive effects, with a developing understanding that fentanyl, morphine, methadone and buprenorphine suppress innate immunity, whilst having diverse effects on adaptive immunity. Morphine suppresses key cells of the innate immunity and is associated with greater risk of infection in the postsurgical setting. Efforts are needed to achieve adequate analgesia whilst avoiding suppression of the innate immunity in the immediate postoperative period caused by certain opioids, particularly in cancer surgery.

Drugs Modulating Renin-Angiotensin System in COVID-19 Treatment

A massive worldwide vaccination campaign constitutes the main tool against the COVID-19 pandemic. However, drug treatments are also necessary. Antivirals are the most frequently considered treatments. However, strategies targeting mechanisms involved in disease aggravation may also be effective. A major role of the tissue renin-angiotensin system (RAS) in the pathophysiology and severity of COVID-19 has been suggested. The main link between RAS and COVID-19 is angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), a central RAS component and the primary binding site for SARS-CoV-2 that facilitates the virus entry into host cells. An initial suggestion that the susceptibility to infection and disease severity may be enhanced by angiotensin type-1 receptor blockers (ARBs) and ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) because they increase ACE2 levels, led to the consideration of discontinuing treatments in thousands of patients. More recent experimental and clinical data indicate that ACEIs and, particularly, ARBs can be beneficial for COVID-19 outcome, both by reducing inflammatory responses and by triggering mechanisms (such as ADAM17 inhibition) counteracting viral entry. Strategies directly activating RAS anti-inflammatory components such as soluble ACE2, Angiotensin 1-7 analogues, and Mas or AT2 receptor agonists may also be beneficial. However, while ACEIs and ARBs are cheap and widely used, the second type of strategies are currently under study.

Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with COPD from the United States, South Korea, and Europe

Background: Characterization studies of COVID-19 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are limited in size and scope. The aim of the study is to provide a large-scale characterization of COVID-19 patients with COPD. Methods: We included thirteen databases contributing data from January-June 2020 from North America (US), Europe and Asia. We defined two cohorts of patients with COVID-19 namely a 'diagnosed' and 'hospitalized' cohort. We followed patients from COVID-19 index date to 30 days or death. We performed descriptive analysis and reported the frequency of characteristics and outcomes among COPD patients with COVID-19. Results: The study included 934,778 patients in the diagnosed COVID-19 cohort and 177,201 in the hospitalized COVID-19 cohort. Observed COPD prevalence in the diagnosed cohort ranged from 3.8% (95%CI 3.5-4.1%) in French data to 22.7% (95%CI 22.4-23.0) in US data, and from 1.9% (95%CI 1.6-2.2) in South Korean to 44.0% (95%CI 43.1-45.0) in US data, in the hospitalized cohorts. COPD patients in the hospitalized cohort had greater comorbidity than those in the diagnosed cohort, including hypertension, heart disease, diabetes and obesity. Mortality was higher in COPD patients in the hospitalized cohort and ranged from 7.6% (95%CI 6.9-8.4) to 32.2% (95%CI 28.0-36.7) across databases. ARDS, acute renal failure, cardiac arrhythmia and sepsis were the most common outcomes among hospitalized COPD patients.   Conclusion: COPD patients with COVID-19 have high levels of COVID-19-associated comorbidities and poor COVID-19 outcomes. Further research is required to identify patients with COPD at high risk of worse outcomes.

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.

Research Progress in the Treatment of Complications and Sequelae of COVID-19

With the improvement in the understanding of COVID-19 and the widespread vaccination of COVID-19 vaccines in various countries, the epidemic will be brought under control soon. However, multiple viruses could result in the post-viral syndrome, which is also common among patients with COVID-19. Therefore, the long-term consequences and the corresponding treatment of COVID-19 should be the focus in the post-epidemic era. In this review, we summarize the therapeutic strategies for the complications and sequelae of eight major systems caused by COVID-19, including respiratory system, cardiovascular system, neurological system, digestive system, urinary system, endocrine system, reproductive system and skeletal complication. In addition, we also sorted out the side effects reported in the vaccine trials. The purpose of this article is to remind people of possible complications and sequelae of COVID-19 and provide robust guidance on the treatment. It is extremely important to conduct long-term observational prognosis research on a larger scale, so as to have a comprehensive understanding of the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 on the human body and reduce complications to the greatest extent.

