Real-life use of tocilizumab with or without corticosteroid in hospitalized patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia: A retrospective cohort study

Efficacy of Tocilizumab in Management of COVID-19 Patients Admitted to Intensive Care Units: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Background and Objectives: Mortality and illness due to COVID-19 have been linked to a condition known as cytokine release syndrome (CRS) that is characterized by excessive production of inflammatory cytokines, particularly interleukin-6 (IL-6). Tocilizumab (TCZ), a recent IL-6 antagonist, has been redeployed as adjunctive treatment for CRS remission in COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of Tocilizumab on patients' survival and the length of stay in hospitalized COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Methods: Between January 2021 and June 2021, a multicenter retrospective cohort study was carried out in six tertiary care hospitals in Egypt's governorate of Giza. Based on the use of TCZ during ICU stay, eligible patients were divided into two groups (control vs. TCZ). In-hospital mortality was the main outcome. Results: A total of 740 patient data records were included in the analysis, where 630 patients followed the routine COVID-19 protocol, while 110 patients received TCZ, need to different respiratory support after hospitalization, and inflammatory mediators such as C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, and Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) showed a statistically significant difference between the TCZ group and the control group. Regarding the primary outcome (discharged alive or death) and neither the secondary outcome (length of hospital stay), there is no statistically significant difference between patients treated with TCZ and the control group. Conclusions: Our cohort of patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 did not assert a reduction in the risk of mortality or the length of stay (LOS) after TCZ administration.

Considerations into pharmacogenomics of COVID-19 pharmacotherapy: Hope, hype and reality

COVID-19 medicines, such as molnupiravir are beginning to emerge for public health and clinical practice. On the other hand, drugs display marked variability in their efficacy and safety. Hence, COVID-19 medicines, as with all drugs, will be subject to the age-old maxim “one size prescription does not fit all”. In this context, pharmacogenomics is the study of genome-by-drug interactions and offers insights on mechanisms of patient-to-patient and between-population variations in drug efficacy and safety. Pharmacogenomics information is crucial to tailoring the patients' prescriptions to achieve COVID-19 preventive and therapeutic interventions that take into account the host biology, patients’ genome, and variable environmental exposures that collectively influence drug efficacy and safety. This expert review critically evaluates and summarizes the pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine aspects of the emerging COVID-19 drugs, and other selected drug interventions deployed to date. Here, we aim to sort out the hope, hype, and reality and suggest that there are veritable prospects to advance COVID-19 medicines for public health benefits, provided that pharmacogenomics is considered and implemented adequately. Pharmacogenomics is an integral part of rational and evidence-based medical practice. Scientists, health care professionals, pharmacists, pharmacovigilance practitioners, and importantly, patients stand to benefit by expanding the current pandemic response toolbox by the science of pharmacogenomics, and its applications in COVID-19 medicines and clinical trials.

Treatment of severe COVID-19: an evolving paradigm

INTRODUCTION

The pathogenesis of severe COVID-19 is due, in part, to dysregulation of the human immune system in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Immune cells infected with SARS-CoV-2 can trigger a hyperinflammatory response of both the adaptive and innate immune system that has been associated with severe disease, hospitalization, and death, and better treatment options are urgently needed.

AREAS COVERED

A mainstay of therapy for COVID-19 involves an antiviral agent, remdesivir, in combination with a systemic corticosteroid, dexamethasone.

EXPERT OPINION

The addition of a second immunomodulator, such as an interleukin-6 inhibitor or a Janus kinase inhibitor, has been associated with clinical benefit in a subset of patients with moderate-to-severe disease, but their use remains controversial. This manuscript reviews what is known about the approach to treatment of severe COVID-19 and examines how immunomodulators such as infliximab and abatacept may alter clinical management and COVID-19 research in the years ahead based on the results of randomized, controlled trials.

Effect of corticosteroid therapy on mortality in COVID-19 patients-A systematic review and meta-analysis

The effect of corticosteroid therapy is still controversial on prevention of mortality in coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19). The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of corticosteroids on mortality. This systematic review was performed as per preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses guidelines. A systematic search was performed at different databases namely Medline/PubMed, Cochrane and Google scholar on 10 February 2022. A pooled estimate for effect of corticosteroid therapy on mortality was calculated as outcome of study. Risk bias analysis and Newcastle Ottawa Scale were used to assess the quality of randomized control trial (RCT) and cohort studies, respectively. Cochran's Q test and the I² statistic were conducted for heterogeneity and accordingly study model was applied. A total 43 studies were included, having sample size of 96,852 patients. Amongst them, 19,426 and 77,426 patients received corticosteroid therapy (intervention group) or standard treatment without corticosteroid (control group), respectively. Mortality observed in the intervention and control group was 14.2% (2749) and 7.1% (5459), respectively. The pooled estimate 2.173 (95% CI: 2.0690–2.2820) showed significantly increased mortality in intervention as compared to control. The pooled estimate of methyprednisolone 1.206 (95% CI: 1.0770–1.3500) showed significantly increased mortality while the pooled estimate of dexamethasone 1.040 (95% CI: 0.9459–1.1440) showed insignificantly increased mortality as compared to control. In conclusion, corticosteroid therapy produced a negative prognosis as depicted by increased mortality among COVID‐19 patients. The possible reasons might be delay in virus clearance and secondary infections due to corticosteroids initiated at high dose in the early stage of infection.

