Revised Korean Society of Infectious Diseases/National Evidence-based Healthcarea Collaborating Agency Guidelines on the Treatment of Patients with COVID-19

Current status and clinical outcomes of pharmacotherapies according to SARS-CoV-2 mutations in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19: a retrospective single center study

BACKGROUND

During the pandemic period, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mutated, leading to changes in the disease's severity and the therapeutic effect of drugs accordingly. This study aimed to present the actual use of therapeutics and clinical outcomes based on the prevalence of each variant using real-world data.

METHODS

We analyzed the electronic medical records of adult patients admitted to Busan Medical Center after confirming coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from February 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022. Patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who were at a high risk of disease progression were selected as study subjects, and the time period was classified according to the variants as ancestral strain, Delta variant, or Omicron variant. We compared drug use status and clinical outcomes by time period.

RESULTS

Among all 3,091 patients, corticosteroids were the most commonly used therapy (56.0%), being used most frequently in the Delta variant (93.0%), followed by the Omicron variant (42.9%) and ancestral strain (21.2%). Regdanvimab accounted for the majority of therapeutic use in the Delta variant (82.9%) and ancestral strain (76.8%), whereas remdesivir was most frequently used during the Omicron variant period (68.9%). The composite outcomes of death or disease aggravation were ranked in the order of the Delta variant, Omicron variant, and ancestral strain (14.5, 11.9, and 6.0%, respectively, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Regdanvimab was primarily used during the ancestral strain period, regdanvimab plus corticosteroids during the Delta variant period, and remdesivir during the Omicron variant period. The rate of death or disease aggravation was highest in the Delta variant, followed by the Omicron variant and the ancestral strain.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support in adult patients: Comparing COVID-19- and non-COVID-19-associated respiratory failure

INTRODUCTION

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a vital intervention for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), yet its efficacy with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unknown. This study compared the long-term mortality rates of patients receiving ECMO for COVID-19 with those experiencing other respiratory disease-associated ARDS.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included adults with ARDS receiving ECMO for respiratory disease (COVID-19 and non-COVID-19) based on information collected from the National Health Insurance Service of South Korea from February 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 6 months and 1 year post-ECMO initiation.

RESULTS

Data from 3094 patients with COVID-19 (N = 1095) and non-COVID-19 respiratory disease-associated ARDS (N = 1999) who received ECMO support were analyzed. Despite a higher Charlson Comorbidity index in the non-COVID group, patients with COVID-19 had higher cumulative mortality rates at 6 months and 1 year post-ECMO initiation compared to those with non-COVID-19 respiratory diseases, after adjusting for confounders. Patients with COVID-19 also experienced longer intensive care unit stays, higher hospitalization costs, longer ECMO and mechanical ventilation durations, and lower intensity coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COVID-19 requiring ECMO showed higher mortality rates, possibly due to its distinct long-lasting and potentially fatal consequences compared to other respiratory illnesses.

The effects of remdesivir on mortality and the requirement for mechanical ventilation in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review stratified by disease severity

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The effectiveness of remdesivir treatment in reducing mortality and the requirement for mechanical ventilation (MV) remains uncertain, as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have produced conflicting results.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and other data resources to find RCTs published prior to April 10, 2023. The selection of studies, assessment of risk of bias, and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and the need to initiate MV.

RESULTS

A total of 5,068 articles were screened, from eight RCTs comprising 11,945 patients. The meta-analysis found that, compared to standard care or placebo, remdesivir treatment provided no significant all-cause mortality benefit (pooled risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.02; 8 studies; high certainty evidence), while subgroup analyses revealed a trend towards reduced mortality among patients requiring oxygen but not MV (pooled RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.77-1.00; 6 studies; I2 = 4%). The need to initiate MV (pooled RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59-0.94; 7 studies; moderate certainty evidence) in remdesivir-treated patients was also reduced compared to controls. Remdesivir significantly increased clinical improvement and discharge and significantly reduced serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

