The Efficacy and Safety of Janus Kinase Inhibitors for Patients With COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Tofacitinib in Patients Hospitalized With Moderate and Severe COVID-19: Not Just Another Kinase Inhibitor

Background There has been an intense search for pharmacological agents that can complement corticosteroid therapy in the treatment of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The Janus kinase inhibitor tofacitinib has shown promise in this regard. This study aimed to determine the impact of adding tofacitinib to standard care on the mortality and total duration of hospital stay in severe COVID-19. Methodology This retrospective study compared the mortality and total duration of hospital stay among patients admitted with severe COVID-19 to a designated COVID-19 hospital in south India who had received tofacitinib in addition to standard care versus standard care alone. Medical case records of severe COVID-19 patients were retrieved and screened for inclusion. Categorical variables such as mortality were expressed as proportions and compared using the chi-square test, while continuous variables such as total duration of hospital stay were compared via the independent t-test. The odds ratio (OR) was calculated for the mortality difference between the two groups. P-values ≤0.05 were considered significant. Results Following the initial screening of 250 medical records, 186 patients were included in the final analysis, of whom 103 had received tofacitinib and 83 had received standard care. There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups (OR = 1.58 (95% confidence interval = 0.71 to 3.51); p = 0.26). The total duration of hospital stay was significantly longer among those in the tofacitinib group (17.14 ± 8.85 days vs. 14.04 ± 5.48 days; p = 0.01). Conclusions Tofacitinib did not improve the clinical outcomes when used to supplement corticosteroids in the treatment of severe COVID-19.

Double-edged sword of JAK/STAT signaling pathway in viral infections: novel insights into virotherapy

The Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK/STAT) is an intricate signaling cascade composed of various cytokines, interferons (IFN, growth factors, and other molecules. This pathway provides a delicate mechanism through which extracellular factors adjust gene expression, thereby acting as a substantial basis for environmental signals to influence cell growth and differentiation. The interactions between the JAK/STAT cascade and antiviral IFNs are critical to the host's immune response against viral microorganisms. Recently, with the emergence of therapeutic classes that target JAKs, the significance of this  cascade has been recognized in an unprecedented way. Despite the functions of the JAK/STAT pathway in adjusting immune responses against viral pathogens, a vast body of evidence proposes the role of this cascade in the replication and pathogenesis of viral pathogens. In this article, we review the structure of the JAK/STAT signaling cascade and its role in immuno-inflammatory responses. We also highlight the paradoxical effects of this pathway in the pathogenesis of viral infections. Video Abstract.

Methodological quality and reporting quality of COVID-19 living systematic review: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this study is to evaluate the methodological quality and reporting quality of living systematic reviews (LSRs) on Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), while the secondary objective is to investigate potential factors that may influence the overall quality of COVID-19 LSRs.

METHODS

Six representative databases, including Medline, Excerpta Medica Database (Embase), Cochrane Library, China national knowledge infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, and China Science, Technology Journal Database (VIP) were systematically searched for COVID-19 LSRs. Two authors independently screened articles, extracted data, and then assessed the methodological and reporting quality of COVID-19 LSRs using the "A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2" (AMSTAR-2) tool and "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses" (PRISMA) 2020 statement, respectively. Univariate linear regression and multivariate linear regression were used to explore eight potential factors that might affect the methodological quality and reporting quality of COVID-19 LSRs.

RESULTS

A total of 64 COVID-19 LSRs were included. The AMSTAR-2 evaluation results revealed that the number of "yes" responses for each COVID-19 LSR was 13 ± 2.68 (mean ± standard deviation). Among them, 21.9% COVID-19 LSRs were rated as "high", 4.7% as "moderate", 23.4% as "low", and 50% as "critically low". The evaluation results of the PRISMA 2020 statement showed that the sections with poor adherence were methods, results and other information. The number of "yes" responses for each COVID-19 LSR was 21 ± 4.18 (mean ± standard deviation). The number of included studies and registration are associated with better methodological quality; the number of included studies and funding are associated with better reporting quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvement is needed in the methodological and reporting quality of COVID-19 LSRs. Researchers conducting COVID-19 LSRs should take note of the quality-related factors identified in this study to generate evidence-based evidence of higher quality.

