Infliximab and Intravenous Gammaglobulin in Hospitalized Severe COVID-19 Patients in Intensive Care Unit

Intravenous immunoglobulin for treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients: an evidence mapping and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The clinical efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment for COVID-19 remain controversial. This study aimed to map the current status and gaps of available evidence, and conduct a meta-analysis to further investigate the benefit of IVIg in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SR/MAs), primary studies with control groups, reporting on the use of IVIg in patients with COVID-19. A random-effects meta-analysis with subgroup analyses regarding study design and patient disease severity was performed. Our outcomes of interest determined by the evidence mapping, were mortality, length of hospitalization (days), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (days), number of patients requiring mechanical ventilation, and adverse events.

RESULTS

We included 34 studies (12 SR/MAs, 8 prospective and 14 retrospective studies). A total of 5571 hospitalized patients were involved in 22 primary studies. Random-effects meta-analyses of very low to moderate evidence showed that there was little or no difference between IVIg and standard care or placebo in reducing mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.91; 95% CI 0.78-1.06; risk difference [RD] 3.3% fewer), length of hospital (mean difference [MD] 0.37; 95% CI - 2.56, 3.31) and ICU (MD 0.36; 95% CI - 0.81, 1.53) stays, mechanical ventilation use (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.68-1.24; RD 2.8% fewer), and adverse events (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.84-1.14; RD 0.5% fewer) of patients with COVID-19. Sensitivity analysis using a fixed-effects model indicated that IVIg may reduce mortality (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.60-0.97), and increase length of hospital stay (MD 0.68; 95% CI 0.09-1.28).

CONCLUSION

Very low to moderate certainty of evidence indicated IVIg may not improve the clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Given the discrepancy between the random- and fixed-effects model results, further large-scale and well-designed RCTs are warranted.

COVID-19: A novel holistic systems biology approach to predict its molecular mechanisms (in vitro) and repurpose drugs

PURPOSE

COVID-19 strangely kills some youth with no history of physical weakness, and in addition to the lungs, it may even directly harm other organs. Its complex mechanism has led to the loss of any significantly effective drug, and some patients with severe forms still die daily. Common methods for identifying disease mechanisms and drug design are often time-consuming or reductionist. Here, we use a novel holistic systems biology approach to predict its molecular mechanisms (in vitro), significant molecular relations with SARS, and repurpose drugs.

METHODS

We have utilized its relative phylogenic similarity to SARS. Using the available omics data for SARS and the fewer data for COVID-19 to decode the mechanisms and their significant relations, We applied the Cytoscape analyzer, MCODE, STRING, and DAVID tools to predict the topographically crucial molecules, clusters, protein interaction mappings, and functional analysis. We also applied a novel approach to identify the significant relations between the two infections using the Fischer exact test for MCODE clusters. We then constructed and analyzed a drug-gene network using PharmGKB and DrugBank (retrieved using the dgidb).

RESULTS

Some of the shared identified crucial molecules, BPs and pathways included Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus infection, Influenza A, and NOD-like receptor signaling pathways. Besides, our identified crucial molecules specific to host response against SARS-CoV-2 included FGA, BMP4, PRPF40A, and IFI16.

CONCLUSION

We also introduced seven new repurposed candidate drugs based on the drug-gene network analysis for the identified crucial molecules. Therefore, we suggest that our newly recommended repurposed drugs be further investigated in Vitro and in Vivo against COVID-19.

Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and purpose

Though controversial, many clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 cases. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis have been performed to evaluate the efficacy of IVIG in the treatment of COVID-19 patients.

Experimental approach

A systematic search was performed in electronic databases and preprint servers up to November 20, 2021. Since substantial heterogeneity was expected, a random-effects model was applied to pool effect size from included studies to calculate the standardized mean differences (SMDs) for the continuous variables and relative risks (RRs) for the dichotomous variable with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Findings/Results

Five randomized clinical trials and seven cohort studies were analyzed among the 12 eligible studies with a total of 2,156 patients. The pooled RR of mortality was 0.77 (CI 0.59-1.01, P-value = 0.06), and of mechanical ventilation was 1.50 (CI 0.29-7.83; P-value = 0.63) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group. The pooled SMD of hospital length of stay was 0.84 (CI -0.43-2.11; P-value = 0.20) and of ICU length of stay was -0.07 (CI -0.92-0.78; P-value = 0.86) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group.