In this systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs, it was found that remdesivir treatment did not show a substantial decrease in the risk of mortality. However, it was linked to a reduction in the necessity for additional ventilatory support, suggesting remdesivir could be beneficial for COVID-19 patients, particularly those who are not on MV.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support and Critically Ill COVID-19 Patient Outcomes: A Population-Based Cohort Study

We selected critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who were receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support and had been transferred to experienced centers. Thus, we aimed to evaluate factors that were associated with receiving ECMO support and factors that were associated with patient mortality. Using data from the National Health Insurance Service and Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency in South Korea, adult patients admitted to an intensive care unit from October 8, 2020, to December 31, 2021, with a main diagnosis of COVID-19 were included. They were divided into two groups: ECMO group (n = 455) and non-ECMO group (n = 12,648). Receiving ECMO support was less associated with old age [odds ratio (OR), 0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94-0.96; p  < 0.001], underlying severe disabilities (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.29-0.83; p  = 0.008), and booster vaccination status (second: OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39-0.94; p  = 0.024; third: OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.25-0.65; p  < 0.001). In addition, after adjusting for various variables, low mortality in patients with ECMO support was associated with having previously received a second booster vaccination (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14-0.77; p  = 0.010). Vaccination and booster therapy may lower the need for ECMO support and lower mortality among critically ill patients with COVID-19 with ECMO support.

Clinical outcomes of mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 patients treated with Regdanvimab in delta-variant outbreak: Retrospective cohort study

Regdanvimab is a novel neutralizing antibody agent used for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the effectiveness of regdanvimab in delta-variant patients has rarely been investigated. We examined the clinical outcomes and adverse events in COVID 19 patients treated with regdanvimab in the delta-variant era. Data were collected from laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 hospitalized patients who received regdanvimab in 2021 and categorized into pre-delta and delta variant groups. The primary outcome was the need for oxygen therapy. Rescue therapy, clinical improvement, and adverse events were analyzed. Among 101 patients treated with regdanvimab, 31 (30.7%) were delta patients and 49 (48.5) were pre-delta patients. 64.4% were male, the mean age was 60.3 years, and 70 patients (69%) had at least one underlying disease. The median interval from symptom onset to injection was 4 days. Twenty-three patients (23%) needed oxygen therapy, including 9 (29%) in the delta and 8 (16.3%) in the pre-delta group. (P = .176) The risk of early oxygen supplement was higher in the delta group (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 6.75; 95% confidence interval(CI), 1.53-29.8). The in-hospital survival rate was 100%, and no patients were admitted to the intensive care unit. Adverse events occurred in 43% of patients:13 (42%) delta patients and 23 (47%) pre-delta patients had any adverse events (P = .661). Patients treated with regdanvimab 4 days after symptom onset showed a favorable prognosis (aHR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.26-0.91). We found that the high-risk mild to moderate COVID-19 patients treated with regdanvimab showed similar disease progression in delta-variant patients and pre-delta variants; however, we need to be more closely observed delta-variant patients than those in the pre-delta group despite regdanvimab treatment due to rapid disease aggravation.

Antibiotic Prescription in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Analysis of National Health Insurance System Data in the Republic of Korea

BACKGROUND

Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral infection, antibiotics are often prescribed due to concerns about accompanying bacterial infection. Therefore, we aimed to analyze the number of patients with COVID-19 who received antibiotic prescriptions, as well as factors that influenced antibiotics prescription, using the National Health Insurance System database.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed claims data for adults aged ≥ 19 years hospitalized for COVID-19 from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020. According to the National Institutes of Health guidelines for severity classification, we calculated the proportion of patients who received antibiotics and the number of days of therapy per 1,000 patient-days. Factors contributing to antibiotic use were determined using linear regression analysis. In addition, antibiotic prescription data for patients with influenza hospitalized from 2018 to 2021 were compared with those for patients with COVID-19, using an integrated database from Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency-COVID19-National Health Insurance Service cohort (K-COV-N cohort), which was partially adjusted and obtained from October 2020 to December 2021.