Investigating the risk of deep vein thrombosis with JAK inhibitors: a disproportionality analysis using FDA Adverse Event Reporting System Database (FAERS)

BACKGROUND

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are immune-modulating medications used to treat conditions including rheumatoid arthritis, COVID-19, ulcerative colitis, atopic dermatitis, myelofibrosis, and polycythemia Vera. However, these medications have been associated with higher incidence of deep vein thrombosis. The objective of this study was to investigate potential safety signals for DVT associated with JAK inhibitors using disproportionality analysis from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The authors retrospectively investigated case/non-case analysis using Openvigil 2.1-MedDRA-v24 (2004Q1 to 2022Q4). The preferred term used was 'deep vein thrombosis,' and the drugs included were baricitinib, tofacitinib, and upadacitinib. Reporting odds ratio, proportional reporting ratio, and information component were used to detect signals.

RESULTS

Overall 114,005 AE reports related to JAK inhibitors were identified, of which 647 reports (baricitinib - 169, tofacitinib - 425, and upadacitinib - 53) associated with DVT were obtained from FAERS. On analysis, baricitinib and tofacitinib had greater signal strength for age group of 65-100 years and all three had the highest signal strength for male gender.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified signals for DVT with baricitinib, tofacitinib, and upadacitinib. Further research using well-designed epidemiological data is needed to validate these results.

Repurposing clinically available drugs and therapies for pathogenic targets to combat SARS-CoV-2

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected a large portion of the global population, both physically and mentally. Current evidence suggests that the rapidly evolving coronavirus subvariants risk rendering vaccines and antibodies ineffective due to their potential to evade existing immunity, with enhanced transmission activity and higher reinfection rates that could lead to new outbreaks across the globe. The goal of viral management is to disrupt the viral life cycle as well as to relieve severe symptoms such as lung damage, cytokine storm, and organ failure. In the fight against viruses, the combination of viral genome sequencing, elucidation of the structure of viral proteins, and identifying proteins that are highly conserved across multiple coronaviruses has revealed many potential molecular targets. In addition, the time- and cost-effective repurposing of preexisting antiviral drugs or approved/clinical drugs for these targets offers considerable clinical advantages for COVID-19 patients. This review provides a comprehensive overview of various identified pathogenic targets and pathways as well as corresponding repurposed approved/clinical drugs and their potential against COVID-19. These findings provide new insight into the discovery of novel therapeutic strategies that could be applied to the control of disease symptoms emanating from evolving SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Early administration of tofacitinib in COVID-19 pneumonitis: An open randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Controversies on sub-populations most sensitive to therapy and the best timing of starting the treatment still surround the use of immunomodulatory drugs in COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES

We designed a multicentre open-label randomised controlled trial to test the effect of prompt adding of tofacitinib to standard therapy for hospitalised patients affected by mild/moderate COVID-19 pneumonitis.

METHODS

Patients admitted to three Italian hospitals affected by COVID-19 pneumonitis not requiring mechanical ventilation were randomised to receive standard treatment alone or tofacitinib (10 mg/bid) for 2 weeks, starting within the first 24 h from admission.

RESULTS

A total of 116 patients were randomised; 49 in the experimental arm completed the 14-day treatment period, 9 discontinued tofacitinib as the disease worsened and were included in the analysis, and 1 died of respiratory failure. All 58 control patients completed the study. Clinical and demographic characteristics were similar between the study groups. In the tofacitinib group, 9/58 (15.5%) patients progressed to noninvasive ventilation (CPAP) to maintain SO₂  > 93%, invasive mechanical ventilation or death by day 14 was 15.5%, significantly less than in the control group (20/58, 34.4%, RR 0,45, RRR -55%, NNT 5; p = .018). No differences in severe adverse effect incidence had been observed across the groups.

CONCLUSION

High-dose tofacitinib therapy in patients with COVID pneumonitis is safe and may prevent deterioration to respiratory failure.

Momelotinib versus danazol in symptomatic patients with anaemia and myelofibrosis (MOMENTUM): results from an international, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors approved for myelofibrosis provide spleen and symptom improvements but do not meaningfully improve anaemia. Momelotinib, a first-in-class inhibitor of activin A receptor type 1 as well as JAK1 and JAK2, has shown symptom, spleen, and anaemia benefits in myelofibrosis. We aimed to confirm the differentiated clinical benefits of momelotinib versus the active comparator danazol in JAK-inhibitor-exposed, symptomatic patients with anaemia and intermediate-risk or high-risk myelofibrosis.

