query: what evidence is there for dexamethasone as a treatment for COVID-19?

positive: The Combination of Tocilizumab and Methylprednisolone Along With Initial Lung Recruitment Strategy in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients Requiring Mechanical Ventilation: A Series of 21 Consecutive Cases OBJECTIVE: To describe the outcomes with use of a combination of tocilizumab and methylprednisolone administered around the time of endotracheal intubation in patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019-associated hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. DATA SOURCES: Retrospective chart review. STUDY SELECTION/DATA EXTRACTION: Twenty-one consecutive patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019-associated hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. Initial ventilator parameters were positive end-expiratory pressure 14 cm H(2)o and target plateau pressure 29 cm H(2)o to maximize lung recruitment. Methylprednisolone (125 mg every 6hr for 24 hr with tapering to 60 mg every 12 hr) was administered shortly after patients were intubated (median 11 hr after intubation). DATA SYNTHESIS: No patient in the cohort died while hospitalized (mortality, 0%; 95% CI, 0%–18%) and 18 patients have been discharged from the acute care setting. Twenty of 21 patients (95%) have been liberated from mechanical ventilation after a median duration of 8 days (range, 4–30 d). Following 48 hours of methylprednisolone, the A-a o(2) gradient decreased from 455 ± 103 to 228 ± 109 mm Hg (difference 227 ± 108 mm Hg; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our positive experience with tocilizumab in combination with methylprednisolone started early after endotracheal intubation may be one avenue for reducing the morbidity and mortality seen with severe coronavirus disease 2019 and merits further exploration in clinical studies.

positive: Systematic and Statistical Review of Coronavirus Disease 19 Treatment Trials The following systematic review and meta-analysis compile the current data regarding human controlled COVID-19 treatment trials. An electronic search of the literature compiled studies pertaining to human controlled treatment trials with COVID-19. Medications assessed included lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, favipiravir, heparin, and dexamethasone. Statistical analyses were performed for common viral clearance endpoints whenever possible. Lopinavir/ritonavir showed no significant effect on viral clearance for COVID-19 cases (OR 0.95 [95% CI 0.50–1.83]). Hydroxychloroquine also showed no significant effect on COVID-19 viral clearance rates (OR 2.16 [95% CI 0.80–5.84]). Arbidol showed no 7-day (OR 1.63 [95% CI 0.76–3.50]) or 14-day viral (OR 5.37 [95% CI 0.35–83.30]) clearance difference compared to lopinavir/ritonavir. Review of literature showed no significant clinical improvement with lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, hydroxychloroquine, or remdesivir. Tocilizumab showed mixed results regarding survival. Favipiravir showed quicker symptom improvement compared to lopinavir/ritonavir and arbidol. Heparin and dexamethasone showed improvement with severe COVID-19 cases requiring supplemental oxygenation. Current medications do not show significant effect on COVID-19 viral clearance rates. Tocilizumab showed mixed results regarding survival. Favipiravir shows favorable results compared to other tested medications. Heparin and dexamethasone show benefit especially for severe COVID-19 cases.

positive: What can we learn about corticosteroid therapy as a treatment for COVID-19?

positive: Punica granatum L. Leaf Extract Attenuates Lung Inflammation in Mice with Acute Lung Injury The hydroalcoholic extract of Punica granatum (pomegranate) leaves was previously demonstrated to be anti-inflammatory in a rat model of lipopolysaccharide- (LPS-) induced acute peritonitis. Here, we investigated the anti-inflammatory effects of the ethyl acetate fraction obtained from the pomegranate leaf hydroalcoholic extract (EAFPg) on the LPS-induced acute lung injury (ALI) mouse model. Male Swiss mice received either EAFPg at different doses or dexamethasone (per os) prior to LPS intranasal instillation. Vehicle-treated mice were used as controls. Animals were culled at 4 h after LPS challenge, and the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and lung samples were collected for analysis. EAFPg and kaempferol effects on NO and cytokine production by LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 macrophages were also investigated. Pretreatment with EAFPg (100–300 mg/kg) markedly reduced cell accumulation (specially neutrophils) and collagen deposition in the lungs of ALI mice. The same animals presented with reduced lung and BALF TNF-α and IL-1β expression in comparison with vehicle controls (p < 0.05). Additionally, incubation with either EAFPg or kaempferol (100 μg/ml) reduced NO production and cytokine gene expression in cultured LPS-treated RAW 264.7 macrophages. Overall, these results demonstrate that the prophylactic treatment with EAFPg attenuates acute lung inflammation. We suggest this fraction may be useful in treating ALI.

positive: Targeting inflammation and cytokine storm in COVID-19

positive: COVID-19 and treatment with NSAIDs and corticosteroids: should we be limiting their use in the clinical setting? Given the current SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic, the availability of reliable information for clinicians and patients is paramount. There have been a number of reports stating that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and corticosteroids may exacerbate symptoms in COVID-19 patients. Therefore, this review aimed to collate information available in published articles to identify any evidence behind these claims with the aim of advising clinicians on how best to treat patients. This review found no published evidence for or against the use of NSAIDs in COVID-19 patients. Meanwhile, there appeared to be some evidence that corticosteroids may be beneficial if utilised in the early acute phase of infection, however, conflicting evidence from the World Health Organisation surrounding corticosteroid use in certain viral infections means this evidence is not conclusive. Given the current availability of literature, caution should be exercised until further evidence emerges surrounding the use of NSAIDs and corticosteroids in COVID-19 patients.

positive: A COVID-19 pandemic guideline in evidence-based medicine Data sources This review article scrutinised 16 clinical studies (clinical trials and observational studies) concerning coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19). Additionally, 18 guidelines about the COVID-19 were reviewed and the key points were represented in this study.Study selection The review included human trials, in-vitro studies, review articles, and credible news reports about severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and COVID-19 complications, treatment guidelines, management strategies, and epidemiological features. There were no exclusion criteria reported in this review and the included information was in English and Chinese languages.Data extraction and synthesis A descriptive review of the literature was conducted, taking a comprehensive approach. The paper consisted of three main parts: introduction, presentation, and management. The introduction part presented basic information about the SARS-CoV-2, its evolution and transmission, and the course of disease. The presentation section introduced the signs and symptoms, diagnosis, high risk groups, and complications of COVID-19. Eventually, some evidence was presented about the prevention, medical management, and measuring responses to the treatments in the management section.Results Based on the results of this study, non-pharmaceutical interventions, including strict social isolation and distancing measures, might reduce the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 by nearly 99.3 percent (reproduction number mitigating from 406 to 2.5 in 30 days). In the supportive management section, monitoring vital signs and neonatal feeding were stated as the most important factors to consider. For symptomatic neonates, medical management and intervention were mentioned as essential. It was claimed that for adults with mild infection, the best option would be home quarantine with further medical monitoring or hospitalisation if required. The following sequence was also suggested as early supportive therapy and monitoring: intravenous fluid administration, oxygen therapy, and application of corticosteroids. Management of critical patients with critical COVID-19 included admission to intensive care unit, use of continuous positive airway pressure and bi-level positive airway pressure in certain circumstances, endotracheal intubation, invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and fluid resuscitation and vasopressors. Additionally, this study suggested oseltamivir, iopinavir, remdesivir, chloroquine, baricitinib, ruxolitinib, and fedratinib as possible drugs to help manage COVID-19. A soaring c-reactive protein level and decreased albumin content in the blood were reported to be associated with a deteriorating status in COVID-19 patients. To keep the number of exposures to a minimum, two separate viral clearance tests taken at least 24 hours apart, were stated as necessary laboratory results before the discharge of patients with COVID-19.Conclusions The study warns about possible exponential spread of COVID-19 and proposes to adhering to tighter restrictions of social distancing. Besides the clinical guidelines presented within the study, it also encourages further up-to-date and evidence-based management guidelines for patients with COVID-19.

positive: Clinical review: A systematic review of corticosteroid use in infections Traditional teaching suggests that corticosteroids should be avoided during acute infectious episodes for fear of compromising the immune response. However, the outcome benefit shown through steroid administration in early septic shock implies this paranoia may be misplaced. We therefore performed a systematic review of the literature to identify the current strength of evidence for the use of corticosteroids in specified infections, and to make appropriate graded recommendations.

positive: Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in COVID-19 based on evidence for COVID-19, other coronavirus infections, influenza, community-acquired pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis BACKGROUND: Very little direct evidence exists on use of corticosteroids in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Indirect evidence from related conditions must therefore inform inferences regarding benefits and harms. To support a guideline for managing COVID-19, we conducted systematic reviews examining the impact of corticosteroids in COVID-19 and related severe acute respiratory illnesses. METHODS: We searched standard international and Chinese biomedical literature databases and prepublication sources for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing corticosteroids versus no corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). For acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), influenza and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), we updated the most recent rigorous systematic review. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses to pool relative risks and then used baseline risk in patients with COVID-19 to generate absolute effects. RESULTS: In ARDS, according to 1 small cohort study in patients with COVID-19 and 7 RCTs in non-COVID-19 populations (risk ratio [RR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55 to 0.93, mean difference 17.3% fewer; low-quality evidence), corticosteroids may reduce mortality. In patients with severe COVID-19 but without ARDS, direct evidence from 2 observational studies provided very low-quality evidence of an increase in mortality with corticosteroids (hazard ratio [HR] 2.30, 95% CI 1.00 to 5.29, mean difference 11.9% more), as did observational data from influenza studies. Observational data from SARS and MERS studies provided very low-quality evidence of a small or no reduction in mortality. Randomized controlled trials in CAP suggest that corticosteroids may reduce mortality (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.98, 3.1% lower; very low-quality evidence), and may increase hyperglycemia. INTERPRETATION: Corticosteroids may reduce mortality for patients with COVID-19 and ARDS. For patients with severe COVID-19 but without ARDS, evidence regarding benefit from different bodies of evidence is inconsistent and of very low quality.

positive: COVID-19, Asthma, and Inhaled Corticosteroids (ICS): Another Beneficial Effect of ICS?

positive: Early, low-dose and short-term application of corticosteroid treatment in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: single-center experience from Wuhan, China Background: Severe patients with 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) pneumonia progressed rapidly to acute respiratory failure. We aimed to evaluate the definite efficacy and safety of corticosteroid in the treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: Forty-six hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia hospitalized at Wuhan Union Hospital from January 20 to February 25, 2020, were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether they received corticosteroid treatment. The clinical symptoms and chest computed tomography(CT) results were compared. Results: A total of 26 patients received intravenous administration of methylprednisolone with a dosage of 1-2mg/kg/d for 5-7 days, while the remaining patients not. There was no significant difference in age, sex, comorbidities, clinical or laboratory parameters between the two groups on admission. The average number of days for body temperature back to the normal range was significantly shorter in patients with administration of methylprednisolone when compared to those without administration of methylprednisolone (2.06 ± 0.28 vs. 5.29 ± 0.70, P=0.010). The patients with administration of methylprednisolone had a faster improvement of SpO2, while patients without administration of methylprednisolone had a significantly longer interval of using supplemental oxygen therapy (8.2days[IQR 7.0-10.3] vs. 13.5days(IQR 10.3-16); P<0.001). In terms of chest CT, the absorption degree of the focus was significantly better in patients with administration of methylprednisolone. Conclusion: Our data indicate that in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, early, low-dose and short-term application of corticosteroid was associated with a faster improvement of clinical symptoms and absorption of lung focus.

positive: COVID-19 and the Rationale for Pharmacotherapy: A South African Perspective

positive: Evidence based management guideline for the COVID-19 pandemic - Review article COVID-19 has now been declared a pandemic. To date, COVID-19 has affected over 2.5 million people worldwide, resulting in over 170,000 reported deaths. Numerous preventative strategies and non-pharmaceutical interventions have been employed to mitigate the spread of disease including careful infection control, the isolation of patients, and social distancing. Management is predominantly focused on the provision of supportive care, with oxygen therapy representing the major treatment intervention. Medical therapy involving corticosteroids and antivirals have also been encouraged as part of critical management schemes. However, there is at present no specific antiviral recommended for the treatment of COVID-19, and no vaccine is currently available. Despite the strategic implementation of these measures, the number of new reported cases continues to rise at a profoundly alarming rate. As new findings emerge, there is an urgent need for up-to-date management guidelines. In response to this call, we review what is currently known regarding the management of COVID-19, and offer an evidence-based review of current practice.

positive: Towards treatment planning of COVID-19: Rationale and hypothesis for the use of multiple immunosuppressive agents: anti-antibodies, immunoglobulins, and corticosteroids Abstract The novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV2, can cause a potentially fatal disease, COVID-19, in humans. Here, we will provide an overview of therapeutic options for COVID-19. Plasma from patients recovered from COVID-19 that contains antibodies against SARS-CoV2 has shown promising results in patients with severe COVID-19. Also, IVIG, combined with moderate-dose of corticosteroids, might improve patient outcomes. Evidence links COVID-19 to variable degrees of inflammation. Studies show that the use of corticosteroids might accelerate recovery from COVID-19. There are, however, no controlled clinical trials that show whether the use of corticosteroids can reduce COVID-19-related death. Also, the pro-inflammatory cytokine IL6 is the best-documented cytokine in COVID-19 correlated with severity, criticality, viral load, and prognosis of patients with COVID-19. Tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody against IL6, could confer clinical benefit in patients with high IL6 levels. Essential elements that process SARS-CoV2 cell entry and specific characteristics that allow SARS-CoV2 to escape the immune system have the potential as targets for COVID-19 therapy.

positive: COVID-19 Treatment: Close to a Cure? – A Rapid Review of Pharmacotherapies for the Novel Coronavirus Currently, there is no approved therapy for COVID-19. The World Health Organization therefore endorse supportive care only. However, frontline clinicians and researchers have been experimenting with several virus-based and host-based therapeutics since the outbreak in China. China's National Health Commission has issued the first COVID-19 Treatment Guideline with therapy suggestions (7(th) edition attached) which inspired following clinical studies worldwide. Major therapeutics are evaluated in this review. Key evidence from in vitro researches, animal models and clinical researches in emerging coronaviruses are examined. Antiviral therapies remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir and umifenovir, if considered, could be initiated before the peak of viral replication for optimal outcomes. Ribavirin may be beneficial as an add-on therapy and is ineffective as a monotherapy. Corticosteroids use should be limited to indicating comorbidities. IVIG is not recommended due to lack of data in COVID-19. Xuebijing may benefit patients with complications of bacterial pneumonia or sepsis. The efficacy of interferon is unclear due to conflicting outcomes in coronavirus studies. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have shown in vitro inhibition of SARS-CoV-2, and the studies on clinical efficacy and whether the benefits outweigh the risk of dysrhythmias remain inconclusive. For patients who developed cytokine release syndrome, interleukin-6 inhibitors may be beneficial.

positive: Beneficial effect of corticosteroids in severe COVID-19 pneumonia: a propensity score matching analysis. Background. Since December 2019, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), responsible for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), is spreading worldwide, causing significant morbidity and mortality. No specific treatment has yet clearly shown to improve the disease's evolution. Validated therapeutic options are urgently needed. Methods. In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate determinants of the prognosis of the disease in 70 patients with COVID-19 severe pneumonia (i.e. requiring at least 3 liters of oxygen) hospitalized between 10 March and 9 April, 2020, in the Centre Hospitalier Alpes Leman, France. The main outcome was oro-tracheal intubation and the exposure of interest was corticotherapy. Since this was not a randomized trial, we used propensity score matching to estimate average treatment effect. Results. There was evidence that corticotherapy lowered the risk of intubation with a risk difference of -47.1% (95% confidence interval -71.8% to -22.5%). Conclusion. Corticosteroid, a well-known, easily available, and cheap treatment, could be an important tool in management of severe COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure. Not only could it provide an individual benefit, but also, in the setting of the COVID-19 ongoing pandemic, lower the burden on our vulnerable healthcare systems.

positive: Coronavirus breakthrough: dexamethasone is first drug shown to save lives.

positive: Etoposid-based therapy for severe forms of COVID-19 Abstract The new coronavirus infection COVID-19 has quickly become a global health emergency. Mortality is principally due to severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) which relays only on supportive treatment. Numerous pathological, clinical and laboratory findings rise the similarity between moderate to severe COVID-19 and haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH). Etoposide-based protocol including dexametasone is the standard of care for secondary HLH. The protocol has been successfully used in HLHs that are secondary to EBV and H1N1 infections by inducing complete response and pronged survival. These observations prompt to consider this cytotoxic therapy in HLH associated to moderately severe to severe forms of COVID-19.

positive: Persistence and clearance of viral RNA in 2019 novel coronavirus disease rehabilitation patients BACKGROUND: A patient's infectivity is determined by the presence of the virus in different body fluids, secretions, and excreta. The persistence and clearance of viral RNA from different specimens of patients with 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) remain unclear. This study analyzed the clearance time and factors influencing 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) RNA in different samples from patients with COVID-19, providing further evidence to improve the management of patients during convalescence. METHODS: The clinical data and laboratory test results of convalescent patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to from January 20, 2020 to February 10, 2020 were collected retrospectively. The reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results for patients’ oropharyngeal swab, stool, urine, and serum samples were collected and analyzed. Convalescent patients refer to recovered non-febrile patients without respiratory symptoms who had two successive (minimum 24 h sampling interval) negative RT-PCR results for viral RNA from oropharyngeal swabs. The effects of cluster of differentiation 4 (CD4)+ T lymphocytes, inflammatory indicators, and glucocorticoid treatment on viral nucleic acid clearance were analyzed. RESULTS: In the 292 confirmed cases, 66 patients recovered after treatment and were included in our study. In total, 28 (42.4%) women and 38 men (57.6%) with a median age of 44.0 (34.0–62.0) years were analyzed. After in-hospital treatment, patients’ inflammatory indicators decreased with improved clinical condition. The median time from the onset of symptoms to first negative RT-PCR results for oropharyngeal swabs in convalescent patients was 9.5 (6.0–11.0) days. By February 10, 2020, 11 convalescent patients (16.7%) still tested positive for viral RNA from stool specimens and the other 55 patients’ stool specimens were negative for 2019-nCoV following a median duration of 11.0 (9.0–16.0) days after symptom onset. Among these 55 patients, 43 had a longer duration until stool specimens were negative for viral RNA than for throat swabs, with a median delay of 2.0 (1.0–4.0) days. Results for only four (6.9%) urine samples were positive for viral nucleic acid out of 58 cases; viral RNA was still present in three patients’ urine specimens after throat swabs were negative. Using a multiple linear regression model (F = 2.669, P = 0.044, and adjusted R(2) = 0.122), the analysis showed that the CD4+ T lymphocyte count may help predict the duration of viral RNA detection in patients’ stools (t = −2.699, P = 0.010). The duration of viral RNA detection from oropharyngeal swabs and fecal samples in the glucocorticoid treatment group was longer than that in the non-glucocorticoid treatment group (15 days vs. 8.0 days, respectively; t = 2.550, P = 0.013) and the duration of viral RNA detection in fecal samples in the glucocorticoid treatment group was longer than that in the non-glucocorticoid treatment group (20 days vs. 11 days, respectively; t = 4.631, P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in inflammatory indicators between patients with positive fecal viral RNA test results and those with negative results (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In brief, as the clearance of viral RNA in patients’ stools was delayed compared to that in oropharyngeal swabs, it is important to identify viral RNA in feces during convalescence. Because of the delayed clearance of viral RNA in the glucocorticoid treatment group, glucocorticoids are not recommended in the treatment of COVID-19, especially for mild disease. The duration of RNA detection may relate to host cell immunity.

positive: Dexamethasone treatment for the acute respiratory distress syndrome: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial BACKGROUND: There is no proven specific pharmacological treatment for patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The efficacy of corticosteroids in ARDS remains controversial. We aimed to assess the effects of dexamethasone in ARDS, which might change pulmonary and systemic inflammation and result in a decrease in duration of mechanical ventilation and mortality. METHODS: We did a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in a network of 17 intensive care units (ICUs) in teaching hospitals across Spain in patients with established moderate-to-severe ARDS (defined by a ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen of 200 mm Hg or less assessed with a positive end-expiratory pressure of 10 cm H2O or more and FiO2 of 0·5 or more at 24 h after ARDS onset). Patients with brain death, terminal-stage disease, or receiving corticosteroids or immunosuppressive drugs were excluded. Eligible patients were randomly assigned based on balanced treatment assignments with a computerised randomisation allocation sequence using blocks of 10 opaque, sealed envelopes to receive immediate treatment with dexamethasone or continued routine intensive care (control group). Patients in the dexamethasone group received an intravenous dose of 20 mg once daily from day 1 to day 5, which was reduced to 10 mg once daily from day 6 to day 10. Patients in both groups were ventilated with lung-protective mechanical ventilation. Allocation concealment was maintained at all sites during the trial. Primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days at 28 days, defined as the number of days alive and free from mechanical ventilation from day of randomisation to day 28. Secondary outcome was all-cause mortality 60 days after randomisation. All analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01731795. FINDINGS: Between March 28, 2013, and Dec 31, 2018, we enrolled 277 patients and randomly assigned 139 patients to the dexamethasone group and 138 to the control group. The trial was stopped by the data safety monitoring board due to low enrolment rate after enrolling more than 88% (277/314) of the planned sample size. The mean number of ventilator-free days was higher in the dexamethasone group than in the control group (between-group difference 4·8 days [95% CI 2·57 to 7·03]; p<0·0001). At 60 days, 29 (21%) patients in the dexamethasone group and 50 (36%) patients in the control group had died (between-group difference -15·3% [-25·9 to -4·9]; p=0·0047). The proportion of adverse events did not differ significantly between the dexamethasone group and control group. The most common adverse events were hyperglycaemia in the ICU (105 [76%] patients in the dexamethasone group vs 97 [70%] patients in the control group), new infections in the ICU (eg, pneumonia or sepsis; 33 [24%] vs 35 [25%]), and barotrauma (14 [10%] vs 10 [7%]). INTERPRETATION: Early administration of dexamethasone could reduce duration of mechanical ventilation and overall mortality in patients with established moderate-to-severe ARDS. FUNDING: Fundación Mutua Madrileña, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, The European Regional Development's Funds, Asociación Científica Pulmón y Ventilación Mecánica.

positive: Pulmonary Diseases and Corticosteroids Steroids (corticosteroids) are anti-inflammatory drugs. Corticosteroids are used in many pulmonary conditions. Corticosteroids have a proven beneficial role in asthma, croup (Laryngotracheobronchitis), decreasing the risk and severity of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, interstitial lung disease, hemangioma of trachea, Pulmonary eosinophillic disorders. Role of corticosteroids is controversial in many conditions e.g. idiopathic pulmonary hemosiderosis, bronchiolitis, hypersensitivity pneumonitis, hyperplasia of thymus, bronchiolitis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, aspiration syndromes, atypical pneumonias, laryngeal diphtheria, AIDS, SARS, sarcoidosis, meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS), pulmonary haemorrhage, bronchitis, bronchiolitis obliterans with organizing pneumonia in JRA, histiocytosis, á-1 antitrypsin deficiency, bordtella pertusis, pulmonary involvement in histiocytosis. However these are used empirically in many of these conditions despite lack of clear evidence in favour. There is concern about their side effects, especially on growth. Systemic steroids are associated with significant adverse effects. Pulmonary conditions have a strategic advantage that inhaled corticosteroids are useful in many of these. Although inhaled preparations of corticosteroids have been developed to maximise effective treatment of lung diseases characterised by inflammation and reduce the frequency of harmful effects, these have not been eliminated. There are situations where only systemic steroids are useful. Clinicians must weigh the benefits against the potential detrimental effects. It is recommended that standard protocols for use of steroids available in literature should be followed, always keeping a watch on the potential hazards of prolonged use.

positive: Glucocorticoid versus immunoglobulin in the treatment of COVID-19-associated fulminant myocarditis

positive: A rationale for using steroids in the treatment of severe cases of H5N1 avian influenza. Acute hypercytokinaemia represents an imbalance of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines, and is believed to be responsible for the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome and multiple organ failure in severe cases of avian (H5N1) influenza. Although neuraminidase inhibitors are effective in treating avian influenza, especially if given within 48 h of infection, it is harder to prevent the resultant hypercytokinaemia from developing if the patient does not seek timely medical assistance. Steroids have been used for many decades in a wide variety of inflammatory conditions in which hypercytokinaemia plays a role, such as sepsis and viral infections, including severe acquired respiratory syndromes and avian influenza. However, to date, the results have been mixed. Part of the reason for the discrepancies might be the lack of understanding that low doses are required to prevent mortality in cases of adrenal insufficiency. Adrenal insufficiency, as defined in the sepsis/shock literature, is a plasma cortisol rise of at least 9 microg dl(-1) following a 250 microg dose of adrenocorticotropin hormone (ACTH), or reaching a plasma cortisol concentration of >25 microg dl(-1) following a 1-2 microg dose of ACTH. In addition, in the case of hypercytokinaemia induced by potent viruses, such as H5N1, systemic inflammation-induced, acquired glucocorticoid resistance is likely to be present. Adrenal insufficiency can be overcome, however, with prolonged (7-10 or more days) supraphysiological steroid treatment at a sufficiently high dose to address the excess activation of NF-kappaB, but low enough to avoid immune suppression. This is a much lower dose than has been typically used to treat avian influenza patients. Although steroids cannot be used as a monotherapy in the treatment of avian influenza, there might be a potential role for their use as an adjunct treatment to antiviral therapy if appropriate dosages can be determined. In this paper, likely mechanisms of adrenal insufficiency are discussed, drawing from a broad background of literature sources.

positive: A comprehensive review on drug repositioning against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) is the reason for this ongoing pandemic infection diseases termed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that has emerged since early December 2019 in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China. In this century, it is the worst threat to international health and the economy. After 4 months of COVID-19 outbreak, there is no certain and approved medicine against it. In this public health emergency, it makes sense to investigate the possible effects of old drugs and find drug repositioning that is efficient, economical, and riskless process. Old drugs that may be effective are from different pharmacological categories, antimalarials, anthelmintics, anti-protozoal, anti-HIVs, anti-influenza, anti-hepacivirus, antineoplastics, neutralizing antibodies, immunoglobulins, and interferons. In vitro, in vivo, or preliminary trials of these drugs in the treatment of COVID-19 have been encouraging, leading to new research projects and trials to find the best drug/s. In this review, we discuss the possible mechanisms of these drugs against COVID-19. Also, it should be mentioned that in this manuscript, we discuss preliminary rationales; however, clinical trial evidence is needed to prove them. COVID-19 therapy must be based on expert clinical experience and published literature and guidelines from major health organizations. Moreover, herein, we describe current evidence that may be changed in the future.

positive: COVID-19: disease pathways and gene expression changes predict methylprednisolone can improve outcome in severe cases

positive: Role of adjunctive treatment strategies in COVID-19 and a review of international and national clinical guidelines The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a global struggle to cope with the sheer numbers of infected persons, many of whom require intensive care support or eventually succumb to the illness. The outbreak is managed by a combination of disease containment via public health measures and supportive care for those who are affected. To date, there is no specific anti-COVID-19 treatment. However, the urgency to identify treatments that could turn the tide has led to the emergence of several investigational drugs as potential candidates to improve outcome, especially in the severe to critically ill. While many of these adjunctive drugs are being investigated in clinical trials, professional bodies have attempted to clarify the setting where the use of these drugs may be considered as off-label or compassionate use. This review summarizes the clinical evidence of investigational adjunctive treatments used in COVID-19 patients as well as the recommendations of their use from guidelines issued by international and national organizations in healthcare.

positive: Plasma IL-6 Levels following Corticosteroid Therapy as an Indicator of ICU Length of Stay in Critically ill COVID-19 Patients Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions and mortality in severe COVID-19 patients are driven by cytokine storms and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Interim clinical trial results suggest that the corticosteroid dexamethasone displays superior 28-day survival in severe COVID-19 patients requiring ventilation or oxygen. Among 16 patients with plasma IL-6 measurement post-corticosteroid administration, a higher proportion of patients with an IL-6 value over 10 pg/mL have worse outcomes (i.e. ICU Length of Stay > 15 days or death) when compared to 41 patients treated with non-corticosteroid drugs including antivirals, tocilizumab, azithromycin, and hydroxychloroquine (p-value = 0.0024). Given this unexpected clinical association between post-corticosteroid IL-6 levels and COVID-19 severity, we hypothesized that the Glucocorticoid Receptor (GR or NR3C1) may be coupled to IL-6 expression in specific cell types that govern cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Examining single cell RNA-seq data from bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of severe COVID-19 patients and nearly 2 million human cells from a pan-tissue scan shows that alveolar macrophages, smooth muscle cells, and endothelial cells co-express both NR3C1 and IL-6. The mechanism of Glucocorticoid Receptor (GR) agonists mitigating pulmonary and multi-organ inflammation in some COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure, may be in part due to their successful antagonism of IL-6 production within lung macrophages and vasculature.

positive: Glucocorticoid therapy delays the clearance of SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA in an asymptomatic COVID‐19 patient The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome‐related coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) started in Wuhan China, has become a global health concern. At present, glucocorticoid therapy is one of the most typically controversial treatments with COVID‐19 patients. Here, we reported an asymptomatic COVID‐19 patient with persistent positive detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 for 3 weeks and proposed that glucocorticoid therapy delays the clearance of SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA. Therefore, more attention must be paid to the COVID‐19 patients receiving glucocorticoid therapy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

positive: How likely are COVID-19 interventions to benefit the sickest patients?

positive: Caution against corticosteroid-based COVID-19 treatment

positive: Systemic corticosteroids show no benefit in severe and critical COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China: A retrospective cohort study Background: Systemic corticosteroids are recommended by some treatment guidelines and used in severe and critical COVID-19 patients, though evidence supporting such use is limited. Methods: From December 26, 2019 to March 15, 2020, 1514 severe and 249 critical hospitalized COVID-19 patients were collected from two medical centers in Wuhan, China. We performed multivariable Cox models, Cox model with time-varying exposure and propensity score analysis (both inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM)) to estimate the association of corticosteroid use with the risk of in-hospital mortality among severe and critical cases. Results: Corticosteroids were administered in 531 (35.1%) severe and 159 (63.9%) critical patients. Compared to no corticosteroid use group, systemic corticosteroid use showed no benefit in reducing in-hospital mortality in both severe cases (HR=1.77, 95% CI: 1.08-2.89, p=0.023), and critical cases (HR=2.07, 95% CI: 1.08-3.98, p=0.028). In the time-varying Cox analysis that with time varying exposure, systemic corticosteroid use still showed no benefit in either population (for severe patients, HR=2.83, 95% CI: 1.72-4.64, p< 0.001; for critical patients, HR=3.02, 95% CI: 1.59-5.73, p=0.001). Baseline characteristics were matched after IPTW and PSM analysis. For severe COVID-19 patients at admission, corticosteroid use was not associated with improved outcome in either the IPTW analysis. For critical COVID-19 patients at admission, results were consistent with former analysis that corticosteroid use did not reduce in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: Corticosteroid use showed no benefit in reducing in-hospital mortality for severe or critical cases. The routine use of systemic corticosteroids among severe and critical COVID-19 patients was not recommended.

positive: Clinical Management of Adult Coronavirus Infection Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Positive in the Setting of Low and Medium Intensity of Care: a Short Practical Review Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) is a viral infection which is rapidly spreading on a global scale and causing a severe acute respiratory syndrome that affects today about four and a half million registered cases of people around the world. The aim of this narrative review is to provide an urgent guidance for the doctors who take care of these patients. Recommendations contained in this protocol are based on limited, non-definitive, evidence and experience-based opinions about patients with low and medium intensity of care. A short guidance on the management of COVID-19 is provided for an extensive use in different hospital settings. The evidence-based knowledge of COVID-19 is rapidly evolving, and we hope that, in the near future, a definitive and most efficacious treatment will be available including a specific vaccine for SARS-CoV-2.

positive: Impact of Glucocorticoid Treatment in Sars-cov-2 Infection Mortality: a Retrospective Controlled Cohort Study Background: Evidence to support the use of steroids in COVID-19 pneumonia is lacking. We aim to determine the impact of steroid use in COVID-19 pneumonia in-hospital mortality.Patients and Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study in a University hospital in Madrid, Spain, during March 2020. To determine the role of steroids in in-hospital mortality, patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and treated with steroids were compared to patients not treated with steroids, adjusting by a propensity-score for steroid treatment. Survival times were compared using log-rank test. Different steroid regimens were compared, and adjusted with a second propensity score.Results: During the study period, 463 out of 848 hospitalized patients with COVID19 pneumonia fulfilled inclusion criteria. Among them, 396 (46.7%) patients were treated with steroids and 67 patients were not. Global mortality was 15.1%. Median time to steroid treatment from symptom onset was 10 days (IQR 8-13). In-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with steroids than in controls (13.9% [55/396] versus 23.9% [16/67], HR 0.51 [0.27-0.96], p= 0.044). Steroid treatment reduced mortality by 41.8% relative to no steroid treatment (RRR 0,42 [0.048- 0.65). Initial treatment with 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone versus steroid pulses was not associated with in-hospital mortality (13.5% [42/310] versus 15.1% [13/86], OR 0.880 [0.449-1.726], p=0.710).Conclusions: Our results show that survival of patients with SARS-CoV2 pneumonia is higher in patients treated with glucocorticoids than in those not treated. In-hospital mortality was not different between initial regimens of 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone and glucocorticoid pulses.

positive: Pathophysiology, Transmission, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Review. Importance The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, due to the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has caused a worldwide sudden and substantial increase in hospitalizations for pneumonia with multiorgan disease. This review discusses current evidence regarding the pathophysiology, transmission, diagnosis, and management of COVID-19. Observations SARS-CoV-2 is spread primarily via respiratory droplets during close face-to-face contact. Infection can be spread by asymptomatic, presymptomatic, and symptomatic carriers. The average time from exposure to symptom onset is 5 days, and 97.5% of people who develop symptoms do so within 11.5 days. The most common symptoms are fever, dry cough, and shortness of breath. Radiographic and laboratory abnormalities, such as lymphopenia and elevated lactate dehydrogenase, are common, but nonspecific. Diagnosis is made by detection of SARS-CoV-2 via reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing, although false-negative test results may occur in up to 20% to 67% of patients; however, this is dependent on the quality and timing of testing. Manifestations of COVID-19 include asymptomatic carriers and fulminant disease characterized by sepsis and acute respiratory failure. Approximately 5% of patients with COVID-19, and 20% of those hospitalized, experience severe symptoms necessitating intensive care. More than 75% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 require supplemental oxygen. Treatment for individuals with COVID-19 includes best practices for supportive management of acute hypoxic respiratory failure. Emerging data indicate that dexamethasone therapy reduces 28-day mortality in patients requiring supplemental oxygen compared with usual care (21.6% vs 24.6%; age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.74-0.92]) and that remdesivir improves time to recovery (hospital discharge or no supplemental oxygen requirement) from 15 to 11 days. In a randomized trial of 103 patients with COVID-19, convalescent plasma did not shorten time to recovery. Ongoing trials are testing antiviral therapies, immune modulators, and anticoagulants. The case-fatality rate for COVID-19 varies markedly by age, ranging from 0.3 deaths per 1000 cases among patients aged 5 to 17 years to 304.9 deaths per 1000 cases among patients aged 85 years or older in the US. Among patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit, the case fatality is up to 40%. At least 120 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are under development. Until an effective vaccine is available, the primary methods to reduce spread are face masks, social distancing, and contact tracing. Monoclonal antibodies and hyperimmune globulin may provide additional preventive strategies. Conclusions and Relevance As of July 1, 2020, more than 10 million people worldwide had been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Many aspects of transmission, infection, and treatment remain unclear. Advances in prevention and effective management of COVID-19 will require basic and clinical investigation and public health and clinical interventions.