RESULTS

Of the 55,228 patients, 46.6% were males, 55.9% were aged ≥ 50 years, and most patients (88.7%) had no underlying diseases. The majority (84.3%; n = 46,576) were classified as having mild-to-moderate illness, with 11.2% (n = 6,168) and 4.5% (n = 2,484) having severe and critical illness, respectively. Antibiotics were prescribed to 27.3% (n = 15,081) of the total study population, and to 73.8%, 87.6%, and 17.9% of patients with severe, critical, and mild-to-moderate illness, respectively. Fluoroquinolones were the most commonly prescribed antibiotics (15.1%; n = 8,348), followed by third-generation cephalosporins (10.4%; n = 5,729) and beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitors (6.9%; n = 3,822). Older age, COVID-19 severity, and underlying medical conditions contributed significantly to antibiotic prescription requirement. The antibiotic use rate was higher in the influenza group (57.1%) than in the total COVID-19 patient group (21.2%), and higher in severe-to-critical COVID-19 cases (66.6%) than in influenza cases.

CONCLUSION

Although most patients with COVID-19 had mild to moderate illness, more than a quarter were prescribed antibiotics. Judicious use of antibiotics is necessary for patients with COVID-19, considering the severity of disease and risk of bacterial co-infection.

Two Years of Experience and Methodology of Korean COVID-19 Living Clinical Practice Guideline Development

BACKGROUND

In Korea, during the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we responded to the uncertainty of treatments under various conditions, consistently playing catch up with the speed of evidence updates. Therefore, there was high demand for national-level evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for clinicians in a timely manner. We developed evidence-based and updated living recommendations for clinicians through a transparent development process and multidisciplinary expert collaboration.

METHODS

The National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA) and the Korean Academy of Medical Sciences (KAMS) collaborated to develop trustworthy Korean living guidelines. The NECA-supported methodological sections and 8 professional medical societies of the KAMS worked with clinical experts, and 31 clinicians were involved annually. We developed a total of 35 clinical questions, including medications, respiratory/critical care, pediatric care, emergency care, diagnostic tests, and radiological examinations.

RESULTS

An evidence-based search for treatments began in March 2021 and monthly updates were performed. It was expanded to other areas, and the search interval was organized by a steering committee owing to priority changes. Evidence synthesis and recommendation review was performed by researchers, and living recommendations were updated within 3-4 months.

CONCLUSION

We provided timely recommendations on living schemes and disseminated them to the public, policymakers and various stakeholders using webpages and social media. Although the output was successful, there were some limitations. The rigor of development issues, urgent timelines for public dissemination, education for new developers, and spread of several new COVID-19 variants have worked as barriers. Therefore, we must prepare systematic processes and funding for future pandemics.

Different clinical guidelines, common goal: To reduce COVID-19 mortality

The tendency of the Omicron variant to rapidly became the dominant SARS-CoV-2 strain and its weaker virulence than other strains worldwide has prompted many countries to adjust their public health strategies. This work summarizes all appropriate clinical interventions to reduce the public health burden caused by COVID-19 according to guidelines from the World Health Organization and 10 countries, i.e., the United States of America (USA), India, France, Germany, Brazil, South Korea, Japan, Italy, the United Kingdom (UK), and China. Five stages of COVID-19 were identified: asymptomatic infection and mild, moderate, severe, and critical illness. Most guidelines recommend antivirals starting with mild cases for those from Germany and India. Since more drugs are being developed and are becoming available to COVID-19 patients, guidelines are increasingly being updated with new pharmacological intervention strategies. Thus, a global view needs to be adopted to provide helpful options and precise treatment strategies during the lasting fight against the COVID-19 pandemic.

An Open Label Randomized Controlled Trial of Ivermectin Plus Favipiravir-Based Standard of Care versus Favipiravir-Based Standard of Care for Treatment of Moderate COVID-19 in Thailand

BACKGROUND

The role of ivermectin in the treatment of moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is controversial. We performed an open label randomized controlled trial to evaluate the role of ivermectin plus favipiravir-based standard of care versus favipiravir-based standard of care for the treatment of moderate COVID-19 infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An open-label randomized control trial was performed at Thammasat Field Hospital and Thammasat University Hospital from October 1st, 2021 to May 31st, 2022. Patients with moderate COVID-19 infections were randomized to the intervention (ivermectin plus favipiravir-based standard of care) or control group (favipiravir-based standard of care alone). Patients were followed up to 21 days. The primary outcome was the improvement in World Health Organization (WHO) category ordinal scale by 2 points. Secondary outcomes included duration of illness, development of severe COVID-19, and adverse reactions.