METHODS

MOMENTUM is an international, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study that enrolled patients at 107 sites across 21 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were 18 years or older with a confirmed diagnosis of primary myelofibrosis or post-polycythaemia vera or post-essential thrombocythaemia myelofibrosis. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive momelotinib (200 mg orally once per day) plus danazol placebo (ie, the momelotinib group) or danazol (300 mg orally twice per day) plus momelotinib placebo (ie, the danazol group), stratified by total symptom score (TSS; <22 vs ≥22), spleen size (<12 cm vs ≥12 cm), red blood cell or whole blood units transfused in the 8 weeks before randomisation (0 units vs 1-4 units vs ≥5 units), and study site. The primary endpoint was the Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form (MFSAF) TSS response rate at week 24 (defined as ≥50% reduction in mean MFSAF TSS over the 28 days immediately before the end of week 24 compared with baseline). MOMENTUM is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04173494, and is active but not recruiting.

FINDINGS

195 patients were randomly assigned to either the momelotinib group (130 [67%]) or danazol group (65 [33%]) and received study treatment in the 24-week randomised treatment period between April 24, 2020, and Dec 3, 2021. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the momelotinib group reported a 50% or more reduction in TSS than in the danazol group (32 [25%] of 130 vs six [9%] of 65; proportion difference 16% [95% CI 6-26], p=0·0095). The most frequent grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events with momelotinib and danazol were haematological abnormalities by laboratory values: anaemia (79 [61%] of 130 vs 49 [75%] of 65) and thrombocytopenia (36 [28%] vs 17 [26%]). The most frequent non-haematological grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events with momelotinib and danazol were acute kidney injury (four [3%] of 130 vs six [9%] of 65) and pneumonia (three [2%] vs six [9%]).

INTERPRETATION

Treatment with momelotinib, compared with danazol, resulted in clinically significant improvements in myelofibrosis-associated symptoms, anaemia measures, and spleen response, with favourable safety. These findings support the future use of momelotinib as an effective treatment in patients with myelofibrosis, especially in those with anaemia.

FUNDING

Sierra Oncology.

Therapeutic implications of current Janus kinase inhibitors as anti-COVID agents: A review

Severe cases of COVID-19 are characterized by hyperinflammation induced by cytokine storm, ARDS leading to multiorgan failure and death. JAK-STAT signaling has been implicated in immunopathogenesis of COVID-19 infection under different stages such as viral entry, escaping innate immunity, replication, and subsequent inflammatory processes. Prompted by this fact and prior utilization as an immunomodulatory agent for several autoimmune, allergic, and inflammatory conditions, Jakinibs have been recognized as validated small molecules targeting the rapid release of proinflammatory cytokines, primarily IL-6, and GM-CSF. Various clinical trials are under investigation to evaluate Jakinibs as potential candidates for treating COVID-19. Till date, there is only one small molecule Jakinib known as baricitinib has received FDA-approval as a standalone immunomodulatory agent in treating critical COVID-19 patients. Though various meta-analyses have confirmed and validated the safety and efficacy of Jakinibs, further studies are required to understand the elaborated pathogenesis of COVID-19, duration of Jakinib treatment, and assess the combination therapeutic strategies. In this review, we highlighted JAK-STAT signalling in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and clinically approved Jakinibs. Moreover, this review described substantially the promising use of Jakinibs and discussed their limitations in the context of COVID-19 therapy. Hence, this review article provides a concise, yet significant insight into the therapeutic implications of Jakinibs as potential anti-COVID agents which opens up a new horizon in the treatment of COVID-19, effectively.

Viral proteases as therapeutic targets

Some medically important viruses-including retroviruses, flaviviruses, coronaviruses, and herpesviruses-code for a protease, which is indispensable for viral maturation and pathogenesis. Viral protease inhibitors have become an important class of antiviral drugs. Development of the first-in-class viral protease inhibitor saquinavir, which targets HIV protease, started a new era in the treatment of chronic viral diseases. Combining several drugs that target different steps of the viral life cycle enables use of lower doses of individual drugs (and thereby reduction of potential side effects, which frequently occur during long term therapy) and reduces drug-resistance development. Currently, several HIV and HCV protease inhibitors are routinely used in clinical practice. In addition, a drug including an inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2 main protease, nirmatrelvir (co-administered with a pharmacokinetic booster ritonavir as Paxlovid®), was recently authorized for emergency use. This review summarizes the basic features of the proteases of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and SARS-CoV-2 and discusses the properties of their inhibitors in clinical use, as well as development of compounds in the pipeline.