positive: Dexamethasone for COVID-19? Not so fast Recent announcements indicated, without sharing any distinct published set of results, that the corticosteroid dexamethasone may reduce mortality of severe COVID-19 patients only. The recent Coronavirus [severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2]-associated multiorgan disease, called COVID-19, has high morbidity and mortality due to autoimmune destruction of the lungs stemming from the release of a storm of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Defense against this Corona virus requires activated T cells and specific antibodies. Instead, cytokines are responsible for the serious sequelae of COVID-19 that damage the lungs. Dexamethasone is a synthetic corticosteroid approved by the FDA 1958 as a broad-spectrum immunosuppressor and it is about 30 times as active and with longer duration of action (2-3 days) than cortisone. Dexamethasone would limit the production of and damaging effect of the cytokines, but will also inhibit the protective function of T cells and block B cells from making antibodies, potentially leading to increased plasma viral load that will persist after a patient survives SARS. Moreover, dexamethasone would block macrophages from clearing secondary, nosocomial, infections. Hence, dexamethasone may be useful for the short-term in severe, intubated, COVID-19 patients, but could be outright dangerous during recovery since the virus will not only persist, but the body will be prevented from generating protective antibodies. Instead, a pulse of intravenous dexamethasone may be followed by administration of nebulized triamcinolone (6 times as active as cortisone) to concentrate in the lungs only. These corticosteroids could be given together with the natural flavonoid luteolin because of its antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties, especially its ability to inhibit mast cells, which are the main source of cytokines in the lungs. At the end, we should remember that "The good physician treats the disease; the great physician treats the patient who has the disease" [Sir William Osler's (1849-1919)].

positive: [A study of pulmonary inflammatory reaction induced by N-protein of SARS-CoV in rat models and effects of glucocorticoids on it]. OBJECTIVE To study the pulmonary inflammatory reaction induced by N-protein of SARS-CoV in rat models and the effects of glucocorticoids on the inflammatory reaction. METHODS The pulmonary inflammatory reaction in rat models were induced by intratracheal instillation of N-protein of SARS-CoV with a dose of 0.2 mg/kg. The rats were randomly divided into four groups: normal saline control group (Nc group), N-protein group 1 (P1 group, 6 h), N-protein group 2 (P2 group, 24 h), and N-protein + dexamethasone group (P + D group, dexamethasone 10 mg/kg intraperitoneally). The blood samples, bronchial alveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and lung tissue were collected after challenge. The cytological and histopathologic changes of lung tissues were observed and the wet/dry ratios (W/D) of lung tissue were determined. The interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10 and transforming growth factor-beta1 (TGF-beta1) of serum and BALF were measured by ELISA. RESULTS (1) Compared with the percentage of peripheral blood lymphocytes in Nc group [(68.42 +/- 13.07)%], that in P2 group [(50.50 +/- 14.36)%] was significantly decreased (P < 0.05); compared with Nc group and P2 group, that in P + D group was furthermore significantly decreased (P < 0.01). Compared with the total WBC of peripheral blood in Nc group [(5.86 +/- 2.25) x 10(9)] and P2 group [(4.83 +/- 1.49) x 10(9)], that in P + D group [(1.96 +/- 1.30) x 10(9)] was significantly decreased (P < 0.01). (2) Compared with the total WBC of BALF in Nc group [(95 +/- 29) x 10(7)], that in P2 group [(160 +/- 60) x 10(7)] was significantly increased (P < 0.05); but compared with P2 group, that in P + D group [(62 +/- 23) x 10(7)] was significantly decreased (P < 0.05). Analysis of BALF differential cell counts showed that the majority of cells were alveolar macrophages in all groups. (3) The W/D ratios of lung tissue in both P1 and P2 group [(5.18 +/- 0.29) and (5.19 +/- 0.34), respectively] after N-protein challenge were significantly increased than that in Nc groups [(4.77 +/- 0.27), P < 0.05]; the W/D ratio in P + D group (4.70 +/- 0.18) was significantly decreased than that in P2 group (P < 0.01). (4) Compared with Nc group, the levels of IL-6, IL-10, TGF-beta1 in both serum and BALF of P1 group were significantly increased (P < 0.01), and the levels of these cytokines in P2 group were significantly higher than those in P1 group (P < 0.01), but significantly lower in P + D group compared with P2 group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS The N-protein of SARS-CoV had pathogenicity and could induce obvious pulmonary inflammatory reaction and acute lung injury, which were related to the increase and imbalance of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines. Glucocorticoids could effectively alleviate the pulmonary inflammatory reaction induced by N-protein of SARS-CoV.

positive: Effectiveness and safety of available treatments for COVID-19 during pregnancy: a critical review Background: COVID-19 is a pandemic disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 and it spread globally in the last few months. The complete lack of specific treatment forced clinicians to use old drugs, chosen for their efficacy against similar viruses or their in vitro activity. Trials on patients are ongoing but the majority of information comes from small case series and single center reports. We aimed to provide a literature review on the putative effectiveness and safety of available treatments for COVID-19 in pregnant women. Methods: We reviewed all the available literature concerning the drugs that have been used in the treatment of COVID-19 during pregnancy and whose safe assumption during pregnancy had been demonstrated by clinical studies (i.e. including studies on other infectious diseases). Drugs contra-indicated during pregnancy or with unknown adverse effects were not included in our review. Results and conclusions: Clinical trials are not often conducted among pregnant patients for safety reasons and this means that drugs that may be effective in general population cannot be used for pregnant women due to the lack of knowledge of side effects in this category of people .The choice to use a specific drug for COVID-19 in pregnancy should take into account benefits and possible adverse events in each single case. In the current situation of uncertainty and poor knowledge about the management of COVID-19 during pregnancy, this present overview may provide useful information for physicians with practical implications.

positive: The effect of corticosteroid treatment on patients with coronavirus infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis Abstract Objectives An outbreak of novel coronavirus in 2019 threatens the health of people, and there is no proven pharmacological treatment. Although corticosteroids were widely used during outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome and Middle East respiratory syndrome, their efficacy remainedhighly controversial. We aimed to further evaluate the influence of corticosteroids on patients with coronavirus infection. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search of literature published in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) from January 1, 2002 to March 15, 2020. All statistical analyses in this study were performed on stata14.0. Results A total of 5270 patients from 15 studies were included in this meta-analysis. The result indicated that critical patients were more likely to require corticosteroids therapy (risk ratio [RR] = 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.28-1.90, P<0.001). However, corticosteroid treatment was associated with higher mortality (RR = 2.11, 95%CI = 1.13-3.94, P = 0.019), longer length of stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 6.31, 95%CI = 5.26–7.37, P<0.001), a higher rate of bacterial infection (RR = 2.08, 95%CI = 1.54–2.81, P<0.001), and hypokalemia (RR = 2.21, 95%CI = 1.07–4.55, P = 0.032) but not hyperglycemia (RR = 1.37, 95%CI=0.68–2.76, P = 0.376) or hypocalcemia (RR = 1.35, 95%CI = 0.77–2.37, P = 0.302). Conclusions Patients with severe conditions are more likely to require corticosteroids. Corticosteroid use is associated with increased mortality in patients with coronavirus pneumonia.

positive: Emerging Treatment and Prevention Strategies against COVID-19: A Brief Update Patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at significantly increased risk for mortality and morbidity. Current management remains supportive care, ranging from symptomatic outpatient management to full–intensive care support, including intravenous fluids, invasive, and non-invasive oxygen supplementation. In patients with septic shock, treatment with antibiotics and vasopressors are recommended to keep mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mm Hg and lactate < 2 mmol/L. Because of the lack of effectiveness and possible adverse effects, routine corticosteroids should be avoided unless they are indicated for another reason (exacerbation of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], and septic shock in whom fluids and vasopressors do not restore hemodynamic stability). There is currently no sufficient evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, remdesivir, and other antivirals in the treatment or prevention of COVID-19. Limited evidence shows that COVID-19 convalescent plasma can be used as a treatment of COVID-19 without the occurrence of severe adverse events. Drug regulatory agencies granted an emergency-use authorization of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir to treat patients when a clinical trial is not available or participation is not feasible. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are associated with QT interval prolongation and life-threatening cardiac arrhythmia in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Guidelines are issued for use of convalescent plasma in patients with serious or immediately life-threatening COVID-19. Data from several ongoing randomized controlled trials will provide further evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Thalidomide combined with low-dose short-term glucocorticoid in the treatment of critical Coronavirus Disease 2019.

positive: Can steroids reverse the severe COVID-19 induced 'cytokine storm'? Severe COVID-19 is characterized by an excessive pro-inflammatory cytokine storm, resulting in acute lung injury and development of ARDS. The role of corticosteroids is controversial in severe COVID-19 pneumonia and associated hyper-inflammatory syndrome. We reported a case series of six consecutive COVID-19 patients with severe pneumonia, ARDS and laboratory indices of hyper-inflammatory syndrome. All patients were treated early with a short course of corticosteroids, and clinical outcomes were compared before and after corticosteroids administration. All patients evaded intubation and intensive care admission, ARDS resolved within 11.8 days (median), viral clearance was achieved in 4 patients within 17.2 days (median), and all patients were discharged from the hospital in 16.8 days (median). Early administration of short course corticosteroids improves clinical outcome of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and evidence of immune hyper-reactivity. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

positive: Dexamethasone in the management of covid -19.

positive: Covid-19: Demand for dexamethasone surges as RECOVERY trial publishes preprint

positive: Acute immune thrombocytopaenic purpura in a patient with COVID-19 and decompensated cirrhosis We report on a patient with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and decompensated cirrhosis who experienced a favourable outcome of severe immune thrombocytopaenic purpura (ITP) after administration of intravenous immunoglobulin and high-dose dexamethasone. The present case suggests that it is reasonable to evoke ITP in case of profound thrombocytopaenia in a patient with COVID-19.

positive: Acute maculopapular eruption in Covid-19 patient: A case report We report the case of a positive COVID-19 patient who presented to our hospital for a maculopapular skin rash which appeared 7 days after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. He was 34 years old and nothing relevant was recorded at his previous anamnesis. The patient was hospitalized for 3 days and received systemic therapy with steroid, antihistamines, tocilizumab, and hydroxicloroquine. On the third day of the hospitalization the cutaneous rash had almost completely disappeared.

positive: Dexamethasone in the management of covid -19

positive: A critical evaluation of glucocorticoids in the management of severe COVID-19 The viral infection by SARS-CoV-2 has irrevocably altered the life of the majority of human beings, challenging national health systems worldwide, and pushing researchers to rapidly find adequate preventive and treatment strategies. No therapies have been shown effective with the exception of dexamethasone, a glucocorticoid that was recently proved to be the first life-saving drug in this disease. Remarkably, around 20 % of infected people develop a severe form of COVID-19, giving rise to respiratory and multi-organ failures requiring subintensive and intensive care interventions. This phenomenon is due to an excessive immune response that damages pulmonary alveoli, leading to a cytokine and chemokine storm with systemic effects. Indeed glucocorticoids' role in regulating this immune response is controversial, and they have been used in clinical practice in a variety of countries, even without a previous clear consensus on their evidence-based benefit.

positive: No Clear Benefit to the Use of Corticosteroid as Treatment in Adult Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 : A Retrospective Cohort Study Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is becoming an increasing global health issue which has spread across the globe. We aimed to study the effect of corticosteroids in the treatment of adult inpatients with COVID-19. Methods A retrospective cohort of 115 consecutive adult COVID-19 patients admitted to The Third Peoples Hospital of Hubei Province between Jan 18, 2020, and Feb 28, 2020 was analysed to study the effectiveness of corticosteroid. They were categorized according to whether or not corticosteroid therapy was given, and compared in terms of demographic characteristics, clinical features, laboratory indicators and clinical outcomes. The primary endpoint was defined as either mortality or intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Known adverse prognostic factors were used as covariates in multiple logistic regressions to adjust for their confounding effects on outcomes. Results Among 115 patients, 73 patients (63.5%) received corticosteroid. The levels of age, C-reactive protein, D-dimer and albumin were similar in both groups. The corticosteroid group had more adverse outcomes (32.9% vs. 11.9%) and statistically significant differences were observed (p=0.013). In multivariate analysis, corticosteroid treatment was associated with a 2.155-fold increase in risk of either mortality or ICU admission, although not statistically significant. Conclusion No evidence suggests that adult patients with COVID-19 will benefit from corticosteroids, and they might be more likely to be harmed with such treatment.

positive: Treatment and research lines for the patient with COVID-19. What do we have and where are we going? Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) represents the most significant global public health crisis of this generation. From the beginning of the pandemic, several publications and on-line resources about different treatment lines have been done, and development effort in response to the COVID-19 pandemic to investigate potential therapies is unprecedented. Unfortunately, until now, there is not enough evidence to recommend any specific anti-COVID19 treatment. Randomized clinical trials and high-quality evidence, even in the middle of a pandemic, are needed. We provide a review of the latest published literature on the therapeutic strategies and current investigational lines for SARS-CoV-2.

positive: Pharmacologic Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Review. Importance The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents an unprecedented challenge to identify effective drugs for prevention and treatment. Given the rapid pace of scientific discovery and clinical data generated by the large number of people rapidly infected by SARS-CoV-2, clinicians need accurate evidence regarding effective medical treatments for this infection. Observations No proven effective therapies for this virus currently exist. The rapidly expanding knowledge regarding SARS-CoV-2 virology provides a significant number of potential drug targets. The most promising therapy is remdesivir. Remdesivir has potent in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, but it is not US Food and Drug Administration approved and currently is being tested in ongoing randomized trials. Oseltamivir has not been shown to have efficacy, and corticosteroids are currently not recommended. Current clinical evidence does not support stopping angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis of this generation and, potentially, since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. The speed and volume of clinical trials launched to investigate potential therapies for COVID-19 highlight both the need and capability to produce high-quality evidence even in the middle of a pandemic. No therapies have been shown effective to date.

positive: Routine antiemetic prophylaxis with dexamethasone during COVID-19: Should oncologists reconsider? The ongoing pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2, also known as COVID-19) has caused unprecedented strain on the global healthcare system, causing thousands of deaths worldwide. Patients with underlying conditions such as cancer are at substantial risk of acquiring and dying from this novel coronavirus. Numerous reports have shown that infection with SARS-CoV-2 causes depletion of B- and T-lymphocytes, including CD4 and CD8 T-cells, and is associated with severe illness and death and that patients with higher lymphocyte levels may have better outcomes. Dexamethasone, a widely prescribed antiemetic for acute and delayed nausea and vomiting from a variety of cancer drugs, causes B and T cell depletion, which may augment immunosuppression. Since it seems that lymphocytes are vital in the immune response to novel coronavirus, oncologists should reconsider the routine use of prophylactic dexamethasone in uninfected patients, to avoid inducing lymphopenia, which may increase risk of infection or lead to inferior outcomes if a cancer patient subsequently becomes infected. Since many cancer drugs and malignant diseases inherently cause lymphopenia, further reduction of lymphocytes with dexamethasone should be avoided if possible and if safe and effective alternative antiemetics are available during the COVID-19 crisis.

positive: Weathering the COVID-19 storm: Lessons from hematologic cytokine syndromes A subset of patients with severe COVID-19 develop profound inflammation and multi-organ dysfunction consistent with a “Cytokine Storm Syndrome” (CSS). In this review we compare the clinical features, diagnosis, and pathogenesis of COVID-CSS with other hematological CSS, namely secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (sHLH), idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease (iMCD), and CAR-T cell therapy associated Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS). Novel therapeutics targeting cytokines or inhibiting cell signaling pathways have now become the mainstay of treatment in these CSS. We review the evidence for cytokine blockade and attenuation in these known CSS as well as the emerging literature and clinical trials pertaining to COVID-CSS. Established markers of inflammation as well as cytokine levels are compared and contrasted between these four entities in order to establish a foundation for future diagnostic criteria of COVID-CSS.

positive: Effectiveness and Safety of Glucocorticoids to Treat COVID-19: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis Background: Glucocorticoids are widely used in the treatment of various pulmonary inflammatory diseases, but they are also often accompanied by significant adverse reactions. Published guidelines point out that low dose and short duration systemic glucocorticoid therapy may be considered for patients with rapidly progressing COVID-19 while the evidence is still limited. Methods: We comprehensively searched electronic databases and supplemented the screening by conducting a manual search. We included RCTs and cohort studies evaluating the effectiveness and safety of glucocorticoids in children and adults with COVID-19, SARS and MERS, and conducted meta-analyses of the main indicators that were identified in the studies. Results: Our search retrieved 23 studies, including one RCT and 22 cohort studies, with a total of 13,815 patients. In adults with COVID-19, the use of systemic glucocorticoid did not reduce mortality (RR=2.00, 95% CI: 0.69 to 5.75, I 2=90.9%) or the duration of lung inflammation (WMD=-1 days, 95% CI: -2.91 to 0.91), while a significant reduction was found in the duration of fever (WMD=-3.23 days, 95% CI: -3.56 to -2.90). In patients with SARS, glucocorticoids also did not reduce the mortality (RR=1.52, 95% CI: 0.89 to 2.60, I2=84.6%), duration of fever (WMD=0.82 days, 95% CI: -2.88 to 4.52, I2=97.9%) or duration of lung inflammation absorption (WMD=0.95 days, 95% CI: -7.57 to 9.48, I2=94.6%). The use of systemic glucocorticoid therapy prolonged the duration of hospital stay in all patients (COVID-19, SARS and MERS). Conclusions: Glucocorticoid therapy was found to reduce the duration of fever, but not mortality, duration of hospitalization or lung inflammation absorption. Long-term use of high-dose glucocorticoids increased the risk of adverse reactions such as coinfections, so routine use of systemic glucocorticoids for patients with COVID-19 cannot be recommend. Keywords: COVID-19; glucocorticoids; meta-analysis; rapid review

positive: Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of confounder-adjusted 20212 hospitalized patients Objective: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions used in treating COVID-19 and form a basis for an evidence-based guideline of COVID-19 management by evaluating the level of evidence behind each treatment regimen in different clinical settings. Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis Data Sources: PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv, SSRN, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to June 9th, 2020. Study Selection: Published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and baseline-adjusted observational studies which met our predefined eligibility criteria. Main Outcome Measures: The outcomes of interest were mortality, progression to severe disease (severe pneumonia or admission to intensive care unit (ICU)), time to viral clearance, QT prolongation, fatal cardiac complications, and non-cardiac serious adverse events. The level of evidence behind each outcome was also measured using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results: 49 studies with a total of 20212 confounder-adjusted patients were included for analysis. The risk of progression to severe pneumonia or ICU admission was significantly reduced with tocilizumab (GRADE low), anakinra (GRADE very low), and remdesivir (GRADE high) compared to standard care. Tocilizumab was shown to reduce mortality rate for both moderate-severe patients in the non-ICU setting at admission (Odds ratio (OR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 0.54, GRADE low) and critically ill patients in the ICU setting (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.91, GRADE low). High dose IVIG reduced death rate (GRADE low) while corticosteroids increased mortality for critically ill patients (GRADE moderate). Convalescent plasma and hydroxychloroquine were shown to promote viral clearance (OR 11.39, 95% CI 3.91 to 33.18, GRADE low and OR 6.08, 95% CI 2.74 to 13.48, GRADE moderate, respectively) while not altering mortality or progression to the severe courses. The combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was shown to be associated with increased QT prolongation incidence (OR 1,85, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.26, GRADE low) and fatal cardiac complications in cardiac-impaired populations (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.26 to 4.05, GRADE low). High-dose (>600mg/day) hydroxychloroquine monotherapy was significantly associated with increased non-cardiac serious adverse events (GRADE moderate). Conclusion: Anti-inflammatory agents (tocilizumab, anakinra, and IVIG) and remdesivir may safely and effectively improve outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Widely used hydroxychloroquine provides marginal clinical benefit in improving viral clearance rates whilst posing both cardiac and non-cardiac safety risks, especially in the vulnerable population. Only 20% of current evidence on pharmacological management of COVID-19 is on moderate and high evidence certainty; remaining 80% are of low or very low certainty and warrant further studies to establish firm conclusions. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO 2020: CRD42020186527.

positive: Coronavirus breakthrough: dexamethasone is first drug shown to save lives

positive: The influence of corticosteroid on patients with COVID-19 infection: A meta-analysis

positive: Efficacy and safety of current therapeutic options for COVID-19 - lessons to be learnt from SARS and MERS epidemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis The rapidly progressing of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a global concern. This meta-analysis aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of current option of therapies for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS) besides COVID-19, in an attempt to identify promising therapy for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected patients. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), and WANFANG DATA for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective cohort, and retrospective cohort studies that evaluated therapies (hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir-based therapy, and ribavirin-based therapy, etc.) for SARS, MERS, and COVID-19. The primary outcomes were mortality, virological eradication and clinical improvement, and secondary outcomes were improvement of symptoms and chest radiography results, incidence of acute respiratory disease syndrome (ARDS), utilization of mechanical ventilation, and adverse events (AEs). Summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models, and the quality of evidence was appraised using GRADEpro. Eighteen articles (5 RCTs, 2 prospective cohort studies, and 11 retrospective cohort studies) involving 4,941 patients were included. Compared with control treatment, anti-coronary virus interventions significantly reduced mortality (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44-0.96; I2 = 81.3%), remarkably ameliorate clinical improvement (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.05-2.19) and radiographical improvement (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11-2.36, I2 = 11.0 %), without manifesting clear effect on virological eradication, incidence of ARDS, intubation, and AEs. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the combination of ribavirin and corticosteroids remarkably decreased mortality (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.27-0.68). The lopinavir/ritonavir-based combination showed superior virological eradication and radiographical improvement with reduced rate of ARDS. Likewise, hydroxychloroquine improved radiographical result. For safety, ribavirin could induce more bradycardia, anemia and transaminitis. Meanwhile, hydroxychloroquine could increase AEs rate especially diarrhea. Overall, the quality of evidence on most outcomes were very low. In conclusion, although we could not draw a clear conclusion for the recommendation of potential therapies for COVID-19 considering the very low quality of evidence and wide heterogeneity of interventions and indications, our results may help clinicians to comprehensively understand the advantages and drawbacks of each anti-coronavirus agents on efficacy and safety profiles. Lopinavir/ritonavir combinations might observe better virological eradication capability than other anti-coronavirus agents. Conversely, ribavirin might cause more safety concerns especially bradycardia. Thus, large RCTs objectively assessing the efficacy of antiviral therapies for SARS-CoV-2 infections should be conducted with high priority.

positive: COVID-19 infection and glucocorticoids: update from the Italian Society of Endocrinology Expert Opinion on steroid replacement in adrenal insufficiency

positive: Reducing dexamethasone antiemetic prophylaxis during the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations from Ontario, Canada PURPOSE: People with cancer face an elevated risk of infection and severe sequelae from COVID-19. Dexamethasone is commonly used for antiemetic prophylaxis with systemic therapy for cancer. However, dexamethasone is associated with increased risk of viral and respiratory infections, and causes lymphopenia, which is associated with worse outcomes during COVID-19 infections. Our purpose was to minimize dexamethasone exposure during antiemetic prophylaxis for systemic therapy for solid tumors during the COVID-19 pandemic, while maintaining control of nausea and emesis. METHODS: We convened an expert panel to systematically review the literature and formulate consensus recommendations. RESULTS: No studies considered the impact of dexamethasone-based antiemetic regimens on the risk and severity of COVID-19 infection. Expert consensus recommended modifications to the 2019 Cancer Care Ontario Antiemetic Recommendations. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should prescribe the minimally effective dose of dexamethasone for antiemetic prophylaxis. Single-day dexamethasone dosing is recommended over multi-day dosing for regimens with high emetogenic risk excluding high-dose cisplatin, preferably in combination with palonosetron, netupitant, and olanzapine. For regimens with low emetogenic risk, 5-HT3 antagonists are recommended over dexamethasone.

positive: Critical roles of platelets in lipopolysaccharide-induced lethality: effects of glycyrrhizin and possible strategy for acute respiratory distress syndrome Abstract Within a few minutes of an intravenous injection of a lipopolysaccharide (LPS) into mice, platelets accumulate, largely in the lung. At higher doses, LPS induces rapid shock (within 10 min), leading to death within 1 h. This type of shock differs from so-called endotoxin shock, in which shock signs and death occur several hours or more later. Here, we found that platelet depletion (by a monoclonal anti-platelet antibody) prevented LPS-induced rapid shock, but increased delayed lethality. In Japan, glycyrrhizin (GL), a compound isolated from licorice, is daily and slowly infused intravenously into chronic hepatitis C patients. A single bolus intravenous injection into mice of GL (200 mg/kg or less) shortly before (or simultaneously with) LPS injection reduced the pulmonary platelet accumulation and the severity of the rapid shock, and prevented death in both the early and later periods. GL itself, at 400 mg/kg, produced no detectable abnormalities in the appearance or activity of mice. Intraperitoneal injection of aspirin or dexamethasone had only marginal effects on LPS-induced platelet responses and lethality. These results suggest that platelets play important roles in the development of both the rapid and delayed types of shock induced by LPS. Although the mechanism by which GL suppresses platelet responses and delayed lethality remains to be clarified, GL might provide a strategy for alleviating the acute respiratory distress syndrome seen in sepsis. Our results may also support the proposal by Cinatl et al. [Cinatl J, Morgenstern B, Bauer G, Chandra P, Ravenau H, Doerr HW. Glycyrrhizin, an active component of liquorice roots, and replication of SARS-associated coronavirus. Lancet 2003; 361: 2045–6.] that GL may be an effective drug against severe acute respiratory syndrome.

positive: COVID-19: Transmission, prevention, and potential therapeutic opportunities The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), remains a global challenge. Despite intense research efforts worldwide, an effective vaccine and viable treatment options have eluded investigators. Therefore, infection prevention, early viral detection and identification of successful treatment protocols provide the best approach in controlling disease spread. In this review, current therapeutic options, preventive methods and transmission routes of COVID-19 are discussed.

positive: Outpatient treatment of COVID-19 with steroids in the phase of mild pneumonia without the need for admission as an opportunity to modify the course of the disease: A structured summary of a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to explore the effectiveness and safety of oral corticosteroids (prednisone) in the treatment of early stage SARS-Cov-2 pneumonia in patients who do not yet meet hospital admission criteria. TRIAL DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial, controlled, open, parallel group, to evaluate the effectiveness of steroids in adult patients with confirmed COVID-19, with incipient pulmonary involvement, without hospital admission criteria. Patients will be stratified by the presence or not of radiological data on pneumonia. PARTICIPANTS: We will include patients with early stage SARS-Cov-2 pneumonia who do not meet hospital admission criteria from the reference hospital, the Hospital Universitario de Burgos, in the region of Castilla y León, Spain. Patients will be followed-up by specialist physicians and Primary Health Care professionals. INCLUSION CRITERIA: - Men and women. - Age between 18 and 75 years old. - Diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection, by PCR and/or IgM+ antibody test and/or antigen test. - Clinical diagnosis of lung involvement: (respiratory symptoms +/- pathological auscultation +/- O2 desaturation) - Chest X-ray with mild-moderate alterations or normal. - Patients who give their verbal informed consent in front of witnesses, which will be reflected in the patients' medical records. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: - Oxygen desaturation below 93% or P02 < 62. - Moderate-severe dyspnea or significant respiratory or general deterioration that makes admission advisable. - Chest X-ray with multifocal infiltrates. - Insulin-dependent diabetes with poor control or glycaemia in the emergency room test greater than 300 mg/ml (fasting or not). - Other significant comorbidities: Severe renal failure (creatinine clearance < 30 mL/min); cirrhosis or chronic liver disease, poorly controlled hypertension. - Heart rhythm disturbances (including prolonged QT). - Severe immunosuppression (HIV infection, long-term use of immunosuppressive agents); cancer. - Pregnant or breast-feeding women. - Patients under use of glucocorticoids for other diseases. - History of allergy or intolerance to any of the drugs in the study (prednisone, azithromycin or hydroxychloroquine). - Patients who took one or more of the study drugs in the 7 days prior to study inclusion. - Patients taking non-suppressible drugs with risk of QT prolongation or significant interactions. - Patients unwilling or unable to participate until study completion. - Participation in another study. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Eligible patients will be randomized to receive standard outpatient treatment only (group 1) or standard outpatient treatment plus prednisone (group 2). - Group 1: paracetamol 1 g/8 h (on demand) + hydroxychloroquine 400 mg/12h the first day, 200 mg/12 h for 4 days + azithromycin 500 mg/24h for 5 days. - Group 2: paracetamol 1 g/8 h (on demand) + hydroxychloroquine 400 mg/12h the first day, 200 mg/12 h for 4 days + azithromycin 500 mg/24h for 5 days + prednisone 60 mg / 24 h for 3 days, 30 mg / 24 h for 3 days and 15 mg / 24 h for 3 days. MAIN OUTCOMES: If the patient requires ambulatory observation, according to the protocol established in this respect in the Emergency Department, meets all the criteria for inclusion and none for exclusion, data will be taken by the person responsible on the data collection sheet. The main result is admission after 30 days. Secondary outcomes are 30-day ICU admission and hospital stay. The safety variable will be the occurrence of clinical symptoms or delirium related to the steroids. Also, the possible decompensations of diabetes will be measured. All tests will be on an intention-to-treat basis. RANDOMISATION: Treatment will be assigned according to stratified randomization by the presence or absence of radiological data of lung involvement (previously performed by random sequence 1:1 generated with Epidat and kept hidden by opaque, sealed envelopes, which will only be opened after inclusion and basal measurement). BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers and personnel responsible for outcomes measurement will not be blinded to group assignment, once the patient is included and the basal measurement performed, as per protocol design. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The percentage of patients with incipient lung involvement is unknown, but given that pulmonary involvement already exists it is estimated to be around 20%. We consider that the intervention could reduce this percentage to 5%, so the necessary sample size would be 200 subjects (100 per group), with a power of 80% and an estimated loss percentage of 10%. TRIAL STATUS: The protocol with code TAC-COVID-19, version 2.0 on date: April 16, 2020 is approved by the Spanish Drug Agency (AEMPS) and the local Ethics Committee. The trial is in the recruitment phase. Recruitment began 19 April, 2020 and is anticipated to be complete by April 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered under the title "OUTPATIENT TREATMENT OF EARLY PULMONARY COVID19 WITH CORTICOSTEROIDS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MODIFY THE COURSE OF THE DISEASE" with EudraCT number 2020-001622-64 , registered on 3 April 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Dexamethasone for COVID-19? Not so fast. Recent announcements indicated, without sharing any distinct published set of results, that the corticosteroid dexamethasone may reduce mortality of severe COVID-19 patients only. The recent Coronavirus [severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2]-associated multiorgan disease, called COVID-19, has high morbidity and mortality due to autoimmune destruction of the lungs stemming from the release of a storm of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Defense against this Corona virus requires activated T cells and specific antibodies. Instead, cytokines are responsible for the serious sequelae of COVID-19 that damage the lungs. Dexamethasone is a synthetic corticosteroid approved by the FDA 1958 as a broad-spectrum immunosuppressor and it is about 30 times as active and with longer duration of action (2-3 days) than cortisone. Dexamethasone would limit the production of and damaging effect of the cytokines, but will also inhibit the protective function of T cells and block B cells from making antibodies, potentially leading to increased plasma viral load that will persist after a patient survives SARS. Moreover, dexamethasone would block macrophages from clearing secondary, nosocomial, infections. Hence, dexamethasone may be useful for the short-term in severe, intubated, COVID-19 patients, but could be outright dangerous during recovery since the virus will not only persist, but the body will be prevented from generating protective antibodies. Instead, a pulse of intravenous dexamethasone may be followed by administration of nebulized triamcinolone (6 times as active as cortisone) to concentrate in the lungs only. These corticosteroids could be given together with the natural flavonoid luteolin because of its antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties, especially its ability to inhibit mast cells, which are the main source of cytokines in the lungs. At the end, we should remember that "The good physician treats the disease; the great physician treats the patient who has the disease" [Sir William Osler's (1849-1919)].

positive: Dexamethasone treatment for the acute respiratory distress syndrome: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. BACKGROUND There is no proven specific pharmacological treatment for patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The efficacy of corticosteroids in ARDS remains controversial. We aimed to assess the effects of dexamethasone in ARDS, which might change pulmonary and systemic inflammation and result in a decrease in duration of mechanical ventilation and mortality. METHODS We did a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in a network of 17 intensive care units (ICUs) in teaching hospitals across Spain in patients with established moderate-to-severe ARDS (defined by a ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen of 200 mm Hg or less assessed with a positive end-expiratory pressure of 10 cm H2O or more and FiO2 of 0·5 or more at 24 h after ARDS onset). Patients with brain death, terminal-stage disease, or receiving corticosteroids or immunosuppressive drugs were excluded. Eligible patients were randomly assigned based on balanced treatment assignments with a computerised randomisation allocation sequence using blocks of 10 opaque, sealed envelopes to receive immediate treatment with dexamethasone or continued routine intensive care (control group). Patients in the dexamethasone group received an intravenous dose of 20 mg once daily from day 1 to day 5, which was reduced to 10 mg once daily from day 6 to day 10. Patients in both groups were ventilated with lung-protective mechanical ventilation. Allocation concealment was maintained at all sites during the trial. Primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days at 28 days, defined as the number of days alive and free from mechanical ventilation from day of randomisation to day 28. Secondary outcome was all-cause mortality 60 days after randomisation. All analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01731795. FINDINGS Between March 28, 2013, and Dec 31, 2018, we enrolled 277 patients and randomly assigned 139 patients to the dexamethasone group and 138 to the control group. The trial was stopped by the data safety monitoring board due to low enrolment rate after enrolling more than 88% (277/314) of the planned sample size. The mean number of ventilator-free days was higher in the dexamethasone group than in the control group (between-group difference 4·8 days [95% CI 2·57 to 7·03]; p<0·0001). At 60 days, 29 (21%) patients in the dexamethasone group and 50 (36%) patients in the control group had died (between-group difference -15·3% [-25·9 to -4·9]; p=0·0047). The proportion of adverse events did not differ significantly between the dexamethasone group and control group. The most common adverse events were hyperglycaemia in the ICU (105 [76%] patients in the dexamethasone group vs 97 [70%] patients in the control group), new infections in the ICU (eg, pneumonia or sepsis; 33 [24%] vs 35 [25%]), and barotrauma (14 [10%] vs 10 [7%]). INTERPRETATION Early administration of dexamethasone could reduce duration of mechanical ventilation and overall mortality in patients with established moderate-to-severe ARDS. FUNDING Fundación Mutua Madrileña, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, The European Regional Development's Funds, Asociación Científica Pulmón y Ventilación Mecánica.

positive: Dexamethasone in community-acquired pneumonia

positive: Convalescent Plasma: Therapeutic Hope or Hopeless Strategy in the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic Abstract As the world faces the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, extensive efforts have been applied to identify effective therapeutic agents. Convalescent plasma collected from recovered patients has been a therapeutic modality employed for over a hundred years for various infectious pathogens. Specifically, it has been used in the treatment of many viral infections with varying degrees of clinical efficacy. As we consider the use of convalescent plasma in the battle against this new strain of coronavirus, it is prudent to review what is known from past experiences. Accordingly, the aim of this review is to examine in detail studies of convalescent plasma used during previous viral outbreaks and pandemics with particular focus on hemorrhagic fevers, influenza, and other coronaviruses. The concluding sections of this review address the potential use of convalescent plasma during the present-day SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, not only insofar as its clinical benefit but also the steps required to make convalescent plasma treatments readily available for an exponentially growing patient population. By the end, the authors hope to address the extent to which convalescent plasma represents a realistic therapeutic approach, or a distraction from other potentially useful treatments.

positive: Corticosteroids and the hyper-inflammatory phase of the COVID-19 disease

positive: Updated Approaches against SARS-CoV-2 Novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) lies behind the ongoing outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). There is a growing understanding of SARS-CoV-2 in virology, epidemiology, and clinical management strategies. However, no anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug or vaccine has been officially approved due to the absence of adequate evidence. Scientists are racing to develop a treatment for COVID-19. Recent studies have revealed many attractive therapeutic options, even if some of them remain to be further confirmed in rigorous preclinical models and clinical trials. In this minireview, we aim to summarize the updated potential approaches against SARS-CoV-2. We emphasize that further efforts are warranted to develop the safest and most effective approach.