Santos C, Baião RA, Costa J, Ferreira JJ, Caldeira D. Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and COVID-19 Severity Associated With Exposure to Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were thought to increase the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus entrance into cells. Hence, it was suggested in the media that NSAIDs could lead to a higher risk of infection and/or disease severity. To determine the existence or absence of this association, we aimed to systematically evaluate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality and the risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated with previous exposure to NSAIDs. MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and EMBASE were searched in February 2021 for controlled studies. The results were calculated through random-effect meta-analyses and reported in terms of odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 test. Eleven studies were included, comprising a total of 683 715 patients. NSAID exposure did not increase the risk of having a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.85-1.11, I2 = 24%; 5 studies). The exposure to NSAIDs did not increase the risk of severe/critical COVID-19 disease (OR, 0.92; 95%CI, 0.80-1.05; I2 = 0%; 5 studies) nor all-cause mortality among patients with COVID-19 (OR, 0.86; 95%CI, 0.75-0.99; I2 = 14%, 4 studies). Our data did not suggest that exposure to NSAIDs increases the risk of having SARS-CoV-2 infection or increases the severity of COVID-19 disease. Also, the fragility of the studies included precludes definite conclusions and highlights the need for further robust data.

Immunopathological events surrounding IL-6 and IFN-α: A bridge for anti-lupus erythematosus drugs used to treat COVID-19

With the outbreak and rapid spread of COVID-19, the world health situation is unprecedentedly severe. Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a common autoimmune disease, which can cause multiple organ damage. Numerous studies have shown that immune factors have important roles in the pathogenesis of both COVID-19 and SLE. In the early stages of COVID-19 and SLE pathogenesis, IFN-α expression is frequently increased, which aggravates the virus infection and promotes SLE development. In addition, increased IL-6 levels, caused by different mechanisms, are observed in the peripheral blood of patients with severe COVID-19 and SLE, stimulating a series of immune cascades that lead to a cytokine storm, as well as causing B cell hyperfunction and production of numerous of antibodies, aggravating both COVID-19 and SLE. In this review, we explore the background immunopathological mechanisms in COVID-19 and SLE and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of commonly used SLE drugs for patients with COVID-19, to optimize treatment plans for patients with SLE who develop COVID-19.

Dysregulated Inflammation During Obesity: Driving Disease Severity in Influenza Virus and SARS-CoV-2 Infections

Acute inflammation is a critical host defense response during viral infection. When dysregulated, inflammation drives immunopathology and tissue damage. Excessive, damaging inflammation is a hallmark of both pandemic influenza A virus (IAV) infections and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. Chronic, low-grade inflammation is also a feature of obesity. In recent years, obesity has been recognized as a growing pandemic with significant mortality and associated costs. Obesity is also an independent risk factor for increased disease severity and death during both IAV and SARS-CoV-2 infection. This review focuses on the effect of obesity on the inflammatory response in the context of viral respiratory infections and how this leads to increased viral pathology. Here, we will review the fundamentals of inflammation, how it is initiated in IAV and SARS-CoV-2 infection and its link to disease severity. We will examine how obesity drives chronic inflammation and trained immunity and how these impact the immune response to IAV and SARS-CoV-2. Finally, we review both medical and non-medical interventions for obesity, how they impact on the inflammatory response and how they could be used to prevent disease severity in obese patients. As projections of global obesity numbers show no sign of slowing down, future pandemic preparedness will require us to consider the metabolic health of the population. Furthermore, if weight-loss alone is insufficient to reduce the risk of increased respiratory virus-related mortality, closer attention must be paid to a patient’s history of health, and new therapeutic options identified.

Pericarditis in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review

AIMS

We performed a systematic review to summarize the clinical features, diagnostic methods, treatment, and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with pericarditis.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases from inception to 17 December 2020. Studies that reported clinical data on patients with COVID-19 and pericarditis were included. Descriptive statistics were used for categorical and continuous variables [mean ± standard deviation or median (interquartile range)]. As an exploratory analysis, differences between patients with acute pericarditis and myopericarditis were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies (32 case reports and 1 case series) involving 34 patients were included. The mean age was 51.6 ± 19.5 years and 62% of patients were men. Sixty-two percentage of patients were diagnosed with myopericarditis. The most frequent electrocardiographic pattern (56%) was diffuse ST-elevation and PR depression. Pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade were reported in 76 and 35% of cases, respectively. The median values of C-reactive protein [77 mg/dl (12-177)] and white blood cells [12 335 cells/μl (5625-16 500)] were above the normal range. Thirty-eight percent and 53% of patients were treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and colchicine, respectively. These drugs were more frequently used in patients with acute pericarditis compared with myopericarditis. The in-hospital mortality was 6% without a significant difference between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Our review shows that COVID-19 patients with pericarditis had similar clinical features to other viral cardiotropic infections. However, NSAIDs and colchicine were used in half or less of the cases. Overall, the short-term prognosis was good across groups.