Janus kinases inhibitors for coronavirus disease-2019: A pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analysis

Background

JAK (Janus kinases) inhibitors have been proposed as a promising treatment option for the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, the benefits of JAK inhibitors and the optimum thereof for COVID-19 have not been adequately defined.

Methods

Databases were searched from their inception dates to 17 June 2022. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Extracted data were analyzed by pairwise and network meta-analysis. The primary outcome was the coefficient of mortality.

Results

Twenty-eight studies of 8,206 patients were included and assessed qualitatively (modified Jadad and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores). A pairwise meta-analysis revealed that JAK inhibitors effectively reduced the mortality (OR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.46-0.63; P < 0.00001; I ² = 32%) without increasing the risk of adverse events (OR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.88-1.18; P = 0.79; I ² = 12%). In a network meta-analysis, clinical efficacy benefits were seen among different types of JAK inhibitors (baricitinib, ruxolitinib, and tofacitinib) without the observation of a declined incidence of adverse events. The assessment of rank probabilities indicated that ruxolitinib presented the greatest likelihood of benefits regarding mortality and adverse events.

Conclusion

JAK inhibitors appear to be a promising treatment for COVID-19 concerning reducing mortality, and they do not increase the risk of adverse events vs. standard of care. A network meta-analysis suggests that mortality benefits are associated with specific JAK inhibitors, and among these, ruxolitinib presents the greatest likelihood of having benefits for mortality and adverse events.

Systematic review registration

[www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero], identifier [CRD42022343338].

Efficacy and safety of baricitinib and tocilizumab in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A comparison using systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: This review was performed to compare the efficacy and safety among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received baricitinib and those who received tocilizumab independently with placebo or the standard of care (SOC). Methods: Relevant databases were searched for randomized controlled trials which evaluated the effect of baricitinib or tocilizumab as compared to placebo or the SOC in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The primary endpoint was the comparison of the 28-day mortality. Risk ratios (RR) and mean differences were compared and pooled for dichotomous and continuous variables, respectively. A two-staged exploratory network meta-analysis using a multivariate meta-analysis was also performed. All analyses were performed in Stata version 16.0. The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of the generated evidence (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022323363). Results: Treatment with baricitinib [RR, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.50-0.94), p = 0.02, i2 = 64.86%] but not with tocilizumab [RR, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.71-1.07), p = 0.19, i2 = 24.41%] led to a significant improvement in the 28-day mortality as compared to that with the SOC. Treatment with baricitinib or tocilizumab, both independently led to a significant reduction in the duration of hospitalization [baricitinib: mean difference, -1.13 days (95% CI, -1.51 to -0.76), p < 0.001, i2 = 0.00%; tocilizumab: mean difference, -2.80 days (95% CI, -4.17 to -1.43), p < 0.001, i2 = 55.47%] and a significant improvement in the proportion of patients recovering clinically by day 28 [baricitinib: RR, 1.24 (95% CI, 1.03-1.48), p = 0.02, i2 = 27.20%; tocilizumab: RR, 1.41 (95% CI, 1.12-1.78), p < 0.001, i2 = 34.59%] as compared to those with the SOC. From the safety point of view, both these drugs showed similar results. There were fewer patients who experienced any serious adverse event following treatment with barictinib and tocilizumab as compared to those following treatment with the SOC [baricitinib: RR, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.62-0.92), p = 0.01, i2 = 12.63%; tocilizumab: RR, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.72-1.01), p = 0.07, i2 = 0.00%]. Conclusion: As baricitinib and tocilizumab are recommended interchangeably by various guidelines for the management of COVID-19, considering the better 28-day mortality data and other comparable efficacy and safety outcomes, baricitinib may be favored over tocilizumab considering its ease of administration, shorter half-life, and lower cost of treatment.