positive: Antenatal Corticosteroids for Pregnant Women at High Risk of Preterm Delivery with COVID-19 Infection: A Decision Analysis OBJECTIVE: Antenatal corticosteroids given prior to preterm deliveries reduce the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes. However, steroid administration in the setting of a viral respiratory infection can worsen maternal outcomes. Therefore, the decision to administer corticosteroids must balance the neonatal benefits with the potential harm to the mother if she is infected with the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aimed to determine the gestational ages for which administering antenatal corticosteroids to women at high risk of preterm labor with concurrent COVID-19 infection results in improved combined maternal and infant outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: A decision-analytic model using TreeAge (2020) software was constructed for a theoretical cohort of hospitalized women with COVID-19 in the United States. All model inputs were derived from the literature. Outcomes included maternal intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death, along with infant outcomes of death, respiratory distress syndrome, intraventricular hemorrhage, and neurodevelopmental delay. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were assessed from the maternal and infant perspectives. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine if the results were robust over a range of assumptions. RESULTS: In our theoretical cohort of 10,000 women delivering between 24 and 33 weeks of gestation with COVID-19, corticosteroid administration resulted in 2,200 women admitted to the ICU and 110 maternal deaths. No antenatal corticosteroid use resulted in 1,500 ICU admissions and 75 maternal deaths. Overall, we found that corticosteroid administration resulted in higher combined QALYs up to 31 weeks of gestation in all hospitalized patients, and up to 29 weeks of gestation in ICU patients. CONCLUSION: Administration of antenatal corticosteroids at less than 32 weeks of gestation for hospitalized patients and less than 30 weeks of gestation for patients admitted to the ICU resulted in higher combined maternal and infant outcomes compared with expectant management for women at high risk of preterm birth with COVID-19 infection. These results can guide clinicians in their counseling and management of these pregnant women. KEY POINTS: · Antenatal steroids reduce adverse neonatal outcomes.. · Steroids worsen maternal outcomes in COVID-19.. · Steroids given < 32 weeks result in improved outcomes..

positive: Response to letter Steroids: a therapeutic option for COVID-19 pneumonia patients with end stage-stage renal disease

positive: Adaptations to the British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the management of acute severe UC in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: a RAND appropriateness panel OBJECTIVE: Management of acute severe UC (ASUC) during the novel COVID-19 pandemic presents significant dilemmas. We aimed to provide COVID-19-specific guidance using current British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guidelines as a reference point. DESIGN: We convened a RAND appropriateness panel comprising 14 gastroenterologists and an IBD nurse consultant supplemented by surgical and COVID-19 experts. Panellists rated the appropriateness of interventions for ASUC in the context of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Median scores and disagreement index (DI) were calculated. Results were discussed at a moderated meeting prior to a second survey. RESULTS: Panellists recommended that patients with ASUC should be isolated throughout their hospital stay and should have a SARS-CoV-2 swab performed on admission. Patients with a positive swab should be discussed with COVID-19 specialists. As per BSG guidance, intravenous hydrocortisone was considered appropriate as initial management; only in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was its use deemed uncertain. In patients requiring rescue therapy, infliximab with continuing steroids was recommended. Delaying colectomy because of COVID-19 was deemed inappropriate. Steroid tapering as per BSG guidance was deemed appropriate for all patients apart from those with COVID-19 pneumonia in whom a 4–6 week taper was preferred. Post-ASUC maintenance therapy was dependent on SARS-CoV-2 status but, in general, biologics were more likely to be deemed appropriate than azathioprine or tofacitinib. Panellists deemed prophylactic anticoagulation postdischarge to be appropriate in patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 swab. CONCLUSION: We have suggested COVID-19-specific adaptations to the BSG ASUC guideline using a RAND panel.

positive: Comprehensive analysis of drugs to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection: Mechanistic insights into current COVID-19 therapies (Review) The major impact produced by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) focused many researchers attention to find treatments that can suppress transmission or ameliorate the disease. Despite the very fast and large flow of scientific data on possible treatment solutions, none have yet demonstrated unequivocal clinical utility against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This work represents an exhaustive and critical review of all available data on potential treatments for COVID-19, highlighting their mechanistic characteristics and the strategy development rationale. Drug repurposing, also known as drug repositioning, and target based methods are the most used strategies to advance therapeutic solutions into clinical practice. Current in silico, in vitro and in vivo evidence regarding proposed treatments are summarized providing strong support for future research efforts.

positive: COVID-19-associated ARDS treated with DEXamethasone (CoDEX): Study design and rationale for a randomized trial. OBJECTIVES: The infection caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) spreads worldwide and is considered a pandemic. The most common manifestation of SARS-CoV2 infection (Coronavirus disease 2019 - COVID-19) is viral pneumonia with varying degrees of respiratory compromise and up to 40% of hospitalized patients might develop Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Several clinical trials evaluated the role of corticosteroids in non-COVID-19 ARDS with conflicting results. We designed a trial to evaluate the effectiveness of early intravenous dexamethasone administration on the number of days alive and free of mechanical ventilation within 28 days after randomization in adult patients with moderate or severe ARDS due to confirmed or probable COVID-19. METHODS: This is a pragmatic, prospective, randomized, stratified, multicenter, open-label, controlled trial including 350 patients with early-onset (less than 48h before randomization) moderate or severe ARDS, defined by the Berlin criteria, due to COVID-19. Eligible patients will be randomly allocated to either standard treatment plus dexamethasone (intervention group) or standard treatment without dexamethasone (control group). Patients in the intervention group will receive dexamethasone 20mg IV once daily for 5 days, followed by dexamethasone 10mg IV once daily for additional 5 days or until Intensive Care Unit (ICU) discharge, whichever occurs first. The primary outcome is ventilator-free days within 28 days after randomization, defined as days alive and free from invasive mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes are all-cause mortality rates at day 28, evaluation of the clinical status at day 15 assessed with a 6-level ordinal scale, mechanical ventilation duration from randomization to day 28, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score evaluation at 48h, 72h and 7 days and ICU-free days within 28. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial was approved by the Brazilian National Committee of Ethics in Research (Comissao Nacional de Etica em Pesquisa - CONEP) and National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA). An independent data monitoring committee will perform interim analyses and evaluate adverse events throughout the trial. Results will be submitted for publication after enrolment and follow-up are complete.

positive: A COVID-19 pandemic guideline in evidence-based medicine Data sources This review article scrutinised 16 clinical studies (clinical trials and observational studies) concerning coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19). Additionally, 18 guidelines about the COVID-19 were reviewed and the key points were represented in this study. Study selection The review included human trials, in-vitro studies, review articles, and credible news reports about severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and COVID-19 complications, treatment guidelines, management strategies, and epidemiological features. There were no exclusion criteria reported in this review and the included information was in English and Chinese languages. Data extraction and synthesis A descriptive review of the literature was conducted, taking a comprehensive approach. The paper consisted of three main parts: introduction, presentation, and management. The introduction part presented basic information about the SARS-CoV-2, its evolution and transmission, and the course of disease. The presentation section introduced the signs and symptoms, diagnosis, high risk groups, and complications of COVID-19. Eventually, some evidence was presented about the prevention, medical management, and measuring responses to the treatments in the management section. Results Based on the results of this study, non-pharmaceutical interventions, including strict social isolation and distancing measures, might reduce the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 by nearly 99.3 percent (reproduction number mitigating from 406 to 2.5 in 30 days). In the supportive management section, monitoring vital signs and neonatal feeding were stated as the most important factors to consider. For symptomatic neonates, medical management and intervention were mentioned as essential. It was claimed that for adults with mild infection, the best option would be home quarantine with further medical monitoring or hospitalisation if required. The following sequence was also suggested as early supportive therapy and monitoring: intravenous fluid administration, oxygen therapy, and application of corticosteroids. Management of critical patients with critical COVID-19 included admission to intensive care unit, use of continuous positive airway pressure and bi-level positive airway pressure in certain circumstances, endotracheal intubation, invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and fluid resuscitation and vasopressors. Additionally, this study suggested oseltamivir, iopinavir, remdesivir, chloroquine, baricitinib, ruxolitinib, and fedratinib as possible drugs to help manage COVID-19. A soaring c-reactive protein level and decreased albumin content in the blood were reported to be associated with a deteriorating status in COVID-19 patients. To keep the number of exposures to a minimum, two separate viral clearance tests taken at least 24 hours apart, were stated as necessary laboratory results before the discharge of patients with COVID-19. Conclusions The study warns about possible exponential spread of COVID-19 and proposes to adhering to tighter restrictions of social distancing. Besides the clinical guidelines presented within the study, it also encourages further up-to-date and evidence-based management guidelines for patients with COVID-19.

positive: Blinded randomised controlled trial of low-dose Adjuvant Steroids in Adults admitted to hospital with Pandemic influenza (ASAP): a trial 'in hibernation', ready for rapid activation. BACKGROUND There are no completed randomised trials of the use of corticosteroids in patients with severe influenza infection. Corticosteroid use in influenza is widespread, non-systematic and marked by controversy. A recent meta-analysis of observational studies of adjuvant corticosteroids in influenza found an association with increased mortality but there were important concerns regarding the risks of bias. OBJECTIVES To (1) evaluate whether or not low-dose corticosteroids given as an adjunct to standard treatment is beneficial in patients who are hospitalised with severe pandemic influenza and (2) develop an 'off-the-shelf' clinical trial that is ready to be activated in a future pandemic. DESIGN Multicentre, pragmatic, blinded, randomised placebo-controlled trial. SETTING Thirty to 40 hospitals in the UK. PARTICIPANTS Adults (≥ 16 years) admitted to hospital with an influenza-like illness during a pandemic. INTERVENTION Five-day course of dexamethasone (Dexsol®, Rosemont Pharmaceuticals Ltd) 6 mg daily, started within 24 hours of admission. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Admission to Intensive Care Unit, or death, within 30 days of admission to hospital. RESULTS This trial has not yet been activated. It is currently set up with full ethics and regulatory approvals in place, ready for rapid activation at the onset of the next pandemic. Hurdles to setting up a pandemic trial include planning for pandemic-level pressures on UK NHS resources and co-enrolment of patients to multiple pandemic studies, ensuring adequate geographical distribution of participating sites, maintaining long-term low-level engagement with site investigators, addressing future trial-specific training needs of local investigators and resilience planning in trial management. Identified threats to trial delivery include changes to research capabilities or policies during the hibernation phase, lack of staff resources during a pandemic and the influence of media at the time of a pandemic. A mismatch in the approach to informed consent required by current regulations to that preferred by patients and the public was identified. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates that advance set-up of a trial to be conducted during a pandemic, with full regulatory approvals in place, is possible. Regular review during the hibernation phase will be required. This study serves as a model for the development of other 'off-the-shelf' trials as part of preparedness planning for public health emergencies. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN72331452. European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials number: 2013-001051-12. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

positive: IMPACT OF GLUCOCORTICOID TREATMENT IN SARS-COV-2 INFECTION MORTALITY: A RETROSPECTIVE CONTROLLED COHORT STUDY Objective: We aim to determine the impact of steroid use in COVID-19 pneumonia in-hospital mortality. Design: We performed a single-centre retrospective cohort study. Setting: A University hospital in Madrid, Spain, during March 2020. Participants: Patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Exposures: Patients treated with steroids were compared to patients not treated with steroids. A propensity-score for steroid treatment was developed. Different steroid regimens were also compared, and adjusted with a second propensity score. Main Outcomes and Measures: To determine the role of steroids in in-hospital mortality, univariable and multivariable analyses were performed, and adjusted including the propensity score as a covariate. Survival times were compared using a log-rank test. Results: During the study period, 463 out of 848 hospitalized patients with COVID19 pneumonia fulfilled inclusion criteria. Among them, 396 (46.7%) consecutive patients were treated with steroids and 67 patients were assigned to the control cohort. Global mortality was 15.1%. Median time to steroid treatment from symptom onset was 10 days (IQR 8 to13). In-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with steroids than in controls (13.9% [55/396] versus 23.9% [16/67], OR 0.51 [0.27 to 0.96], p= 0.044). Steroid treatment reduced mortality by 41.8% relative to no steroid treatment (RRR 0,42 [0.048 to 0.65). Initial treatment with 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone (or equivalent) versus steroid pulses was not associated with in-hospital mortality (13.5% [42/310] versus 15.1% [13/86], OR 0.880 [0.449-1.726], p=0.710). Conclusions: Our results show that survival of patients with SARS-CoV2 pneumonia is higher in patients treated with glucocorticoids than in those not treated. In-hospital mortality was not different between initial regimens of 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone or equivalent and glucocorticoid pulses. These results support the use of glucocorticoids in SARS-CoV2 infection.

positive: Pulmonary Capillary Leak Syndrome following COVID‐19 Virus Infection Pulmonary capillary leak syndrome secondary to influenza SARS‐CoV‐2virus infection was not previously reported. We report 2 cases. The diagnosis of non‐cardiogenic pulmonary edema due to pulmonary capillary leak syndrome SARS‐CoV‐2 virus infection was obtained by a medical committee of 6 physicians. The diagnosis of COVID‐19 infection is confirmed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) test. Moreover, in this specific endemic situation, and according to the British Society of Thoracic Imaging expert reference group update, we took account of chest CT‐Scan results in the early detection of COVID‐19 pneumonia. Our 2 patients with a confirmed influenza SARS‐CoV‐2virus infection had respiratory distress with lung crackles on auscultation of one or both lungs and with alveolar pulmonary edema on the chest CT‐Scan. The cardiogenic nature of pulmonary edema was ruled out in both cases by a transthoracic echocardiography showing normal systolic and diastolic functions. Our patients were treated by oxygen via face mask in one case and mechanical ventilation as supportive treatment in the other patient. Hydroxychloroquine (600mg/day), Azithromycine, steroids (dexamethasone 20mg/day), vitamin C (3g/day), Zinc, diuretics and Enoxaparine were equally used for the two patients. Evolution was marked by a good outcome in both of them. In summary, acute respiratory failure is a rare but major complication of COVID‐19 virus infection. It is due to pulmonary capillary leak syndrome. Treatment is based on a good oxygenation, intravenous corticosteroids, diuretics, Azithromycine, vitamin C, and other symptomatic treatments. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

positive: COVID-19 and immunomodulation treatment for women with reproductive failures COVID-19 pandemic is affecting various areas of health care, including human reproduction. Many women with reproductive failures, during the peri-implantation period and pregnancy, are on the immunotherapy using immune modulators and immunosuppressant due to underlying autoimmune diseases, cellular immune dysfunction, and rheumatic conditions. Many questions have been raised for women with immunotherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic, including infection susceptibility, how to manage women with an increased risk of and active COVID-19 infection. SARS-CoV-2 is a novel virus, and not enough information exists. Yet, we aim to review the data from previous coronavirus outbreaks and current COVID-19 and provide interim guidelines for immunotherapy in women with reproductive failures.

positive: Kidney transplant patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection: the brescia renal COVID task force experience The outcome of kidney transplant patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection is still unclear. Here we describe the clinical characteristics, disease outcome and risk factors for ARDS and death of a cohort of 53 kidney transplant patients with COVID‐19. 8/53 have been handled as outpatients due to mild disease, on average with immunosuppression reduction and the addiction of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin; no patients required admission, developed ARDS or died. 45/53 required admission due to severe symptoms: this cohort has been managed with immunosuppression withdrawal, methylprednisolone 16 mg/day, hydroxychloroquine and antiviral drugs. Dexamethasone and tocilizumab were considered in case of ARDS. 33% of the patients developed AKI, 60% ARDS and 33% died. In this group, thrombocytopenia was associated to ARDS while lymphopenia at the baseline, higher D‐dimer and lack of CRP reduction with risk of death. In the overall population, dyspnoea was associated with the risk of ARDS while age older than 60 years and dyspnoea with the risk of death with only a trend towards an increased risk of death for patients on tacrolimus. In conclusion, SARS‐CoV‐2 infection may have a variable outcome in renal transplant patients, with higher risk of ARDS and death in the ones requiring admission.

positive: Current evidence for directed and supportive investigational therapies against COVID-19 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global health crisis. There is currently a great need for effective and safe therapies directed at the disease, but no drugs are presently registered for use in COVID-19. Several directed therapies have been proposed, and most are still in clinical trials. Currently available published, peer-reviewed results mostly involve small sample sizes with study limitations restricting the interpretation of the findings. Many trials currently published also do not have a control group, limiting the interpretation of the effect of the intervention. Investigational directed therapies as well as investigational supportive therapies against COVID-19 are reviewed here. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine show promise as directed therapies, but current trial results are conflicting. Lopinavir/ritonavir also shows potential, but was started late in the disease course in most trials. No randomised controlled evidence is currently available for remdesivir and favipiravir. Corticosteroid use is not recommended for directed therapy against COVID-19, and the role of tocilizumab is currently unclear, based on limited evidence. Early initiation of investigational directed therapies may provide benefit in selected patients. The results from larger randomised controlled trials will clarify the place of these therapies in COVID-19 treatment.

positive: Association of RANTES with the replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus in THP-1 cells. BACKGROUND Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is a novel infectious disease which is characterized by an overaggressive immune response. Chemokines are important inflammatory mediators and regulate disease due to viral infection. In previous study, we found that SARS-CoV has the ability to replicate in mononuclear cells. In present work, we sought to characterize the replication of SARS-CoV at the presence of RANTES in THP-1 cells. METHODS To determine whether RANTES play an role in the process of SARS, THP-1 cells were incubated with heat-inactivated SARS-CoV and ELISA was used to test RANTES levels in the supernatants; Then the effect of dexamethasone on the induced secretion was evaluated. Real-time PCR was used to investigate the effort of RANTES on the replication of SARS-CoV in vitro. Macrophages, induced by THP-1 cells, were used as cell model. FINDINGS Inactive SARS-CoV could induce THP-1 cells secret RANTES and this increase effect could not be suppressed by DXM. RANTES itself could inhibit the replication of SARS-CoV in THP-1 cells when it was added into the culture before or at the same time with the virus; No inhibition effect was shown when RANTES were added into the culture after SARS-CoV infected the cells.

positive: Corticosteroid treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of corticosteroid treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). DESIGN, SETTING: Observational study in the two COVID‐19‐designated hospitals in Wuhu, Anhui province, China, 24 January – 24 February 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty‐one patients infected with the severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) treated at the two designated hospitals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Virus clearance time, length of hospital stay, and duration of symptoms, by treatment type (including or not including corticosteroid therapy). RESULTS: Eleven of 31 patients with COVID‐19 received corticosteroid treatment. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis indicated no association between corticosteroid treatment and virus clearance time (hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 0.58–2.74), hospital length of stay (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.33–1.78), or duration of symptoms (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.40–1.83). Univariate analysis indicated that virus clearance was slower in two patients with chronic hepatitis B infections (mean difference, 10.6 days; 95% CI, 6.2–15.1 days). CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroids are widely used when treating patients with COVID‐19, but we found no association between therapy and outcomes in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome. An existing HBV infection may delay SARS‐CoV‐2 clearance, and this association should be further investigated.

positive: Effectiveness and safety of glucocorticoids to treat COVID-19: a rapid review and meta-analysis. Background Glucocorticoids are widely used in the treatment of various pulmonary inflammatory diseases, but they are also often accompanied by significant adverse reactions. Published guidelines point out that low dose and short duration systemic glucocorticoid therapy may be considered for patients with rapidly progressing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) while the evidence is still limited. Methods We comprehensively searched electronic databases and supplemented the screening by conducting a manual search. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies evaluating the effectiveness and safety of glucocorticoids in children and adults with COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and conducted meta-analyses of the main indicators that were identified in the studies. Results Our search retrieved 23 studies, including one RCT and 22 cohort studies, with a total of 13,815 patients. In adults with COVID-19, the use of systemic glucocorticoid did not reduce mortality [risk ratio (RR) =2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.69 to 5.75, I2=90.9%] or the duration of lung inflammation [weighted mean difference (WMD) =-1 days, 95% CI: -2.91 to 0.91], while a significant reduction was found in the duration of fever (WMD =-3.23 days, 95% CI: -3.56 to -2.90). In patients with SARS, glucocorticoids also did not reduce the mortality (RR =1.52, 95% CI: 0.89 to 2.60, I2=84.6%), duration of fever (WMD =0.82 days, 95% CI: -2.88 to 4.52, I2=97.9%) or duration of lung inflammation absorption (WMD =0.95 days, 95% CI: -7.57 to 9.48, I2=94.6%). The use of systemic glucocorticoid therapy prolonged the duration of hospital stay in all patients (COVID-19, SARS and MERS). Conclusions Glucocorticoid therapy was found to reduce the duration of fever, but not mortality, duration of hospitalization or lung inflammation absorption. Long-term use of high-dose glucocorticoids increased the risk of adverse reactions such as coinfections, so routine use of systemic glucocorticoids for patients with COVID-19 cannot be recommend.

positive: Short-Term Dexamethasone in Sars-CoV-2 Patients BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone, a synthetic glucocorticoid, has anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive properties There is a hyperinflammatory response involved in the clinical course of patients with pneumonia due to SARS-CoV-2 To date, there has been no definite therapy for COVID-19 We reviewed the charts of SARS-CoV-2 patients with pneumonia and moderate to severely elevated CRP and worsening hypoxemia who were treated with early, short-term dexamethasone METHODS: We describe a series of 21 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were admitted to The Miriam Hospital in Providence, RI, and were treated with a short course of dexamethasone, either alone or in addition to current investigative therapies RESULTS: CRP levels decreased significantly following the start of dexamethasone from mean initial levels of 129 52 to 40 73 mg/L at time of discharge 71% percent of the patients were discharged home with a mean length of stay of 7 8 days None of the patients had escalation of care, leading to mechanical ventilation Two patients were transferred to inpatient hospice facilities on account of persistent hypoxemia, in line with their documented goals of care CONCLUSIONS: A short course of systemic corticosteroids among inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 with hypoxic respiratory failure was well tolerated, and most patients had improved outcomes This limited case series may not offer concrete evidence towards the benefit of corticosteroids in COVID-19 However, patients' positive response to short-term corticosteroids demonstrates that they may help blunt the severity of inflammation and prevent a severe hyperinflammatory phase, in turn reducing the length of stay, ICU admissions, and healthcare costs

positive: Antenatal Corticosteroids for Pregnant Women at High Risk of Preterm Delivery with COVID-19 Infection: A Decision Analysis. OBJECTIVE Antenatal corticosteroids given prior to preterm deliveries reduce the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes. However, steroid administration in the setting of a viral respiratory infection can worsen maternal outcomes. Therefore, the decision to administer corticosteroids must balance the neonatal benefits with the potential harm to the mother if she is infected with the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aimed to determine the gestational ages for which administering antenatal corticosteroids to women at high risk of preterm labor with concurrent COVID-19 infection results in improved combined maternal and infant outcomes. STUDY DESIGN A decision-analytic model using TreeAge (2020) software was constructed for a theoretical cohort of hospitalized women with COVID-19 in the United States. All model inputs were derived from the literature. Outcomes included maternal intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death, along with infant outcomes of death, respiratory distress syndrome, intraventricular hemorrhage, and neurodevelopmental delay. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were assessed from the maternal and infant perspectives. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine if the results were robust over a range of assumptions. RESULTS In our theoretical cohort of 10,000 women delivering between 24 and 33 weeks of gestation with COVID-19, corticosteroid administration resulted in 2,200 women admitted to the ICU and 110 maternal deaths. No antenatal corticosteroid use resulted in 1,500 ICU admissions and 75 maternal deaths. Overall, we found that corticosteroid administration resulted in higher combined QALYs up to 31 weeks of gestation in all hospitalized patients, and up to 29 weeks of gestation in ICU patients. CONCLUSION Administration of antenatal corticosteroids at less than 32 weeks of gestation for hospitalized patients and less than 30 weeks of gestation for patients admitted to the ICU resulted in higher combined maternal and infant outcomes compared with expectant management for women at high risk of preterm birth with COVID-19 infection. These results can guide clinicians in their counseling and management of these pregnant women. KEY POINTS · Antenatal steroids reduce adverse neonatal outcomes.. · Steroids worsen maternal outcomes in COVID-19.. · Steroids given < 32 weeks result in improved outcomes..

positive: Severe Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia in COVID-19 İnfection, Safely Treated with Steroids

positive: Tocilizumab and steroid treatment in patients with severe Covid-19 pneumonia. Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to respiratory failure due to severe immune response. Treatment targeting this immune response might be beneficial but there is limited evidence on its efficacy. The aim of this study was to determine if early treatment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with tocilizumab and/or steroids was associated with better outcome. Methods This observational single-center study included patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who were not intubated and received either standard of care (SOC, controls) or SOC plus early (within 3 days from hospital admission) anti-inflammatory treatment. SOC consisted of hydroxychloroquine 400mg bid plus, in those admitted before March 24th, also darunavir/ritonavir. Anti-inflammatory treatment consisted of either tocilizumab (8mg/kg intravenously or 162mg subcutaneously) or methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg for 5 days or both. Failure was defined as intubation or death, and the endpoints were failure-free survival (primary endpoint) and overall survival (secondary) at day 30. Difference between the groups was estimated as Hazard Ratio by a propensity score weighted Cox regression analysis (HROW). Results Overall, 196 adults were included in the analyses. They were mainly male (67.4%), with comorbidities (78.1%) and severe COVID-19 pneumonia (83.7%). Median age was 67.9 years (range, 30-100) and median PaO2/FiO2 200 mmHg (IQR 133-289). Among them, 130 received early anti-inflammatory treatment with: tocilizumab (n=29, 22.3%), methylprednisolone (n=45, 34.6%), or both (n=56, 43.1%). The adjusted failure-free survival among tocilizumab/methylprednisolone/SOC treated patients vs. SOC was 80.8% (95%CI, 72.8-86.7) vs. 64.1% (95%CI, 51.3-74.0), HROW 0.48, 95%CI, 0.23-0.99; p=0.049. The overall survival among tocilizumab/methylprednisolone/SOC patients vs. SOC was 85.9% (95%CI, 80.7-92.6) vs. 71.9% (95%CI, 46-73), HROW 0.41, 95%CI: 0.19-0.89, p=0.025. Conclusion Early adjunctive treatment with tocilizumab, methylprednisolone or both may improve outcomes in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

positive: Rapid Radiological Worsening and Cytokine Storm Syndrome in COVID-19 Pneumonia BACKGROUND: In June 2020, a large randomised controlled clinical trial in the UK found that dexamethasone was effective in reducing the number of deaths in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). CASE DESCRIPTION: We describe a patient with rapid worsening of COVID-19 pneumonia and its dramatic improvement under corticosteroids. DISCUSSION: Corticosteroids could be useful in patients with an inflammatory profile, considering that acute respiratory distress syndrome may be the consequence of cytokine storm syndrome. LEARNING POINTS: One of the main pathophysiological hypotheses for severe COVID-19 pneumonia is inappropriate immunological hyperactivation. Corticosteroid therapy may be useful in these patients.

positive: Reducing dexamethasone antiemetic prophylaxis during the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations from Ontario, Canada PURPOSE: People with cancer face an elevated risk of infection and severe sequelae from COVID-19. Dexamethasone is commonly used for antiemetic prophylaxis with systemic therapy for cancer. However, dexamethasone is associated with increased risk of viral and respiratory infections, and causes lymphopenia, which is associated with worse outcomes during COVID-19 infections. Our purpose was to minimize dexamethasone exposure during antiemetic prophylaxis for systemic therapy for solid tumors during the COVID-19 pandemic, while maintaining control of nausea and emesis. METHODS: We convened an expert panel to systematically review the literature and formulate consensus recommendations. RESULTS: No studies considered the impact of dexamethasone-based antiemetic regimens on the risk and severity of COVID-19 infection. Expert consensus recommended modifications to the 2019 Cancer Care Ontario Antiemetic Recommendations. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should prescribe the minimally effective dose of dexamethasone for antiemetic prophylaxis. Single-day dexamethasone dosing is recommended over multi-day dosing for regimens with high emetogenic risk excluding high-dose cisplatin, preferably in combination with palonosetron, netupitant, and olanzapine. For regimens with low emetogenic risk, 5-HT(3) antagonists are recommended over dexamethasone.

positive: High‐dose, short‐term corticosteroids for ARDS caused by COVID‐19: a case series We report a case series of seven mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) caused by coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) who received early treatment with high‐dose, short‐term systemic corticosteroids to prevent cytokine overproduction. Of the seven patients, four were male and median age was 69 years. They were intubated within seven days after admission when their respiratory status rapidly worsened. At that time, we administered 1000 or 500 mg/day for three days of methylprednisolone intravenously, followed by 1 mg/kg and tapered off. The median duration for the total administration of corticosteroids was 13 days. This high‐dose, short‐term corticosteroid therapy enabled extubation of the patients within seven days. Many questions on the clinical management of COVID‐19 remain unanswered, and data on corticosteroid therapy as a choice of treatment are mixed. We present the clinical course of our cases, review the previous evidence, and discuss management.

positive: Use of inhaled corticosteroids in asthma and coronavirus disease 2019: Keep calm and carry on

positive: Towards treatment planning of COVID-19: Rationale and hypothesis for the use of multiple immunosuppressive agents: Anti-antibodies, immunoglobulins, and corticosteroids The novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV2, can cause a potentially fatal disease, COVID-19, in humans. Here, we will provide an overview of therapeutic options for COVID-19. Plasma from patients recovered from COVID-19 that contains antibodies against SARS-CoV2 has shown promising results in patients with severe COVID-19. Also, IVIG, combined with moderate-dose of corticosteroids, might improve patient outcomes. Evidence links COVID-19 to variable degrees of inflammation. Studies show that the use of corticosteroids might accelerate recovery from COVID-19. There are, however, no controlled clinical trials that show whether the use of corticosteroids can reduce COVID-19-related death. Also, the pro-inflammatory cytokine IL6 is the best-documented cytokine in COVID-19 correlated with severity, criticality, viral load, and prognosis of patients with COVID-19. Tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody against IL6, could confer clinical benefit in patients with high IL6 levels. Essential elements that process SARS-CoV2 cell entry and specific characteristics that allow SARS-CoV2 to escape the immune system have the potential as targets for COVID-19 therapy.

positive: Clinical evidence does not support corticosteroid treatment for 2019-nCoV lung injury

positive: Repurposing drugs for COVID-19 based on transcriptional response of host cells to SARS-CoV-2 The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has infected over 10 million people globally with a relatively high mortality rate. There are many therapeutics undergoing clinical trials, but there is no effective vaccine or therapy for treatment thus far. After affected by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), molecular signaling of host cells plays critical roles during the life cycle of SARS-CoV-2. Thus, it is significant to identify the involved molecular signaling pathways within the host cells, and drugs targeting these molecular signaling pathways could be potentially effective for COVID-19 treatment. In this study, we aimed to identify these potential molecular signaling pathways, and repurpose existing drugs as a potentially effective treatment of COVID-19 to facilitate the therapeutic discovery, based on the transcriptional response of host cells. We first identified dysfunctional signaling pathways associated with the infection caused SARS-CoV-2 in human lung epithelial cells through analysis of the altered gene expression profiles. In addition to the signaling pathway analysis, the activated gene ontologies (GOs) and super gene ontologies were identified. Signaling pathways and GOs such as MAPK, JNK, STAT, ERK, JAK-STAT, IRF7-NFkB signaling, and MYD88/CXCR6 immune signaling were particularly identified. Based on the identified signaling pathways and GOs, a set of potentially effective drugs were repurposed by integrating the drug-target and reverse gene expression data resources. The dexamethasone was top-ranked in the prediction, which was the first reported drug to be able to significantly reduce the death rate of COVID-19 patients receiving respiratory support. The results can be helpful to understand the associated molecular signaling pathways within host cells, and facilitate the discovery of effective drugs for COVID-19 treatment.

positive: Altered pathogenesis of porcine respiratory coronavirus in pigs due to immunosuppressive effects of dexamethasone: implications for corticosteroid use in treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. The pathogenesis and optimal treatments for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) are unclear, although corticosteroids were used to reduce lung and systemic inflammation. Because the pulmonary pathology of porcine respiratory coronavirus (PRCV) in pigs resembles SARS, we used PRCV as a model to clarify the effects of the corticosteroid dexamethasone (DEX) on coronavirus (CoV)-induced pneumonia. Conventional weaned pigs (n = 130) in one of four groups (PRCV/phosphate-buffered saline [PBS] [n = 41], PRCV/DEX [n = 41], mock/PBS [n = 23], and mock/DEX [n = 25]) were inoculated intranasally and intratracheally with the ISU-1 strain of PRCV (1 x 10(7) PFU) or cell culture medium. DEX was administered (once daily, 2 mg/kg of body weight/day, intramuscularly) from postinoculation day (PID) 1 to 6. In PRCV/DEX pigs, significantly milder pneumonia, fewer PRCV-positive cells, and lower viral RNA titers were present in lungs early at PID 2; however, at PID 4, 10, and 21, severe bronchointerstitial pneumonia, significantly higher numbers of PRCV-positive cells, and higher viral RNA titers were observed compared to results for PRCV/PBS pigs. Significantly lower numbers of CD2(+), CD3(+), CD4(+), and CD8(+) T cells were also observed in lungs of PRCV/DEX pigs than in those of PRCV/PBS pigs at PID 8 and 10, coincident with fewer gamma interferon (IFN-gamma)-secreting cells in the tracheobronchial lymph nodes as determined by enzyme-linked immunospot assay. Our results confirm that DEX treatment alleviates PRCV pneumonia early (PID 2) in the infection but continued use through PID 6 exacerbates later stages of infection (PID 4, 10, and 21), possibly by decreasing cellular immune responses in the lungs (IFN-gamma-secreting T cells), thereby creating an environment for more-extensive viral replication. These data have potential implications for corticosteroid use with SARS-CoV patients and suggest a precaution against prolonged use based on their unproven efficacy in humans, including possible detrimental secondary effects.

positive: COVID-19: An Update on the Epidemiological, Clinical, Preventive and Therapeutic Evidence and Guidelines of Integrative Chinese-Western Medicine for the Management of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Disease As of 22 February 2020, more than 77662 cases of confirmed COVID-19 have been documented globally with over 2360 deaths. Common presentations of confirmed cases include fever, fatigue, dry cough, upper airway congestion, sputum production, shortness of breath, myalgia/arthralgia with lymphopenia, prolonged prothrombin time, elevated C-reactive protein, and elevated lactate dehydrogenase. The reported severe/critical case ratio is approximately 7-10% and median time to intensive care admission is 9.5-10.5 days with mortality of around 1-2% varied geographically. Similar to outbreaks of other newly identified virus, there is no proven regimen from conventional medicine and most reports managed the patients with lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, beta-interferon, glucocorticoid and supportive treatment with remdesivir undergoing clinical trial. In China, Chinese medicine is proposed as a treatment option by national and provincial guidelines with substantial utilization. We reviewed the latest national and provincial clinical guidelines, retrospective cohort studies, and case series regarding the treatment of COVID-19 by add-on Chinese medicine. We have also reviewed the clinical evidence generated from SARS and H1N1 management with hypothesized mechanisms and latest in silico findings to identify candidate Chinese medicines for the consideration of possible trials and management. Given the paucity of strongly evidence-based regimens, the available data suggest that Chinese medicine could be considered as an adjunctive therapeutic option in the management of COVID-19.

positive: Glucocorticoids in the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterized by local inflammation and an intense systemic inflammatory reaction. Glucocorticoid administration has been suggested due to their anti-inflammatory properties. However, results from the initial studies of glucocorticoids in ARDS, which evaluated high-dose and short-term treatments, were negative. More recent studies have evaluated the effect of lower doses of glucocorticoids administered over longer periods, but the results thus far have been inconclusive.

positive: Role of corticosteroid in the management of COVID-19: A systemic review and a Clinician's perspective BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Interest in corticosteroid therapy in COVID-19 has been rekindled after the results from Randomized Evaluation of COVid-19 thERapY (RECOVERY) Trial. However, the World health Organization has not recommended corticosteroid in the treatment of COVID-19. We sought to conduct a systematic review on the role of corticosteroid in the management of patients of COVID-19. METHODS: A systematic electronic search of PubMed, Cochrane and MedRxiv database using specific keywords was made up till June 17, 2020. Full text of all the original articles with supplementary appendix that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were retrieved and a detailed analysis of results were represented. RESULTS: Of the 5 studies (4 retrospective studies and 1 quasi-prospective study) conducted for evaluating the role of corticosteroids, 3 studies have shown benefit, while 2 studies shown no benefit and there was a suggestion of significant harm in critical cases in one sub-study. RECOVERY trial is the only randomized controlled trial that has shown a significant reduction of death by 35% in ventilated patients and by 20% amongst patients on supplemental oxygen therapy with the dexamethasone, although no benefit was observed in mild cases. CONCLUSIONS: While the results from retrospective studies are heterogenous and difficult to infer of a definitive protective benefit with corticosteroids, RECOVERY trial found a significantly better outcome with dexamethasone, mostly in severe cases. Nonetheless, more studies are needed to replicate the outcome shown in RECOVERY trial for a substantial conclusion.