A virus-free cellular model recapitulates several features of severe COVID-19

As for all newly-emergent pathogens, SARS-CoV-2 presents with a relative paucity of clinical information and experimental models, a situation hampering both the development of new effective treatments and the prediction of future outbreaks. Here, we find that a simple virus-free model, based on publicly available transcriptional data from human cell lines, is surprisingly able to recapitulate several features of the clinically relevant infections. By segregating cell lines (n = 1305) from the CCLE project on the base of their sole angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) mRNA content, we found that overexpressing cells present with molecular features resembling those of at-risk patients, including senescence, impairment of antibody production, epigenetic regulation, DNA repair and apoptosis, neutralization of the interferon response, proneness to an overemphasized innate immune activity, hyperinflammation by IL-1, diabetes, hypercoagulation and hypogonadism. Likewise, several pathways were found to display a differential expression between sexes, with males being in the least advantageous position, thus suggesting that the model could reproduce even the sex-related disparities observed in the clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19. Overall, besides validating a new disease model, our data suggest that, in patients with severe COVID-19, a baseline ground could be already present and, as a consequence, the viral infection might simply exacerbate a variety of latent (or inherent) pre-existing conditions, representing therefore a tipping point at which they become clinically significant.

A randomized, open-label, multicentre, comparative study of therapeutic efficacy, safety, and tolerability of BNO 1030 extract, containing marshmallow root, chamomile flowers, horsetail herb, walnut leaves, yarrow herb, oak bark, dandelion herb, in the treatment of mild forms of COVID-19

Background

COVID19 is a high burden for medicine and society as still no specific therapy exists. Most patients depend on symptomatic treatment, comparable to the symptomatic treatment in common respiratory infection e.g., Acetaminophen or Ibuprofen. Many cases of COVID19 show mild forms without need of hospitalization. In this randomized, open-label, multicentre, comparative trial we analysed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the herbal medicinal product BNO 1030 in mild cases of COVID-19 to offer an additional symptomatic relive.

Methods

The study was designed as an open label randomized, prospective, multicentred clinical trial. Out of 133 screened outpatients aged 18 to 70 with mild COVID-19 symptoms 120 patients were randomised (1:1) in 2 parallel groups. The main group received BNO 1030 in addition to symptomatic therapy (acetaminophen or ibuprofen). The control group got a symptomatic therapy only. The patients with laboratory proven COVID 19 were included for the final analyses: 47 – in the main group and 46 – in the control one. The evaluation criteria were dynamics of the symptoms: hyperthermia, myalgia, nasal congestion, nasal discharge, coughing, anosmia, rhinolalia, sore throat, duration of the use of antipyretics (clinically significant fever). These symptoms were assessed during the physician’s visit on a 4-point scale (0 — absent, 1 — insignificant, 2 — moderate, 3 — strong/pronounced) and self- assessed via ten-point visual analogue scale (VAS) daily in a patient’s diary. The primary endpoint was the decrease of the average score compared to the baseline defined as “therapeutic benefit” from the usage of BNO 1030.

Results

In the comparison of both groups over the treatment time, the main group (n = 47) showed a greater decrease in the severity of symptoms of fever, myalgia, nasal congestion, coughing, anosmia and rhinolalia, assessed by the doctor on a 4-point scale on V2 (4th day) and V3 (14th day) compared to those on V1, as well as a reduction of the antipyretics intake duration (p < 0.05). Significant differences of the main group were obtained, too, based on the results of symptoms self-assessment by the patient. The “therapeutic benefit from the use of BNO 1030 was 3 days. There is an increase in the number of recovered patients from 73.9–96.6 % according to the average symptom score, and a decrease in the number of hospitalized patients from 8.6–4.4 % in the main group., as compared to the data of the control group (p < 0.05). All patients tolerated the herbal medicine well, with no adverse drug reactions being reported.

Conclusions

BNO 1030 (Imupret®) offers a safe and effective treatment benefit in patients with mild forms of diagnosed COVID-19 aged 18–70 in addition to symptomatic treatment with acetaminophen or NSAIDs. COVID 19 positive patients treated with Imupret showed an earlier relive of symptoms when being treated with BNO 1030.

Trial registration

This trial was registered in ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT04797936.

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.

Protecting older patients with cardiovascular diseases from COVID-19 complications using current medications

PURPOSE

In the pathogenesis of severe COVID-19 complications, derangements of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), vascular endothelial dysfunction leading to inflammation and coagulopathy, and arrhythmias play an important role. Therefore, it is worth considering the use of currently available drugs to protect COVID-19 patients with cardiovascular diseases.