RESULTS

There were 157 patients in the intervention and 160 patients in the control group. Characteristics, underlying diseases, and risk factors for severe COVID-19 were comparable in both groups. Improvement in the WHO-category ordinal scale by 2 points was achieved in 98.7% of the intervention group and in 99.4% of the control group (relative risk [RR]: 0.487; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.044-5.430). The median illness duration was 5.0 days (range, 3 - 28 days) in intervention group versus 5.2 days (range, 3 - 28 days) in control group (P = 0.630). Severe COVID-19 that required intensive care occurred in 2 patients (1.3%) in the intervention group and 1 patient (0.6%) in the control group (RR: 2.052; 95% CI: 0.184 - 22.857). No significant difference in serious drug adverse events was seen.

CONCLUSION

In this study ivermectin plus standard of care was not associated with improvement in the WHO-category ordinal scale, reduced illness duration, or development of severe COVID-19 in moderately ill COVID-19 patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: TCTR20220427005.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Korea

Since December 2020, various coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have been developed and approved. As of February 2023, mRNA vaccines including bivalent vaccines (Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna), recombinant protein vaccines (Novavax, SK Bioscience), and viral vector vaccines (AstraZeneca, Janssen) have been approved in Korea. COVID-19 vaccination can effectively reduce hospitalization and deaths due to symptomatic COVID-19, especially severe and critical COVID-19. The primary series vaccination against COVID-19 is recommended for all adults aged ≥18 years in Korea. Booster vaccination with the bivalent mRNA vaccine is available for those ≥12 years who have completed the primary series vaccination, regardless of the type of vaccine previously received, and is recommended for all adults. Booster vaccination can be administered since 90 days after the last dose. Localized and systemic adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination are relatively common and more frequently documented in younger age groups. Rare but potentially serious specialized adverse reactions include anaphylaxis, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, myocarditis, and Guillain-Barré syndrome. Previous severe allergic reactions, such as anaphylaxis, to any COVID19 vaccine or vaccine component are considered a contraindication for vaccination. The indications and schedule for COVID-19 vaccination are subject to change based on further research results and the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 Outbreak in Daegu City, Korea and Response to COVID-19: How Have We Dealt and What Are the Lessons?

The first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in Daegu city was overcome by efforts, including; 1) prompt isolation and quarantine action by local government with cooperative help from expert groups and the central government, 2) high-intensity social distancing and active cooperation of citizens, 3) admission of asymptomatic and mild patients in 'residential treatment centers', and 4) use of a telephone scoring system for the allocation of patients, with a mortality rate of 2.5%. A continuous suppression policy with test, tracing, and treatment (3 Ts) was implemented as an active response to the initial outbreaks in Korea. With the introduction of vaccines and therapeutic agents, the COVID-19 crisis had improved. Recently, the omicron variant was responsible for most domestic outbreaks, albeit with a low mortality rate (0.1%). Since the omicron outbreak, a damage mitigation policy has been implemented, focusing on protecting vulnerable groups. In the future, preparation including below are needed; 1) improving the national public health emergency response system, 2) strengthening the crisis response capacity of local governments, 3) cooperation between public healthcare and private healthcare, and 4) establishing a resilient medical response system.