positive: Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Treatment and Management of Patients with COVID-19 BACKGROUND: There are many pharmacologic therapies that are being used or considered for treatment of COVID-19. There is a need for frequently updated practice guidelines on their use, based on critical evaluation of rapidly emerging literature. OBJECTIVE: Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support patients, clinicians and other health-care professionals in their decisions about treatment and management of patients with COVID-19. METHODS: IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel of infectious disease clinicians, pharmacists, and methodologists with varied areas of expertise. Process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. RESULTS: The IDSA guideline panel agreed on 7 treatment recommendations and provided narrative summaries of other treatments undergoing evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: The panel expressed the overarching goal that patients be recruited into ongoing trials, which would provide much needed evidence on the efficacy and safety of various therapies for COVID-19, given that we could not make a determination whether the benefits outweigh harms for most treatments.

positive: Corticosteroids for Urological Cancer Care During Coronavirus Disease 2019. Treat or Not to Treat? Currently, the official World Health Organization guidance is not to start corticosteroids, but there is no robust evidence of risk in patients with cancer and coronavirus disease 2019. A risk-benefit analysis should be performed for each patient on the use of steroids in cancer care.

positive: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): latest developments in potential treatments Many viral respiratory infections can cause severe acute respiratory symptoms leading to mortality and morbidity. In the spring of 2003, the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak caused by SARS-CoV spread globally. In the summer of 2012, the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) outbreak caused by MERS-CoV occurred in Saudi Arabia. In the winter of 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak caused by a novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 occurred in China which rapidly spread worldwide causing a global pandemic. Up until 27 May 2020, there are 5.5 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 347,587 COVID-19 related deaths worldwide, and there has also been an unprecedented increase in socioeconomic and psychosocial issues related to COVID-19. This overview aims to review the current developments in preventive treatments and therapies for COVID-19. The development of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 is ongoing and various clinical trials are currently underway around the world. It is hoped that existing antivirals including remdesivir and lopinavir-ritonavir might have roles in the treatment of COVID-19, but results from trials thus far have not been promising. COVID-19 causes a mild respiratory disease in the majority of cases, but in some cases, cytokine activation causes sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome, leading to morbidity and mortality. Immunomodulatory treatments and biologics are also being actively explored as therapeutics for COVID-19. On the other hand, the use of steroidal and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has been discouraged based on concerns about their adverse effects. Over the past two decades, coronaviruses have caused major epidemics and outbreaks worldwide, whilst modern medicine has been playing catch-up all along.

positive: COVID-19 and Headache Medicine: A Narrative Review of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug (NSAID) and Corticosteroid Use OBJECTIVE: To summarize the current literature on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and corticosteroid use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, recognizing that these are commonly used treatments in the field of headache medicine. BACKGROUND: The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids in patients during the COVID-19 pandemic has been a controversial topic within the medical community and international and national health organizations. Lay press and social media outlets have circulated opinions on this topic despite the fact that the evidence for or against the use of these medications is sparse. In the field of headache medicine, these medications are used commonly and both patients and clinicians may have questions or hesitations pertaining to their use during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A detailed search of the scientific and popular literature was performed. RESULTS: There is limited literature pertaining to the safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids during the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, there are no clear scientific data that preclude the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the general population who may acquire COVID-19 or in those acutely infected with the virus. Several health organizations have concluded that treatment with corticosteroids during active infection should be avoided due to concerns of prolonged viral shedding in the respiratory tract and the lack of survival benefit based on the data from past coronaviruses and influenza virus; specific exceptions exist including treatment for underlying asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, septic shock, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. CONCLUSION: Scientific information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic is constantly evolving, and limited or contradictory information can lead to confusion for both patients and clinicians. It is recommended that prior to prescribing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and steroids for the treatment of headache, clinicians have open discussions with their patients about the potential risks and benefits of using these medications during the COVID-19 pandemic. This manuscript summarizes the currently available evidence and understanding about these risks and benefits to help clinicians navigate such discussions.

positive: Low dose anti-inflammatory radiotherapy for the treatment of pneumonia by covid-19: A proposal for a multi-centric prospective trial BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a highly contagious viral infection with high morbidity that is draining health resources. The biggest complication is pneumonia, which has a serious inflammatory component, with no standardized treatment. Low-dose radiation therapy (LD-RT) is non-invasive and has anti-inflammatory effects that can interfere with the inflammatory cascade, thus reducing the severity of associated cytokine release and might be useful in the treatment of respiratory complications caused by COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This multicentric prospective clinical trial seeks to evaluate the efficacy of bilateral lung LD-RT therapy as a treatment for interstitial pneumonia in patients with COVID-19 for improving respiratory function. This prospective study will have 2 phases: I) an exploratory phase enrolling 10 patients, which will assess the feasibility and efficacy of low-dose lung irradiation, evaluated according to an increase in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of at least 20% at 48–72 h with respect to the pre-irradiation value. If a minimum efficiency of 30% of the patients is not achieved, the study will not be continued. II) Non-randomized comparative phase in two groups: a control group, which will only receive pharmacological treatment, and an experimental arm with pharmacological treatment and LD-RT. It will include 96 patients, the allocation will be 1: 2, that is, 32 in the control arm and 64 in the experimental arm. The primary end-point will be the efficacy of LD-RT in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia according to an improvement in PaO2/FiO2. Secondary objectives will include the safety of bilateral lung LD-RT, an improvement in the radiology image, overall mortality rates at 15 and 30 days after irradiation and characterizing anti-inflammatory mechanisms of LD-RT by measuring the level of expression of adhesion molecules, anti-inflammatory cytokines and oxidative stress mediators. Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov NCT-04380818 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04380818?term=RADIOTHERAPY&cond=COVID&draw=2&rank=4.

positive: Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in COVID-19 based on evidence for COVID-19, other coronavirus infections, influenza, community-acquired pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BACKGROUND Very little direct evidence exists on use of corticosteroids in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Indirect evidence from related conditions must therefore inform inferences regarding benefits and harms. To support a guideline for managing COVID-19, we conducted systematic reviews examining the impact of corticosteroids in COVID-19 and related severe acute respiratory illnesses. METHODS We searched standard international and Chinese biomedical literature databases and prepublication sources for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing corticosteroids versus no corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). For acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), influenza and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), we updated the most recent rigorous systematic review. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses to pool relative risks and then used baseline risk in patients with COVID-19 to generate absolute effects. RESULTS In ARDS, according to 1 small cohort study in patients with COVID-19 and 7 RCTs in non-COVID-19 populations (risk ratio [RR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55 to 0.93, mean difference 17.3% fewer; low-quality evidence), corticosteroids may reduce mortality. In patients with severe COVID-19 but without ARDS, direct evidence from 2 observational studies provided very low-quality evidence of an increase in mortality with corticosteroids (hazard ratio [HR] 2.30, 95% CI 1.00 to 5.29, mean difference 11.9% more), as did observational data from influenza studies. Observational data from SARS and MERS studies provided very low-quality evidence of a small or no reduction in mortality. Randomized controlled trials in CAP suggest that corticosteroids may reduce mortality (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.98, 3.1% lower; very low-quality evidence), and may increase hyperglycemia. INTERPRETATION Corticosteroids may reduce mortality for patients with COVID-19 and ARDS. For patients with severe COVID-19 but without ARDS, evidence regarding benefit from different bodies of evidence is inconsistent and of very low quality.

positive: Treatment Considerations for COVID-19: A Critical Review of the Evidence (or Lack Thereof) Abstract The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is causing a worldwide pandemic that may lead to a highly morbid and potentially fatal coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). There is currently no drug that has been proven as an effective therapy for COVID-19. Several candidate drugs are being considered and evaluated for treatment. This includes clinically-available drugs, such as chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and lopinavir/ritonavir, which are being repurposed for the treatment of COVID-19. Novel experimental therapies, such as remdesivir and favipiravir, are also actively being investigated for antiviral efficacy. Clinically-available and investigational immunomodulators, such as the IL-6 inhibitors tocilizumab and sarilumab and the anti-GMCSF lenzilumab, are being tested for their anticipated effect in counteracting the pro-inflammatory cytokine environment that characterizes severe and critical COVID-19. This review article examines the evidence behind the potential use of these leading drug candidates for the treatment of COVID-19. The authors conclude, based on this review, that there is still no high-quality evidence to support any of these proposed drug therapies. The authors, therefore, encourage the enrollment of eligible patients to multiple ongoing clinical trials that assess the efficacy and safety of these candidate therapies. Until the results of controlled trials are available, none of the suggested therapeutics is clinically proven as an effective therapy for COVID-19.

positive: Coronavirus Disease 2019 Treatment: A Review of Early and Emerging Options Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has spread across the globe resulting in a pandemic. At the time of this review, COVID-19 has been diagnosed in more than 200 000 patients and associated with over 8000 deaths (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, World Health Organization). On behalf of the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists, we herein summarize the current evidence as of March 18, 2020 to provide guidance on potential COVID-19 treatment options. It is important to caution readers that new data emerges daily regarding clinical characteristics, treatment options, and outcomes for COVID-19. Optimized supportive care remains the mainstay of therapy, and the clinical efficacy for the subsequent agents is still under investigation. Antimicrobial stewardship programs, including infectious diseases pharmacists and physicians, are at the forefront of COVID-19 emergency preparedness. We encourage all readers to continue to assess clinical data as it emerges and share their experience within our community in a well-controlled, adequately powered fashion.

positive: Contrasting evidence for corticosteroid treatment for coronavirus-induced cytokine storm.

positive: Repurpose Open Data to Discover Therapeutics for COVID-19 using Deep Learning. There have been more than 2.2 million confirmed cases and over 120,000 deaths from the human coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), in the United States alone. However, there are currently lack of proven effective medications against COVID-19. Drug repurposing offers a promising way for the development of prevention and treatment strategies for COVID-19. This study reports an integrative, network-based deep learning methodology to identify repurposable drugs for COVID-19 (termed CoV-KGE). Specifically, we built a comprehensive knowledge graph that includes 15 million edges across 39 types of relationships connecting drugs, diseases, proteins/genes, pathways, and expression, from a large scientific corpus of 24 million PubMed publications. Using Amazon's AWS computing resources and a network-based, deep learning framework, we identified 41 repurposable drugs (including dexamethasone, indomethacin, niclosamide, and toremifene) whose therapeutic association with COVID-19 were validated by transcriptomic and proteomic data in SARS-CoV-2 infected human cells and data from ongoing clinical trials. While this study, by no means recommends specific drugs, it demonstrates a powerful deep learning methodology to prioritize existing drugs for further investigation, which holds the potential of accelerating therapeutic development for COVID-19.

positive: Pathophysiology, Transmission, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Review Importance: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, due to the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has caused a worldwide sudden and substantial increase in hospitalizations for pneumonia with multiorgan disease. This review discusses current evidence regarding the pathophysiology, transmission, diagnosis, and management of COVID-19. Observations: SARS-CoV-2 is spread primarily via respiratory droplets during close face-to-face contact. Infection can be spread by asymptomatic, presymptomatic, and symptomatic carriers. The average time from exposure to symptom onset is 5 days, and 97.5% of people who develop symptoms do so within 11.5 days. The most common symptoms are fever, dry cough, and shortness of breath. Radiographic and laboratory abnormalities, such as lymphopenia and elevated lactate dehydrogenase, are common, but nonspecific. Diagnosis is made by detection of SARS-CoV-2 via reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing, although false-negative test results may occur in up to 20% to 67% of patients; however, this is dependent on the quality and timing of testing. Manifestations of COVID-19 include asymptomatic carriers and fulminant disease characterized by sepsis and acute respiratory failure. Approximately 5% of patients with COVID-19, and 20% of those hospitalized, experience severe symptoms necessitating intensive care. More than 75% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 require supplemental oxygen. Treatment for individuals with COVID-19 includes best practices for supportive management of acute hypoxic respiratory failure. Emerging data indicate that dexamethasone therapy reduces 28-day mortality in patients requiring supplemental oxygen compared with usual care (21.6% vs 24.6%; age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.74-0.92]) and that remdesivir improves time to recovery (hospital discharge or no supplemental oxygen requirement) from 15 to 11 days. In a randomized trial of 103 patients with COVID-19, convalescent plasma did not shorten time to recovery. Ongoing trials are testing antiviral therapies, immune modulators, and anticoagulants. The case-fatality rate for COVID-19 varies markedly by age, ranging from 0.3 deaths per 1000 cases among patients aged 5 to 17 years to 304.9 deaths per 1000 cases among patients aged 85 years or older in the US. Among patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit, the case fatality is up to 40%. At least 120 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are under development. Until an effective vaccine is available, the primary methods to reduce spread are face masks, social distancing, and contact tracing. Monoclonal antibodies and hyperimmune globulin may provide additional preventive strategies. Conclusions and Relevance: As of July 1, 2020, more than 10 million people worldwide had been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Many aspects of transmission, infection, and treatment remain unclear. Advances in prevention and effective management of COVID-19 will require basic and clinical investigation and public health and clinical interventions.

positive: Clinical trials for coronavirus disease 2019: What is being evaluated and what is not Since the report of the first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China in late December 2019, there have been 204 610 cases worldwide as of 18 March, 2020. As part of the response to this outbreak, there has been an impressive amount of research undertaken to better characterize the disease and to evaluate therapeutic options. By March 12, 2020, there are more than 382 studies registered in the clinical trials databases addressing COVID-19 including more than 80 randomized controlled trials.

positive: [Drugs that aggravate the course of COVID-19 : really ?] The safety of NSAIDs, corticosteroids and renin-angiotensin inhibitors in COVID-19 is challenged NSAIDs may interfere with the defense process against viral infection and are best avoided Systemic corticosteroids have not shown benefit in viral infection, including other coronavirus;thus they should be avoided, unless prescribed for another indication The benefit-risk ratio is however clearly in favor of continuing inhaled corticosteroids in patients with asthma or COPD ACE inhibitors and sartans upregulate the expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), the pulmonary receptor for SARS-CoV-2 Any possible clinical impact of these treatments on COVID-19 infection remains to be clarified;in the meantime, they should be continued

positive: COVID-19 in patients with rheumatic diseases in northern Italy: a single-centre observational and case–control study BACKGROUND: The highest number of COVID-19 cases in Italy have been reported in Lombardy, a region in northern Italy. We aimed to analyse the course of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases living in a district of Lombardy with a high prevalence of COVID-19. METHODS: We did a single-centre observational study at the Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale (ASST) Spedali Civili of Brescia, Italy. We collected data from patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases enrolled in our outpatient clinic to identify confirmed or possible cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were collected through a survey that was administered via telephone or in the outpatient clinic by rheumatologists. We also did a case–control study of all patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia and rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases who were admitted to the ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia during the study period. Cases were matched by age, sex, and month of hospital admission to at least two controls admitted to the same hospital for COVID-19 pneumonia during the study period. FINDINGS: Between Feb 24 and May 1, 2020, we collected data from 1525 patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: 117 (8%) presented with symptoms that were compatible with COVID-19. 65 patients had a swab confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection, whereas 52 presented with a spectrum of symptoms indicative of COVID-19 but were not swab tested. Patients with confirmed COVID-19 were older than those with suspected COVID-19 (median age 68 [IQR 55–76] years vs 57 [49–67] years; p=0·0010) and more likely to have arterial hypertension (33 [51%] vs 14 [27%] patients; odds ratio [OR] 2·8 [95% CI 1·3–6·1]; p=0·031) and obesity (11 [17%] vs 1 [2%]; OR 11·0 [1·3–83·4]; p=0·0059). We found no differences in rheumatological disease or background therapy between confirmed and suspected COVID-19 cases. 47 (72%) of the 65 patients with confirmed COVID-19 developed pneumonia that required admission to hospital. 12 (10%) deaths occurred among the 117 patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 (ten in those with confirmed COVID-19 and two in those with suspected COVID-19). Deceased patients with confirmed COVID-19 were older than survivors (median age 78·8 years [IQR 75·3–81·3] vs 65·5 years [53·3–74·0]; p=0·0002). We observed no differences in sex, comorbidities, or therapies between the deceased patients and survivors. The case–control study comprised 26 patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases and COVID-19 pneumonia and 62 matched controls. We found no significant differences between cases and controls in duration of COVID-19 symptoms before admission, duration of stay in hospital, or the local chest X-ray scoring system. Glucocorticoids were used for severe respiratory manifestations related to lung involvement in 17 (65%) of 26 cases and tocilizumab in six (23%) of 26; thrombotic events occurred in four (15%) of 26 cases. Four (15%) of 26 cases and six (10%) of 62 controls died during the study period. INTERPRETATION: In this cohort of patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases in a geographical region with a high prevalence of COVID-19, a poor outcome from COVID-19 seems to be associated with older age and the presence of comorbidities rather than the type of rheumatic disease or the degree of pharmacological immunosuppression. FUNDING: None.

positive: COVID 19 in babies: Knowledge for neonatal care Infection is a leading cause of death worldwide in babies under one month of age who are more susceptible to sepsis due to immature host defence mechanisms. Usually, babies may become acutely unwell from infective pathogens due to specific differences in their respiratory and immune systems. However, with the Covid-19 virus, the focus of this paper, it appears that the neonatal population is not significantly affected in the same way as adults. That said, knowledge about this novel virus is rapidly emerging. Therefore, it is vital that neonatal nurses, midwives and other healthcare professionals are adequately informed and educated about the potential impact on neonatal practice. This review paper draws upon key findings and themes from a selection of recent literature to provide an overview of current knowledge on Covid-19 and the implications for care within the neonatal field. The discussion focuses on the nature of Covid-19, its pathophysiology and transmission relevant to maternal and neonatal care. This is followed by implications for practice; namely, maternal issues, the importance of human breast milk, neonatal care relating to parenting and specific management before a final review of the current World Health Organization guidance.

positive: Glucocorticoid treatment of patients with SARS: implications for mechanisms of immunopathology

positive: Acute myelitis after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a case report. We report a case of acute myelitis in a patient infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). A 66-year-old man with coronavirus disease 2019 was admitted with acute flaccid paralysis of the bilateral lower limbs and urinary and bowel incontinence. All serum microbiological test results were negative, except for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing. Clinical findings indicated post-infectious acute myelitis. He received treatment containing ganciclovir, lopinavir/ritonavir, moxifloxacin, dexamethasone, human immunoglobulin, and mecobalamin. With a diagnosis of post-infectious acute myelitis and comprehensive treatment, paralysis of the bilateral lower extremities ameliorated. After two negative novel coronavirus RNA nasopharyngeal swab tests, he was discharged and transferred to a designated hospital for isolation and rehabilitation therapy.

positive: Use of corticosteroids in asthma and COPD patients with or without COVID-19 The potential detrimental effects of steroids on the immune system to fight viral infections had always been a concern for patients on long term steroids in chronic conditions. A recent warning from WHO on systemic corticosteroid use amid COVID-19 raised suspicion among public and healthcare professionals regarding the safety of steroid use during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The corticosteroids (inhaled and oral) are commonly prescribed in the management of asthma and COPD patients and any unsolicited changes in medications use may lead to potentially severe exacerbations and risk patient lives. This article provides a critical review of clinical evidence and offers a detailed discussion on the safety and efficacy of corticosteroids in asthma and COPD patients, both with and without COVID-19.

positive: Adjuvant corticosteroid therapy for critically ill patients with COVID-19

positive: Dexamethasone attenuated endotoxin-induced acute lung injury through inhibiting expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase. Application of glucocorticoids in sepsis or severe infection is disputable in clinic. In this experiment, we studied the effect of dexamethasone on nitric oxide synthases and whether dexamethasone could attenuate endotoxin-induced acute lung injury (ALI). SD rats received 5 mg/kg lipopolisaccharide (LPS) injection. Then arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2), lung histology, lung tissue nitric oxide (NO) production and expression of nitric oxide synthases (NOS) were detected at 0.5, 1, 2, 3 or 4 h after LPS injection. PaO2 and lung injury deteriorated upon time. Production of NO in lung tissue increased significantly particularly in the first two hours, and this change was mainly due to the over-expression of inducible NOS (iNOS), but not endothelial NOS (eNOS). Furthermore, a tight positive correlation was observed between lung injury score (LIS) and NO production level in lung tissue. Dexamethasone could ameliorate PaO2 and lung damage evidently, which were paralleled by significant decreases in the production of NO and in the expression of iNOS mRNA. In conclusion, dexamethasone could effectively attenuate endotoxin-induced lung injury through inhibiting iNOS expression and activation in the very early stage of ALI.

positive: Corticosteroid therapy for severe COVID-19 pneumonia: optimal dose and duration of administration

positive: A critical evaluation of glucocorticoids in the treatment of severe COVID-19 The viral infection by SARS-CoV-2, has revolutionized the life of the majority of human beings, challenging national health systems worldwide, and pushing researchers to rapidly find adequate preventive and treatment strategies. No therapies have been shown effective, with the exception of dexamethasone, a glucocorticoid that was recently proved to be the first life-saving drug in this disease. Remarkably, around 20% of infected people develop a severe form of COVID-19, giving rise to respiratory and multi-organ failures requiring subintensive and intensive care interventions. This phenomenon is due to an excessive immune response that damages pulmonary alveoli, leading to a cytokine and chemokine storm with systemic effects. Indeed glucocorticoids’ role in regulating this immune response is controversial, and they have been used in clinical practice in a variety of countries, even without a previous clear consensus on their evidence-based benefit.

positive: Severe immune thrombocytopenic purpura in critical COVID-19 COVID-19 is a new disease with many undescribed clinical manifestations. We report herein a case of severe immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) in a critical COVID-19 patient. A patient presented a severe episode of immune thrombocytopenia (< 10 × 10(9)/L) 20 days after admission for a critical COVID-19. This thrombocytopenia was associated with a life-threatening bleeding. Response to first-line therapies was delayed as it took up to 13 days after initiation of intravenous immunoglobulin and high-dose dexamethasone to observe an increase in platelet count. COVID-19 may be associated with late presenting severe ITP. Such ITP may also be relatively resistant to first-line agents. Hematological manifestations of COVID-19, such as the ones associated with life-threatening bleeding, must be recognized.

positive: Initial experience with short-course corticosteroids in a small cohort of adults with severe COVID-19 in a tertiary care hospital in India Abstract Severe COVID 19 disease is associated with high morbidity and mortality with limited therapeutic options. The role of glucocorticoids in treatment of COVID 19 has been riddled with controversy. The study site has been using glucocorticoids in patients with severe COVID 19 since the first few patients of COVID 19 that were admitted. In the initial cohort of 7 patients with severe COVID disease, use of methylprednisolone in a dose of 30 mg twice daily was associated with rapid improvement in oxygenation and decline in CRP levels. While six patients made a complete clinical recovery, one patient died. There were no secondary infections.

positive: Elucidating the molecular physiopathology of acute respiratory distress syndrome in severe acute respiratory syndrome patients Abstract Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a severe form of acute lung injury. It is a response to various diseases of variable etiology, including SARS-CoV infection. To date, a comprehensive study of the genomic physiopathology of ARDS (and SARS) is lacking, primarily due to the difficulty of finding suitable materials to study the disease process at a tissue level (instead of blood, sputa or swaps). Hereby we attempt to provide such study by analyzing autopsy lung samples from patient who died of SARS and showed different degrees of severity of the pulmonary involvement. We performed real-time quantitative PCR analysis of 107 genes with functional roles in inflammation, coagulation, fibrosis and apoptosis; some key genes were confirmed at a protein expression level by immunohistochemistry and correlated to the degree of morphological severity present in the individual samples analyzed. Significant expression levels were identified for ANPEP (a receptor for CoV), as well as inhibition of the STAT1 pathway, IFNs production and CXCL10 (a T-cell recruiter). Other genes unassociated to date with ARDS/SARS include C1Qb, C5R1, CASP3, CASP9, CD14, CD68, FGF7, HLA-DRA, IGF1, IRF3, MALAT-1, MSR1, NFIL3, SLPI, USP33, CLC, GBP1 and TAC1. As a result, we proposed to therapeutically target some of these genes with compounds such as ANPEP inhibitors, SLPI and dexamethasone. Ultimately, this study may serve as a model for future, tissue-based analyses of fibroinflammatory conditions affecting the lung.

positive: Letter to the editor: efficacy of different methods of combination regimen administrations including dexamethasone, intravenous immunoglobulin, and interferon-beta to treat critically ill COVID-19 patients: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial OBJECTIVES: There is little information about Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) management for critically ill patients. Most of these patients develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to excessive inflammatory response and the ensuing cytokine storm. Anti-inflammatory drugs including corticosteroids can be used to effectively reduce the effect of this cytokine storm and lung damage. However, corticosteroids can have side effects, so simultaneous administration of immunoglobulin (IV-IG) and interferon-beta can help manage treatment using corticosteroids. Therefore, we designed a trial to test our hypothesis that early administration of dexamethasone in combination with IV-IG and interferon-beta can reduce the effect of the cytokine storm in critically ill patients COVID-19. TRIAL DESIGN: A phase two multi-center randomized controlled trial (RCT) with three parallel arms (1:1:1 ratio). PARTICIPANTS: They will be hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 who have positive RT-PCR test and have blood oxygen saturation levels (SpO2) less than 90% and respiratory rate higher than 24 per minute or have involvement of more than 50% of their lung when viewed using computed tomography (CT)-scan. The age range of patients will be 18-70 years old. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: the need for intubation; allergy, intolerance, or contraindication to any study drug including dexamethasone, IV-IG, and interferon-beta; pregnancy or lactation; known HIV positive or active hepatitis B or C. The study will be conducted in several hospitals of the Golestan province, Iran. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The study subjects will be randomly allocated to three treatment arms: two experimental groups (two arms: Intervention 1 and Intervention 2) and one Control Group, which will be matched for age and sex using frequency matching method. Each eligible patient in the control arm will receive the standard treatment for COVID-19 based on WHO guidelines and the Ministry of the Health and Medical Education (MOHME) of Iran. Each patient in the Intervention Group 1 will receive the standard treatment for COVID-19 and dexamethasone, at the first 24 hours' time of admission. The intervention begins with the administration of dexamethasone based on the SpO2 levels. If the level of SpO2 does not improve after 24 hours, IV-IG (400 mg/kg once daily for 5 days) and interferon-beta (7 doses every other day) will be prescribed along with dexamethasone administration. In Intervention Group 2, the administration of dexamethasone will be started within the first 24 hours' time of admission and will be continued for 48-72 hours and then the SpO2 level will be checked. Then, if the level of SpO2 has not improved after that time, IV-IG and interferon-beta will be prescribed as the same dosage as Group 1. If the percentages of the SpO2 level are between 85 and 90/ 80 and 85/ 75 and 80/ less than 75, the dosages will be 4 mg every 12 hours/ 4 mg every 8 hours/ 8 mg every 12 hours/ 8 mg every 8 hours, respectively. According to the WHO recommendation, all participants will have the best available supportive care with full monitoring. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary: An increase in the SpO2 level to reach more than 90% in each case, which will be assessed by the oximeter. Secondary: The duration of hospital stays; intubation status and the percentage of patients who are free of mechanical ventilation; the mortality rates during hospitalization and one month after the admission time. RANDOMISATION: Participants will be allocated into either control or intervention groups with a 1:1:1 allocation ratio using a computer random number generator to generate a table of random numbers for simple randomization. BLINDING (MASKING): The project's principal investigator (PI) is unblinded. However, the PI will not analyse the data and interpret the results. An unblinded researcher (a pharmacist) will cover the drug's bottles with aluminium foil and prepare them interventions and control drugs in a syringe with a code so that patients are blinded. This person will have no patients contact. The staff and nurses, caring for the patients, will be unblinded for each study group due to the nature of this study. The staff that take outcome measurements will be blinded. The laboratory technicians will also be blinded as well as the statistical team. These study statisticians will have access to coded data and will analyse the data labelled as group X, group Y, and group Z. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The target sample size will be 105 critically ill COVID-19 patients, who will be allocated randomly to the three trial arms with 35 patients in each group. TRIAL STATUS: Recruitment is ongoing. The study began on April 18 2020 and will be completed June 19 2020. This summary describes protocol version 1; April 2 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.irct.ir/. Identifier: IRCT20120225009124N4 version 1; Registration date: April 2 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting the dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The full protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines.

positive: AhR and IDO1 in pathogenesis of Covid-19 and the "Systemic AhR Activation Syndrome:" Translational review and therapeutic perspectives Covid-19 is the acute illness caused by SARS-CoV-2 with initial clinical symptoms such as cough, fever, malaise, headache, and anosmia. After entry into cells, corona viruses (CoV) activate aryl hydrocarbon receptors (AhRs) by an indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO1)-independent mechanism, bypassing the IDO1-kynurenine-AhR pathway. The IDO1-kynurenine-AhR signaling pathway is used by multiple viral, microbial and parasitic pathogens to activate AhRs and to establish infections. AhRs enhance their own activity through an IDO1-AhR-IDO1 positive feedback loop prolonging activation induced by pathogens. Direct activation of AhRs by CoV induces immediate and simultaneous up-regulation of diverse AhR-dependent downstream effectors, and this, in turn, results in a "Systemic AhR Activation Syndrome" (SAAS) consisting of inflammation, thromboembolism, and fibrosis, culminating in multiple organ injuries, and death. Activation of AhRs by CoV may lead to diverse sets of phenotypic disease pictures depending on time after infection, overall state of health, hormonal balance, age, gender, comorbidities, but also diet and environmental factors modulating AhRs. We hypothesize that elimination of factors known to up-regulate AhRs, or implementation of measures known to down-regulate AhRs, should decrease severity of infection. Although therapies selectively down-regulating both AhR and IDO1 are currently lacking, medications in clinical use such as dexamethasone may down-regulate both AhR and IDO1 genes, as calcitriol/vitamin D3 may down-regulate the AhR gene, and tocopherol/vitamin E may down-regulate the IDO1 gene. Supplementation of calcitriol should therefore be subjected to epidemiological studies and tested in prospective trials for prevention of CoV infections, as should tocopherol, whereas dexamethasone could be tried in interventional trials. Because lack of physical exercise activates AhRs via the IDO1-kynurenine-AhR signaling pathway increasing risk of infection, physical exercise should be encouraged during quarantines and stay-at-home orders during pandemic outbreaks. Understanding which factors affect gene expression of both AhR and IDO1 may help in designing therapies to prevent and treat humans suffering from Covid-19.

positive: Kidney transplant patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection: the brescia renal COVID task force experience The outcome of kidney transplant patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection is still unclear. Here we describe the clinical characteristics, disease outcome and risk factors for ARDS and death of a cohort of 53 kidney transplant patients with COVID-19. 8/53 have been handled as outpatients due to mild disease, on average with immunosuppression reduction and the addiction of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin; no patients required admission, developed ARDS or died. 45/53 required admission due to severe symptoms: this cohort has been managed with immunosuppression withdrawal, methylprednisolone 16 mg/day, hydroxychloroquine and antiviral drugs. Dexamethasone and tocilizumab were considered in case of ARDS. 33% of the patients developed AKI, 60% ARDS and 33% died. In this group, thrombocytopenia was associated to ARDS while lymphopenia at the baseline, higher D-dimer and lack of CRP reduction with risk of death. In the overall population, dyspnoea was associated with the risk of ARDS while age older than 60 years and dyspnoea with the risk of death with only a trend towards an increased risk of death for patients on tacrolimus. In conclusion, SARS-CoV-2 infection may have a variable outcome in renal transplant patients, with higher risk of ARDS and death in the ones requiring admission.

positive: Covid-19: Demand for dexamethasone surges as RECOVERY trial publishes preprint.

positive: Information Mining for COVID-19 Research From a Large Volume of Scientific Literature The year 2020 has seen an unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic due to the outbreak of a novel strain of coronavirus in 180 countries. In a desperate effort to discover new drugs and vaccines for COVID-19, many scientists are working around the clock. Their valuable time and effort may benefit from computer-based mining of a large volume of health science literature that is a treasure trove of information. In this paper, we have developed a graph-based model using abstracts of 10,683 scientific articles to find key information on three topics: transmission, drug types, and genome research related to coronavirus. A subgraph is built for each of the three topics to extract more topic-focused information. Within each subgraph, we use a betweenness centrality measurement to rank order the importance of keywords related to drugs, diseases, pathogens, hosts of pathogens, and biomolecules. The results reveal intriguing information about antiviral drugs (Chloroquine, Amantadine, Dexamethasone), pathogen-hosts (pigs, bats, macaque, cynomolgus), viral pathogens (zika, dengue, malaria, and several viruses in the coronaviridae virus family), and proteins and therapeutic mechanisms (oligonucleotide, interferon, glycoprotein) in connection with the core topic of coronavirus. The categorical summary of these keywords and topics may be a useful reference to expedite and recommend new and alternative directions for COVID-19 research.

positive: Pros and cons of corticosteroid therapy for COVID-19 patients In December 2019, an outbreak of severe pneumonia was reported in Wuhan, China. Later described as COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), this infection caused by a virus from the Coronaviridae family (SARS-CoV-2) has spread globally. Effective therapies for this new disease are urgently needed. In this short communication, we will evaluate the use of corticosteroids as an adjunctive pharmacological therapy in the management of COVID-19 and describe its pros and cons in light of the latest available evidence.

positive: Anti COVID-19 Drugs: Need for More Clinical Evidence and Global Action The World Health Organization (WHO) called the outbreak of coronavirus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19) a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern” (PHEIC). According to the WHO, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), currently there are no medicines or vaccines that have been claimed to be useful in the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. Several existing antiviral drugs, previously developed or used as treatments for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and malaria, are being investigated as COVID-19 treatments and some of them are being used in clinical trials. According to the CDC and Chinese treatment guidelines for COVID-19, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and one of the investigational agents (remdesivir) are recommended in critically ill older patients. The use of other potential drugs reported in different studies may be considered if treatment with first-line drugs is ineffective. There are currently no complete data available from large randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to provide clinical guidance on the use, dosing, or duration to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all of the trial drugs for prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19. Until now, it is still unclear which drug can successfully fight against the disease. Therefore, for the better safety of patients with COVID-19, further clinical trials and large randomized controlled studies are needed to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all the potential drugs. Such a measure requires action at the global level.

positive: The role of adjuvant immunomodulatory agents for treatment of severe influenza Abstract A severe inflammatory immune response with hypercytokinemia occurs in patients hospitalized with severe influenza, such as avian influenza A(H5N1), A(H7N9), and seasonal A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infections. The role of immunomodulatory therapy is unclear as there have been limited published data based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Passive immunotherapy such as convalescent plasma and hyperimmune globulin have some studies demonstrating benefit when administered as an adjunctive therapy for severe influenza. Triple combination of oseltamivir, clarithromycin, and naproxen for severe influenza has one study supporting its use, and confirmatory studies would be of great interest. Likewise, confirmatory studies of sirolimus without concomitant corticosteroid therapy should be explored as a research priority. Other agents with potential immunomodulating effects, including non-immune intravenous immunoglobulin, N-acetylcysteine, acute use of statins, macrolides, pamidronate, nitazoxanide, chloroquine, antiC5a antibody, interferons, human mesenchymal stromal cells, mycophenolic acid, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors agonists, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, mesalazine, herbal medicine, and the role of plasmapheresis and hemoperfusion as rescue therapy have supportive preclinical or observational clinical data, and deserve more investigation preferably by RCTs. Systemic corticosteroids administered in high dose may increase the risk of mortality and morbidity in patients with severe influenza and should not be used, while the clinical utility of low dose systemic corticosteroids requires further investigation.