METHODS

We review the current experience of conventional cardiovascular drugs [angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, anticoagulants, acetosalicylic acid, antiarrhythmic drugs, statins] as well as some other drug classes (antidiabetic drugs, vitamin D and NSAIDs) frequently used by older patients with cardiovascular diseases. Data were sought from clinical databases for COVID-19 and appropriate key words. Conclusions and recommendations are based on a consensus among all authors.

RESULTS

Several cardiovascular drugs have a potential to protect patients with COVID-19, although evidence is largely based on retrospective, observational studies. Despite propensity score adjustments used in many analyses observational studies are not equivalent to randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Ongoing RCTs include treatment with antithrombotics, pulmonary vasodilators, RAAS-related drugs, and colchicine. RCTs in the acute phase of COVID-19 may not, however, recognise the benefits of long term anti-atherogenic therapies, such as statins.

CONCLUSIONS

Most current cardiovascular drugs can be safely continued during COVID-19. Some drug classes may even be protective. Age-specific data are scarce, though, and conditions which are common in older patients (frailty, comorbidities, polypharmacy) must be individually considered for each drug group.

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.

Ibuprofen and COVID-19 disease: separating the myths from facts

Introduction: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) poses novel challenges in the healthcare systems around the world. Concern about the role of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) and, in particular, ibuprofen has led to significant speculation.Areas covered: A literature search was conducted to evaluate ibuprofen's potential benefits and harms in the COVID-19 disease. Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE-2) is crucial entry receptor for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in host cells. We found no scientific evidence linking ibuprofen use and an ACE-2 overexpression. Ibuprofen suppresses the production of various pro-inflammatory cytokines that are implicated in the 'cytokine storm' and subsequent ARDS in COVID-19 disease. Nevertheless, the exact role of ibuprofen in the immune response in COVID-19 disease is still unknown. There are no double-blind, placebo-controlled studies assessing the effect of ibuprofen on COVID-19 disease progression.Expert opinion: The studies that have been performed so far demonstrate no association between ibuprofen use and increased mortality rates or an increased risk for respiratory support. Accordingly, we recommend ibuprofen to be used for managing COVID-19 symptoms.

Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of death from COVID-19: an OpenSAFELY cohort analysis based on two cohorts

OBJECTIVES

To assess the association between routinely prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and deaths from COVID-19 using OpenSAFELY, a secure analytical platform.

METHODS

We conducted two cohort studies from 1 March to 14 June 2020. Working on behalf of National Health Service England, we used routine clinical data in England linked to death data. In study 1, we identified people with an NSAID prescription in the last 3 years from the general population. In study 2, we identified people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis. We defined exposure as current NSAID prescription within the 4 months before 1 March 2020. We used Cox regression to estimate HRs for COVID-19 related death in people currently prescribed NSAIDs, compared with those not currently prescribed NSAIDs, accounting for age, sex, comorbidities, other medications and geographical region.

RESULTS

In study 1, we included 536 423 current NSAID users and 1 927 284 non-users in the general population. We observed no evidence of difference in risk of COVID-19 related death associated with current use (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14) in the multivariable-adjusted model. In study 2, we included 1 708 781 people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis, of whom 175 495 (10%) were current NSAID users. In the multivariable-adjusted model, we observed a lower risk of COVID-19 related death (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.94) associated with current use of NSAID versus non-use.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of a harmful effect of routinely prescribed NSAIDs on COVID-19 related deaths. Risks of COVID-19 do not need to influence decisions about the routine therapeutic use of NSAIDs.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and outcomes of COVID-19 in the ISARIC Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK cohort: a matched, prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Early in the pandemic it was suggested that pre-existing use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) could lead to increased disease severity in patients with COVID-19. NSAIDs are an important analgesic, particularly in those with rheumatological disease, and are widely available to the general public without prescription. Evidence from community studies, administrative data, and small studies of hospitalised patients suggest NSAIDs are not associated with poorer COVID-19 outcomes. We aimed to characterise the safety of NSAIDs and identify whether pre-existing NSAID use was associated with increased severity of COVID-19 disease.

METHODS

This prospective, multicentre cohort study included patients of any age admitted to hospital with a confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to COVID-19 between Jan 17 and Aug 10, 2020. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes were disease severity at presentation, admission to critical care, receipt of invasive ventilation, receipt of non-invasive ventilation, use of supplementary oxygen, and acute kidney injury. NSAID use was required to be within the 2 weeks before hospital admission. We used logistic regression to estimate the effects of NSAIDs and adjust for confounding variables. We used propensity score matching to further estimate effects of NSAIDS while accounting for covariate differences in populations.

