Vitamin D Supplementation in Neonatal and Infant MIS-C Following COVID-19 Infection

To date, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still represents a great clinical challenge worldwide, and effective anti-COVID-19 drugs are limited. For this reason, nutritional supplements have been investigated as adjuvant therapeutic approaches in disease management. Among such supplements, vitamin D has gained great interest, due to its immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory actions both in adult and pediatric populations. Even if there is conflicting evidence about its prevention and/or mitigation effectiveness in SARS-CoV-2 infection, several studies demonstrated a strict correlation between hypovitaminosis D and disease severity in acute COVID-19 and MIS-C (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children). This narrative review offers a resume of the state of the art about vitamin D's role in immunity and its clinical use in the context of the current pandemic, specially focusing on pediatric manifestations and MIS-C. It seems biologically reasonable that interventions aimed at normalizing circulating vitamin D levels could be beneficial. To help clinicians in establishing the correct prophylaxis and/or supportive therapy with vitamin D, well-designed and adequately statistically powered clinical trials involving both adult and pediatric populations are needed. Moreover, this review will also discuss the few other nutraceuticals evaluated in this context.

HBsAg kinetics after 7 years of therapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in a cohort of naïve patients affected by chronic hepatitis B with different genotypes

The role of different genotypes in nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) treatment is still debated. Previous studies conducted on special populations evidenced that the E genotype had the lower virological and serological response. This descriptive study aims to recognize the hepatitis B "s" antigen (HBsAg) decline during tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) treatment in a cohort of patient affected by chronic hepatitis B (CHB). We retrospectively included all patients with CHB treated with TDF between April 2007 and March 2012 with a duration of treatment of 7 years. Kinetics of HBsAg was determined as serological response in this cohort. We include 110 subjects; virological response was observed in all subjects with genotypes A, B, and D; in 17 patients with C genotype (94.4%) and 24 with E genotype (96%). HBeAg loss was observed in 2 patients with genotype A (50%), 3 with B (100%), 0 with C (0%), 1 with D (20%), and 1 with E genotype (25%). In multivariate analysis we observed as predictive factors of HBsAg decline the baseline level of HBsAg (OR = 1.467; 95%CI: 1.221-5.113; p = 0.017) and viral genotypes (OR = 11.218; 95%CI: 5.441-41.138; p < 0.001). This study confirmed higher HBsAg decline after 7 years of treatment in A and B genotypes, and lower in C, E, and D genotypes. However, no evidence is enough to choose a single NAs, but in special populations, as well as in genotype E, the use of TDF should be preferred to entecavir.

Effect of Lactoferrin on Clinical Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: The LAC Randomized Clinical Trial

As lactoferrin is a nutritional supplement with proven antiviral and immunomodulatory abilities, it may be used to improve the clinical course of COVID-19. The clinical efficacy and safety of bovine lactoferrin were evaluated in the LAC randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. A total of 218 hospitalized adult patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 were randomized to receive 800 mg/die oral bovine lactoferrin (n = 113) or placebo (n = 105), both given in combination with standard COVID-19 therapy. No differences in lactoferrin vs. placebo were observed in the primary outcomes: the proportion of death or intensive care unit admission (risk ratio of 1.06 (95% CI 0.63-1.79)) or proportion of discharge or National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) ≤ 2 within 14 days from enrollment (RR of 0.85 (95% CI 0.70-1.04)). Lactoferrin showed an excellent safety and tolerability profile. Even though bovine lactoferrin is safe and tolerable, our results do not support its use in hospitalized patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19.

Impact of socioeconomic status on the clinical outcomes in hospitalised patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a retrospective analysis

Aim

A disadvantaged socioeconomic status (SES) was previously associated with higher incidence and poor outcomes both of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and infectious diseases. Inequalities in health services also have a negative effect on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) morbidity and mortality.

Subject and methods

The study analysed the role of SES measured by the educational level (EL) in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 between 9 March 2020 and 20 September 2021 at our centre of infectious diseases. Clinical outcomes were: length of hospitalisation, in-hospital mortality and the need of intensive-care-unit (ICU) support.

Results

There were 566 patients included in this retrospective analysis. Baseline EL was: illiterate (5, 0.9%), primary school (99, 17.5%), secondary school (228, 40.3%), high school (211, 37.3%), degree (23, 4.1%); median age was higher in low EL (72.5 years vs 61 years, p = 0.003), comorbidity (56% in low EL, 34.6% in high EL, p < 0.001), time from the symptoms and PCR diagnosis (8.5 days in low EL, 6.5 days in high EL, p < 0.001), hospitalisation length (11.5 days in low EL, 9.5 days in high EL, p = 0.011), mortality rate (24.7% in low EL, 13.2% in high EL, p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis there were predictors of mortality: age (OR = 4.981; 95%CI 2.172-11.427; p < 0.001), comorbidities (OR = 3.227; 95%CI 2.515-11.919; p = 0.007), ICU admission (OR = 6.997; 95%CI 2.334-31.404; p = 0.011), high vs low EL (OR = 0.761; 95%CI 0.213-0.990; p = 0.021). In survival analysis, higher EL was associated with a decreased risk of mortality up to 23.9%.

Conclusion

Even though the EL is mainly related to the age of patients, in our analysis, it resulted as an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality and hospitalisation time. Unfortunately, this is a study focused only on hospitalised patients, and we did not examine the possible effect of EL in outpatients. Further analyses are required to confirm this suggestion and provide novel information.

Remdesivir treatment in hospitalized patients affected by COVID-19 pneumonia: a case-control study

To date the optimal antiviral treatment against severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has not been proven; remdesivir is a promising drug with in vitro activity against several viruses, but in COVID‐19 the clinical results are currently not definitive. In this retrospective observational study, we analyzed the clinical outcomes (survival analysis, efficacy, and safety) in a group of hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 treated with remdesivir in comparison with a control group of patients treated with other antiviral or supportive therapies. We included 163 patients treated with remdesivir and 403 subjects in the control group; the baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups; the mortality rate was higher in the control group (24.8% vs. 2.4%, p < 0.001), the risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission was higher in the control group (17.8% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.008); hospitalization time was significantly lower in patients treated with remdesivir (9.5 vs. 12.5 days, p < 0.001). The safety of remdesivir was good and no significant adverse events were reported. In multivariate analysis, the remdesivir treatment was independently associated with a 34% lower mortality rate (odds ratio = 0.669; p = 0.014). In this analysis, the treatment with remdesivir was associated with lower mortality, lower rate of ICU admission, and shorter time of hospitalization. No adverse events were observed. This promising antiviral treatment should also be confirmed by other studies.