Conclusion and implications

This meta-analysis found that the IVIG therapy was not statistically different from the standard care group. Mortality, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and length of ICU stay were not significantly improved among IVIG recipients. However, statistical indifference is not equal to clinical indifference.

Benefits of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin on mortality in patients with severe COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The clinical benefits of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) in treating COVID-19 remained controversial.

Methods

We systematically searched databases up to February 17, 2022, for studies examining the efficacy of IVIg compared to routine care. Meta-analyses were conducted using the random-effects model. Subgroup analysis, meta-regression, and trial series analysis w ere performed to explore heterogeneity and statistical significance.

Results

A total of 4,711 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (1,925 IVIg treated and 2786 control) were collected from 17 studies, including five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 12 cohort studies. The application of IVIg was not associated with all-cause mortality (RR= 0.89 [0.63, 1.26], P= 0.53; I² = 75%), the length of hospital stays (MD= 0.29 [-3.40, 6.44] days, P= 0.88; I2 = 96%), the needs for mechanical ventilation (RR= 0.93 ([0.73, 1.19], P= 0.31; I2 = 56%), or the incidence of adverse events (RR= 1.15 [0.99, 1.33], P= 0.06; I2 = 20%). Subgroup analyses showed that overall mortality among patients with severe COVID-19 was reduced in the high-dose IVIg subgroup (RR= 0.33 [0.13, 0.86], P= 0.02, I² = 68%; very low certainty).

Conclusions

Results of this study suggest that severe hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with high-dose IVIg would have a lower risk of death than patients with routine care.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021231040, identifier CRD42021231040.

Infliximab as a potential treatment for COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

As the third year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic approaches, COVID-19 continues to cause substantial morbidity and mortality due to waning vaccine efficacy and the emergence of new, highly contagious subvariants and better therapies are urgently needed.

AREAS COVERED

Hospitalized patients who develop hypoxia due to SARS-CoV-2 infection are typically treated with an antiviral agent, remdesivir, as well as an immunomodulator, dexamethasone, but mortality rates for severe COVID-19 remain unacceptably high. Mounting evidence suggests a second immunomodulator added to the standard of care may benefit some hospitalized patients; however, the optimal treatment remains controversial.

EXPERT OPINION

On 2 June 2022, the United States National Institutes of Health reported results from a large, randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial known as ACTIV-1. The study found a mortality benefit and substantially improved clinical status for adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who were treated with infliximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody that binds to and inhibits TNF-α, and is widely used to treat a variety of autoimmune conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis. This manuscript reviews what is known about infliximab as an immunomodulator for patients with COVID-19 and explores how this agent may be used in the future to address the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of oseltamivir (Tamiflu) in the treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Efforts are ongoing by researchers globally to develop new drugs or repurpose existing ones for treating COVID-19. Thus, this led to the use of oseltamivir, an antiviral drug used for treating influenza A and B viruses, as a trial drug for COVID-19. However, available evidence from clinical studies has shown conflicting results on the effectiveness of oseltamivir in COVID-19 treatment. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the clinical safety and efficacy of oseltamivir for treating COVID-19. The study was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines, and the priori protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021270821). Five databases were searched, the identified records were screened, and followed by the extraction of relevant data. Eight observational studies from four Asian countries were included. A random-effects model was used to pool odds ratios (ORs), mean differences (MD), and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the study analysis. Survival was not significantly different between all categories of oseltamivir and the comparison groups analysed. The duration of hospitalisation was significantly shorter in the oseltamivir group following sensitivity analysis (MD -5.95, 95% CI -9.91--1.99 p = 0.003, heterogeneity I2 0%, p = 0.37). The virological, laboratory and radiological response rates were all not in favour of oseltamivir. However, the electrocardiographic safety parameters were found to be better in the oseltamivir group. However, more studies are needed to establish robust evidence on the effectiveness or otherwise of oseltamivir usage for treating COVID-19.