Dok3 restrains neutrophil production of calprotectin during TLR4 sensing of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein

Increased neutrophils and elevated level of circulating calprotectin are hallmarks of severe COVID-19 and they contribute to the dysregulated immune responses and cytokine storm in susceptible patients. However, the precise mechanism controlling calprotectin production during SARS-CoV-2 infection remains elusive. In this study, we showed that Dok3 adaptor restrains calprotectin production by neutrophils in response to SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein engagement of TLR4. Dok3 recruits SHP-2 to mediate the de-phosphorylation of MyD88 at Y257, thereby attenuating downstream JAK2-STAT3 signaling and calprotectin production. Blocking of TLR4, JAK2 and STAT3 signaling could prevent excessive production of calprotectin by Dok3^-/- neutrophils, revealing new targets for potential COVID-19 therapy. As S protein from SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants can activate TLR4-driven calprotectin production in Dok3^-/- neutrophils, our study suggests that targeting calprotectin production may be an effective strategy to combat severe COVID-19 manifestations associated with these emerging variants.

Application of Machine Learning in Hospitalized Patients with Severe COVID-19 Treated with Tocilizumab

Among the IL-6 inhibitors, tocilizumab is the most widely used therapeutic option in patients with SARS-CoV-2-associated severe respiratory failure (SRF). The aim of our study was to provide evidence on predictors of poor outcome in patients with COVID-19 treated with tocilizumab, using machine learning (ML) techniques. We conducted a retrospective study, analyzing the clinical, laboratory and sociodemographic data of patients admitted for severe COVID-19 with SRF, treated with tocilizumab. The extreme gradient boost (XGB) method had the highest balanced accuracy (93.16%). The factors associated with a worse outcome of tocilizumab use in terms of mortality were: baseline situation at the start of tocilizumab treatment requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), elevated ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and glutamate-pyruvate transaminase (GPT), lymphopenia, and low PaFi [ratio between arterial oxygen pressure and inspired oxygen fraction (PaO₂/FiO₂)] values. The factors associated with a worse outcome of tocilizumab use in terms of hospital stay were: baseline situation at the start of tocilizumab treatment requiring IMV or supplemental oxygen, elevated levels of ferritin, glutamate-oxaloacetate transaminase (GOT), GPT, C-reactive protein (CRP), LDH, lymphopenia, and low PaFi values. In our study focused on patients with severe COVID-19 treated with tocilizumab, the factors that were weighted most strongly in predicting worse clinical outcome were baseline status at the start of tocilizumab treatment requiring IMV and hyperferritinemia.

Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19

Purpose

The systematic review aims to analyze and summarize the characteristics of living systematic review (LSR) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods

Six databases including Medline, Excerpta Medica (Embase), Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database and China Science, and Technology Journal Database (VIP), were searched as the source of basic information and methodology of LSR. Descriptive analytical methods were used to analyze the included COVID-19 LSRs, and the study characteristics of COVID-19 LSRs were further assessed.

Results

Sixty-four COVID-19 LSRs were included. Eighty-nine point one percent of LSRs were published on Science Citation Index (SCI) journals, and 64.1% publication with an impact factor (IF) >5 and 17.2% with an IF >15 among SCI journals. The first unit of the published LSRs for COVID-19 came from 19 countries, with the largest contribution from the UK (17.2%, 11/64). Forty point six percent of LSRs for COVID-19 were related to therapeutics topic which was considered the most concerned perspective for LSRs for COVID-19. Seventy-six point six percent of LSRs focused on the general population, with less attention to children, pregnant women and the elderly. However, the LSR for COVID-19 was reported incomplete on “living” process, including 40.6% of studies without search frequency, 79.7% of studies without screening frequency, 20.3% of studies without update frequency, and 65.6% of studies without the timing or criteria of transitioning LSR out of living mode.

Conclusion

Although researchers in many countries have applied LSRs to COVID-19, most of the LSRs for COVID-19 were incomplete in reporting on the “living” process and less focused on special populations. This could reduce the confidence of health-care providers and policy makers in the results of COVID-19 LSR, thereby hindering the translation of evidence on COVID-19 LSR into clinical practice. It was necessary to explicitly enact preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) to improve the reporting quality of LSR and support ongoing efforts of therapeutics research for special patients with COVID-19.