positive: Rationale for Prolonged Corticosteroid Treatment in the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Caused by Coronavirus Disease 2019

positive: Corticosteroid treatment in severe COVID-19 pneumonia: two cases and literature review Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia, firstly reported in Wuhan, Hubei province, China, has rapidly spread around the world with high mortality rate among critically ill patients. The use of corticosteroids in COVID-19 remains a major controversy. Available evidences are inconclusive. According to WHO guidance, corticosteroids are not recommended to be used unless for another reason. Chinese Thoracic Society (CTS) proposes an expert consensus statement that suggests taking a prudent attitude of corticosteroid usage. In our clinical practice, we do not use corticosteroids routinely; only low-to-moderate doses of corticosteroids were given to several severely ill patients prudently. In this paper, we will present two confirmed severe COVID-19 cases admitted to isolation wards in Optical Valley Campus of Tongji hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology. We will discuss questions related to corticosteroids usages.

positive: Corticosteroid use for 2019-nCoV infection: A double-edged sword

positive: A Spanish-translated clinical algorithm for management of suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant women

positive: Effect of Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Preliminary Report Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Corticosteroids may modulate immune-mediated lung injury and reducing progression to respiratory failure and death. Methods: The Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 therapy (RECOVERY) trial is a randomized, controlled, open-label, adaptive, platform trial comparing a range of possible treatments with usual care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We report the preliminary results for the comparison of dexamethasone 6 mg given once daily for up to ten days vs. usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Results: 2104 patients randomly allocated to receive dexamethasone were compared with 4321 patients concurrently allocated to usual care. Overall, 454 (21.6%) patients allocated dexamethasone and 1065 (24.6%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (age-adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74 to 0.92; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute mortality rate reductions varied significantly depending on level of respiratory support at randomization (test for trend p<0.001): Dexamethasone reduced deaths by one-third in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.0% vs. 40.7%, RR 0.65 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.82]; p<0.001), by one-fifth in patients receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (21.5% vs. 25.0%, RR 0.80 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.92]; p=0.002), but did not reduce mortality in patients not receiving respiratory support at randomization (17.0% vs. 13.2%, RR 1.22 [95% CI 0.93 to 1.61]; p=0.14). Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, dexamethasone reduced 28-day mortality among those receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen at randomization, but not among patients not receiving respiratory support.

positive: [Glucocorticoid in the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome patients: a preliminary report]. OBJECTIVE To discuss the effect of glucocorticoid (methylprednisolone) on severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). METHODS Thirty SARS patients were treated at our hospital for over 3 weeks since March to May 2003. The course and dosage of glucocorticoid, counts of CD(4)(+), CD(8)(+) and CD(3)(+), electrolytes, blood routine, and sera albumin before and after the treatment were analysed. RESULTS Before treatment by methylprednisolone, the counts of CD(4)(+), CD(8)(+) and CD(3)(+) of 27 SARS patients were (401 +/- 203), (340 +/- 187), (756 +/- 383) cells/ microl. Twenty-nine of the 30 SARS patients were treated by methylprednisolone. The dosage for 24 patients was 80 - 160 mg/d with the largest being 1,000 mg/d before admission to the hospital. The count of WBC was increased after treatment (P < 0.01). No obvious effect was observed on the potassium, sodium and chlorine of blood (P > 0.05). Glucocorticoid increased the level of blood glucose (P = 0.01), decreased the level of sera albumin (P < 0.01), and its large dosage decreased the counts of CD(4)(+), CD(8)(+) and CD(3)(+). Three severe patients had secondary infection after administration of a large dose of glucocorticoid. CONCLUSIONS In the early stage of the disease, the counts of CD(4)(+), CD(8)(+) and CD(3)(+) of SARS patients may reduce markedly indicating the immunity is suppressed. A large dose of glucocorticoid may aggravate the suppression and make the body in an active metabolic state (the increase of blood glucose and the decrease of sera albumin). Thus the disease is aggravated and patients are likely to suffer from severe secondary infection. Indications for use of glucocorticoid must strictly controlled and its large dosage is improper.

positive: COVID-19 and Headache Medicine: A Narrative Review of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug (NSAID) and Corticosteroid Use. OBJECTIVE To summarize the current literature on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and corticosteroid use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, recognizing that these are commonly used treatments in the field of headache medicine. BACKGROUND The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids in patients during the COVID-19 pandemic has been a controversial topic within the medical community and international and national health organizations. Lay press and social media outlets have circulated opinions on this topic despite the fact that the evidence for or against the use of these medications is sparse. In the field of headache medicine, these medications are used commonly and both patients and clinicians may have questions or hesitations pertaining to their use during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS A detailed search of the scientific and popular literature was performed. RESULTS There is limited literature pertaining to the safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids during the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, there are no clear scientific data that preclude the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the general population who may acquire COVID-19 or in those acutely infected with the virus. Several health organizations have concluded that treatment with corticosteroids during active infection should be avoided due to concerns of prolonged viral shedding in the respiratory tract and the lack of survival benefit based on the data from past coronaviruses and influenza virus; specific exceptions exist including treatment for underlying asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, septic shock, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. CONCLUSION Scientific information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic is constantly evolving, and limited or contradictory information can lead to confusion for both patients and clinicians. It is recommended that prior to prescribing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and steroids for the treatment of headache, clinicians have open discussions with their patients about the potential risks and benefits of using these medications during the COVID-19 pandemic. This manuscript summarizes the currently available evidence and understanding about these risks and benefits to help clinicians navigate such discussions.

positive: Short-Term Corticosteroids in SARS-CoV2 Patients: Hospitalists' Perspective Background: Dexamethasone, a synthetic glucocorticoid, has anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive properties. There is a hyperinflammatory response involved in the clinical course of patients with pneumonia due to SARS-CoV2. To date, there has been no definite therapy for COVID-19. We reviewed the charts of SARS-CoV2 patients with pneumonia and moderate to severely elevated CRP and worsening hypoxemia who were treated with early, short-term dexamethasone. Methods: We describe a series of 21 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV2 and were admitted to The Miriam Hospital in Providence and were treated with a short course of dexamethasone, either alone or in addition to current investigative therapies. Results: CRP levels decreased significantly following the start of dexamethasone from mean initial levels of 129.52 to 40.73 mg/L at time of discharge. 71% percent of the patients were discharged home with a mean length of stay of 7.8 days. None of the patients had escalation of care, leading to mechanical ventilation. Two patients were transferred to inpatient hospice facilities on account of persistent hypoxemia, in line with their documented goals of care. Conclusions: A short course of systemic corticosteroids among inpatients with SARS-CoV2 with hypoxic respiratory failure was well tolerated, and most patients had improved outcomes. This limited case series may not offer concrete evidence towards the benefit of corticosteroids in COVID-19. However, patients positive response to short-term corticosteroids demonstrates that they may help blunt the severity of inflammation and prevent a severe hyperinflammatory phase, in turn reducing the length of stay, ICU admissions, and healthcare costs.

positive: IMPACT OF GLUCOCORTICOID TREATMENT IN SARS-COV-2 INFECTION MORTALITY: A RETROSPECTIVE CONTROLLED COHORT STUDY. Background: Evidence to support the use of steroids in COVID-19 pneumonia is lacking. We aim to determine the impact of steroid use in COVID-19 pneumonia in-hospital mortality.Patients and Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study in a University hospital in Madrid, Spain, during March 2020. To determine the role of steroids in in-hospital mortality, patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and treated with steroids were compared to patients not treated with steroids, adjusting by a propensity-score for steroid treatment. Survival times were compared using log-rank test. Different steroid regimens were compared, and adjusted with a second propensity score.Results: During the study period, 463 out of 848 hospitalized patients with COVID19 pneumonia fulfilled inclusion criteria. Among them, 396 (46.7%) patients were treated with steroids and 67 patients were not. Global mortality was 15.1%. Median time to steroid treatment from symptom onset was 10 days (IQR 8-13). In-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with steroids than in controls (13.9% [55/396] versus 23.9% [16/67], HR 0.51 [0.27-0.96], p= 0.044). Steroid treatment reduced mortality by 41.8% relative to no steroid treatment (RRR 0,42 [0.048- 0.65). Initial treatment with 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone versus steroid pulses was not associated with in-hospital mortality (13.5% [42/310] versus 15.1% [13/86], OR 0.880 [0.449-1.726], p=0.710).Conclusions: Our results show that survival of patients with SARS-CoV2 pneumonia is higher in patients treated with glucocorticoids than in those not treated. In-hospital mortality was not different between initial regimens of 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone and glucocorticoid pulses.

positive: Corticosteroid administration for viral pneumonia: COVID-19 and beyond BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are commonly used as adjuvant therapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) by many clinicians due to their perceived anti-inflammatory effects. However, for patients with severe viral pneumonia, the corticosteroid treatment is highly controversial. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review is to systematically evaluate the effect and potential mechanism of corticosteroid administration in pandemic viral pneumonia. SOURCES: We comprehensively searched all manuscripts on corticosteroids therapy for influenza, SARS, MERS and SARS-CoV-2 viral pneumonia from the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases. CONTENT: We systematic summarized the effects of corticosteroids therapy for pandemic viral pneumonia and the potential mechanism of corticosteroid worked in COVID-19. IMPLICATIONS: Observational studies showed that corticosteroid treatment was associated with increased mortality and nosocomial infections for influenza and delay virus clearance for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. Limited data on corticosteroid therapy for COVID-19 were reported. Corticosteroids were used in about a fifth of patients (670/2995, 22.4%). Although clinical observational studies reported the improvement in symptoms and oxygenation for the severe COVID-19 patients received corticosteroids therapy, case fatality rate in the corticosteroid group was significantly higher than that in the non-corticosteroid group (69/443, 15.6% vs 56/1310, 4.3%). Compared with non-severe patients, severe patients were more likely to receive corticosteroid therapy (201/382, 52.6% vs 201/1310, 15.3%). Although there is no evidence of corticosteroid therapy reduce the mortality of COVID-19 patients, some improvements in clinical symptoms and oxygenation were reported in some clinical observational studies. Excessive inflammatory response and lymphopenia might be critical factors associated with disease severity and mortality of COVID-19. Sufficiently powered randomized controlled trials with rigorous inclusion/exclusion criteria and standardized dose and duration of corticosteroids are needed to verify the effectiveness and safety of corticosteroid therapy.

positive: Psychopharmacology of COVID-19 BACKGROUND: With the rapid, global spread of SARS-CoV-2, hospitals have become inundated with patients suffering from COVID-19. Consultation-liaison psychiatrists are actively involved in managing these patients and should familiarize themselves with how the virus and its proposed treatments can affect psychotropic management. The only FDA approved drug to treat COVID-19 is remdesivir, and other off-label medications used include chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, lopinavir/ritonavir, favipiravir, convalescent plasma therapy, azithromycin, vitamin C, corticosteroids, interferon and colchicine. PURPOSE: To provide an overview of the major safety considerations relevant to clinicians who prescribe psychotropics to patients with COVID-19, both related to the illness and its proposed treatments. METHODS: In this targeted review we performed structured literature searches in PubMed to identify articles describing the impacts of COVID-19 on different organ systems, the neuropsychiatric adverse effects of treatments, and any potential drug interactions with psychotropics. The articles most relevant to this manuscript were included. RESULTS: COVID-19 impacts multiple organ systems, including gastrointestinal, renal, cardiovascular, pulmonary, immunological, and hematological systems. This may lead to pharmacokinetic changes that impact psychotropic medications and increase sensitivity to psychotropic-related adverse effects. Additionally, several proposed treatments for COVID-19 have neuropsychiatric effects and potential interactions with commonly used psychotropics. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should be aware of the need to adjust existing psychotropics or avoid using certain medications in some COVID-19 patients. They should also be familiar with neuropsychiatric effects of medications being used to treat this disease. Further research is needed to identify strategies to manage psychiatric issues in this population.

positive: Glucocorticoids (as an Etiologic Factor) Adrenocortical hormones were first prepared from the adrenal gland as a new compound by Kendall in 1935 [1]. Thirteen years later, Hench et al. [2] observed a miraculous effect of cortisone in a patient with severe rheumatoid arthritis, which opened new doors to innovative treatments for a variety of inflammatory diseases. Against this background, Kendall, Hench, and Reichstein were awarded the 1950 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine. Since then, glucocorticoids have been used as a first-line therapy for immune-mediated conditions or as an adjunctive therapy in many inflammatory, infectious, or malignant diseases.

positive: Corticosteroid administration for viral pneumonia: COVID-19 and beyond BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are commonly used as adjuvant therapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome by many clinicians because of their perceived anti-inflammatory effects. However, for patients with severe viral pneumonia, the corticosteroid treatment is highly controversial. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review is to systematically evaluate the effect and potential mechanism of corticosteroid administration in pandemic viral pneumonia. SOURCES: We comprehensively searched all manuscripts on corticosteroid therapy for influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral pneumonia from the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases. CONTENT: We systematically summarized the effects of corticosteroid therapy for pandemic viral pneumonia and the potential mechanism of action for corticosteroids in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). IMPLICATIONS: Observational studies showed that corticosteroid treatment was associated with increased mortality and nosocomial infections for influenza and delayed virus clearance for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. Limited data on corticosteroid therapy for COVID-19 were reported. Corticosteroids were used in about a fifth of patients (670/2995, 22.4%). Although clinical observational studies reported the improvement in symptoms and oxygenation for individuals with severe COVID-19 who received corticosteroid therapy, case fatality rate in the corticosteroid group was significantly higher than that in the non-corticosteroid group (69/443, 15.6% versus 56/1310, 4.3%). Compared individuals with non-severe disease, those with severe disease were more likely to receive corticosteroid therapy (201/382, 52.6% versus 201/1310, 15.3%). Although there is no evidence that corticosteroid therapy reduces mortality in people with COVID-19, some improvements in clinical symptoms and oxygenation were reported in some clinical observational studies. Excessive inflammatory response and lymphopenia might be critical factors associated with severity of and mortality from COVID-19. Sufficiently powered randomized controlled trials with rigorous inclusion/exclusion criteria and standardized dose and duration of corticosteroids are needed to verify the effectiveness and safety of corticosteroid therapy.

positive: A global treatments for coronaviruses including COVID‐19 In late December 2019 in Wuhan, China, several patients with viral pneumonia were identified as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019‐nCoV). So far, there are no specific treatments for patients with coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19), and the treatments available today are based on previous experience with similar viruses such as severe acute respiratory syndrome‐related coronavirus (SARS‐CoV), Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS‐CoV), and Influenza virus. In this article, we have tried to reach a therapeutic window of drugs available to patients with COVID‐19. Cathepsin L is required for entry of the 2019‐nCoV virus into the cell as target teicoplanin inhibits virus replication. Angiotensin‐converting‐enzyme 2 (ACE2) in soluble form as a recombinant protein can prevent the spread of coronavirus by restricting binding and entry. In patients with COVID‐19, hydroxychloroquine decreases the inflammatory response and cytokine storm, but overdose causes toxicity and mortality. Neuraminidase inhibitors such as oseltamivir, peramivir, and zanamivir are invalid for 2019‐nCoV and are not recommended for treatment but protease inhibitors such as lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) inhibit the progression of MERS‐CoV disease and can be useful for patients of COVID‐19 and, in combination with Arbidol, has a direct antiviral effect on early replication of SARS‐CoV. Ribavirin reduces hemoglobin concentrations in respiratory patients, and remdesivir improves respiratory symptoms. Use of ribavirin in combination with LPV/r in patients with SARS‐CoV reduces acute respiratory distress syndrome and mortality, which has a significant protective effect with the addition of corticosteroids. Favipiravir increases clinical recovery and reduces respiratory problems and has a stronger antiviral effect than LPV/r. currently, appropriate treatment for patients with COVID‐19 is an ACE2 inhibitor and a clinical problem reducing agent such as favipiravir in addition to hydroxychloroquine and corticosteroids.

positive: Tissue-specific tolerance in fatal Covid-19 Successful host defence against a pathogen can involve resistance or tolerance, with implications for prioritising either antimicrobial or immunomodulatory therapeutic approaches. Hyper-inflammation occurs in Covid-19 and is associated with worse outcomes. The efficacy of dexamethasone in preventing mortality in critical Covid-19 suggests that inflammation has a causal role in death. Whether this deleterious inflammation is primarily a direct response to the presence of SARS-CoV-2 requiring enhanced resistance, or an independent immunopathologic process necessitating enhanced tolerance, is unknown. Here we report an aberrant immune response in fatal Covid-19, principally involving the lung and reticuloendothelial system, that is not clearly topologically associated with the virus, indicating tissue-specific tolerance of SARS-CoV-2. We found that inflammation and organ dysfunction in fatal Covid-19 did not map to the widespread tissue and cellular distribution of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and protein, both between and within tissues. A monocyte/myeloid-rich vasculitis was identified in the lung, along with an influx of macrophages/monocytes into the parenchyma. In addition, stereotyped abnormal reticulo-endothelial responses (reactive plasmacytosis and iron-laden macrophages) were present and dissociated from the presence of virus in lymphoid tissues. Our results support virus-independent immunopathology being one of the primary mechanisms underlying fatal Covid-19. This supports prioritising pathogen tolerance as a therapeutic strategy in Covid-19, by better understanding non-injurious organ-specific viral tolerance mechanisms and targeting aberrant macrophage and plasma cell responses.

positive: Natural History of COVID-19 and Current Knowledge on Treatment Therapeutic Options Despite intense research there is currently no effective vaccine available against the new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in the later 2019 and responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. This infectious and communicable disease has become one of the major public health challenges in the world. The clinical management of COVID-19 has been limited to infection prevention and control measures associated with supportive care such as supplemental oxygen and mechanical ventilation. Meanwhile efforts to find an effective treatment to inhibit virus replication, mitigate the symptoms, increase survival and decrease mortality rate are ongoing. Several classes of drugs, many of them already in use for other diseases, are being evaluated based on the body of clinical knowledge obtained from infected patients regarding to the natural history and evolution of the infection. Herein we will provide an updated overview of the natural history and current knowledge on drugs and therapeutic agents being tested for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. These include different classes of drugs such as antiviral agents (chloroquine, ivermectin, nitazoxanide, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, remdesivir, tocilizumab), supporting agents (Vitamin C, Vitamin D, azithromycin, corticosteroids) and promising investigational vaccines. Considering the controversies and excessive number of compounds being tested and reported in the literature we hope that this review can provide useful and updated consolidated information on potential drugs used to prevent, control and treat COVID-19 patients worldwide.

positive: Drug treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China. Since December 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread throughout China as well as other countries. More than 8,700,000 confirmed COVID-19 cases have been recorded worldwide so far, with much more cases popping up overseas than those inside. As the initial epicenter in the world, China has been combating the epidemic for a relatively longer period and accumulated valuable experience in prevention and control of COVID-19. This article reviewed the clinical use, mechanism and efficacy of the clinically approved drugs recommended in the Diagnosis and Treatment Protocol for Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia (DTPNCP) released by National Health Commission of P.R.China, and the novel therapeutic agents now undergoing clinical trials approved by China National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) to evaluate experimental treatment for COVID-19. Reviewing the progress in drug development for the treatment against COVID-19 in China may provide insight into the epidemic control in other countries.

positive: Cytokine responses in porcine respiratory coronavirus-infected pigs treated with corticosteroids as a model for severe acute respiratory syndrome. The effectiveness and potential immunosuppressive effects of anti-inflammatory glucocorticoids in the lungs of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) patients are undefined. We treated porcine respiratory coronavirus (PRCV)-infected conventional pigs with the corticosteroid dexamethasone (DEX) as a model for SARS. Innate and Th1 cytokines in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and serum were elevated in PRCV-infected pigs compared to controls, but were decreased after DEX treatment in the PRCV-infected, DEX-treated (PRCV/DEX) pigs. Although decreased in BAL, Th2 cytokine levels were higher in serum after DEX treatment. Levels of the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin-6 in BAL and serum were decreased in PRCV/DEX pigs early but increased later compared to those in phosphate-buffered saline-treated, PRCV-infected pigs, corresponding to a similar trend for lung lesions. PRCV infection increased T-cell frequencies in BAL, but DEX treatment of PRCV-infected pigs reduced frequencies of T cells; interestingly B and SWC3a(+) (monocytes/macrophages/granulocytes) cell frequencies were increased. DEX reduced numbers of PRCV-stimulated Th1 gamma interferon-secreting cells in spleen, tracheobroncheolar lymph nodes, and blood. Our findings suggest that future glucocorticoid treatment of SARS patients should be reconsidered in the context of potential local immunosuppression of immune responses in lung and systemic Th1 cytokine-biased suppression.

positive: A case of Bacillus cereus bacteremia in a COVID-19 patient treated with steroids This report describes a case of Bacillus cereus bacteremia in a COVID-19 patient with prior inhalational steroid use and inpatient steroid treatment for COVID-19 pulmonary symptoms. The case herein is intended to illustrate an uncommon presentation of B. cereus bacteremia and highlight the increased likelihood for the occurrence of this bacteremia in patients with COVID-19 and concomitant steroid use.

positive: Letter to the editor: efficacy of different methods of combination regimen administrations including dexamethasone, intravenous immunoglobulin, and interferon-beta to treat critically ill COVID-19 patients: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial OBJECTIVES: There is little information about Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) management for critically ill patients. Most of these patients develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to excessive inflammatory response and the ensuing cytokine storm. Anti-inflammatory drugs including corticosteroids can be used to effectively reduce the effect of this cytokine storm and lung damage. However, corticosteroids can have side effects, so simultaneous administration of immunoglobulin (IV-IG) and interferon-beta can help manage treatment using corticosteroids. Therefore, we designed a trial to test our hypothesis that early administration of dexamethasone in combination with IV-IG and interferon-beta can reduce the effect of the cytokine storm in critically ill patients COVID-19. TRIAL DESIGN: A phase two multi-center randomized controlled trial (RCT) with three parallel arms (1:1:1 ratio). PARTICIPANTS: They will be hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 who have positive RT-PCR test and have blood oxygen saturation levels (SpO(2)) less than 90% and respiratory rate higher than 24 per minute or have involvement of more than 50% of their lung when viewed using computed tomography (CT)-scan. The age range of patients will be 18-70 years old. Exclusion criteria: the need for intubation; allergy, intolerance, or contraindication to any study drug including dexamethasone, IV-IG, and interferon-beta; pregnancy or lactation; known HIV positive or active hepatitis B or C. The study will be conducted in several hospitals of the Golestan province, Iran. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The study subjects will be randomly allocated to three treatment arms: two experimental groups (two arms: Intervention 1 and Intervention 2) and one Control Group, which will be matched for age and sex using frequency matching method. Each eligible patient in the control arm will receive the standard treatment for COVID-19 based on WHO guidelines and the Ministry of the Health and Medical Education (MOHME) of Iran. Each patient in the Intervention Group 1 will receive the standard treatment for COVID-19 and dexamethasone, at the first 24 hours’ time of admission. The intervention begins with the administration of dexamethasone based on the SpO(2) levels. If the level of SpO(2) does not improve after 24 hours, IV-IG (400 mg/kg once daily for 5 days) and interferon-beta (7 doses every other day) will be prescribed along with dexamethasone administration. In Intervention Group 2, the administration of dexamethasone will be started within the first 24 hours’ time of admission and will be continued for 48-72 hours and then the SpO(2) level will be checked. Then, if the level of SpO(2) has not improved after that time, IV-IG and interferon-beta will be prescribed as the same dosage as Group 1. If the percentages of the SpO(2) level are between 85 and 90/ 80 and 85/ 75 and 80/ less than 75, the dosages will be 4 mg every 12 hours/ 4 mg every 8 hours/ 8 mg every 12 hours/ 8 mg every 8 hours, respectively. According to the WHO recommendation, all participants will have the best available supportive care with full monitoring. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary: An increase in the SpO(2) level to reach more than 90% in each case, which will be assessed by the oximeter. Secondary: The duration of hospital stays; intubation status and the percentage of patients who are free of mechanical ventilation; the mortality rates during hospitalization and one month after the admission time. RANDOMISATION: Participants will be allocated into either control or intervention groups with a 1:1:1 allocation ratio using a computer random number generator to generate a table of random numbers for simple randomization. BLINDING (MASKING): The project's principal investigator (PI) is unblinded. However, the PI will not analyse the data and interpret the results. An unblinded researcher (a pharmacist) will cover the drug’s bottles with aluminium foil and prepare them interventions and control drugs in a syringe with a code so that patients are blinded. This person will have no patients contact. The staff and nurses, caring for the patients, will be unblinded for each study group due to the nature of this study. The staff that take outcome measurements will be blinded. The laboratory technicians will also be blinded as well as the statistical team. These study statisticians will have access to coded data and will analyse the data labelled as group X, group Y, and group Z. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The target sample size will be 105 critically ill COVID-19 patients, who will be allocated randomly to the three trial arms with 35 patients in each group. TRIAL STATUS: Recruitment is ongoing. The study began on April 18 2020 and will be completed June 19 2020. This summary describes protocol version 1; April 2 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.irct.ir/. Identifier: IRCT20120225009124N4 version 1; Registration date: April 2 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting the dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The full protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines.

positive: Pharmacologic Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Review Importance: The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents an unprecedented challenge to identify effective drugs for prevention and treatment. Given the rapid pace of scientific discovery and clinical data generated by the large number of people rapidly infected by SARS-CoV-2, clinicians need accurate evidence regarding effective medical treatments for this infection. Observations: No proven effective therapies for this virus currently exist. The rapidly expanding knowledge regarding SARS-CoV-2 virology provides a significant number of potential drug targets. The most promising therapy is remdesivir. Remdesivir has potent in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, but it is not US Food and Drug Administration approved and currently is being tested in ongoing randomized trials. Oseltamivir has not been shown to have efficacy, and corticosteroids are currently not recommended. Current clinical evidence does not support stopping angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance: The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis of this generation and, potentially, since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. The speed and volume of clinical trials launched to investigate potential therapies for COVID-19 highlight both the need and capability to produce high-quality evidence even in the middle of a pandemic. No therapies have been shown effective to date.

positive: The use of dexamethasone in the treatment of COVID-19

positive: Successful steroid treatment for acute fibrinous and organizing pneumonia: A case report BACKGROUND: Since the acute fibrinous and organizing pneumonia (AFOP) was first described by Beasley in 2002, some case reports of patients aged from 38 d to 80 years have been published worldwide, but there is still no standard therapy for this disease and the treatment methods remain controversial. Both steroid and immunosuppressive agents, such as cyclophosphamide or mycophenolate mofetil, have been reported to be effective in some studies, but with many side effects, especially in patients of advanced age. CASE SUMMARY: We herein report an 81-year-old female patient who was admitted to our hospital due to dry cough, and breathlessness for 1 mo. She was treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics and anti-fungal therapy, but without improvement in both symptoms and radiological findings, and her respiratory status worsened, and she required bed rest almost the whole day. Computed tomography-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy was performed and histopathology examination confirmed the diagnosis of AFOP. She was then successfully treated with a steroid monotherapy, which resulted in a satisfactory clinical outcome without serious complications. CONCLUSION: We conclude that complete remission of AFOP can be achieved by steroid monotherapy in patients of advanced age.

positive: Corticosteroid Guidance for Pregnancy during COVID-19 Pandemic The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is causing a necessary, rapid adjustment within the field of obstetrics. Corticosteroid use is a mainstay of therapy for those women delivering prematurely. Unfortunately, corticosteroid use has been associated with worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive patients. Given this information, it is necessary that obstetricians adjust practice to carefully weigh the fetal benefits with maternal risks. Therefore, our institution has examined the risks and benefits and altered our corticosteroid recommendations. Key Points: Corticosteroid use is an important part of prematurity treatment because it provides benefit to the fetus. Corticosteroid use may be related with increased morbidity and mortality in novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, during the COVID-19 pandemic, an alteration in current corticosteroid practices is necessary to uniquely weigh the maternal risks and fetal benefits.

positive: Therapeutic Management of COVID-19 Patients: A systematic review Abstract Background SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of COVID-19; that has been declared a global pandemic by the WHO in 2020. The COVID-19 treatment guidelines vary in each country, and yet there is no approved therapeutic for COVID-19. Aims of the study this review aimed to report any evidence of therapeutics used for the management of COVID-19 patients in clinical practice since the emergence of the virus. Methods A systematic review protocol was developed based on PRISMA Statement. Articles for review were selected from electronic databases (Embase, Medline and Google Scholar). Readily accessible peer-reviewed, full articles in English published from December 1st , 2019 to March 26th , 2020 were included. The search terms included combinations of: COVID, SARS-COV-2, glucocorticoids, convalescent plasma, antiviral and antibacterial. There were no restrictions on the type of study design eligible for inclusion. Results As of March 26th, 2020, of the initial manuscripts identified (n=449); forty-one studies were included. These consisted of clinical trials (n=3), case reports (n=7), case series (n=10), retrospective (n=11) and prospective (n=10) observational studies. Thirty-six studies were conducted in China (88%). The most commonly reported medicine in this systematic review was corticosteroids (n=25), followed by Lopinavir (n=21) and Oseltamivir (n=16). Conclusions This is the first systematic review to date related to the therapeutics used in COVID-19 patients. Only 41 research articles on COVID-19 and therapeutics were found eligible to be included, most conducted in China. Corticosteroid therapy was found to be the most studied medicine in the literature.

positive: Severe immune thrombocytopenic purpura in critical COVID-19 COVID-19 is a new disease with many undescribed clinical manifestations. We report herein a case of severe immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) in a critical COVID-19 patient. A patient presented a severe episode of immune thrombocytopenia (< 10 × 109/L) 20 days after admission for a critical COVID-19. This thrombocytopenia was associated with a life-threatening bleeding. Response to first-line therapies was delayed as it took up to 13 days after initiation of intravenous immunoglobulin and high-dose dexamethasone to observe an increase in platelet count. COVID-19 may be associated with late presenting severe ITP. Such ITP may also be relatively resistant to first-line agents. Hematological manifestations of COVID-19, such as the ones associated with life-threatening bleeding, must be recognized.

positive: Emerging pharmacological therapies for ARDS: COVID-19 and beyond ARDS, first described in 1967, is the commonest form of acute severe hypoxemic respiratory failure. Despite considerable advances in our knowledge regarding the pathophysiology of ARDS, insights into the biologic mechanisms of lung injury and repair, and advances in supportive care, particularly ventilatory management, there remains no effective pharmacological therapy for this syndrome. Hospital mortality at 40% remains unacceptably high underlining the need to continue to develop and test therapies for this devastating clinical condition. The purpose of the review is to critically appraise the current status of promising emerging pharmacological therapies for patients with ARDS and potential impact of these and other emerging therapies for COVID-19-induced ARDS. We focus on drugs that: (1) modulate the immune response, both via pleiotropic mechanisms and via specific pathway blockade effects, (2) modify epithelial and channel function, (3) target endothelial and vascular dysfunction, (4) have anticoagulant effects, and (5) enhance ARDS resolution. We also critically assess drugs that demonstrate potential in emerging reports from clinical studies in patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS. Several therapies show promise in earlier and later phase clinical testing, while a growing pipeline of therapies is in preclinical testing. The history of unsuccessful clinical trials of promising therapies underlines the challenges to successful translation. Given this, attention has been focused on the potential to identify biologically homogenous subtypes within ARDS, to enable us to target more specific therapies ‘precision medicines.’ It is hoped that the substantial number of studies globally investigating potential therapies for COVID-19 will lead to the rapid identification of effective therapies to reduce the mortality and morbidity of this devastating form of ARDS.

positive: Evidence Based Management Guideline for the COVID-19 Pandemic - Review article ABSTRACT COVID-19 has now been declared a pandemic. To date, COVID-19 has affected over 944,181 people worldwide, resulting in over 47,312 reported deaths. Numerous preventative strategies and non-pharmaceutical interventions have been employed to mitigate the spread of disease including careful infection control, the isolation of patients, and social distancing. Management is predominantly focused on the provision of supportive care, with oxygen therapy representing the major treatment intervention. Medical therapy involving corticosteroids and antivirals have also been encouraged as part of critical management schemes. However, there is at present no specific antiviral recommended for the treatment of COVID-19, and no vaccine is currently available. Despite the strategic implementation of these measures, the number of new reported cases continues to rise at a profoundly alarming rate. As new findings emerge, there is an urgent need for up-to-date management guidelines. In response to this call, we review what is currently known regarding the management of COVID-19, and offer an evidence-based review of current practice.

positive: Clinical trials on drug repositioning for COVID-19 treatment The World Health Organization (WHO) was informed on December 2019 about a coronavirus pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan, Hubei province (China). Subsequently, on March 12, 2020, 125,048 cases and 4,614 deaths were reported. Coronavirus is an enveloped RNA virus, from the genus Betacoronavirus, that is distributed in birds, humans, and other mammals. WHO has named the novel coronavirus disease as COVID-19. More than 80 clinical trials have been launched to test coronavirus treatment, including some drug repurposing or repositioning for COVID-19. Hence, we performed a search in March 2020 of the clinicaltrials.gov database. The eligibility criteria for the retrieved studies were: contain a clinicaltrials.gov base identifier number; describe the number of participants and the period for the study; describe the participants’ clinical conditions; and utilize interventions with medicines already studied or approved for any other disease in patients infected with the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV). It is essential to emphasize that this article only captured trials listed in the clinicaltrials.gov database. We identified 24 clinical trials, involving more than 20 medicines, such as human immunoglobulin, interferons, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, arbidol, remdesivir, favipiravir, lopinavir, ritonavir, oseltamivir, methylprednisolone, bevacizumab, and traditional Chinese medicines (TCM). Although drug repurposing has some limitations, repositioning clinical trials may represent an attractive strategy because they facilitate the discovery of new classes of medicines; they have lower costs and take less time to reach the market; and there are existing pharmaceutical supply chains for formulation and distribution.

positive: Therapeutic Management of COVID-19 Patients: A systematic review Background: SARS-CoV-2 is the cause of the COVID-19 that has been declared a global pandemic by the WHO in 2020. The COVID-19 treatment guidelines vary in each country, and yet there is no approved therapeutic for COVID-19. Aims of the study: this review aimed to report any evidence of therapeutics used for the management of COVID-19 patients in clinical practice since the emergence of the virus. Methods: A systematic review protocol was developed based on PRISMA Statement. Articles for review were selected from electronic databases (Embase, Medline and Google Scholar). Readily accessible peer-reviewed full articles in English published from December 1 st , 2019 to March 26 th , 2020 were included. The search terms included combinations of: COVID, SARS-COV-2, glucocorticoids, convalescent plasma, antiviral, antibacterial. There were no restrictions on the type of study design eligible for inclusion. Results: As of March 26, 2020, of the initial manuscripts identified (n=449) articles. Forty-one studies were included, of which clinical trials (n=3), (case reports n=7), case series (n=10), retrospective (n=11) and prospective (n=10) observational studies. Thirty-six studies were conducted in China (88%). The most common mentioned and reported medicine in this systematic review was corticosteroids (n=25), followed by Lopinavir (n=21) and oseltamivir (n=16). Conclusions: This is the first systematic review up to date related to the therapeutics used in COVID-19 patients. Only forty-one research articles on COVID-19 and therapeutics were found eligible to be included, most conducted in China, corticosteroid therapy was found to be the most used medicine in these studies.

positive: The role of corticosteroids in the management of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A meta-analysis Objective: There are no controlled studies on the role of systemic corticosteroids (CS) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In the absence of high-quality evidence, understandably the recommendations from various organizations are cautious. Several randomized controlled trials are underway but shall take time to conclude. We therefore undertook a meta-analysis to ascertain the role of CS in the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Data Sources: Electronic databases, including Pubmed, Cochrane library and Embase, were searched, using the keywords of interest and the PICO search technique, from inception to 12th April 2020. Study Selection: Studies highlighting the use of CS in coronavirus infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and COVID-19 were selected based on pre-determined inclusion criteria. Data extraction: Data was extracted into an excel sheet and transferred to comprehensive meta-analysis software version 3, Biostat Inc., Englewood, NJ, USA, for analysis. Data synthesis: Five studies with SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in the meta-analysis. The rate ratio (RR) for mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.26 (95% CI: 0.96-1.65, I2: 74.46), indicating lack of benefit of CS therapy on mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19. The RR for mortality on analysis of the three studies that particularly reported on patients with significant pulmonary compromise secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection was neutral (RR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.63-1.33, I2: 63.38). Conclusions: The use of CS in critically ill patients with COVID-19 did not improve or worsen mortality. Pending further information from controlled studies, CS can be used in critically ill patients with COVID-19 with critical illness related corticosteroid insufficiency and moderate to severe ARDS without the risk of increased mortality.