Tryptophan Metabolism 'Hub' Gene Expression Associates with Increased Inflammation and Severe Disease Outcomes in COVID-19 Infection and Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The epithelial barrier's primary role is to protect against entry of foreign and pathogenic elements. Both COVID-19 and Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) show commonalities in symptoms and treatment with sensitization of the epithelial barrier inviting an immune response. In this study we use a multi-omics strategy to identify a common signature of immune disease that may be able to predict for more severe patient outcomes. Global proteomic approaches were applied to transcriptome and proteome. Further semi- and relative- quantitative targeted mass spectrometry methods were developed to substantiate the proteomic and metabolomics changes in nasal swabs from healthy, COVID-19 (24 h and 3 weeks post infection); serums from Crohn's disease patients (scored for epithelial leak), terminal ileum tissue biopsies (patient matched inflamed and non-inflamed regions, and controls). We found that the tryptophan/kynurenine metabolism pathway is a 'hub' regulator of canonical and non-canonical transcription, macrophage release of cytokines and significant changes in the immune and metabolic status with increasing severity and disease course. Significantly modified pathways include stress response regulator EIF2 signaling (p = 1 × 10^-3); energy metabolism, KYNU (p = 4 × 10^-4), WARS (p = 1 × 10^-7); inflammation, and IDO activity (p = 1 × 10^-6). Heightened levels of PARP1, WARS and KYNU are predictive at the acute stage of infection for resilience, while in contrast, levels remained high and are predictive of persistent and more severe outcomes in COVID disease. Generation of a targeted marker profile showed these changes in immune disease underlay resolution of epithelial barrier function and have the potential to define disease trajectory and more severe patient outcomes.

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) therapy in hospitalised adult COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) therapy has been suggested as a potential treatment option for hospitalised COVID-19 patients. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the potential impact of IVIg on mortality and length of hospitalisation in adult COVID-19 patients. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and medRxiv were searched in the week of 20.12.2021 for English language, prospective trials, and retrospective studies with control groups, reporting on the use of intravenous immunoglobulin therapy in adult hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Exclusion criteria were: studies evaluating the use of IVIg in paediatric COVID-19 cases, trials using convalescent anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma or immunoglobulins derived from convalescent anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma. A random effects meta-analysis with subgroup analyses regarding study design and patient disease severity according to WHO criteria was also performed. A total of 13 studies were included, of which 6 were prospective, on a total of 2313 (IVIg = 1104, control = 1209) patient outcomes. Meta-analysis results indicated that IVIg therapy had no statistically significant effect on mortality (RR 0.91 [0.59; 1.39], p = 0.65, I²  = 69% [46%; 83%]) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.51 [-2.80; 3.81], p = 0.76, I²  = 96% [94%; 98%]). Subgroup analyses indicated no statistically significant impact on either outcome, but prospective studies' results suggested that IVIg may increase the length of hospitalisation in the severe COVID-19 patient group (MD 2.66 [1.43; 3.90], p < 0.01, I²  = 0% [0%; >90%]). The results of this meta-analysis do not support use of IVIg in hospitalised adult COVID-19 patients.

Artesunate, imatinib, and infliximab in COVID‐19: A rapid review and meta‐analysis of current evidence

Background and Objective

Despite the pervasive vaccination program against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), people who got fully vaccinated are still contaminated by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, making an effective and safe therapeutic intervention a crucial need for the patients' survival. The purpose of the present study is to seek available evidence for the efficacy and safety of three promising medications artesunate, imatinib, and infliximab against COVID‐19.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, medRxive, and Google Scholar, and the relevant articles published up to January 2022 were found. Furthermore, the clinical trial databases were screened for finding more citations. Data analysis was carried out applying The Cochrane Collaboration tool and Newcastle–Ottawa scale to assess the included studies. Meta‐analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1.

Results

Five published studies were identified as eligible. Meta‐analysis showed that there was no significant difference between the infliximab and control groups in terms of mortality rate (risk ratio [RR]: 0.65; confidence interval [CI] 95%: 0.40–1.07; p = .09). However, a significant difference was observed between the two groups for the hospital discharge (RR: 1.37; CI 95%: 1.04–1.80; p = .03). No remarkable clinical benefit was observed for using imatinib in COVID‐19 patients. Artesunate showed significant improvement in patients with COVID‐19.

Conclusion

In the present, limited evidence exists for the efficacy and safety of artesunate, imatinib, and infliximab in patients with COVID‐19. The findings of WHO's Solidarity international trial will provide further information regarding these therapeutic interventions.

Clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 and inflammatory rheumatic diseases receiving biological/targeted therapy

BACKGROUND

Anti-cytokine treatments are used in the treatment of severe COVID-19. Other studies have shown statistical significance with TNF inhibitors but not with other biological/targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARD).

OBJECTIVES

Compare the rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-COV-2) infection and the course and incidence of COVID-19 infection in patients who received b/tsDMARD with control patients.