Clinical and survival differences during separate COVID-19 surges: Investigating the impact of the Sars-CoV-2 alpha variant in critical care patients

A number of studies have highlighted physiological data from the first surge in critically unwell Covid-19 patients but there is a paucity of data describing emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2, such as B.1.1.7. We compared ventilatory parameters, biochemical and physiological data and mortality between the first and second COVID-19 surges in the United Kingdom, where distinct variants of SARS-CoV-2 were the dominant stain. We performed a retrospective cohort study investigating critically unwell patients admitted with COVID-19 across three tertiary regional ICUs in London, UK. Of 1782 adult ICU patients screened, 330 intubated and ventilated patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were included. In the second wave where B.1.1.7 variant was the dominant strain, patients were had increased severity of ARDS whilst compliance was greater (p<0.05) and d-dimer lower. The 28-day mortality was not statistically significant (1st wave: 42.2% vs 2nd wave: 39.8%). However, when adjusted for key covariates, the hazard ratio for 28-day mortality in those patients with B.1.1.7 was 3.79 (CI 1.04–13.8; p = 0.043) compared to the original strain. During the second surge in the UK, where the COVID-19 variant B.1.1.7 was most prevalent, significantly more patients presented to critical care with severe ARDS. Furthermore, mortality risk was significantly greater in our ICU population during the second wave of the pandemic in those patients with B.1.1.7. As ICUs are experiencing further waves (particularly by the delta (B.1.617.2) variant), we highlight the urgent need for prospective studies describing immunological and pathophysiological differences across novel emerging variants.

Role of Tocilizumab in Down Regulating sCD163 Plasmatic Levels in a Cohort of COVID-19 Patients

Background

CD163, a haptoglobin-hemoglobin scavenger receptor mostly expressed by monocytes and macrophages, is involved in the regulation of inflammatory processes. Following proteolytic cleavage after pro-inflammatory stimulation, CD163 is shed from the cell surface and its soluble form in plasma, sCD163, is a biomarker of monocyte/macrophage lineage activation.

The assessment of sCD163 plasmatic levels in an early stage of the disease could have clinical utility in predicting the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia. The use of tocilizumab (monoclonal antibody anti-IL-6 receptor) in COVID-19 patients reduces lethality rate at 30 days. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of tocilizumab on sCD163 plasmatic levels in a cohort of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

In COVID-19 patients, on hospital admission (T0), after 7 days from hospitalization (T7) and after 45 days from discharge (T45) sCD163 plasmatic levels were evaluated, along with other laboratory parameters. COVID-19 patients were stratified into tocilizumab (TCZ) and non-tocilizumab (non-TCZ) groups. TCZ group was further divided into responder (R) and non-responder (NR) groups. Patients who died or required mechanical ventilation were defined as NR. As control group, healthy donors (HD) were enrolled.

Results

Seventy COVID-19 patients and 47 HD were enrolled. At T0, sCD163 plasmatic levels were higher in COVID-19 patients compared to HD (p<0.0001) and the longitudinal evaluation showed a reduction in sCD163 plasmatic levels at T7 compared to T0 (p=0.0211). At T0, both TCZ and non-TCZ groups showed higher sCD163 plasmatic levels compared to HD (p<0.0001 and p=0.0147, respectively). At T7, the longitudinal evaluation showed a significant reduction in sCD163 plasmatic levels (p=0.0030) only in the TCZ group, reaching levels comparable to those of HD. Conversely, not statistically significance in non-TCZ group was observed and, at T7, a statistically significance was found comparing non-TCZ group to HD (p=0.0019). At T0, R and NR groups showed not statistically significance in sCD163 plasmatic levels and both groups showed higher levels compared to HD (p=0.0001 and p=0.0340, respectively). The longitudinal evaluation showed significant reductions in both groups (R: p=0.0356; NR: p=0.0273) independently of the outcome. After 45 days of follow-up sCD163 plasmatic levels remain stable.

Conclusion

sCD163 plasmatic levels are increased in COVID-19 pneumonia and is efficiently down-regulated by tocilizumab treatment regardless of the clinical outcome.