positive: Inhaled corticosteroids and COVID-19: a systematic review and clinical perspective There is no evidence on benefits or harms of inhaled steroids in COVID-19. It is essential that epidemiological studies of COVID-19 include detailed information on comorbidities and prior medication to help answer this question. https://bit.ly/2XVwIsa

positive: Clinical trials for the treatment of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A rapid response to urgent need

positive: Outpatient treatment of COVID-19 with steroids in the phase of mild pneumonia without the need for admission as an opportunity to modify the course of the disease: A structured summary of a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to explore the effectiveness and safety of oral corticosteroids (prednisone) in the treatment of early stage SARS-Cov-2 pneumonia in patients who do not yet meet hospital admission criteria. TRIAL DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial, controlled, open, parallel group, to evaluate the effectiveness of steroids in adult patients with confirmed COVID-19, with incipient pulmonary involvement, without hospital admission criteria. Patients will be stratified by the presence or not of radiological data on pneumonia. PARTICIPANTS: We will include patients with early stage SARS-Cov-2 pneumonia who do not meet hospital admission criteria from the reference hospital, the Hospital Universitario de Burgos, in the region of Castilla y León, Spain. Patients will be followed-up by specialist physicians and Primary Health Care professionals. Inclusion criteria: - Men and women. - Age between 18 and 75 years old. - Diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection, by PCR and/or IgM+ antibody test and/or antigen test. - Clinical diagnosis of lung involvement: (respiratory symptoms +/- pathological auscultation +/- O2 desaturation) - Chest X-ray with mild-moderate alterations or normal. - Patients who give their verbal informed consent in front of witnesses, which will be reflected in the patients’ medical records. Exclusion criteria: - Oxygen desaturation below 93% or P0(2) < 62. - Moderate-severe dyspnea or significant respiratory or general deterioration that makes admission advisable. - Chest X-ray with multifocal infiltrates. - Insulin-dependent diabetes with poor control or glycaemia in the emergency room test greater than 300 mg/ml (fasting or not). - Other significant comorbidities: Severe renal failure (creatinine clearance < 30 mL/min); cirrhosis or chronic liver disease, poorly controlled hypertension. - Heart rhythm disturbances (including prolonged QT). - Severe immunosuppression (HIV infection, long-term use of immunosuppressive agents); cancer. - Pregnant or breast-feeding women. - Patients under use of glucocorticoids for other diseases. - History of allergy or intolerance to any of the drugs in the study (prednisone, azithromycin or hydroxychloroquine). - Patients who took one or more of the study drugs in the 7 days prior to study inclusion. - Patients taking non-suppressible drugs with risk of QT prolongation or significant interactions. - Patients unwilling or unable to participate until study completion. - Participation in another study. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Eligible patients will be randomized to receive standard outpatient treatment only (group 1) or standard outpatient treatment plus prednisone (group 2). - Group 1: paracetamol 1 g/8 h (on demand) + hydroxychloroquine 400 mg/12h the first day, 200 mg/12 h for 4 days + azithromycin 500 mg/24h for 5 days. - Group 2: paracetamol 1 g/8 h (on demand) + hydroxychloroquine 400 mg/12h the first day, 200 mg/12 h for 4 days + azithromycin 500 mg/24h for 5 days + prednisone 60 mg / 24 h for 3 days, 30 mg / 24 h for 3 days and 15 mg / 24 h for 3 days. MAIN OUTCOMES: If the patient requires ambulatory observation, according to the protocol established in this respect in the Emergency Department, meets all the criteria for inclusion and none for exclusion, data will be taken by the person responsible on the data collection sheet. The main result is admission after 30 days. Secondary outcomes are 30-day ICU admission and hospital stay. The safety variable will be the occurrence of clinical symptoms or delirium related to the steroids. Also, the possible decompensations of diabetes will be measured. All tests will be on an intention-to-treat basis. RANDOMISATION: Treatment will be assigned according to stratified randomization by the presence or absence of radiological data of lung involvement (previously performed by random sequence 1:1 generated with Epidat and kept hidden by opaque, sealed envelopes, which will only be opened after inclusion and basal measurement). BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers and personnel responsible for outcomes measurement will not be blinded to group assignment, once the patient is included and the basal measurement performed, as per protocol design. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The percentage of patients with incipient lung involvement is unknown, but given that pulmonary involvement already exists it is estimated to be around 20%. We consider that the intervention could reduce this percentage to 5%, so the necessary sample size would be 200 subjects (100 per group), with a power of 80% and an estimated loss percentage of 10%. TRIAL STATUS: The protocol with code TAC-COVID-19, version 2.0 on date: April 16, 2020 is approved by the Spanish Drug Agency (AEMPS) and the local Ethics Committee. The trial is in the recruitment phase. Recruitment began 19 April, 2020 and is anticipated to be complete by April 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered under the title “OUTPATIENT TREATMENT OF EARLY PULMONARY COVID19 WITH CORTICOSTEROIDS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MODIFY THE COURSE OF THE DISEASE” with EudraCT number 2020-001622-64, registered on 3 April 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Potential benefits of precise corticosteroids therapy for severe 2019-nCoV pneumonia Salvage corticosteroids treatment for critical patients with 2019-nCoV? Corticosteroids are widely used to prevent lung injury caused by severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP) due to their excellent pharmacological effects on the suppression of exuberant and dysfunctional systematic inflammation5. Some scholars may not support the corticosteroids treatment for novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP), because observational studies and systematic reviews have indicated inconclusive clinical evidence on the effect of corticosteroids therapy for viral pneumonias (such as SARS, MERS and H1N1). Additionally, pulse-dose therapy or long-term administration to high dose of corticosteroids in early stage were reported to be possibly harmful6,7,8. However, these conclusions obscured the clinical benefits of corticosteroids on some subgroups of patients, particularly those with severe symptoms, as the clinical effects might be related to the indication (severities of illness), the timing of intervention, the dose and duration of corticosteroids therapy9.

positive: Contrasting evidence for corticosteroid treatment for coronavirus-induced cytokine storm

positive: Effects of methylprednisolone use on viral genomic nucleic acid negative conversion and CT imaging lesion absorption in COVID-19 patients under 50 years old The use of corticosteroids has been controversial in viral pneumonia. In most cases, application of methylprednisolone in severe and critical viral pneumonia patients can quickly alleviate the symptoms of dyspnea and prevent disease progression. However, some scholars have confirmed that corticosteroids delayed the body's clearance of the virus. In our retrospective non-randomised study, 34 patients under 50 years old and diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were included, according to given methylprednisolone treatment (n = 18) or not (n = 16), they were separated into 2 groups. By comparing the clinical data we concluded that corticosteroids therapy can effectively release COVID-19 symptoms such as persistent fever and difficult breathing, improve oxygenation and prevent disease progression. However, it can prolong the negative conversion of nucleic acids. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

positive: Effect of dexamethasone on acute respiratory distress syndrome induced by the H5N1 virus in mice. Glucocorticoids are widely used in the treatment of different inflammatory diseases. The present study was performed to investigate the effect of dexamethasone (DEX) on acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) induced by the H5N1 viral infection in mice. BALB/c mice, 6-8 weeks old, were divided into three groups with 80 mice in each. The infected group and the DEX-treated infected group were inoculated intranasally with 1 x 10(2) 50% mouse infectious dose of A/Chicken/Hebei/108/2002 (H5N1) viruses, with daily intraperitoneal injections of PBS, or 2.5 mg.kg(-1) DEX at days 3-14 post inoculation, respectively. The control group received noninfectious allantoic fluid and a daily intraperitoneal injection of PBS. In H5N1-infected mice, DEX treatment did not improve the mortality (17 out of 20 versus 16 out of 20 deaths in the DEX-treated infected group versus the infected group), and did not alleviate clinical signs, including weight loss, decreased food intake and inactivity. There was no significant amelioration of the hypoxaemia and ARDS-associated pathological changes in DEX-treated infected mice, as assessed by blood gas analysis and histological score. Furthermore, DEX therapy did not inhibit inflammatory cellular infiltration and cytokine release (interleukin-6 and tumour necrosis factor-alpha) in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid induced by the H5N1 infection. In conclusion, dexamethasone treatment (2.5 mg.kg(-1)) from days 3-14 post inoculation has no beneficial effect on acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by the H5N1 infection in mice.

positive: The use of corticosteroids for COVID-19 infection The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is continuing relentlessly in many parts of the world and has resulted in the outpouring of literature on various aspects of the infection, including studies and recommendations regarding the optimal treatment of infected patients. Not surprisingly, the use of corticosteroids in the management of such patients has featured prominently in many of these publications. There is considerable debate in the literature as to the likely benefits, as well as the potential detrimental effects of corticosteroid therapy in general viral respiratory infections and, in particular, COVID-19 infections. While the definitive answer may need to await the results of ongoing randomised, controlled trials recent studies suggest that corticosteroid use in COVID-19 cases with hypoxaemia may benefit from low-dose corticosteroid therapy.

positive: Drug treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China Since December 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread throughout China as well as other countries. More than 8,700,000 confirmed COVID-19 cases have been recorded worldwide so far, with much more cases popping up overseas than those inside. As the initial epicenter in the world, China has been combating the epidemic for a relatively longer period and accumulated valuable experience in prevention and control of COVID-19. This article reviewed the clinical use, mechanism and efficacy of the clinically approved drugs recommended in the Diagnosis and Treatment Protocol for Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia (DTPNCP) released by National Health Commission of P.R.China, and the novel therapeutic agents now undergoing clinical trials approved by China National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) to evaluate experimental treatment for COVID-19. Reviewing the progress in drug development for the treatment against COVID-19 in China may provide insight into the epidemic control in other countries.

positive: Potential benefits of precise corticosteroids therapy for severe 2019-nCoV pneumonia

positive: Use of Corticosteroids in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia: A Systematic Review of the Literature The aim was to investigate the effectiveness of glucocorticoid therapy in patients with COVID-19. A systematic search of the literature across nine databases was conducted from inception until 15th March 2020, following the PRISMA guidelines. Patients with a validated diagnosis of COVID-19 and using corticosteroids were included, considering all health outcomes. Four studies with 542 Chinese participants were included. Two studies reported negative findings regarding the use of corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19, i.e., corticosteroids had a detrimental impact on clinical outcomes. One study reported no significant association between the use of corticosteroids and clinical outcomes. However, one study, on 201 participants with different stages of pneumonia due to COVID-19, found that in more severe forms, the administration of methylprednisolone significantly reduced the risk of death by 62%. The literature to date does not fully support the routine use of corticosteroids in COVID-19, but some findings suggest that methylprednisolone could lower mortality rate in more severe forms of the condition.

positive: Initial emergency department mechanical ventilation strategies for COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure and ARDS INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an emerging viral pathogen that causes the novel coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) and may result in hypoxemic respiratory failure necessitating invasive mechanical ventilation in the most severe cases. OBJECTIVE: This narrative review provides evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of COVID-19 related respiratory failure requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. DISCUSSION: In severe cases, COVID-19 leads to hypoxemic respiratory failure that may meet criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The mainstay of treatment for ARDS includes a lung protective ventilation strategy with low tidal volumes (4–8 mL/kg predicted body weight), adequate positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), and maintaining a plateau pressure of < 30 cm H(2)O. While further COVID-19 specific studies are needed, current management should focus on supportive care, preventing further lung injury from mechanical ventilation, and treating the underlying cause. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of COVID-19 related respiratory failure requiring invasive mechanical ventilation.

positive: Corticosteroid Administration Is Associated With Improved Outcome in Patients With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2-Related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical outcome of mechanically ventilated patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-related acute respiratory distress syndrome, who received corticosteroid with those who did not. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Intensive care setting. PATIENTS: All adult mechanically ventilated patients, who were admitted to the ICU between March 20, 2020, and May 10, 2020, for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-related acute respiratory distress syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Cohort was divided into two groups based on corticosteroid administration. The primary outcome variable was ventilator-free days at day 28. Secondary outcome variable was ICU-free days at day 30, and hospital-free days at day 30. Consecutive 61 mechanically ventilated patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-related acute respiratory distress syndrome were analyzed. Patient in corticosteroid group as compared with noncorticosteroid group have higher 28-day ventilator-free days (mean, 10.2; median, 7 [interquartile range, 0–22.3] vs mean, 4.7; median, 0 [interquartile range, 0–11]; p = 0.01).There was no significant difference noted in secondary outcomes (ICU-free days at day 30 and hospital-free days at day 30). CONCLUSIONS: Among mechanically ventilated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-related acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, corticosteroids use was associated with significant improvement in 28-day ventilator-free days at day 28, but no significant improvement in ICU-free days at day 30, and hospital-free days at day 30.

positive: Associations between immune-suppressive and stimulating drugs and novel COVID-19—a systematic review of current evidence BACKGROUND: Cancer and transplant patients with COVID-19 have a higher risk of developing severe and even fatal respiratory diseases, especially as they may be treated with immune-suppressive or immune-stimulating drugs. This review focuses on the effects of these drugs on host immunity against COVID-19. METHODS: Using Ovid MEDLINE, we reviewed current evidence for immune-suppressing or -stimulating drugs: cytotoxic chemotherapy, low-dose steroids, tumour necrosis factorα (TNFα) blockers, interlukin-6 (IL-6) blockade, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, IL-1 blockade, mycophenolate, tacrolimus, anti-CD20 and CTLA4-Ig. RESULTS: 89 studies were included. Cytotoxic chemotherapy has been shown to be a specific inhibitor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus in in vitro studies, but no specific studies exist as of yet for COVID-19. No conclusive evidence for or against the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the treatment of COVID-19 patients is available, nor is there evidence indicating that TNFα blockade is harmful to patients in the context of COVID-19. COVID-19 has been observed to induce a pro-inflammatory cytokine generation and secretion of cytokines, such as IL-6, but there is no evidence of the beneficial impact of IL-6 inhibitors on the modulation of COVID-19. Although there are potential targets in the JAK-STAT pathway that can be manipulated in treatment for coronaviruses and it is evident that IL-1 is elevated in patients with a coronavirus, there is currently no evidence for a role of these drugs in treatment of COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to challenging decision-making about treatment of critically unwell patients. Low-dose prednisolone and tacrolimus may have beneficial impacts on COVID-19. The mycophenolate mofetil picture is less clear, with conflicting data from pre-clinical studies. There is no definitive evidence that specific cytotoxic drugs, low-dose methotrexate for auto-immune disease, NSAIDs, JAK kinase inhibitors or anti-TNFα agents are contraindicated. There is clear evidence that IL-6 peak levels are associated with severity of pulmonary complications.

positive: Role of corticosteroid in the management of COVID-19: A systemic review and a Clinician’s perspective BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Interest in corticosteroid therapy in COVID-19 has been rekindled after the results from Randomized Evaluation of COVid-19 thERapY (RECOVERY) Trial. However, the World health Organization has not recommended corticosteroid in the treatment of COVID-19. We sought to conduct a systematic review on the role of corticosteroid in the management of patients of COVID-19. METHODS: A systematic electronic search of PubMed, Cochrane and MedRxiv database using specific keywords was made up till June 17, 2020. Full text of all the original articles with supplementary appendix that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were retrieved and a detailed analysis of results were represented. RESULTS: Of the 5 studies (4 retrospective studies and 1 quasi-prospective study) conducted for evaluating the role of corticosteroids, 3 studies have shown benefit, while 2 studies shown no benefit and there was a suggestion of significant harm in critical cases in one sub-study. RECOVERY trial is the only randomized controlled trial that has shown a significant reduction of death by 35% in ventilated patients and by 20% amongst patients on supplemental oxygen therapy with the dexamethasone, although no benefit was observed in mild cases. CONCLUSIONS: While the results from retrospective studies are heterogenous and difficult to infer of a definitive protective benefit with corticosteroids, RECOVERY trial found a significantly better outcome with dexamethasone, mostly in severe cases. Nonetheless, more studies are needed to replicate the outcome shown in RECOVERY trial for a substantial conclusion.

positive: Systemic steroids in patients with COVID-19: pros and contras, an endocrinological point of view

positive: Short-Term Dexamethasone in Sars-CoV-2 Patients. BACKGROUND Dexamethasone, a synthetic glucocorticoid, has anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive properties. There is a hyperinflammatory response involved in the clinical course of patients with pneumonia due to SARS-CoV-2. To date, there has been no definite therapy for COVID-19. We reviewed the charts of SARS-CoV-2 patients with pneumonia and moderate to severely elevated CRP and worsening hypoxemia who were treated with early, short-term dexamethasone. METHODS We describe a series of 21 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were admitted to The Miriam Hospital in Providence, RI, and were treated with a short course of dexamethasone, either alone or in addition to current investigative therapies. RESULTS CRP levels decreased significantly following the start of dexamethasone from mean initial levels of 129.52 to 40.73 mg/L at time of discharge. 71% percent of the patients were discharged home with a mean length of stay of 7.8 days. None of the patients had escalation of care, leading to mechanical ventilation. Two patients were transferred to inpatient hospice facilities on account of persistent hypoxemia, in line with their documented goals of care. CONCLUSIONS A short course of systemic corticosteroids among inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 with hypoxic respiratory failure was well tolerated, and most patients had improved outcomes. This limited case series may not offer concrete evidence towards the benefit of corticosteroids in COVID-19. However, patients' positive response to short-term corticosteroids demonstrates that they may help blunt the severity of inflammation and prevent a severe hyperinflammatory phase, in turn reducing the length of stay, ICU admissions, and healthcare costs.

positive: Current pharmacological treatments for SARS-COV-2: A narrative review The novel coronavirus, later identified as SARS-CoV-2, originating from Wuhan in China in November 2019, quickly spread around the world becoming a pandemic. Despite the knowledge of previous coronaviruses, such as those responsible for the SARS and MERS-CoV epidemic, there is no drug or prophylaxis treatment to this day. The rapid succession of scientific findings on SARS-CoV-2 provides a significant number of potential drug targets. Nevertheless, at the same time, the high quantity of clinical data, generated by a large number of rapidly infected people, require accurate tests regarding effective medical treatments. Several in vitro and in vivo studies were rapidly initiated after the outbreak of the pandemic COVID-19. Initial clinical studies revealed the promising potential of remdesivir that demonstrated a powerful and specific in vitro antiviral activity for COVID-19. Promising effects appear to be attributable to hydroxychloroquine. Remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine are being tested in ongoing randomized trials. In contrast, oseltamivir was not effective and corticosteroids are not currently recommended. However, few data from ongoing clinical trials are identifying low molecular weight heparins, innate immune system stimulating agents, and inflammatory modulating agents as potential effective agents. The authors assume that the current pandemic will determine the need for a systematic approach based on big data analysis for identifying effective drugs to defeat SARS-Cov-2. This work is aimed to be a general reference point and to provide an overview as comprehensive as possible regarding the main clinical trials in progress at the moment.

negative: The Father-Daughter Dinner Dance: A Waltz With Ethics and COVID-19 Commentary on "The Father-Daughter Dinner Dance: A Waltz With Ethics and COVID-19"

negative: Pain Management During COVID-19 and Steroids: Striking a Balance

negative: Implementing One Health as an integrated approach to health in Rwanda It is increasingly clear that resolution of complex global health problems requires interdisciplinary, intersectoral expertise and cooperation from governmental, non-governmental and educational agencies. ‘One Health’ refers to the collaboration of multiple disciplines and sectors working locally, nationally and globally to attain optimal health for people, animals and the environment. One Health offers the opportunity to acknowledge shared interests, set common goals, and drive toward team work to benefit the overall health of a nation. As in most countries, the health of Rwanda's people and economy are highly dependent on the health of the environment. Recently, Rwanda has developed a One Health strategic plan to meet its human, animal and environmental health challenges. This approach drives innovations that are important to solve both acute and chronic health problems and offers synergy across systems, resulting in improved communication, evidence-based solutions, development of a new generation of systems-thinkers, improved surveillance, decreased lag time in response, and improved health and economic savings. Several factors have enabled the One Health movement in Rwanda including an elaborate network of community health workers, existing rapid response teams, international academic partnerships willing to look more broadly than at a single disease or population, and relative equity between female and male health professionals. Barriers to implementing this strategy include competition over budget, poor communication, and the need for improved technology. Given the interconnectedness of our global community, it may be time for countries and their neighbours to follow Rwanda's lead and consider incorporating One Health principles into their national strategic health plans.

negative: Multiple Myeloma in the Time of COVID-19 We provide our recommendations (not evidence based) for managing multiple myeloma patients during the pandemic of COVID-19. We do not recommend therapy for smoldering myeloma patients (standard or high risk). Screening for COVID-19 should be done in all patients before therapy. For standard-risk patients, we recommend the following: ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (IRd) (preferred), cyclophosphamide lenalidomide and dexamethasone (CRd), daratumumab lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd), lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd), or cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (CyBorD). For high-risk patients we recommend carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) (preferred) or RVd. Decreasing the dose of dexamethasone to 20 mg and giving bortezomib subcutaneously once a week is recommended. We recommend delaying autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), unless the patient has high-risk disease that is not responding well, or if the patient has plasma cell leukemia (PCL). Testing for COVID-19 should be done before ASCT. If a patient achieves a very good partial response or better, doses and frequency of drug administration can be modified. After 10-12 cycles, lenalidomide maintenance is recommended for standard-risk patients and bortezomib or ixazomib are recommended for high-risk patients. Daratumumab-based regimens are recommended for relapsed patients. Routine ASCT is not recommended for relapse during the epidemic unless the patient has an aggressive relapse or secondary PCL. Patients on current maintenance should continue their therapy.

negative: Remdesivir for COVID-19: challenges of underpowered studies

negative: Role of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine in the Treatment of COVID-19 Infection- A Systematic Literature Review Background: Coronavirus pandemic is currently a global public health emergency. At present, no pharmacological treatment is known to treat this condition, and there is a need to review the available treatments. Objective: While there have been studies to describe the role of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in various viral conditions, there is limited information about the use of them in COVID-19. This systematic review aims to summarize the available evidence regarding the role of chloroquine in treating coronavirus infection. Methods: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used for this review. A literature search was performed using PUBMED & Google Scholar to find articles about the role of CQ in COVID-19 patients. Results: We included 19 publications (Five published articles, three letters/correspondence, one commentary, five pre-proofs of accepted articles, one abstract of yet to be published article, and four were pre-prints (not yet peer-reviewed) articles) in this systematic review. All the articles mentioned about the role of chloroquine and /or hydroxychloroquine in limiting the infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus causing COVID-19). Conclusions: There is theoretical, experimental, preclinical and clinical evidence of the effectiveness of chloroquine in patients affected with COVID-19. There is adequate evidence of drug safety from the long-time clinical use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in other indications. More data from ongoing and future trials will add more insight into the role of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 infection.

negative: Risks and Impact of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin-Receptor Blockers on SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Adults BACKGROUND: The role of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) in COVID-19 disease susceptibility, severity, and treatment is unclear. PURPOSE: To evaluate, on an ongoing basis, whether use of ACEIs or ARBs either increases risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or is associated with worse COVID-19 disease outcomes, and to assess the efficacy of these medications for COVID-19 treatment. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (Ovid) and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 2003 to 4 May 2020, with planned ongoing surveillance for 1 year; the World Health Organization database of COVID-19 publications and medRxiv.org through 17 April 2020; and ClinicalTrials.gov to 24 April 2020, with planned ongoing surveillance. STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies and trials in adults that examined associations and effects of ACEIs or ARBs on risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease severity and mortality. DATA EXTRACTION: Single-reviewer abstraction confirmed by another reviewer, independent evaluation by 2 reviewers of study quality, and collective assessment of certainty of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Two retrospective cohort studies found that ACEI and ARB use was not associated with a higher likelihood of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and 1 case-control study found no association with COVID-19 illness in a large community (moderate-certainty evidence). Fourteen observational studies, involving a total of 23 565 adults with COVID-19, showed consistent evidence that neither medication was associated with more severe COVID-19 illness (high-certainty evidence). Four registered randomized trials plan to evaluate ACEIs and ARBs for treatment of COVID-19. LIMITATION: Half the studies were small and did not adjust for important confounding variables. CONCLUSION: High-certainty evidence suggests that ACEI or ARB use is not associated with more severe COVID-19 disease, and moderate-certainty evidence suggests no association between use of these medications and positive SARS-CoV-2 test results among symptomatic patients. Whether these medications increase the risk for mild or asymptomatic disease or are beneficial in COVID-19 treatment remains uncertain. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None. (PROSPERO: registration number pending).

negative: Lectins as Promising Therapeutics for the Prevention and Treatment of HIV and Other Potential Coinfections Human immunodeficiency virus-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) remains a global health problem. Current therapeutics specifically target the viral pathogen at various stages of its life cycle, although complex interactions between HIV and other pathogenic organisms are evident. Targeting HIV and concomitant infectious pathogens simultaneously, both by therapeutic regimens and in prevention strategies, would help contain the AIDS pandemic. Lectins, a ubiquitous group of proteins that specifically bind glycosylated molecules, are interesting compounds that could be used for this purpose, with demonstrated anti-HIV properties. In addition, potential coinfecting pathogens, including other enveloped viruses, bacteria, yeasts and fungi, and protozoa, display sugar-coated macromolecules on their surfaces, making them potential targets of lectins. This review summarizes the currently available findings suggesting that lectins should be further developed to simultaneously fight the AIDS pandemic and concomitant infections in HIV infected individuals.

negative: Hydroxychloroquine for the management of COVID-19: Hope or Hype? A Systematic review of the current evidence Purpose: The COVID-19 Pandemic has literally left the world breathless in the chase for Pharmacotherapy. With the vaccine approval likely more than a year away and novel drugs in early clinical trials, repurposing of existing drugs takes the center stage. A potential drug discussed both in geopolitical and global scientific community is hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). We intend to systematically weigh and analyze the existing evidence of HCQ in the light of published and pre-print data available so far. Methods: PubMed Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google scholar databases and official clinical trial Registries of the United States, China, WHO ICTRP were electronically searched for studies for the use of HCQ in patients with COVID-19. Pre-proof article repositories like MedRxiv, BioRxiv, and ChemRxiv were also included in the search. The literature was critically appraised. Results: Total 71 articles were available as of 15 th April of which articles of relevance (three invitro studies, two open label non-randomized trials, two open label randomized control trials, one follow-up study, three reviews, ten short communications) and 88 clinical trials registered in three clinical trial registries were analyzed. HCQ seems to be efficient in inhibiting of SARS CoV-2 in in-vitro cell lines; there is lack of strong evidence from human studies. Conclusions: The in-vitro cell culture based data of viral inhibition does not suffice for the use of hydroxychloroquine in the patients with COVID-19. Currently literature shows inadequate, low level evidence in human studies. Scarcity of safety and efficacy data warrants medical communities, health care agencies and governments across the world against the widespread use of HCQ in COVID-19 prophylaxis and treatment, until robust evidence becomes available. Keywords: Hydroxychloroquine, SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, Corona virus, nCov2, systematic review

negative: Should azithromycin be used to treat COVID-19? A rapid review BACKGROUND: There are no established effective treatments for COVID-19. While novel drugs are being developed, azithromycin has been identified as a candidate treatment in the interim. AIM: To review the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of azithromycin in treating COVID-19. DESIGN & SETTING: A rapid review of the literature was conducted. METHOD: Electronic searches were conducted on 16 April 2020 of PubMed, TRIP, EPPI COVID Living Map, MedRxiv, GoogleScholar, and Google. In vivo and in vitro studies were included assessing the safety and effectiveness of azithromycin for treatment of COVID-19, and/or the activity of azithromycin against SARS-CoV-2. In vivo studies needed to include a comparator group. RESULTS: Three studies were identified, two in vitro and one in vivo, which were suitable for inclusion. All three were published as pre-prints. The in vitro studies revealed conflicting results, with one finding anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity for azithromycin alone, while the other found activity against SARS-CoV-2 only when azithromycin was combined with hydroxychloroquine. A small trial of 36 patients, with high risk of bias, found superior viral clearance in patients with COVID-19 treated with azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine combined, compared with hydroxychloroquine alone. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to support the use of azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19 outside of the context of clinical trials, unless it is used to treat bacterial super-infection. There is extremely limited evidence of a possible synergy between azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine. The adverse events profile of azithromycin in the context of COVID-19 has not yet been established. Well-conducted clinical trials are urgently needed in this area.

negative: A framework for identifying and mitigating the equity harms of COVID-19 policy interventions Abstract: Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic. Governments have implemented combinations of ‘lockdown’ measures of various stringencies, including school and workplace closures, cancellations of public events, and restrictions on internal and external movements. These policy interventions are an attempt to shield high risk individuals and to prevent overwhelming countries’ healthcare systems, or, colloquially, ‘flatten the curve’. However, these policy interventions may come with physical and psychological health harms, group and social harms, and opportunity costs. These policies may particularly affect vulnerable populations and not only exacerbate pre-existing inequities, but also generate new ones. Methods We developed a conceptual framework to identify and categorise adverse effects of COVID-19 lockdown measures. We based our framework on Lorenc and Oliver’s framework for the adverse effects of public health interventions and the PROGRESS-Plus equity framework. To test its application we purposively sampled COVID-19 policy examples from around the world and evaluated them for the potential physical, psychological, and social harms, as well as opportunity costs, in each of the PROGRESS-Plus equity domains: Place of residence, Race/ethnicity, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, Social capital, Plus (age, and disability). Results We found examples of inequitably distributed adverse effects for each COVID-19 lockdown policy example, stratified by LMIC and HIC, in every PROGRESS-Plus equity domain. We identified known policy interventions intended to mitigate some of these adverse effects. The same harms (anxiety; depression; food insecurity; loneliness; stigma; violence) appear to be repeated across many groups, and are exacerbated by several COVID-19 policy interventions. Conclusion Our conceptual framework highlights the fact that COVID-19 policy interventions can generate or exacerbate interactive and multiplicative equity harms. Applying this framework can help in three ways: (1) identifying areas where a policy intervention may generate inequitable adverse effects; (2) mitigating policy and practice interventions by facilitating the systematic examination of relevant evidence; and (3) planning for lifting COVID-19 lockdowns and policy interventions around the world.

negative: Covid-19 treatment update: follow the scientific evidence

negative: Non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs in management of COVID‐19; a systematic review on current evidence BACKGROUND: Since there is still no definitive conclusion regarding which non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are most effective and safe in viral respiratory infections, we decided to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various NSAIDs in viral respiratory infections so that we can reach a conclusion on which NSAID is best choice for COVID‐19. METHODS: A search was performed in Medline (via PubMed), Embase, and CENTRAL databases until 23 March 2020. Clinical trials on application of NSAIDs in viral respiratory infections were included. RESULTS: Six clinical trials were included. No clinical trial has been performed on COVID‐19, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome infections. Studies show that ibuprofen and naproxen not only have positive effects in controlling cold symptoms but also do not cause serious side effects in rhinovirus infections. In addition, it was found that clarithromycin, naproxen and oseltamivir combination leads to decrease in mortality rate and duration of hospitalization in patients with pneumonia due to influenza. CONCLUSION: Although based on existing evidence, NSAIDs have been effective in treating respiratory infections caused by influenza and rhinovirus, since there is no clinical trial on COVID‐19 and case‐reports and clinical experiences are indicative of elongation of treatment duration and exacerbation of the clinical course of patients with COVID‐19, it is recommended to use substitutes such as acetaminophen for controlling fever and inflammation and be cautious about using NSAIDs in management of COVID‐19 patients until there are enough evidence. Naproxen may be a good choice for future clinical trials.

negative: Baricitinib therapy in COVID-19: A pilot study on safety and clinical impact • Baricitinib at 4 mg/day/orally was given to 12 patients with moderate COVID-19. • In baricitinib-treated patients no adverse events were recorded, after 2 weeks. • Clinical and respiratory parameters significantly improved at 2 weeks. • None of the baricitinib-treated patients required admission to ICU. • Proper control group was missing; this is required to demonstrate the efficacy.

negative: COVID-19: what is next for public health?

negative: Attenuation of acute lung injury in mice by oxymatrine is associated with inhibition of phosphorylated p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase Oxymatrine is one of the alkaloids extracted from Chinese herb Sophora japonica (Sophora flavescens Ait.) with activities of anti-inflammation, inhibiting immune reaction, antivirus, protecting hepatocytes and antihepatic fibrosis. However, the effect of oxymatrine on acute lung injury (ALI) has not been known yet. In this study, the effect of oxymatrine on ALI was investigated using an oleic acid-induced ALI mouse model. Morphological findings showed that the oleic acid group demonstrated a marked lung injury represented by prominent atelectasis, intraalveolar and interstitial patchy hemorrhage, edema, thickened alveolar septum, formation of hyaline membranes and the existence of inflammatory cells in alveolar spaces. While in the oxymatrine/dexamethasone group, these changes were less severe and in the vicinity of the control group. Furthermore, pretreatment with oxymatrine significantly alleviated oleic acid-induced lung injury accompanied by reduction of lung index and wet-to-dry weight ratio, decreases in serum TNF-α level and inhibition of phosphorylated p38 MAPK. These findings suggest that oxymatrine has a beneficial effect on acute lung injury induced by oleic acid in mice and may inhibit the production of proinflammatory cytokine, TNF-α, by means of the inhibition of p38 MAPK.

negative: Test and treat COVID 65 plus - Hydroxychloroquine versus placebo in early ambulatory diagnosis and treatment of older patients with COVID19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The aim of this trial is to identify the effect of ambulatory treatment in early COVID-19 disease with hydroxychloroquine on the rate of hospitalization or death in older patients above the age of 64. TRIAL DESIGN: Parallel, 2:1 randomization, double blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center trial. PARTICIPANTS: Male and female patients above the age of 64 (i.e. ≥65 years of age) with COVID-19 diagnosis confirmed by SARS-CoV2 positive throat swab (PCR). Patients can only be included within 3 days of symptom onset in ambulatory care if they consent to the study procedure and are able to adhere to the study visit schedule and protocol requirements (including telephone visits concerning symptoms and side effects). Severity of disease at inclusion is mild to moderate defined as not requiring hospital admission: SpO2 >94%, respiratory rate <20, mental state alert, no signs of septic shock. Cardiac risk is minimised by requiring a Tisdale score ≤ 6. Patients are recruited in the two german cities of Ulm and Tübingen in various ambulatory care settings. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Each patient will be given a first dose of 600 mg Hydroxychloroquine or the equivalent number of placebo capsules (3 capsules) at the day of inclusion. From the 2(nd) day on, each patient will get 200 mg or the equivalent number of placebo capsules twice a day (400mg/day) until day 7 (6 more does of 400 mg); a cumulative dose of 3 g. MAIN OUTCOMES: Rate of hospitalization or death at day 7 after study inclusion RANDOMISATION: All consenting adult patients having confirmed COVID-19 are randomly and blindly allocated in a 2:1 ratio to either IMP or placebo. The biostatistical center produced a randomization list (block randomization) with varying block length and stratified for the study center. This list is provided for packaging to the pharmaceutical unit which is providing encapsulated placebo and IMP. Only the pharmaceutical unit is aware of group allocation according to the randomization list. BLINDING (MASKING): Patients and investigators, as well as treating physicians are blinded to the treatment- allocation. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): In the first stage of an adaptive design 120 patients in a 2:1 ration: 72 Verum and 36 Placebo, plus an increase for 10% drop outs. After interim analysis, the total sample size will be calculated based on the effect seen in the first stage. Total sample size is estimated approximately n = 300-400 patients. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version number: V3, 19.05.2020 Recruitment not yet started but is anticipated to begin by June 2020 and be complete by December 2020 TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04351516, date: 17 April 2020 EudraCT: 2020-001482-37, date: 30 March 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

negative: A potential role for Galectin-3 inhibitors in the treatment of COVID-19 The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization. With no standard of care for the treatment of COVID-19, there is an urgent need to identify therapies that may be effective in treatment. Recent evidence has implicated the development of cytokine release syndrome as the major cause of fatality in COVID-19 patients, with elevated levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) observed in patients. Galectin-3 (Gal-3) is an animal lectin that has been implicated in the disease process of a variety of inflammatory conditions. Inhibitors of the small molecule Gal-3 have been shown to reduce the levels of both IL-6 and TNF-α in vitro and have shown anti-inflammatory effects in vivo. Additionally, a key domain in the spike protein of β-coronaviridae, a genus which includes SARS-CoV2, is nearly identical in morphology to human Gal-3. These spike proteins are critical for the virus’ entry into host cells. Here we provide a systematic review of the available literature and an impetus for further research on the use of Gal-3 inhibitors in the treatment of COVID-19. Further, we propose a dual mechanism by which Gal-3 inhibition may be beneficial in the treatment of COVID-19, both suppressing the host inflammatory response and impeding viral attachment to host cells.