DESIGN

Analytical cross-sectional SETTINGS: Tertiary care hospital PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who applied to the rheumatology outpatient clinic between June 2020-March 2021 and received b/tsDMARD were included in the study. All patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and spondyloarthritis who applied to the rheumatology outpatient clinic in the three months before March 2021 and did not receive b/tsDMARD were included as the control group. History of COVID-19 infection and treatments were recorded. Multivariate analysis was performed to assess factors associated with use of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and differences between specific biologic drugs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rate of COVID-19 disease among patients using biological/targeted synthetic therapy and non-biological/targeted synthetic therapy. COVID-19 clinical outcomes (hospitalization, intensive care admission, mechanical ventilation and death).

SAMPLE SIZE

533 in total; 341 received b/tsDMARD, 212 in the control group that did not receive b/tsDMARD.

RESULTS

One hundred patients (18%) had been infected with SARS-COV-2. The difference in SARS-COV-2 infection between b/tsDMARD and the control was statistically significant (13, 2% vs. 25, 9%, respectively) (P<.001). The hospital stays were longer in the controls (P<.001). Multinomial regression analysis revealed that COVID-19 negative patients were more likely to use tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (OR: 2, 911; 95% CI: 1.727-4.908; P<.001) compared to COVID-19 positive participants. Multinomial logistic regression analysis indicated that hospitalized patients were more likely to use TNF inhibitors (OR: 11, 006; 95% CI: 3.447-35.138; P<.001) and there was no significant difference between b/tsDMARDs other than TNF inhibitors in frequency of hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who were medicated with b/tsDMARD were less likely to be infected with COVID-19 and be hospitalized due to the infection. We have found that this effect was particularly dependent on the use of TNF inhibitors.

LIMITATIONS

Conducted in a single center and unable to provide a homogeneous study population.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

Immunomodulatory agents for COVID-19 treatment: possible mechanism of action and immunopathology features

The novel coronavirus pandemic has emerged as one of the significant medical-health challenges of the current century. The World Health Organization has named this new virus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Since the first detection of SARS-CoV-2 in November 2019 in Wuhan, China, physicians, researchers, and others have made it their top priority to find drugs and cures that can effectively treat patients and reduce mortality rates. The symptoms of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) include fever, dry cough, body aches, and anosmia. Various therapeutic compounds have been investigated and applied to mitigate the symptoms in COVID-19 patients and cure the disease. Degenerative virus analyses of the infection incidence and COVID-19 have demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 penetrates the pulmonary alveoli's endothelial cells through Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors on the membrane, stimulates various signaling pathways and causes excessive secretion of cytokines. The continuous triggering of the innate and acquired immune system, as well as the overproduction of pro-inflammatory factors, cause a severe condition in the COVID-19 patients, which is called "cytokine storm". It can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in critical patients. Severe and critical COVID-19 cases demand oxygen therapy and mechanical ventilator support. Various drugs, including immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive agents (e.g., monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and interleukin antagonists) have been utilized in clinical trials. However, the studies and clinical trials have documented diverging findings, which seem to be due to the differences in these drugs' possible mechanisms of action. These drugs' mechanism of action generally includes suppressing or modulating the immune system, preventing the development of cytokine storm via various signaling pathways, and enhancing the blood vessels' diameter in the lungs. In this review article, multiple medications from different drug families are discussed, and their possible mechanisms of action are also described.

Intravenous Immunoglobulin Therapy for Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients With Different Inflammatory Phenotypes: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study

Background

The benefits of intravenous immunoglobulin administration are controversial for critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Methods

We analyzed retrospectively the effects of immunoglobulin administration for critically ill COVID-19 patients. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with propensity score was used to account for baseline confounders. Cluster analysis was used to perform phenotype analysis.

Results

Between January 1 and February 29, 2020, 754 patients with complete data from 19 hospitals were enrolled. Death at 28 days occurred for 408 (54.1%) patients. There were 392 (52.0%) patients who received intravenous immunoglobulin, at 11 (interquartile range (IQR) 8, 16) days after illness onset; 30% of these patients received intravenous immunoglobulin prior to intensive care unit (ICU) admission. By unadjusted analysis, no difference was observed for 28-day mortality between the immunoglobulin and non-immunoglobulin groups. Similar results were found by propensity score matching (n = 506) and by IPTW analysis (n = 731). Also, IPTW analysis did not reveal any significant difference between hyperinflammation and hypoinflammation phenotypes.