How We Have Treated Severe to Critically Ill Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea

Since 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread worldwide, and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic currently continues. In response to this unprecedented pandemic, several researchers and medical staff have struggled to find appropriate treatments for COVID-19. Patients with mild symptoms can recuperate with symptomatic care, however establishing treatment for severe to critically ill patients who can have a high mortality has been essential. Accordingly, the guidelines for COVID-19 treatment have evolved through numerous trials and errors and have been relatively well established to date. In the Republic of Korea, several evidence-based guidelines for COVID-19 treatment were released and revised, reflecting various research and regional medical conditions. To date, approximately 3 years after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are reflecting on the changes in the guidelines thus far and have summarized the treatment experience of severe to critically ill patients with COVID-19. The Korean guidelines for COVID-19 treatment have been updated continuously as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines have changed. Dexamethasone is currently used as the backbone for the treatment of severe to critically ill patients with COVID-19, and remdesivir, baricitinib, and tocilizumab can be added depending on a patient's situation. In addition, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is one of the important adjunctive therapies for patients with severe COVID-19. In the clinical field, treatment of severely ill patients with COVID-19 based on guidelines is widely practiced by medical staff and established currently.

Treatment Options for Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to threaten public health in Korea although several surges have passed in the past 3 years since 2019. Although patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 can usually recover at home, antiviral therapy to prevent disease progression and hospitalization is beneficial for those at high risk of progressing to severe COVID-19. The purpose of this article was to review how antivirals have been rolled out for the treatment of COVID-19 and how domestic and international guidelines for their use have evolved. Several evidence-based treatment guidelines have been developed in Korea, including those derived from domestic studies. Although many different antiviral agents were nominated as promising therapeutics at the onset of the pandemic, most failed to show efficacy in clinical trials. Currently, three types of antiviral agents-nirmatrelvir-ritonavir, molnupiravir, and remdesivir-are available in Korea to treat severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Each antiviral has its advantages and disadvantages. For most individuals, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is preferred because of its high efficacy and convenience of administration. When serious drug interactions occur or are expected with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir administration, 3 days of remdesivir treatment is shown to be a reasonable alternative. Molnupiravir may be prescribed with caution only if no other therapeutic options are available or acceptable.

Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Prescription Rate and Outcomes in Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Single Center Study

BACKGROUND

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was Korea's first oral antiviral agent to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We analyzed the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir prescription rate and treatment outcomes in treatment-eligible patients with COVID-19 receiving home-based care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively collected data of patients with COVID-19-eligible for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment from January 14, 2022, to February 15, 2022. We analyzed the prescription rate of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, the reasons for non-prescription, and patient outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 414 patients were included, of whom 44.2% were male, and the mean age was 64.6 (standard deviation [SD] = 8.5). Approximately 73.2% (n = 303) of patients were not prescribed nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. More than fourth-fifths of the patients refused nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment (n = 262, 86.5%). The mean symptom duration was significantly shorter in the prescription group (5.2 days [SD = 2.3] vs. 4.4 days [SD = 1.9], P = 0.001). A total of 6 (1.4%) patients were hospitalized, and none of the patients who received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir required admission. Among the patients prescribed nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (n = 111), 17 (15.3%) patients experienced side effects, and 5 (4.5%) patients discontinued nirmatrelvir/ritonavir due to side effects.

CONCLUSION

The nirmatrelvir/ritonavir prescription rate was low, with more than fourth-fifths of non-prescriptions being due to patient refusal. Symptom resolution was faster, and no life-threatening side effects were reported. Accurate information about drug safety must be provided to patients to make informed decisions regarding nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment.

Impact of prior vaccination on clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19

Fully vaccinated people remain at risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). We examined association between prior vaccination and clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Overall, 387 patients with mild-to-severe COVID-19 were enrolled. Patients were considered fully vaccinated at least 14, 7, and 14 days after receiving the second dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or mRNA-1273, second dose of BNT162b2, or single dose of Ad26.COV2.S, respectively. The primary outcomes (risk of pneumonia, requirement of supplemental oxygen, and progression to respiratory failure) were compared between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the outcomes. There were 204 and 183 patients in the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, respectively. The vaccinated group was significantly older and had more comorbidities than the unvaccinated group. Patients in the unvaccinated group were significantly more likely to develop pneumonia (65.6% vs. 36.8%) or require supplemental oxygen (29.0 vs. 15.7%) than the vaccinated group. The vaccinated group had a significantly shorter time from symptom onset to hospital discharge than the unvaccinated group (10 vs. 11 days; p<0.001). The proportion of patients who progressed to respiratory failure did not differ significantly between groups. In multivariable analyses, vaccination was associated with an approximately 70% and 82% lower likelihood of pneumonia and supplemental oxygen requirement, respectively. Being vaccinated was associated with a significantly lower risk of pneumonia and severe disease when breakthrough infection developed. Our findings support continuous efforts to increase vaccine coverage in populations.