negative: “Remote monitoring of intranasal ketamine self-administration as maintenance therapy in treatment-resistant depression (TRD): a novel strategy for vulnerable and at-risk populations to COVID-19?” Abstract This work describes a clinical case in which we used telemedicine to monitor at-home ketamine treatment in TRD. Ketamine has been shown to be a promising and safe treatment for TRD in elderly patients. However, the COVID-19 pandemic is clearly impacting the world and this disease is recognized as being particularly dangerous for the elderly and vulnerable patients. To limit the transmission of the disease, geriatric mental health specialists must be creative and ensure the safety of their patients by limiting human to human contact. This problem might be averted by massive deployment of outreach services and telemedicine strategies.

negative: Potential Role of Anti-interleukin (IL)-6 Drugs in the Treatment of COVID-19: Rationale, Clinical Evidence and Risks The epidemic due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been spreading globally, raising increasing concerns. This public health emergency has triggered a race to find medications to improve the prognosis of this disease. There is currently great interest in drug repositioning to manage SARS-CoV-2 infection, that is, the evaluation of the potential benefits of a drug that has already been proven safe and effective in humans for other approved indications. As interleukin-6 (IL-6) acts as a key driver of the inflammation associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), IL-6 and IL-6 receptor (IL-6R) inhibition appear to be promising targets for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. It is important to critically analyze the available evidence concerning the use of the available anti-IL-6 (siltuximab) and anti-IL-6R (tocilizumab and sarilumab) agents in COVID-19 patients, in terms of both benefit and risk. In this review, the pathogenesis of the cytokine storm induced by COVID-19, the role of IL-6 in this cytokine storm, the rationale for the use of anti-IL-6 agents, and key information on potential benefits and safety monitoring of these biologicals in COVID-19 patients is discussed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40259-020-00430-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: Evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: A global health emergency Abstract According to data compiled by researchers at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, more than two and half million cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a newly discovered virus named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), have been confirmed on April 20, 2020 (Nature, 2020b). Since the emergence of this infectious disease in Asia (Wuhan, China) late last year, it has been subsequently span to every continent of the world except Antarctica (Rodríguez-Morales et al., 2020). Along with a foothold in every country, the current disease pandemic is disrupting practically every aspect of life all over the world. As the outbreak are continuing to evolve, several research activities have been conducted for better understanding the origin, functions, treatments, and preventions of this novel coronavirus. This review will be a summa of the key features of novel coronavirus (nCoV), the virus causing disease 2019 and the present epidemic situation worldwide up to April 20, 2020. It is expected that this record will play an important role to take more preventive measures for overcoming the challenges faced during this current pandemic.

negative: Bortezomib and Vorinostat Therapy as Maintenance Therapy after Autologous Transplant for Multiple Myeloma. BACKGROUND In multiple myeloma (MM), relapse is a frequent complication after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (ASCT). To reduce the risk of relapse, additional therapy has been added post-ASCT. In a nontransplant relapse setting, the combination of intravenous bortezomib and oral vorinostat (BV) was studied and showed efficacy. Therefore, it was reasonable to study this combination therapy post-ASCT. PATIENTS AND METHODS We report on BV given post-ASCT. All 30 patients underwent conditioning for ASCT with high-dose melphalan. After recovery from the acute transplant-related toxicity, BV therapy was started and given for a total of 12 (28-day) cycles. RESULTS The most common toxicities were hematological, gastrointestinal (diarrhea and nausea), fatigue, and peripheral neuropathy. The median follow-up for BV patients is 7.8 (range: 6.12-9.03) years. After BV therapy, 18 patients (60%) are alive, and 9 (30%) are alive without disease progression. CONCLUSIONS BV can be given post-ASCT with an acceptable toxicity profile and produces reasonable disease-free and overall survival rates. A randomized study comparing the BV regimen to single-agent lenalidomide or bortezomib is needed.

negative: Tripartite Combination of Candidate Pandemic Mitigation Agents: Vitamin D, Quercetin, and Estradiol Manifest Properties of Medicinal Agents for Targeted Mitigation of the COVID-19 Pandemic Defined by Genomics-Guided Tracing of SARS-CoV-2 Targets in Human Cells Genes required for SARS-CoV-2 entry into human cells, ACE2 and FURIN, were employed as baits to build genomic-guided molecular maps of upstream regulatory elements, their expression and functions in the human body, and pathophysiologically relevant cell types. Repressors and activators of the ACE2 and FURIN genes were identified based on the analyses of gene silencing and overexpression experiments as well as relevant transgenic mouse models. Panels of repressors (VDR; GATA5; SFTPC; HIF1a) and activators (HMGA2; INSIG1; RUNX1; HNF4a; JNK1/c-FOS) were then employed to identify existing drugs manifesting in their effects on gene expression signatures of potential coronavirus infection mitigation agents. Using this strategy, vitamin D and quercetin have been identified as putative 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) mitigation agents. Quercetin has been identified as one of top-scoring candidate therapeutics in the supercomputer SUMMIT drug-docking screen and Gene Set Enrichment Analyses (GSEA) of expression profiling experiments (EPEs), indicating that highly structurally similar quercetin, luteolin, and eriodictyol could serve as scaffolds for the development of efficient inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In agreement with this notion, quercetin alters the expression of 98 of 332 (30%) of human genes encoding protein targets of SARS-CoV-2, thus potentially interfering with functions of 23 of 27 (85%) of the SARS-CoV-2 viral proteins in human cells. Similarly, Vitamin D may interfere with functions of 19 of 27 (70%) of the SARS-CoV-2 proteins by altering expression of 84 of 332 (25%) of human genes encoding protein targets of SARS-CoV-2. Considering the potential effects of both quercetin and vitamin D, the inference could be made that functions of 25 of 27 (93%) of SARS-CoV-2 proteins in human cells may be altered. GSEA and EPEs identify multiple drugs, smoking, and many disease conditions that appear to act as putative coronavirus infection-promoting agents. Discordant patterns of testosterone versus estradiol impacts on SARS-CoV-2 targets suggest a plausible molecular explanation of the apparently higher male mortality during the coronavirus pandemic. Estradiol, in contrast with testosterone, affects the expression of the majority of human genes (203 of 332; 61%) encoding SARS-CoV-2 targets, thus potentially interfering with functions of 26 of 27 SARS-CoV-2 viral proteins. A hypothetical tripartite combination consisting of quercetin/vitamin D/estradiol may affect expression of 244 of 332 (73%) human genes encoding SARS-CoV-2 targets. Of major concern is the ACE2 and FURIN expression in many human cells and tissues, including immune cells, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 may infect a broad range of cellular targets in the human body. Infection of immune cells may cause immunosuppression, long-term persistence of the virus, and spread of the virus to secondary targets. Present analyses and numerous observational studies indicate that age-associated vitamin D deficiency may contribute to the high mortality of older adults and the elderly. Immediate availability for targeted experimental and clinical interrogations of potential COVID-19 pandemic mitigation agents, namely vitamin D and quercetin, as well as of the highly selective (Ki, 600 pm) intrinsically specific FURIN inhibitor (a1-antitrypsin Portland (a1-PDX), is considered an encouraging factor. Observations reported in this contribution are intended to facilitate follow-up targeted experimental studies and, if warranted, randomized clinical trials to identify and validate therapeutically viable interventions to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, gene expression profiles of vitamin D and quercetin activities and their established safety records as over-the-counter medicinal substances strongly argue that they may represent viable candidates for further considerations of their potential utility as COVID-19 pandemic mitigation agents. In line with the results of present analyses, a randomized interventional clinical trial evaluating effects of estradiol on severity of the coronavirus infection in COVID19+ and presumptive COVID19+ patients and two interventional randomized clinical trials evaluating effects of vitamin D on prevention and treatment of COVID-19 were listed on the ClinicalTrials.gov website.

negative: Immunosuppressive Drugs Modulate the Replication of Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) in a Hydrodynamic Injection Mouse Model Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation and recurrence are common in patients under immunosuppression and can be controlled by hepatitis B immunoglobulin, antivirals, and hepatitis B vaccine. However, the detailed analysis of HBV infection under immunosuppression is essential for the prophylaxis and therapy for HBV reactivation and recurrence. In this study, HBV replication and T cell responses were analyzed in a HBV-transfected mouse model under immunosuppressive therapy. During the treatment, HBV replication was at a high level in mice treated with dexamethasone, cyclosporine, and cyclophosphamide, whereas was terminated in mice treated with mycophenolate mofetil. After the withdrawal, HBV replication was at low or high levels in the dexamethasone-treated mice or in both cyclosporine- and cyclophosphamide-treated mice. The early withdrawal of cyclosporine allowed the recovery of suppressed T cell responses and led to subsequent HBV clearance, while the adoptive immune transfer to the mice with HBV persistence led to HBV suppression. Taken together, long-term HBV persistence under immunosuppression depends on the immunosuppressive drugs used and on the treatment duration and is mediated by the suppressed intrahepatic CD8 T cell response. These data may be helpful for individualized immunosuppressive therapy in patients with high risk of HBV reactivation and recurrence, and the mouse system is suitable for studying HBV reactivation and recurrence under immunosuppression.

negative: SARS‐CoV‐2 as a trigger of neurodegeneration: thinking ahead

negative: Comparison of the release profile and pharmacokinetics of intact and fragmented dexamethasone intravitreal implants in rabbit eyes. PURPOSE Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant, Ozurdex(®); Allergan, Inc.) is used to treat noninfectious posterior uveitis and macular edema associated with retinal vein occlusion and diabetic retinopathy. Two recently published reports of DEX implant fragmentation shortly after injection have raised concerns about the potential for faster implant dissolution and elevated ocular dexamethasone concentrations. This study compared the in vivo release profile and pharmacokinetic behavior of intact and fragmented DEX implants. METHODS DEX implant was surgically implanted as a single unit or fragmented into 3 pieces in the posterior segment of opposing eyes of 36 New Zealand white rabbits. The release of dexamethasone over time from 1-piece and 3-piece fragmented implants dissolved in solution in vitro was compared with that from the 1-piece and 3-piece fragmented implants placed in the rabbit eyes. In addition, dexamethasone concentrations in the vitreous and aqueous humors of each eye were measured at 3 h and days 1, 7, 14, 21, and 28. High-performance liquid chromatography and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry were used for assays. RESULTS Dexamethasone release from the 1-piece and 3-piece DEX implants in vivo was not different and was consistent with the in vitro release pattern. Moreover, the concentration profile of dexamethasone in the vitreous and aqueous humors was similar for the 1-piece and 3-piece DEX implants at each time point measured. CONCLUSIONS DEX implant fragmentation neither accelerated its dissolution nor increased the dexamethasone concentration delivered at a given time. Accordingly, DEX implant fragmentation is unlikely to have clinically significant effects in patients.

negative: COVID-19 Infection and Haematological Involvement: a Review of Epidemiology, Pathophysiology and Prognosis of Full Blood Count Findings The unfolding COVID-19 pandemic began in December 2019 in Wuhan, Hubei Province. COVID-19 is a systemic infection affecting several systems including the haematopoietic system. Surveys illustrating the laboratory findings of these patients conclude that lymphocytopenia, neutrophilia and thrombocytopenia are prominent amongst them. Moreover, it has been reported a significant decrease in T lymphocyte subsets and an increase of inflammatory cytokines of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Generally, thrombocytopenia is commonplace in critically ill patients and usually suggests serious organ malfunction. In view of this, this review investigates the correlation between these abnormalities and the prognosis and disease course. Full blood count is an easy, economic and widely available tool which may help to discriminate between patients with or without severe disease. Last but not least, this review examines potential pathophysiological mechanisms by the novel coronavirus which contribute to these haematological alterations aiding the clinicians to better understand this disease and provide more clinical treatment options.

negative: Changes in epithelial secretory cells and potentiation of neurogenic inflammation in the trachea of rats with respiratory tract infections In rats respiratory tract infections due to Sendai virus and coronavirus usually are transient, but they can have long-lasting consequences when accompanied by Mycoplasma pulmonis infections. Morphological alterations in the tracheal epithelium and a potentiation of the inflammatory response evoked by sensory nerve stimulation (“neurogenic inflammation”) are evident nine weeks after the infections begin, but the extent to which these changes are present at earlier times is not known. In the present study we characterized these abnormalities in the epithelium and determined the extent to which they are present 3 and 6 weeks after the infections begin. We also determined the magnitude of the potentiation of neurogenic inflammation at these times, whether the potentiation can be reversed by glucocorticoids, and whether a proliferation of blood vessels contributes to the abnormally large amount of plasma extravasation associated with this potentiation. To this end, we studied Long-Evans rats that acquired these viral and mycoplasmal infections from other rats. We found that the tracheal epithelium of the infected rats had ten times as many Alcian blue-PAS positive mucous cells as did that of pathogen-free rats; but it contained none of the serous cells typical of pathogen-free rats, so the total number of secretory cells was not increased. In addition, the epithelium of the infected rats had three times the number of ciliated cells and had only a third of the number of globule leukocytes. In response to an injection of capsaicin (150 μg/kg i.v.), the tracheas of the infected rats developed an abnormally large amount of extravasation of two tracers Evans blue dye and Monastral blue pigment, and had an abnormally large number of Monastral blue-labeled venules, particularly in regions of mucosa overlying the cartilaginous rings. This abnormally large amount of extravasation was blocked by dexamethasone (1 mg/day i.p. for 5 days). We conclude that M. pulmonis infections, exacerbated at the outset by viral infections, result within three weeks in the transformation of epithelial serous cells into mucous cells, the proliferation of ciliated cells, and the depletion of globule leukocytes. They also cause a proliferation of mediator-sensitive blood vessels in the airway mucosa, which is likely to contribute to the potentiation of neurogenic inflammation that accompanies these infections.

negative: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19. Backgrounds. Since COVID-19 outbreak, various agents have been tested but no proven effective therapies have been identified. This has led to a lot of controversies among associated researches. Hence, in order to address the issue of using hydroxychloroquine in treating COVID-19 patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods. A thorough search was carried out to find relevant studies in MEDLINE, medRxiv, PubMed, Cochrane Database, China Academic Journals Full-text Database and Web of Science. Two investigators independently reviewed 274 abstracts and 23 articles. The trials which evaluated hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 were included for this systematic review. Two investigators assessed quality of the studies and data extraction was done by one reviewer and cross checked by the other. Results. Five trials involving 677 patients were included while conducting the meta-analysis. Compared with the control group, hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin showed benefits in positive-to-negative conversion of SARS-CoV-2 (odds ratio [OR], 1.95 [95% CI,0.19 to 19.73] and a reduction in progression rate (OR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.58 to 1.37]), but without demonstrating any statistical significance. This systematic review has also suggested a possible synergistic effect of the combination therapy which included hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. However, the use of hydroxychloroquine alone was associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients. Conclusion. The use of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin for treatment of COVID-19 patients, seems to be effective. The combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin has shown synergic effects. However, mortality rate was increased when the treatment was conducted with hydroxychloroquine.

negative: Lithium as a candidate treatment for COVID‐19: Promises and pitfalls The pandemic of respiratory illness caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS‐nCoV‐2) is a global health crisis. Despite numerous preliminary results, there is as yet no treatment of proven efficacy for this condition. In this context, the pharmacological properties of lithium, better known as a treatment for mood disorders, merit closer examination. Lithium has shown in vitro efficacy at inhibiting the replication of coronaviruses responsible for gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases in animals. It has immunomodulatory properties that may be of additional benefit in moderating the host inflammatory response to the novel coronavirus (SARS‐CoV‐2). Furthermore, there is evidence that lithium may exert a protective action against upper respiratory infections and influenza‐like illnesses in patients taking it for other indications. These promising reports must be balanced against the narrow therapeutic index and high risk of toxicity associated with lithium therapy, its documented interactions with several commonly used drugs, and the absence of evidence of its efficacy against coronaviruses responsible for human disease. Nevertheless, naturalistic studies of the risk of COVID‐19 in patients already receiving lithium could provide indirect evidence of its efficacy, and understanding the putative antiviral and immune‐regulatory mechanisms of lithium in models of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection may provide leads for the development of safer and more effective treatments with a specific action against COVID‐19.

negative: Glucocorticosteroids as Dengue Therapeutics: Resolving Clinical Observations With a Primary Human Macrophage Model

negative: Understanding the Promises and Hurdles of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing as a Diagnostic Tool for Infectious Diseases Agnostic metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) has emerged as a promising single, universal pathogen detection method for infectious disease diagnostics. This methodology allows for identification and genomic characterization of bacteria, fungi, parasites, and viruses without the need for a priori knowledge of a specific pathogen directly from clinical specimens. Although there are increasing reports of mNGS successes, several hurdles need to be addressed, such as differentiation of colonization from infection, extraneous sources of nucleic acid, method standardization, and data storage, protection, analysis, and interpretation. As more commercial and clinical microbiology laboratories develop mNGS assays, it is important for treating practitioners to understand both the power and limitations of this method as a diagnostic tool for infectious diseases.

negative: Emerging and experimental treatments for COVID-19 and drug interactions with psychotropic agents As yet, no agents have been approved for the treatment of COVID-19, although several experimental drugs are being used off licence. These may have serious adverse effects and potential drug interactions with psychotropic agents. We reviewed the common agents being used across the world for the treatment of COVID-19 and investigated their drug interaction potential with psychotropic agents using several drug interaction databases and resources. A preliminary search identified the following drugs as being used to treat COVID-19 symptoms: atazanavir (ATV), azithromycin (AZI), chloroquine (CLQ)/hydroxychloroquine (HCLQ), dipyridamole, famotidine (FAM), favipiravir, lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r), nitazoxanide, remdesivir, ribavirin and tocilizumab. Many serious adverse effects and potential drug interactions with psychotropic agents were identified. The most problematic agents were found to be ATV, AZI, CLQ, HCLQ, FAM and LPV/r in terms of both pharmacokinetic as well as serious pharmacodynamic drug interactions, including QTc prolongation and neutropenia. Significant caution should be exercised if using any of the medications being trialled for the treatment of COVID-19 until robust clinical trial data are available. An even higher threshold of vigilance should be maintained for patients with pre-existing conditions and older adults due to added toxicity and drug interactions, especially with psychotropic agents.

negative: Efficacy and Safety of Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine for COVID-19: A systematic review BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are widely used to treat hospitalized COVID-19 patients primarily based on antiviral activity in in vitro studies. Our objective was to systematically evaluate their efficacy and safety in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically reviewed PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Medrxviv for studies of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in COVID-19 hospitalized patients on April 26, 2020. We evaluated the quality of trials and observational studies using the Jadad criteria and Newcastle Ottawa Scale, respectively. RESULTS: After a review of 175 citations, we included 5 clinical trials (total of 345 patients), 9 observational studies (n = 2529), and 6 additional studies (n = 775) reporting on the QT interval. Three studies reported treatment benefits including two studies reporting benefit on virologic outcomes, which was statistically significant in one study, and another reported significant improvement on cough symptoms. Three studies reported that treatment was potentially harmful, including an significantly increased risk of mortality in two studies and increased need for respiratory support in another. Eight studies were unable to detect improvements on virologic outcomes (n = 3) or pneumonia or transfer to ICU/death (n = 5). The proportion of participants with critical QTc intervals of [≥] 500 ms or an increase of [≥] 60 ms from baseline ranged from 8.3% to 36% (n = 8). One clinical trial and six observational studies were of good quality. The remaining studies were of poor quality. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review of reported clinical studies did not identify substantial evidence to support the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and raises questions about potential harm from QT prolongation and increased mortality.

negative: Az elso két sikeres, convalescens friss fagyasztott plazmával történo terápia hazai alkalmazása intenzív osztályon kezelt, kritikus állapotú, COVID19-fertozésben szenvedo betegekben: (A COVID19-pandémia orvosszakmai kérdései)/ Successful administration of convalescent plasma in critically ill COVID-19 patients in Hungary: the first two cases INTRODUCTION: At present, neither specific curative treatment nor vaccines for novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) are available. There is an urgent need to look for alternative strategies for COVID-19 treatment especially in the case of severe and/or critically ill patients with cytokine release syndrome (CRS). AIM: Convalescent plasma proved to increase survival rates in other severe viral infections. Therefore, convalescent plasma could be a promising treatment option for severe COVID-19 patients. METHOD: In our article, we present the first two critically ill Hungarian patients with COVID-19 infection treated with convalescent fresh frozen plasma. RESULTS: At the time of plasma therapy both patients were on mechanical ventilation and received antiviral agents and a full scale of supportive care. Each patient received 3 × 200 mL of convalescent plasma of recently recovered donors with sufficient novel anti-coronavirus IgG titers. Subsequent to convalescent plasma infusion, oxygenization improved and inflammatory markers decreased in both individuals. As compared to pretransfusion, lymphocyte counts increased and interleukin-6 level lessened. Both patients were weaned from mechanical ventilation within 2 weeks of treatment. No severe adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience indicates that convalescent plasma therapy is well tolerated and could potentially improve clinical outcomes. Optimal dose and timing as well as precise assessment of clinical benefit of convalescent plasma therapy will need further investigation in larger, well-controlled trials. This is the first report of the successful use of convalescent plasma in the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection in Hungary. Orv Hetil. 2020; 161(27): 1111-1121.

negative: The effect of intraoperative administration of dexamethasone for PONV prophylaxis on perioperative blood glucose level in obese and normal weight children. BACKGROUND The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) can be reduced by dexamethasone. Single-dose administration may cause elevated blood glucose levels in obese adults. No data are available for children. OBJECTIVE The aim was to evaluate perioperative blood glucose changes related to body weight in children who received dexamethasone. PATIENTS AND METHODS This prospective observational study included 62 children. All patients received total intravenous anesthesia and a single dose of dexamethasone (0.15 mg/kg, maximum 8 mg). Blood glucose levels were measured up to 6 h. Standard deviation scores (SDS) were calculated using age- and gender-specific body mass index (BMI) percentiles, p<0.05. RESULTS A total of 62 children (11.5±2.9 years, median SDS 0.43, 29% overweight/obese) were included. Blood glucose levels increased from 5.52±0.52 to 6.74±0.84 mmol/L 6 h after dexamethasone without correlation to the BMI-SDS. CONCLUSIONS This study showed an increase of perioperative blood glucose (normoglycemic ranges) after single dose of dexamethasone, but no BMI-dependent effect was observed in children. Therefore, low-dose dexamethasone may be used in obese children for PONV prophylaxis.

negative: Psychological intervention on COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is novel coronavirus infection in 2019. Many reports suggested that psychological intervention is playing a positive role in COVID-19 treatment, but there is no high-quality evidence to prove its effects. This paper reports the protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify effectiveness of psychological intervention during the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The following electronic databases will be used by 2 independent reviewers: Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, Wan fang Database, ClinicalTrials, WHO Trials, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. The randomised controlled trials of psychological intervention on COVID-19 will be searched in the databases by 2 researchers independently. Clinical recovery time and effective rate will be assessed as the primary outcomes. Changes of patients physical condition (1. Time until COVID-19 RT-PCR negative in upper respiratory tract specimen; 2. Time until cough reported as mild or absent; 3. Time until dyspnea reported as mild or absent; 4. Frequency of requiring supplemental oxygen or non-invasive ventilation; 5. Frequency of requiring respiratory; 6. Incidence of severe cases; 7. Proportion of re-hospitalization or admission to ICU; 8. All-cause mortality; 9. Frequency of seriously adverse events) and changes of psychological condition (such as: SRQ-20, PHQ-9, GAD-7, Hamilton Depression Scale, Hamilton Anxiety Scale) will be assessed as the secondary outcomes. For dichotomous outcomes, such as effective rate, data will be expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For continuous outcomes, weighted mean differences (WMD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) will be calculated. Fixed effect model will be used for evaluating efficiency. Considering clinical heterogeneity, random effect model will be used for continuous outcomes. RESULTS: Relevant studies will be used to evaluate whether psychological intervention is effective for COVID-19. CONCLUSION: This study will provide reliable evidence for psychological intervention on COVID-19. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020178699

negative: Effect of Hydroxychloroquine in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Preliminary results from a multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial. Background: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been proposed as treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the basis of in vitro activity, uncontrolled data, and small randomized studies. Methods: The Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 therapy (RECOVERY) trial is a randomized, controlled, open-label, platform trial comparing a range of possible treatments with usual care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We report the preliminary results for the comparison of hydroxychloroquine vs. usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Results: 1561 patients randomly allocated to receive hydroxychloroquine were compared with 3155 patients concurrently allocated to usual care. Overall, 418 (26.8%) patients allocated hydroxychloroquine and 788 (25.0%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96 to 1.23; P=0.18). Consistent results were seen in all pre-specified subgroups of patients. Patients allocated to hydroxychloroquine were less likely to be discharged from hospital alive within 28 days (60.3% vs. 62.8%; rate ratio 0.92; 95% CI 0.85-0.99) and those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline were more likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (29.8% vs. 26.5%; risk ratio 1.12; 95% CI 1.01-1.25). There was no excess of new major cardiac arrhythmia. Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, hydroxychloroquine was not associated with reductions in 28-day mortality but was associated with an increased length of hospital stay and increased risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death.

negative: Sudden cardiac death in COVID-19 patients, a report of three cases The mortality rate of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has been reported as 1–6% in most studies. The cause of most deaths has been acute pneumonia. Nevertheless, it has been noted that cardiovascular failure can also lead to death. Three COVID-19 patients were diagnosed based on reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction of a nasopharyngeal swab test and radiological examinations in our hospital. The patients received medications at the discretion of the treating physician. In this case series, chest computed tomography scans and electrocardiograms, along with other diagnostic tests were used to evaluate these individuals. Sudden cardiac death in COVID-19 patients is not common, but it is a major concern. So, it is recommended to monitor cardiac condition in selected patients with COVID-19.

negative: An early assessment of the efficacy of medicines in the treatment of patients with COVID-19/ РАННЯЯ ОЦЕНКА ЭФФЕКТИВНОСТИ ЛЕКАРСТВЕННЫХ СРЕДСТВ ПРИ ЛЕЧЕНИИ БОЛЬНЫХ С COVID-19 Coronavirus infection 2019 is considered a modern challenge to the world community. In the absence of vaccines and antivirals, effective and safe medicines are an urgent request from the healthcare system. We have evaluated the medical technologies for COVID-19 which are being examined. The search was conducted on the СlinicalTrials.gov at the beginning of April 2020. As a result it was shown that the growth of new clinical trials in the world devoted to COVID-19 is growing by 65% per week. More often, interventional clinical trials of the II and III phases are carried out. Most studies are planned or conducted in Western Europe (n = 92), China (n = 79), and the United States (n = 51). Surrogate points are usually evaluated, such as: clinical recovery, symptom-based disease relief (fever, cough, diarrhea, myalgia, shortness of breath), lack of progression of shortness of breath, rate of artificial ventilation, rate of admission to the intensive care unit, etc. It is antimalarial drugs that are mainly studied. Currently, it is not possible to discuss the efficacy and safety of a drug in the treatment of COVID-19, as most studies have just begun. The therapeutic regimens proposed now in clinical recommendations have no evidence base, and the studies indicated in them are at best considered hypothesizing.

negative: Current State of Research About Chinese Herbal Medicines (CHM) for the Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Scoping Review. Background: There is currently no effective treatment against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The optimal selection of interventions targeting the virus is unknown. Therefore, evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to support specific treatment against COVID-19 is urgently needed. The use of Chinese herbal medicines (CHMs) might have a role in the treatment and symptomatic management of patients with COVID-19. It was aimed at providing an overview of the available evidence and ongoing trials concerning the effects of CHMs for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: This is a narrative review of relevant studies. Searches were conducted to identify documents published till April 22, 2020. Electronic databases, evidence-based collections, websites of relevant organizations, and trial registries were consulted. Results: A total of 25 guidelines on the treatment of patients with COVID-19 were identified. Four guidelines provided recommendations on the use of CHMs; these guidelines were developed in China and South Korea and were based on the consensus of experts exclusively. The remaining 21 guidelines provided no guidance on CHMs. No finished RCTs of CHMs for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 was found. According to the evidence evaluated in this review, a Cochrane review of CHMs for severe acute respiratory syndrome and five uncontrolled observational studies of the effects of CHMs in patients with COVID-19, the effects of CHMs for COVID-19 are unknown. A total of 52 ongoing clinical trials of CHM interventions for the treatment of COVID-19 were found. These trials will be carried out mostly in China (n = 51). Forty (77%) of the ongoing trials will be randomized, whereas 12 (23%) have an unclear sequence generation procedure. Forty-seven trials (90%) will have a sample size <400 participants. Conclusions: To the authors' knowledge, only the Chinese and the South Korean guidelines recommend CHMs as a treatment option for patients with COVID-19. These guidelines base their recommendations on the consensus of experts. Clinical guidelines or health authorities from other countries do not provide advice on CHMs. Due to the absence of RCT, there is currently no reliable evidence on the effects of any specific CHM intervention for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. A high number of clinical trials of different herbal products are being currently conducted in China.

negative: Revisiting the Dexamethasone Suppression Test in unipolar major depression: an exploratory study. BACKGROUND Important methodological questions still exist concerning the Dexamethasone Suppression Test (DST), including the possibility of a better way of interpreting it. The aim of the present study was to explore the feasibility of an alternative way of interpreting DST results. METHODS A total of 50 patients with major depression aged 41.0 +/- 11.4 years old participated in the study. Past and present suicide attempts were recorded. Psychometric assessment included the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAS), the Newcastle Depression Diagnostic Scale (NDDS), the Diagnostic Melancholia Scale (DMS) and the General Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale. The 1 mg DST protocol was used. Analysis methods included the chi square test and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with Fisher least significant difference (LSD) as post hoc tests. RESULTS In all, 34 patients (68%) were suppressors, 16 (32%) were non-suppressors and 14 patients had cortisol values above 5 microg/dl at baseline. Baseline cortisol level did not influence the classical DST interpretation. A total of 18 patients (36%) showed an increase of their cortisol levels after dexamethasone administration and 32 patients (64%) showed a decrease. Reducers had less melancholic features, similar levels of depression, better sleep and less suicidal thoughts in comparison to increasers. No relationship of DST to suicidality was found. DISCUSSION The present study explored the pattern of cortisol response to dexamethasone suppression and suggested an alternative way of coding and interpreting the DST on the basis of whether the cortisol levels remain stable or increase vs decrease after the administration of cortisol. The results put forward a complex way of understanding the relationship of the DST results with clinical symptoms.

negative: Dexamethasone/prednisone/sodium chloride: Nosocomial legionellosis and invasive aspergillosis: case report

negative: Hydroxychloroquine in patients with mainly mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019: open label, randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 16 government designated covid-19 treatment centres in China, 11 to 29 February 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 150 patients admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed covid-19 were included in the intention to treat analysis (75 patients assigned to hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care, 75 to standard of care alone). INTERVENTIONS: Hydroxychloroquine administrated at a loading dose of 1200 mg daily for three days followed by a maintenance dose of 800 mg daily (total treatment duration: two or three weeks for patients with mild to moderate or severe disease, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Negative conversion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by 28 days, analysed according to the intention to treat principle. Adverse events were analysed in the safety population in which hydroxychloroquine recipients were participants who received at least one dose of hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine non-recipients were those managed with standard of care alone. RESULTS: Of 150 patients, 148 had mild to moderate disease and two had severe disease. The mean duration from symptom onset to randomisation was 16.6 (SD 10.5; range 3-41) days. A total of 109 (73%) patients (56 standard of care; 53 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) had negative conversion well before 28 days, and the remaining 41 (27%) patients (19 standard of care; 22 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) were censored as they did not reach negative conversion of virus. The probability of negative conversion by 28 days in the standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine group was 85.4% (95% confidence interval 73.8% to 93.8%), similar to that in the standard of care group (81.3%, 71.2% to 89.6%). The difference between groups was 4.1% (95% confidence interval –10.3% to 18.5%). In the safety population, adverse events were recorded in 7/80 (9%) hydroxychloroquine non-recipients and in 21/70 (30%) hydroxychloroquine recipients. The most common adverse event in the hydroxychloroquine recipients was diarrhoea, reported in 7/70 (10%) patients. Two hydroxychloroquine recipients reported serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of hydroxychloroquine did not result in a significantly higher probability of negative conversion than standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with mainly persistent mild to moderate covid-19. Adverse events were higher in hydroxychloroquine recipients than in non-recipients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR2000029868.

negative: Revisiting hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for patients with chronic immunity-mediated inflammatory rheumatic diseases Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, also known as antimalarial drugs, are widely used in the treatment of rheumatic diseases and have recently become the focus of attention because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Rheumatologists have been using antimalarials to manage patients with chronic immune-mediated inflammatory rheumatic diseases for decades. It is an appropriate time to review their immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory mechanisms impact on disease activity and survival of systemic lupus erythematosus patient, including antiplatelet effect, metabolic and lipid benefits. We also discuss possible adverse effects, adding a practical and comprehensive approach to monitoring rheumatic patients during treatment with these drugs.

negative: Therapeutic efficacy of Qingfei Paidu decoction combined with antiviral drugs in the treatment of corona virus disease 2019: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis BACKGROUND: The corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a global pandemic, there are no specific drugs and vaccines for epidemic control at present. More and more clinical practice shows that traditional Chinese medicine has played an important role in the outbreak. Among them, Qingfei Paidu decoction (QPD) combined with antiviral drugs can enhance the therapeutic efficacy for COVID-19. However, there is still a lack of comprehensive and systematic evidence, which urgently requires us to verify its therapeutic efficacy. Hence, we provide a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We will search the studies in MEDLINE/PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, VIP database, the Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Database and Chinese Science Citation Database. Searches are limited to clinical studies published in Chinese and English. Next, the quality of each study is assessed according to the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Then, the outcome data are recorded and pooled by Review Manager 5.3 and STATA 16.0 software. RESULTS: The systematic review and meta-analysis aims to review and pool current clinical outcomes of QPD combined with antiviral drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. CONCLUSION: This study will provide a high-quality evidence of QPD for the treatment on COVID-19 patients. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020182409.

negative: Therapeutic potential of ciclesonide inahalation for COVID-19 pneumonia: Report of three cases No specific and effective anti-viral treatment has been approved for COVID-19 so far. Systemic corticosteroid has been sometimes administered to severe infectious diseases combined with the specific treatment. However, as lack of the specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug, systemic steroid treatment has not been recommended for COVID-19. We report here three cases of the COVID-19 pneumonia successfully treated with ciclesonide inhalation. Rationale of the treatment is to mitigate the local inflammation with inhaled steroid that stays in the lung and to inhibit proliferation of the virus by antiviral activity. Larger and further studies are warranted to confirm the result of these cases.

negative: The use of corticosteroid as treatment in SARS was associated with adverse outcomes: a retrospective cohort study Abstract Objective To study the effect of corticosteroids in the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Methods A retrospective cohort of 78 consecutive adult SARS patients admitted to a regional hospital in Hong Kong between March and May 2003 was analysed to study the effectiveness of corticosteroid. They were categorized according to whether or not corticosteroid therapy was given, and compared in terms of demographic characteristics, comorbidities, peak lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels and clinical outcomes. Established adverse prognostic factors including old age, comorbidities and high LDH levels were used as covariates in multiple logistic regressions to adjust for their confounding effect on adverse outcomes. Results Among 78 patients, 66 patients (84.6%) received corticosteroid. The LDH level was similar in both groups. The corticosteroid group had more adverse outcomes (37.9% vs. 16.7%) despite younger age and less comorbidity. In multivariate analysis, corticosteroid treatment was associated with a 20.7-fold increase in risk of either ICU admission or mortality, independent of age and disease severity. Conclusion Despite more favourable baseline characteristics and similar peak LDH levels, SARS patients given corticosteroid had more adverse outcomes.