RESULTS

Between Jan 17 and Aug 10, 2020, we enrolled 78 674 patients across 255 health-care facilities in England, Scotland, and Wales. 72 179 patients had death outcomes available for matching; 40 406 (56·2%) of 71 915 were men, 31 509 (43·8%) were women. In this cohort, 4211 (5·8%) patients were recorded as taking systemic NSAIDs before admission to hospital. Following propensity score matching, balanced groups of NSAIDs users and NSAIDs non-users were obtained (4205 patients in each group). At hospital admission, we observed no significant differences in severity between exposure groups. After adjusting for explanatory variables, NSAID use was not associated with worse in-hospital mortality (matched OR 0·95, 95% CI 0·84-1·07; p=0·35), critical care admission (1·01, 0·87-1·17; p=0·89), requirement for invasive ventilation (0·96, 0·80-1·17; p=0·69), requirement for non-invasive ventilation (1·12, 0·96-1·32; p=0·14), requirement for oxygen (1·00, 0·89-1·12; p=0·97), or occurrence of acute kidney injury (1·08, 0·92-1·26; p=0·33).

INTERPRETATION

NSAID use is not associated with higher mortality or increased severity of COVID-19. Policy makers should consider reviewing issued advice around NSAID prescribing and COVID-19 severity.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research and Medical Research Council.

Evolution or Revolution? Recommendations to Improve the Swiss Health Data Framework

Background: Facilitating access to health data for public health and research purposes is an important element in the health policy agenda of many countries. Improvements in this sense can only be achieved with the development of an appropriate data infrastructure and the implementations of policies that also respect societal preferences. Switzerland is a revealing example of a country that has been struggling to achieve this aim. The objective of the study is to reflect on stakeholders' recommendations on how to improve the health data framework of this country.

Methods: We analysed the recommendations collected as part of a qualitative study including 48 expert stakeholders from Switzerland that have been working principally with health databases. Recommendations were divided in themes and subthemes according to applied thematic analysis.

Results: Stakeholders recommended several potential improvements of the health data framework in Switzerland. At the general level of mind-set and attitude, they suggested to foster the development of an explicit health data strategy, better communication and the respect of societal preferences. In terms of infrastructure, there were calls for the creation of a national data center, the improvement of IT solutions and the use of a Unique Identifier for patient data. Lastly, they recommended harmonising procedures for data access and to clarify data protection and consent rules.

Conclusion: Recommendations show several potential improvements of the health data framework, but they have to be reconciled with existing policies, infrastructures and ethico-legal limitations. Achieving a gradual implementation of the recommended solutions is the preferable way forward for Switzerland and a lesson for other countries that are also seeking to improve health data access for public health and research purposes.

Positive Predictive Value of ICD-10 Diagnosis Codes for COVID-19

Purpose

To examine the positive predictive value (PPV) of International Classification version 10 (ICD-10) diagnosis codes for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Patients and Methods

Medical record review of all patients assigned a diagnosis code of COVID-19 (DB342A or DB972A) at six Danish departments of infectious diseases from February 27 through May 4, 2020. Confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis was defined as either: 1) definite, a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on a respiratory sample combined with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19: 2) probable, clinical presentation of COVID-19 without detection of SARS-CoV-2 and no alternative diagnoses considered more likely; or 3) possible, clinical presentation of COVID-19 without detection of SARS-CoV-2, and the patient was discharged or deceased before further investigations were carried out. We computed the PPV with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as the number of patients with confirmed (i.e., definite, probable, and possible) COVID-19 divided by the number of patients assigned a diagnosis code for COVID-19.

Results

The study included 710 patients with a median age of 61 years (interquartile range [IQR] 47–74) and 285/710 (40%) were female. COVID-19 was confirmed in 706/710 (99%) with 705/710 (99%) categorized as definite, 1/710 (0.1%) as probable, and 0 patients as possible COVID-19. The diagnosis was disproven in 4/710 (0.6%) patients who were hospitalized due to bacterial pneumonia (n = 2), influenza (n = 1), and urinary tract infection (n = 1). The overall PPV for COVID-19 was 99% (95% CI 99–100) and remained consistently high among all subgroups including sex, age groups, calendar period, and stratified by diagnosis code and department of infectious diseases (range 97–100%).

Conclusion

The overall PPV of diagnosis codes for COVID-19 in Denmark was high and may be suitable for future registry-based prognosis studies of COVID-19.