Risk factors and clinical impact of COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis: Multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The risk factors and clinical impacts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) remain controversial, and no data have been reported in Korea. This study aimed to investigate the epidemiology and importance of CAPA diagnostic efforts and to identify the predictors of CAPA and the impacts on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Between January 2020 and May 2021, data of severely to critically ill COVID-19 patients were extracted from seven hospitals of the Catholic Medical Center through a clinical data warehouse. Corticosteroid use was subcategorized into total cumulative dose, early 7-day dose, mean daily dose, and duration of use.

RESULTS

A total of 2,427 patients were screened, and 218 patients were included. CAPA was diagnosed in 4.6% (10/218) of all hospitalized and 11.2% (10/89) of intensive care unit patients. Total cumulative dose (over 1,000 mg as methylprednisolone) and daily high-dose corticosteroid use (over 60 mg/day) were independent predictors but not early 7-day high-dose corticosteroid use (over 420 mg/week) (odds ratio [OR], 1.731; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.350 to 8.571) nor prolonged use (OR, 2.794; 95% CI, 0.635 to 13.928). In-hospital overall mortality was 11.9% (26 of 218). CAPA itself did not affect the outcome; rather, daily high-dose steroid use significantly increased the 30-day mortality (hazard ratio, 5.645; 95% CI, 1.225 to 26.091).

CONCLUSION

CAPA was not uncommon, especially in critically ill patients. Daily high-dose corticosteroid use was the predictor of CAPA and associated with high mortality rates. High-dose corticosteroids use after early inflammatory phase should be avoided, and active surveillance methods for CAPA are essential for those high-risk patients.

Effectiveness and Safety of Regdanvimab in Patients With Mild-To-Moderate COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Regdanvimab has decreased the time to clinical recovery from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and lowered the rate of oxygen therapy according to the results from phase 2/3 randomized controlled trial. More information is needed about the effects and safety of regdanvimab.

METHODS

We analyzed data for patients with high-risk mild or moderate COVID-19 being admitted to Busan Medical Center between December 1, 2020 and April 16, 2021. A propensity score (PS) matched analysis was conducted to compare patients treated with and without regdanvimab. The primary outcome was in-hospital death or disease aggravation which means the need for oxygen therapy (low- or high-flow oxygen therapy and mechanical ventilation) and secondary outcomes comprised the length of hospital stay and adverse reactions.

RESULTS

Among 1,617 selected patients, 970 (60.0%) were indicated for regdanvimab. Of these, 377 (38.9%) were administered with regdanvimab. Among a 1:1 PS-matched cohort of 377 patients each treated with and without regdanvimab, 19 (5%) and 81 (21.5%) reached the composite outcome of death, or disease aggravation, respectively (absolute risk difference, -16.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -21.1, -11.7; relative risk difference, 76.5%; P < 0.001). Regdanvimab significantly reduced the composite outcome of death, or disease aggravation in univariate (odds ratio [OR], 0.194; 95% CI, 0.112-0.320; P < 0.001) and multivariable-adjusted analyses (OR, 0.169; 95% CI, 0.095-0.289; P < 0.001). The hospital stay was shorter for the group with than without regdanvimab. Some hematological adverse reactions were more frequent in the group without regdanvimab, but other adverse reactions did not significantly differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Regdanvimab was associated with a significantly lower risk of disease aggravation without increasing adverse reactions.