Conclusion

No significant association was observed for use of intravenous immunoglobulin and decreased mortality of severe COVID-19 patients. Phenotype analysis did not show any survival benefit for patients who received immunoglobulin therapy.

The outcome of using intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in critically ill COVID-19 patients': a retrospective, multi-centric cohort study

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, different treatments have been used in critically ill patients. Using intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) has been suggested in various studies as an effective option. Our study aims to access the efficacy of IVIG in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective matched cohort study, records of three tertiary centers with a large number of COVID-19 admissions were evaluated and used. Based on treatment options, patients were divided into two groups, standard COVID-19 treatment (109 patients) and IVIG treatment (74 patients) patients. Also, the effect of IVIG in different dosages was evaluated. Patients with IVIG treatment were divided into three groups of low (0.25 gr/kg), medium (0.5 gr/kg), and high (1 gr/kg) dose. Data analysis was performed using an independent t test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare the outcomes between two groups, including duration of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and mortality rate.

RESULTS

The duration of hospitalization in the IVIG group was significantly longer than standard treatment (13.74 days vs. 11.10 days, p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in ICU length of stay, the number of intubated patients, and duration of mechanical ventilation (p > 0.05). Also, initial outcomes in IVIG subgroups were compared separately with the standard treatment group. The results indicated that only the duration of hospitalization in the IVIG subgroup with medium dose is significantly longer than the standard treatment group (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Our data indicate that the use of IVIG in critically ill COVID-19 patients could not be beneficial, based on no remarkable differences in duration of hospitalization, ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and even mortality rate.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: COVID-19 outcomes in patients receiving anti-TNF treatments

BACKGROUND

Accumulating evidence suggests a beneficial effective of tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors on the outcomes of COVID-19 disease, which, however is not validated by all studies.

AIMS

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing reports to investigate the impact of anti-TNF treatments on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

A systematic search at PubMed and SCOPUS databases using specific keywords was performed. All reports of COVID-19 outcomes for patients receiving anti-TNF therapy by September 2021 were included. Pooled effect measures were calculated using a random-effects model. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale for observational studies was used to assess bias. Studies that were not eligible for meta-analysis were described qualitatively.

RESULTS

In total, 84 studies were included in the systematic review, and 35 were included in the meta-analysis. Patients receiving anti-TNF treatment, compared to non-anti-TNF, among COVID-19 cases had a lower probability of hospitalisation (eight studies, 2555 patients, pooled OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.42-0.67, I²  = 0) and severe disease defined as intensive care unit admission or death (two studies, 1823 patients, pooled OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.41-0.96, I²  = 0), after adjustment for validated predictors of adverse disease outcomes. No difference was found for the risk for hospitalisation due to COVID-19 in populations without COVID-19 for patients receiving anti-TNF treatment compared to non-anti-TNF (three studies, 5 994 958 participants, pooled risk ratio = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.68-1.39, I²  = 20) adjusted for age, sex and comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

TNF-α inhibitors are associated with a lower probability of hospitalisation and severe COVID-19 when compared to any other treatment for an underlying inflammatory disease.

Molecular pathways involved in COVID-19 and potential pathway-based therapeutic targets

Deciphering the molecular downstream consequences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)- 2 infection is important for a greater understanding of the disease and treatment planning. Furthermore, greater understanding of the underlying mechanisms of diagnostic and therapeutic strategies can help in the development of vaccines and drugs against COVID-19. At present, the molecular mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 in the host cells are not sufficiently comprehended. Some of the mechanisms are proposed considering the existing similarities between SARS-CoV-2 and the other members of the β-CoVs, and others are explained based on studies advanced in the structure and function of SARS-CoV-2. In this review, we endeavored to map the possible mechanisms of the host response following SARS-CoV-2 infection and surveyed current research conducted by in vitro, in vivo and human observations, as well as existing suggestions. We addressed the specific signaling events that can cause cytokine storm and demonstrated three forms of cell death signaling following virus infection, including apoptosis, pyroptosis, and necroptosis. Given the elicited signaling pathways, we introduced possible pathway-based therapeutic targets; ADAM17 was especially highlighted as one of the most important elements of several signaling pathways involved in the immunopathogenesis of COVID-19. We also provided the possible drug candidates against these targets. Moreover, the cytokine-cytokine receptor interaction pathway was found as one of the important cross-talk pathways through a pathway-pathway interaction analysis for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