COVID-19 and The Promise of Small Molecule Therapeutics: Are There Lessons to be Learnt?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had grounded the world to a standstill. As the disease continues to rage two years on, it is apparent that effective therapeutics are critical for a successful endemic living with COVID-19. A dearth in suitable antivirals has prompted researchers and healthcare professionals to investigate existing and developmental drugs against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Although some of these drugs initially appeared to be promising for the treatment of COVID-19, they were ultimately found to be ineffective. In this review, we provide a retrospective analysis on the merits and limitations of some of these drugs that were tested against SARS-CoV-2 as well as those used for adjuvant therapy. While many of these drugs are no longer part of our arsenal for the treatment of COVID-19, important lessons can be learnt. The recent inclusion of molnupiravir and Paxlovid™ as treatment options for COVID-19 represent our best hope to date for endemic living with COVID-19. Our viewpoints on these two drugs and their prospects as current and future antiviral agents will also be provided.

FRAGILE-COLCOVID19: A Clinical Trial Based on Early Administration of an Oral Combination of Colchicine and Prednisone in Elderly Patients with COVID-19 in Geriatric Facilities

BACKGROUND

Unprotected and fragile elderly people in nursing homes experienced the highest mortality rates during the initial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to study the role of two oral anti-inflammatory drugs, colchicine and prednisone, in elderly patients with COVID-19 in geriatric centers.

METHODS

A phase II/III, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial was performed in a geriatric population comparing the efficacy and safety of an oral combination of prednisone (60 mg/day for 3 days) and colchicine (at loading doses of 1-1.5 mg/day for 3 days, followed by 0.5 mg/day for 11 days) with the standard treatment, based on intravenous dexamethasone. Primary endpoints assessed the efficacy in reducing death or the modified endpoint death/therapeutic failure to the study drugs over a 28-day period, while secondary endpoints included safety, laboratory changes, and additional therapies used.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients (35 female/19 male) were enrolled, 25 (46.3%) of whom were allocated to the experimental arm and 29 (53.7%) to the control arm. At day 28, no differences in deaths were observed. The combination of mortality or therapeutic failure occurred in 12 (45.13%) patients receiving dexamethasone and 6 (28.13%) patients receiving colchicine/prednisone, resulting in a reduction of risk difference (RD) of - 17% (p = 0.17), with an average reduction of 39% (risk ratio [RR] 0.61) in patients receiving colchicine/prednisone (p = 0.25). Control patients received higher amounts of additional glucocorticoids (p = 0.0095) over a longer time frame (p = 0.0003). Colchicine/prednisone significantly reduced ferritin levels at day 14, as well as D-dimer and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels at day 28. Adverse events were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination colchicine/prednisone compared with intravenous dexamethasone has shown a remarkable trend to increase disease survival over a 28-day period in elderly patients requiring oxygen therapy in geriatric centers, without safety issues.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT04492358.

Management of hospitalised adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a European Respiratory Society living guideline

INTRODUCTION

Hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a result of SARS-CoV-2 infection have a high mortality rate and frequently require noninvasive respiratory support or invasive ventilation. Optimising and standardising management through evidence-based guidelines may improve quality of care and therefore patient outcomes.

METHODS

A task force from the European Respiratory Society and endorsed by the Chinese Thoracic Society identified priority interventions (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for the initial version of this "living guideline" using the PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) format. The GRADE approach was used for assessing the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Systematic literature reviews were performed, and data pooled by meta-analysis where possible. Evidence tables were presented and evidence to decision frameworks were used to formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

Based on the available evidence at the time of guideline development (20 February, 2021), the panel makes a strong recommendation in favour of the use of systemic corticosteroids in patients requiring supplementary oxygen or ventilatory support, and for the use of anticoagulation in hospitalised patients. The panel makes a conditional recommendation for interleukin (IL)-6 receptor antagonist monoclonal antibody treatment and high-flow nasal oxygen or continuous positive airway pressure in patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure. The panel make strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir-ritonavir. Conditional recommendations are made against the use of azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine combined with azithromycin, colchicine, and remdesivir, in the latter case specifically in patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. No recommendation was made for remdesivir in patients requiring supplemental oxygen. Further recommendations for research are made.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base for management of COVID-19 now supports strong recommendations in favour and against specific interventions. These guidelines will be regularly updated as further evidence becomes available.