Development and Roll-Out of A Coronavirus Disease 2019 Clinical Pathway for Standardized Qualified Care in Public Hospitals in Korea

Despite the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination roll-out, variant-related outbreaks have occurred repeatedly in Korea. Although public hospitals played a major role in COVID-19 patients’ care, difficulty incorporating evolving COVID-19 treatment guidelines called for a clinical pathway (CP). Eighteen public hospitals volunteered, and a professional review board was created. CPs were formulated containing inclusion/exclusion criteria, application flow charts, and standardized order sets. After CP roll-out, key parameters improved, such as increased patient/staff five-point satisfaction scores (0.41/0.57) and decreased hospital stays (1.78 days)/medical expenses (17.5%). The CPs were updated consistently after roll-out as new therapeutics drugs were introduced and quarantine policies changed.

Korean Society of Infectious Diseases/National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency Recommendations for Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Monoclonal Antibody Treatment of Patients with COVID-19

Neutralizing antibodies targeted at the receptor-binding domain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein have been developed and now under evaluation in clinical trials. The US Food and Drug Administration currently issued emergency use authorizations for neutralizing monoclonal antibodies in non-hospitalized patients with mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who are at high risk for progressing to severe disease and/or hospitalization. In terms of this situation, there is an urgent need to investigate the clinical aspects and to develop strategies to deploy them effectively in clinical practice. Here we provide guidance for the use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of COVID-19 based on the latest evidence.

Current advances in pharmacological treatments for patients with COVID-19

Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, more than 150 million people in over 200 countries have been infected, with over 3 million people dying due to it, as of May 1, 2021. Many researchers are working continuously to find effective drug treatments for COVID-19; however, the optimal treatment approach remains unclear. In this article, current advances in pharmacological treatments for patients with COVID-19 are discussed. Data obtained from recent studies indicate a mortality benefit with the administration of dexamethasone or adjunctive tocilizumab and potential clinical benefits with remdesivir (with or without baricitinib). Several monoclonal antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 have been developed. The US Food and Drug Administration issued two emergency use authorizations: one for bamlanivimab/etesevimab and another for casirivimab/imdevimab for patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, at high risk of progression to severe disease and/or hospitalization. The pathogenesis of COVID-19 indicates that antiviral treatments would be most beneficial in the early phase of the infection that is primarily driven by replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, whereas immunosuppressive/anti-inflammatory therapies are likely to be more beneficial during the late phase of the infection, when the disease is driven by an exaggerated immune/inflammatory response to the virus that causes tissue damage.

A Direct Rapid Phenotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test Enables Early Selection of Optimal Antibiotics to Treat Bacteremia in COVID-19 Patients

Background

Co-infection with bacteria and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 may result in greater use of healthcare resources and a poor prognosis. Therefore, early selection and use of optimal antibiotics are essential. The direct rapid antibiotic susceptibility test (dRAST) can detect antibiotic resistance within 6 h of a Gram smear result. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of dRAST for improving early selection of appropriate antibiotics for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with bacteremia.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study included 96 blood culture-positive COVID-19 patients. Bacterial isolates and antimicrobial resistance profiles of each case were evaluated. Cases were divided into two groups based on whether they underwent conventional antibiotic susceptibility test (AST) or dRAST. The time to optimal targeted treatment for the two groups was investigated and compared. In addition, we examined the proportion of cases for which appropriate antibiotics were selected and broad spectrum antibiotics were administered at 72 h from blood sample collection.

Results

The mean time to optimal targeted antibiotic treatment was shorter for the dRAST group [55.7; standard deviation (SD), 28.7 vs. 92.3; SD, 51.1 h; P = 0.041]. The proportion of cases receiving optimal targeted antibiotics 72 h after blood collection for culture was higher [6/10 (60.0%) vs. 10/25 (40.0%)] and the percentage receiving broad spectrum antibiotics at 72 h was lower [6/10 (60.0%) vs. 19/25 (76.0%)] in the dRAST group than in the conventional AST group. In terms of microbiology profile, the contamination rate was high (35.5%) and multidrug-resistant strains were common (63.2%) in COVID-19 patients with bacteremia.

Conclusion

Application of dRAST for selection of antibiotics to treat bacteremia in COVID-19 patients may enable earlier and optimal treatment. The high incidence of contamination and resistant organisms in blood cultures from COVID-19 patients suggest that dRAST may speed up appropriate targeted treatment.