COVID-19-associated opportunistic infections: a snapshot on the current reports

Treatment of the novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a complicated challenge, especially among patients with severe disease. In recent studies, immunosuppressive therapy has shown promising results for control of the cytokine storm syndrome (CSS) in severe cases of COVID-19. However, it is well documented that immunosuppressive agents (e.g., corticosteroids and cytokine blockers) increase the risk of opportunistic infections. On the other hand, several opportunistic infections were reported in COVID-19 patients, including Aspergillus spp., Candida spp., Cryptococcus neoformans, Pneumocystis jiroveci (carinii), mucormycosis, Cytomegalovirus (CMV), Herpes simplex virus (HSV), Strongyloides stercoralis, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and Toxoplasma gondii. This review is a snapshot about the main opportunistic infections that reported among COVID-19 patients. As such, we summarized information about the main immunosuppressive agents that were used in recent clinical trials for COVID-19 patients and the risk of opportunistic infections following these treatments. We also discussed about the main challenges regarding diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19-associated opportunistic infections (CAOIs).

Therapeutic Agents Rounding Up the Immunopathology of COVID-19

COVID-19 pandemic has caused more than 3 million deaths globally during the past year. The direct attack from SARS-CoV-2 and hyperactivated immune response contribute to the progress and deterioration of COVID-19. After the virus invades, the activation and release of cytokines/chemokines cause "cytokine storm", leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multiple organs dysfunction syndrome (MODS). Eliminating virus and blocking cytokines are important checkpoints of COVID-19 therapy, and several agents targeting immunopathology, including interferons, thymosin, glucocorticoids and immunoglobulin, have shown therapeutic effects in severe patients with COVID-19. Herein, we reviewed the practice evidences and concluded that several agents rounding up the immunopathology of COVID-19 may be the alternative approaches under the scenario of the lacking of effective antiviral drugs.

A fatal toxic shock-like syndrome post COVID-19 infection in a child

Background

Children affected by Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) showed various manifestations. Some of them were severe cases presenting with multi-system inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) causing multiple organ dysfunction.

Case presentation

We report the case of a 12-year-old girl with recent COVID-19 infection who presented with persistent fever, abdominal pain and other symptoms that meet the definition of MIS-C. She had lymphopenia and a high level of inflammatory markers. She was admitted to pediatric intensive care unit since she rapidly developed refractory catecholamine-resistant shock with multiple organ failure. Echocardiography showed a small pericardial effusion with a normal ejection fraction (Ejection Fraction = 60%) and no valvular or coronary lesions. The child showed no signs of improvement even after receiving intravenous immunoglobulin, fresh frozen plasma, high doses of Vasopressors and corticosteroid. His outcome was fatal.

Conclusion

Pediatric patients affected by the new COVID-19 related syndrome may show severe life-threatening conditions similar to Kawasaki disease shock syndrome. Hypotension in these patients results from heart failure and the decreased cardiac output. We report a new severe clinical feature of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children in whom hypotension was the result of refractory vasoplegia.

Passive Immunity Should and Will Work for COVID-19 for Some Patients

In the absence of effective antiviral chemotherapy and still in the context of emerging vaccines for severe acute respiratory syndrome-CoV-2 infections, passive immunotherapy remains a key treatment and possible prevention strategy. What might initially be conceived as a simplified donor-recipient process, the intricacies of donor plasma, IV immunoglobulins, and monoclonal antibody modality applications are becoming more apparent. Key targets of such treatment have largely focused on virus neutralization and the specific viral components of the attachment Spike protein and its constituents (e.g., receptor binding domain, N-terminal domain). The cumulative laboratory and clinical experience suggests that beneficial protective and treatment outcomes are possible. Both a dose- and a time-dependency emerge. Lesser understood are the concepts of bioavailability and distribution. Apart from direct antigen binding from protective immunoglobulins, antibody effector functions have potential roles in outcome. In attempting to mimic the natural but variable response to infection or vaccination, a strong functional polyclonal approach attracts the potential benefits of attacking antigen diversity, high antibody avidity, antibody persistence, and protection against escape viral mutation. The availability and ease of administration for any passive immunotherapy product must be considered in the current climate of need. There is never a perfect product, but yet there is considerable room for improving patient outcomes. Given the variability of human genetics, immunity, and disease, and given the nuances of the virus and its potential for change, passive immunotherapy can be developed that will be effective for some but not all patients. An understanding of such patient variability and limitations is just as important as the understanding of the direct interactions between immunotherapy and virus.