negative: Chapter 6 Natural Products as Cathepsin Inhibitors Abstract Cathepsins are proteases found in all animals as well as other organisms. There are approximately a dozen members of this family, which are distinguished by their structure, their catalytic mechanism, and which proteins they cleave. Most of the members become activated at the low pH found in lysosomes. Cathepsins have been identified as therapeutic targets in the search for new drugs against a number of human pathologies, including cancer, Alzheimer's, and osteoporosis. A number of natural products have been reported as selective inhibitors of some cathepsins. Chemical structure of natural products as inhibitors of cathepsins can be very diverse. Some peptidic natural products are inhibitors of the cysteine protease cathepsins such as E-64 isolated from Aspergillus, which is a cathepsin B inhibitor, or more recently the marine cyanobacterial metabolite gallinamide A which is a selective inhibitor of human cathepsin L. Also amino acid derivatives have been reported as inhibitors of cathepsin A. Other natural products include chalcone natural products possessing cytotoxic activities against prostate cancer cells and inhibiting cysteine cathepsins in vitro, antipain and its analogues isolated from Streptomyces as inhibitors of cathepsin K, and natural biflavones as novel inhibitors of cathepsins B and K. In this review we will report the most representative examples of natural products as inhibitors of cathepsins, especially the ones reported during the last decade.

negative: Lopinavir-Ritonavir in the Treatment of COVID-19: A Dynamic Systematic Benefit-Risk Assessment INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 is an ongoing, global public health crisis for which safe and effective treatments need to be identified. The benefit-risk balance for the use of lopinavir-ritonavir in COVID-19 needs to be monitored on an ongoing basis, therefore a systematic benefit-risk assessment was designed and conducted. A key objective of this study was to provide a platform for a dynamic systematic benefit-risk evaluation; although initially this evaluation is likely to contain limited information, it is required because of the urgent unmet public need. Importantly, it allows additional data to be incorporated as they become available, and re-evaluation of the benefit-risk profile. METHODS: A systematic benefit-risk assessment was conducted using the Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework. The exposure of interest was lopinavir-ritonavir treatment in severe COVID-19 compared to standard of care, placebo or other treatments. A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase to identify peer-reviewed papers reporting clinical outcomes. Two clinicians constructed a value tree and ranked key benefits and risks in order of considered clinical importance. RESULTS: We screened 143 papers from PubMed and 264 papers from Embase for lopinavir-ritonavir; seven papers were included in the final benefit-risk assessment. In comparison to standard of care, data for several key benefits and risks were identified for lopinavir-ritonavir. Time to clinical improvement was not significantly different for lopinavir-ritonavir in comparison to standard of care (hazard ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 0.95–1.80). From one study, there were fewer cases of acute respiratory distress syndrome with lopinavir-ritonavir compared with standard of care (13% vs 27%). There also appeared to be fewer serious adverse events with lopinavir-ritonavir (20%) vs standard of care (32%). Limited data were available for comparison of lopinavir-ritonavir to other treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Based on currently available data, there was no clear benefit for the use of lopinavir-ritonavir compared to standard of care in severe COVID-19. Risk data suggested a possible decrease in serious adverse events. There was a reduction in acute respiratory distress syndrome with lopinavir-ritonavir in one study. Overall, the benefit-risk profile for lopinavir-ritonavir in severe COVID-19 cannot be considered positive until further efficacy and effectiveness data become available.

negative: The need to include animal protection in public health policies Many critical public health issues require non-traditional approaches. Although many novel strategies are used, one approach not widely applied involves improving the treatment of animals. Emerging infectious diseases are pressing public health challenges that could benefit from improving the treatment of animals. Other human health issues, that overlap with animal treatment issues, and that warrant further exploration, are medical research and domestic violence. The diverse nature of these health issues and their connection with animal treatment suggest that there may be other similar intersections. Public health would benefit by including the treatment of animals as a topic of study and policy development.

negative: New treatment regimes for virus-induced exacerbations of asthma Abstract This review will focus on the role of viruses as causes of asthma exacerbations. The article will briefly review the current literature supporting this view, with a special focus on human rhinovirus (RV), the main virus associated with exacerbations of asthma. The review will then refer to possible strategies for treatment, and will include discussion on treatment with specific anti-viral therapy and type I interferon as a treatment for RV. The review will also include a discussion on current therapies for asthma, such as glucocorticosteroid and β 2 agonist therapy alone and in combination and why this may be relevant to virus-induced exacerbations of asthma. Finally, the potential for future anti-inflammatory/immunomodulatory therapies with a focus on NF-κB inhibition will be discussed.

negative: Renin–Angiotensin–Aldosterone System Inhibitors in Patients with Covid-19

negative: Dogs (Canis familiaris) as Sentinels for Human Infectious Disease and Application to Canadian Populations: A Systematic Review In a world where climate change, vector expansion, human activity, and pathogen dispersal do not respect boundaries, the human–animal–pathogen interface has become less defined. Consequently, a One Health approach to disease surveillance and control has generated much interest across several disciplines. This systematic review evaluates current global research on the use of domestic dogs as sentinels for human infectious disease, and critically appraises how this may be applied within Canada. Results highlighted a bias in research from high- and middle-income-economy countries, with 35% of the studies describing data from the Latin America/Caribbean region, 25% from North America, and 11% from the European/Central Asia region. Bacteria were the most studied type of infectious agent, followed by protozoa, viruses, helminths, and fungi. Only six out of 142 studies described disease in Canada: four researched a variety of pathogens within Indigenous communities, one researched Borrelia burgdorferi in British Columbia, and one researched arboviruses in Quebec. Results from this review suggest that dogs could provide excellent sentinels for certain infectious-disease pathogens in Canada, yet are currently overlooked. Further research into the use of dog-sentinel surveillance is specifically recommended for California serogroup viruses, Chikungunya virus, West Nile virus, Lyme borreliosis, Rickettsia spp., Ehrlichia spp., and Dirofilaria immitis.

negative: COVID-19: is there a role for immunonutrition, particularly in the over 65s? In late December 2019 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) first emerged in Wuhan, Hubei, China, resulting in the potentially fatal COVID-19. It went on to be officially recognised as a pandemic by the World Health Organisation on 11 March 2020. While many public health strategies have evolved, there has been little mention of the immune system and how this could be strengthened to help protect against viral infections such as SARS-CoV-2. The present paper evaluates the current evidence base relating to immunonutrition, with a particular focus on respiratory viruses. Within the nutrition sector a promising body of evidence studying inter-relationships between certain nutrients and immune competence already exists. This could potentially be an important player in helping the body to deal with the coronavirus, especially among elders. Evidence for vitamins C, D and zinc and their roles in preventing pneumonia and respiratory infections (vitamins C and D) and reinforcing immunity (zinc) appears to look particularly promising. Ongoing research within this important field is urgently needed.

negative: Porcine adenovirus as a delivery system for swine vaccines and immunotherapeutics Abstract Porcine adenovirus (PAdV) has many qualities which make it an ideal choice for use as a delivery vector in swine. It is a low grade pathogen, present almost world-wide in a number of serotypes varying in their virulence and tissue tropism, which may allow for serotype specific vaccine targeting. PAdV is species specific having only been isolated from swine, reducing the possibility of its spread to other animals or man following administration. When engineered to contain a foreign gene, recombinant PAdV (rPAdV) can be grown to high titres in tissue culture cells making it cheap to produce. Knowledge of the complete nucleotide sequence of the PAdV genome has enabled rationally directed insertions of foreign genes which remain stably inserted in the genome and can be expressed at high levels following delivery to the target host. Importantly, recombinant PAdV can be administered by injection or by the oral route in feed or drinking water. We have delivered a range of antigens and immunomodulatory molecules to commercially available pigs using rPAdV and found it to be a very effective delivery system. Significantly, recombinant PAdV serotype 3 is highly effective as a delivery vehicle even when administered in the face of high levels of artificially induced serotype specific neutralising antibody to the vector.

negative: Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2. BACKGROUND The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and resulting COVID-19 pandemic present important diagnostic challenges. Several diagnostic strategies are available to identify current infection, rule out infection, identify people in need of care escalation, or to test for past infection and immune response. Serology tests to detect the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 aim to identify previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and may help to confirm the presence of current infection. OBJECTIVES To assess the diagnostic accuracy of antibody tests to determine if a person presenting in the community or in primary or secondary care has SARS-CoV-2 infection, or has previously had SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the accuracy of antibody tests for use in seroprevalence surveys. SEARCH METHODS We undertook electronic searches in the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and the COVID-19 Living Evidence Database from the University of Bern, which is updated daily with published articles from PubMed and Embase and with preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv. In addition, we checked repositories of COVID-19 publications. We did not apply any language restrictions. We conducted searches for this review iteration up to 27 April 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA We included test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated antibody tests (including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, chemiluminescence immunoassays, and lateral flow assays) in people suspected of current or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, or where tests were used to screen for infection. We also included studies of people either known to have, or not to have SARS-CoV-2 infection. We included all reference standards to define the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 (including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction tests (RT-PCR) and clinical diagnostic criteria). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We assessed possible bias and applicability of the studies using the QUADAS-2 tool. We extracted 2x2 contingency table data and present sensitivity and specificity for each antibody (or combination of antibodies) using paired forest plots. We pooled data using random-effects logistic regression where appropriate, stratifying by time since post-symptom onset. We tabulated available data by test manufacturer. We have presented uncertainty in estimates of sensitivity and specificity using 95% confidence intervals (CIs). MAIN RESULTS We included 57 publications reporting on a total of 54 study cohorts with 15,976 samples, of which 8526 were from cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Studies were conducted in Asia (n = 38), Europe (n = 15), and the USA and China (n = 1). We identified data from 25 commercial tests and numerous in-house assays, a small fraction of the 279 antibody assays listed by the Foundation for Innovative Diagnostics. More than half (n = 28) of the studies included were only available as preprints. We had concerns about risk of bias and applicability. Common issues were use of multi-group designs (n = 29), inclusion of only COVID-19 cases (n = 19), lack of blinding of the index test (n = 49) and reference standard (n = 29), differential verification (n = 22), and the lack of clarity about participant numbers, characteristics and study exclusions (n = 47). Most studies (n = 44) only included people hospitalised due to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection. There were no studies exclusively in asymptomatic participants. Two-thirds of the studies (n = 33) defined COVID-19 cases based on RT-PCR results alone, ignoring the potential for false-negative RT-PCR results. We observed evidence of selective publication of study findings through omission of the identity of tests (n = 5). We observed substantial heterogeneity in sensitivities of IgA, IgM and IgG antibodies, or combinations thereof, for results aggregated across different time periods post-symptom onset (range 0% to 100% for all target antibodies). We thus based the main results of the review on the 38 studies that stratified results by time since symptom onset. The numbers of individuals contributing data within each study each week are small and are usually not based on tracking the same groups of patients over time. Pooled results for IgG, IgM, IgA, total antibodies and IgG/IgM all showed low sensitivity during the first week since onset of symptoms (all less than 30.1%), rising in the second week and reaching their highest values in the third week. The combination of IgG/IgM had a sensitivity of 30.1% (95% CI 21.4 to 40.7) for 1 to 7 days, 72.2% (95% CI 63.5 to 79.5) for 8 to 14 days, 91.4% (95% CI 87.0 to 94.4) for 15 to 21 days. Estimates of accuracy beyond three weeks are based on smaller sample sizes and fewer studies. For 21 to 35 days, pooled sensitivities for IgG/IgM were 96.0% (95% CI 90.6 to 98.3). There are insufficient studies to estimate sensitivity of tests beyond 35 days post-symptom onset. Summary specificities (provided in 35 studies) exceeded 98% for all target antibodies with confidence intervals no more than 2 percentage points wide. False-positive results were more common where COVID-19 had been suspected and ruled out, but numbers were small and the difference was within the range expected by chance. Assuming a prevalence of 50%, a value considered possible in healthcare workers who have suffered respiratory symptoms, we would anticipate that 43 (28 to 65) would be missed and 7 (3 to 14) would be falsely positive in 1000 people undergoing IgG/IgM testing at days 15 to 21 post-symptom onset. At a prevalence of 20%, a likely value in surveys in high-risk settings, 17 (11 to 26) would be missed per 1000 people tested and 10 (5 to 22) would be falsely positive. At a lower prevalence of 5%, a likely value in national surveys, 4 (3 to 7) would be missed per 1000 tested, and 12 (6 to 27) would be falsely positive. Analyses showed small differences in sensitivity between assay type, but methodological concerns and sparse data prevent comparisons between test brands. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The sensitivity of antibody tests is too low in the first week since symptom onset to have a primary role for the diagnosis of COVID-19, but they may still have a role complementing other testing in individuals presenting later, when RT-PCR tests are negative, or are not done. Antibody tests are likely to have a useful role for detecting previous SARS-CoV-2 infection if used 15 or more days after the onset of symptoms. However, the duration of antibody rises is currently unknown, and we found very little data beyond 35 days post-symptom onset. We are therefore uncertain about the utility of these tests for seroprevalence surveys for public health management purposes. Concerns about high risk of bias and applicability make it likely that the accuracy of tests when used in clinical care will be lower than reported in the included studies. Sensitivity has mainly been evaluated in hospitalised patients, so it is unclear whether the tests are able to detect lower antibody levels likely seen with milder and asymptomatic COVID-19 disease. The design, execution and reporting of studies of the accuracy of COVID-19 tests requires considerable improvement. Studies must report data on sensitivity disaggregated by time since onset of symptoms. COVID-19-positive cases who are RT-PCR-negative should be included as well as those confirmed RT-PCR, in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) and China National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China (CDC) case definitions. We were only able to obtain data from a small proportion of available tests, and action is needed to ensure that all results of test evaluations are available in the public domain to prevent selective reporting. This is a fast-moving field and we plan ongoing updates of this living systematic review.

negative: Safety and feasibility of adjunctive dexamethasone infusion into the adventitia of the femoropopliteal artery following endovascular revascularization. OBJECTIVE Restenosis following endovascular treatment of the femoropopliteal segment is associated with the inflammatory response produced in the artery wall at the time of the procedure. Although local drug delivery to the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries promises improved patency, data are currently limited. We hypothesized that improved percutaneous delivery of an anti-inflammatory compound into the adventitia of the femoropopliteal at the time of endovascular treatment would be safe, feasible, and decrease the inflammatory response. METHODS This was a prospective, investigator-initiated, phase I, first-in-man study testing the safety and feasibility of percutaneous adventitial delivery of dexamethasone. Following successful intervention, an adventitial microinfusion catheter was advanced over a 0.014-inch wire to the treated segment. Its microneedle (0.9 mm long × 140-μm diameter) was deployed into the adventitia to deliver dexamethasone (4 mg/mL) mixed with contrast agent (80:20 ratio), providing fluoroscopic visualization. The primary safety outcome measure was freedom from vessel dissection, thrombosis, or extravasation while the primary efficacy outcome was duplex-determined binary restenosis defined as a peak systolic velocity ratio >2.5. RESULTS Twenty patients with Rutherford clinical category 2-5 enrolled in this study. The mean age was 66, and 55% had diabetes mellitus. Treated lesion length was 8.9 ± 5.3 cm, and 50% were chronic total occlusions. Eighty percent of treated lesions were in the distal superficial femoral or popliteal arteries. All lesions were treated by balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting (n = 6) for suboptimal result. Three patients were treated with atherectomy as well. A mean of 1.6 ± 1.1 mg (0.5 ± 0.3 mL) of dexamethasone sodium phosphate was injected per centimeter of lesion length. In total, a mean of 12.1 ± 6.1 mg of dexamethasone was injected per patient. The mean number of injections required per lesion was 3.0 ± 1.3 cm, minimum one and maximum six injections. There was 100% technical success of drug delivery and no procedural or drug-related adverse events. The mean Rutherford score decreased from 3.1 ± .7 (median, 3.0) preoperatively to .5 ± .7 at 6 months (median, 0.0; P < .00001). Over this same time interval, the index leg ankle-brachial index increased from .68 ± .15 to .89 ± .19 (P = .0003). The preoperative C-reactive protein in this study was 6.9 ± 8.5 indicating severe baseline inflammation, which increased to 14.0 ± 23.1 mg/L (103% increase) at 24 hours following the procedure. However, this increase did not reach statistical significance of P = .14. Two patients met the primary efficacy end point of loss of primary patency by reoccluding their treated segment of the index lesion during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS Adventitial drug delivery via a microinfusion catheter is a safe and feasible alternative to intimal-based methods for adjunctive treatment in the femoropopliteal segment. The 6-month preliminary results suggest perivascular dexamethasone treatment may improve outcomes following angioplasty to the femoral and popliteal arteries, and support further clinical investigation of this approach.

negative: Infektionen Trotz Weiterentwicklung moderner Antibiotika in den letzten Jahren sind die Letalitätszahlen der bakteriellen (eitrigen) Meningitis weiterhin hoch; Überlebende haben häufig neurologische Residuen. Die ungünstigen klinischen Verläufe der bakteriellen Meningitis sind meist Folge intrakranieller Komplikationen, wie z. B. eines generalisierten Hirnödems, einer zerebrovaskulären arteriellen oder venösen Beteiligung oder eines Hydrozephalus. Als Folge dieser Komplikationen kommt es häufig zu einem Anstieg des intrakraniellen Drucks. Bei schweren, komplizierten klinischen Verläufen der bakteriellen Meningitis kommen oft adjuvante Therapiemaßnahmen (z. B. intravenöse Gabe von hyperosmolaren Substanzen, externe Ventrikeldrainage) zum Einsatz. Bei Nachweis einer meningitisassoziierten septischen Sinus-/Venenthrombose erfolgt die dosisadaptierte intravenöse Heparintherapie.

negative: An invited commentary on: “Evidence based management guideline for the COVID-19 pandemic - Review article”

negative: AGA Institute Rapid Review of the GI and Liver Manifestations of COVID-19, Meta-Analysis of International Data, and Recommendations for the Consultative Management of Patients with COVID-19 Abstract Background Multiple gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms including diarrhea, nausea/vomiting, and abdominal pain, as well liver enzyme abnormalities have been variably reported in patients with COVID-19. The AGA) Institute Clinical Guideline Committee and Clinical Practice Updates Committee performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of international data on GI and liver manifestations of COVID-19. Methods We performed a systematic literature search to identify published and unpublished studies using OVID Medline and pre-print servers (medRxiv, LitCovid, and SSRN) up until April 5 2020; major journal sites were monitored for US publications until April 19 2020. We analyzed the prevalence of diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain as well as LFT abnormalities using a fixed effect model and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. Results We identified 118 studies and used a hierarchal study selection process to identify unique cohorts. We performed a meta-analysis of 47 studies including 10,890 unique patients. Pooled prevalence estimates of GI symptoms was diarrhea 7.7% (95% CI 7.2-8.2), nausea/vomiting 7.8% (95% CI 7.1-8.5), abdominal pain 2.7% (95% CI 2.0-3.4). Most studies reported on hospitalized patients. The pooled prevalence of elevated liver abnormalities was: AST 15.0% (13.6 to 16.5) and ALT 15.0% (13.6 to 16.4). When analyzed comparing data from China to studies from countries other than China, diarrhea, nausea/vomiting, liver abnormalities were more prevalent outside of China with diarrhea reported in 18.3% (16.6 to 20.1). Isolated GI symptoms were rarely reported. We also summarized of the Gl and liver adverse effects of the most commonly utilized medications for COVID19 Conclusions GI symptoms are associated with COVID-19 in less than 10% of patients. In studies outside of China, estimates are higher. Further studies are needed with standardized GI symptoms questionnaires and LFT checks on admission to better quantify and qualify the association of these symptoms with COVID-19. Based on findings from our meta-anlaysis, we make several Best Practice Statements for the consultative management of COVID-19.

negative: Barriers to conducting deprescribing in the elderly population amid the COVID-19 pandemic Deprescribing aims to reduce polypharmacy, especially in the elderly population, in order to maintain or improve quality of life, reduce harm from medications, and limit healthcare expenditure. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease that has led to a pandemic and has changed the lives many throughout the world. The mode of transmission of this virus is from person to person through the transfer of respiratory droplets. Therefore, non-essential healthcare services involving direct patient interactions, including deprescribing, has been on hiatus to reduce spread. Barriers to deprescribing before the pandemic include patient and system related factors, such as resistance to change, patient's knowledge deficit about deprescribing, lack of alternatives for treatment of disease, uncoordinated delivery of health services, prescriber's attitudes and/or experience, limited availability of guidelines for deprescribing, and lack of evidence on preventative therapy. Some of these barriers can be mitigated by using the following interventions:patient education, prioritization of non-pharmacological therapy, incorporation of electronic health record (EHR), continuous prescriber education, and development of research studies on deprescribing. Currently, deprescribing cannot be delivered through in person interactions, so virtual care is a reasonable alternative format. The full incorporation of EHR throughout Canada can add to the success of this strategy. However, there are several challenges of conducting deprescribing virtually in the elderly population. These challenges include, but are not limited, to their inability to use technology, lack of literacy, lack of assistance from others, greater propensity for withdrawal effects, and increased risk of severe consequences, if hospitalized. Virtual care is the future of healthcare and in order to retain the benefits of deprescribing, additional initiatives should be in place to address the challenges that elderly patients may experience in accessing deprescribing virtually. These initiatives should involve teaching elderly patients how to use technology to access health services and with technical support in place to address any concerns.

negative: Are dexamethasone suppression test nonsuppression and thyroid dysfunction related to a family history of dementia in patients with major depression? An exploratory study. OBJECTIVE Recent data suggest that the low thyroid function syndrome in depression is nonspecific. They also suggest that depression may constitute a risk factor for the development of dementia, especially in atypical patients who have high rates of hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal axis disorders. This study aimed to search for correlations among Dexamethasone Suppression Test (DST) cortisol levels, thyroid indices, and family history of dementia in patients with depression. METHODS A sample of 30 patients, aged 21 to 60 years and suffering from major depression according to DSM-IV criteria, took part in the study. Three had a family history of dementia in first-degree relatives. We measured their serum levels of free T3, free T4, thyroid-stimulating hormone, thyroid binding inhibitory immunoglobulines, thyroglobulin antibodies, and thyroid microsomal antibodies (TMAs). We applied the 1-mg DST to all patients. The statistical analysis included 1-way multivariate analysis of covariance using t tests as the post hoc tests. RESULTS Significantly higher levels of TMAs were found in patients with a family history of dementia, compared with those who did not have this family history. CONCLUSION The results of this study suggest that a more pronounced autoimmune process may characterize depression patients with a family history of dementia.

negative: Corticosteroids as standalone or add-on treatment for sore throat. BACKGROUND Sore throat is a common condition associated with a high rate of antibiotic prescriptions, despite limited evidence for the effectiveness of antibiotics. Corticosteroids may improve symptoms of sore throat by reducing inflammation of the upper respiratory tract. OBJECTIVES To assess the clinical benefit and safety of corticosteroids for symptoms of sore throat in adults and children. SEARCH METHODS We searched The Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2012, Issue 5) which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Group's Specialised Register, the Database of Reviews of Effects and the NHS Health Economics Database, MEDLINE (1966 to November Week 4, 2012) and EMBASE (1974 to June 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials that compared steroids to either placebo or standard care in adults and children (older than three years of age) with sore throat. We excluded studies of hospitalised participants, those with infectious mononucleosis, sore throat following tonsillectomy or intubation, or peritonsillar abscess. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently reviewed and selected trials from searches, assessed and rated study quality, and extracted relevant data. MAIN RESULTS We included eight trials involving 743 participants (369 children and 374 adults). All trials gave antibiotics to both placebo and corticosteroid groups; no trials assessed corticosteroids as standalone treatment for sore throat. In addition to any effect of antibiotics and analgesia, corticosteroids increased the likelihood of complete resolution of pain at 24 hours by more than three times (risk ratio (RR) 3.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.0 to 5.1, P < 0.001, I(2) statistic 44%) and at 48 hours by 1.7 times. Fewer than four people need to be treated to prevent one person continuing to experience pain at 24 hours. Corticosteroids also reduced the mean time to onset of pain relief and the mean time to complete resolution of pain by 6 and 14 hours, respectively, although significant heterogeneity was present. At 24 hours, pain (assessed by visual analogue scores) was reduced by an additional 14% by corticosteroids. No difference in rates of recurrence, relapse or adverse events were reported for participants taking corticosteroids compared to placebo, although reporting of adverse events was poor. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Oral or intramuscular corticosteroids, in addition to antibiotics, increase the likelihood of both resolution and improvement of pain in participants with sore throat. Further trials assessing corticosteroids in the absence of antibiotics and in children are warranted.

negative: A Rapid Systematic Review of Clinical Trials Utilizing Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine as a Treatment for COVID‐19 OBJECTIVES: The emergence of SARS‐CoV‐2 has presented clinicians with a difficult therapeutic dilemma. With supportive care as the current mainstay of treatment, the fatality rate of COVID‐19 is 6.9%. There are currently several trials assessing the efficacy of different antivirals as treatment. Of these, chloroquine (CQ) and its derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have garnered the most attention. METHODS: In this study, the literature currently available on CQ and HCQ as treatment of COVID‐19 was surveyed using EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, MedRxiv, and one clinical trial registry. Upon gathering published and preprint trials, risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. RESULTS: There are currently seven completed clinical trials and 29 registered clinical trials focusing on HCQ or CQ as a therapeutic avenue for COVID‐19. Of these, five of seven trials have shown favorable outcomes for patients using CQ or HCQ and two of seven have shown no change compared to control. However, all seven trials carried varying degrees of bias and poor study design. CONCLUSION: There are currently not enough data available to support the routine use of HCQ and CQ as therapies for COVID‐19. Pending further results from more extensive studies with more stringent study parameters, clinicians should defer from routine use of HCQ and CQ. There are several clinical trials currently under way with results expected soon.

negative: Association of Vitamin D Deficiency and Treatment with COVID-19 Incidence Importance: Vitamin D treatment has been found to decrease incidence of viral respiratory tract infection, especially in vitamin D deficiency. It is unknown whether COVID-19 incidence is associated with vitamin D deficiency and treatment. Objective: To examine whether vitamin D deficiency and treatment are associated with testing positive for COVID-19. Design: Retrospective cohort study Setting: University of Chicago Medicine Participants: Patients tested for COVID-19 from 3/3/2020-4/10/2020. Vitamin D deficiency was defined by the most recent 25-hydroxycholecalciferol <20ng/ml or 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol <18pg/ml within 1 year before COVID-19 testing. Treatment was defined by the most recent vitamin D type and dose, and treatment changes between the time of the most recent vitamin D level and time of COVID-19 testing. Vitamin D deficiency and treatment changes were combined to categorize vitamin D status at the time of COVID-19 testing as likely deficient(last-level-deficient/treatment-not-increased), likely sufficient(last-level-not-deficient/treatment-not-decreased), or uncertain deficiency(last-level-deficient/treatment-increased or last-level-not-deficient/treatment-decreased). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was testing positive for COVID-19. Multivariable analysis tested whether the most recent vitamin D level and treatment changes after that level were associated with testing positive for COVID-19 controlling for demographic and comorbidity indicators. Bivariate analyses of associations of treatment with vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 were performed. Results: Among 4,314 patients tested for COVID-19, 499 had a vitamin D level in the year before testing. Vitamin D status at the time of COVID-19 testing was categorized as likely deficient for 127(25%) patients, likely sufficient for 291(58%) patients, and uncertain for 81(16%) patients. In multivariate analysis, testing positive for COVID-19 was associated with increasing age(RR(age<50)=1.05,p<0.021;RR(age[≥]50)=1.02,p<0.064)), non-white race(RR=2.54,p<0.01) and being likely vitamin D deficient (deficient/treatment-not-increased:RR=1.77,p<0.02) as compared to likely vitamin D sufficient(not-deficient/treatment-not-decreased), with predicted COVID-19 rates in the vitamin D deficient group of 21.6%(95%CI[14.0%-29.2%] ) versus 12.2%(95%CI[8.9%-15.4%]) in the vitamin D sufficient group. Vitamin D deficiency declined with increasing vitamin D dose, especially of vitamin D3. Vitamin D dose was not significantly associated with testing positive for COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance: Vitamin D deficiency that is not sufficiently treated is associated with COVID-19 risk. Testing and treatment for vitamin D deficiency to address COVID-19 warrant aggressive pursuit and study.

negative: Efficacy and harms of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis Background: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: Systematic review in five engines, pre-print webpages and RCT registries until May 22, 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies evaluating remdesivir on confirmed, COVID-19 adults with pneumonia and/or respiratory insufficiency. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, clinical improvement or recovery, need for invasive ventilation, and serious adverse events (SAE). Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, progression of pneumonia, and adverse events (AE). Inverse variance random effects meta-analyses were performed. Results: Two placebo-controlled RCTs (n=1300) and two case series (n=88) were included. All studies used remdesivir 200mg IV the first day and 100mg IV for 9 more days, and followed up until 28 days. Wang et al. RCT was stopped early due to AEs; ACTT-1 was preliminary reported at 15-day follow up. Time to clinical improvement was not decreased in Wang et al. RCT, but median time to recovery was decreased by 4 days in ACTT-1. Remdesivir did not decrease all-cause mortality (RR 0.71, 95%CI 0.39 to 1.28) and need for invasive ventilation at 14 days (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.23 to 1.42), but had fewer SAEs (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.63 to 0.94). AEs were similar between remdesivir and placebo arms. Risk of bias ranged from some concerns to high risk in RCTs. Interpretation: There is paucity of adequately powered and fully reported RCTs evaluating effects of remdesivir in adult, hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Remdesivir should not be recommended for the treatment of severe COVID-19.

negative: Is there a place for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in non-neutropenic critically ill patients? Immunoparalysis, characterised by impairments in neutrophil and monocyte/macrophage function, is common in critically ill patients. The theoretical ability of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to improve the functions of both neutrophils and monocytes/macrophages provides a rationale for G-CSF therapy in non-neutropenic critically ill patients with infection or a high risk of nosocomial infection. The expression of the receptors that mediate G-CSF effects in neutrophils and monocytes/macrophages is regulated by bacterial products, cytokines and endogenous G-CSF levels, accounting for the variables effects of G-CSF on the neutrophil functions of critically ill patients. This variability should be taken into account when designing studies on the use of G-CSF in ICU-patients. Studies are still needed to identify the subset of patients who may benefit from G-CSF therapy.

negative: Evaluation of infliximab as second-line treatment of acute graft versus host disease -validating response on day 7 and 28 as predictors of survival Several immunosuppressive drugs have been proposed for second-line treatment of steroid-refractory acute graft versus host disease (aGvHD) after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. However, the studies on these drugs are small, retrospective, uncontrolled and use different endpoints. Therefore, it remains unknown which treatment is superior. We retrospectively evaluated 68 consecutive patients treated with infliximab for aGvHD. We adhered to recently proposed guidelines for aGvHD trials and thus evaluated response on day 7 and 28. Furthermore, we assessed the composite endpoint 6 months freedom from treatment failure (6MFTF). The majority of patients had grade III-IV aGvHD. We found that 41 patients (60%) responded on day 7 and 31 patients (46%) on day 28. Twenty-four patients (35%) achieved 6MFTF. The main reasons for failure within 6 months were death (n = 31) or additional immunosuppression (n = 16). By six and 24 months, 44 and 34% of the patients were alive respectively. Patients with response to infliximab on day 7 and 28 had significantly higher overall survival (OS) probability than non-responders. We show that response on day 7 and 28 identifies high and low risk groups. Patients who fail to respond should be identified early and offered alternative therapy.

negative: 2019-nCoV - Towards a 4th generation vaccine The first report of the unusual manifestation of pneumonia-like symptoms in Wuhan City, China was made on 31 December 2019. Within one week, the Chinese authorities reported that they had identified the causative agent as a new member of the Coronavirus family, the same family of that was responsible for MERS and SARS not so many years ago. The new virus was called Novel Coronavirus 2019 (2019-nCoV). Three weeks later, the World Health Organization declared that 2019-nCoV was capable of direct human-to-human transmission, the virus had spread across several countries in three continents, and had infected close to two thousand people, of whom at least 1 in 5 quite severely. The number of fatalities was fast rising. Yet, the World Health Organization officially announced that there is still at present no recommended anti-nCoV vaccine for subject at-risk, nor treatment for patients with suspected or confirmed nCoV, let alone 2019-nCov. It is therefore timely and critical to propose new possible and practical approaches for preventive interventions for subjects at-risk, and for treatment of patients afflicted with 2019-nCov-induced disease (Corona Virus Disease 2019; COVID-19) before the present situation explodes into a worldwide pandemic. One such potential clinical protocol is proposed as a hypothesis.

negative: Rebound stridor in children with croup after nebulised adrenaline: does it really exist? Rebound stridor after the use of nebulised adrenaline does not exist http://ow.ly/aoOd30o5lEo

negative: Potential new treatment strategies for COVID-19: is there a role for bromhexine as add-on therapy? Of huge importance now is to provide a fast, cost-effective, safe, and immediately available pharmaceutical solution to curb the rapid global spread of SARS-CoV-2. Recent publications on SARS-CoV-2 have brought attention to the possible benefit of chloroquine in the treatment of patients infected by SARS-CoV-2. Whether chloroquine can treat SARS-CoV-2 alone and also work as a prophylactic is doubtful. An effective prophylactic medication to prevent viral entry has to contain, at least, either a protease inhibitor or a competitive virus ACE2-binding inhibitor. Using bromhexine at a dosage that selectively inhibits TMPRSS2 and, in so doing, inhibits TMPRSS2-specific viral entry is likely to be effective against SARS-CoV-2. We propose the use of bromhexine as a prophylactic and treatment. We encourage the scientific community to assess bromhexine clinically as a prophylactic and curative treatment. If proven to be effective, this would allow a rapid, accessible, and cost-effective application worldwide.

negative: An Updated Systematic Review of the Therapeutic Role of Hydroxychloroquine in Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The world is currently experiencing the Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. There is no approved drug for the definitive treatment of the disease. Various drugs are being tried for the treatment of COVID-19, including hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). This study was performed to systematically review the therapeutic role of HCQ in COVID-19 from the available literature. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP (WHO), Cochrane Library databases, and two pre-print servers (medRxiv.org and Research Square) were searched for clinical studies that evaluated the therapeutic role of HCQ on COVID-19 until 10 May 2020. The available studies were critically analyzed and the data were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 663 articles were screened and 12 clinical studies (seven peer-reviewed and published studies and five non-peer-reviewed studies from pre-print servers) with a total sample size of 3543 patients were included. Some of the clinical studies demonstrated good virological and clinical outcomes with HCQ alone or in combination with azithromycin in COVID-19 patients, although the studies had major methodological limitations. Some of the other studies showed negative results with HCQ therapy along with the risk of adverse reactions. CONCLUSION: The results of efficacy and safety of HCQ in COVID-19, as obtained from the clinical studies, are not satisfactory, although many of these studies had major methodological limitations. Stronger evidence from well-designed robust randomized clinical trials is required before conclusively determining the role of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19. Clinical prudence is required in advocating HCQ as a therapeutic armamentarium in COVID-19.

negative: Outcome of a public consultation on the Draft Opinion of the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition, and Allergies (NDA) on a guidance on the scientific requirements for health claims related to gut and immune function

negative: Treating Leukemia in the Time of COVID-19 The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses several challenges to the management of patients with leukemia. The biology of each leukemia and its corresponding treatment with conventional intensive chemotherapy, with or without targeted therapies (venetoclax, FLT3 inhibitors, IDH1/2 inhibitors, Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors), introduce additional layers of complexity during COVID-19 high-risk periods. The knowledge about COVID-19 is accumulating rapidly. An important distinction is the prevalence of “exposure” versus “clinical infectivity,” which determine the risk versus benefit of modifying potentially highly curative therapies in leukemia. At present, the rate of clinical infection is <1–2% worldwide. With a mortality rate of 1–5% in COVID-19 patients in the general population and potentially of >30% in patients with cancer, careful consideration should be given to the risk of COVID-19 in leukemia. Instead of reducing patient access to specialized cancer centers and modifying therapies to ones with unproven curative benefit, there is more rationale for less intensive, yet effective therapies that may require fewer clinic visits or hospitalizations. Here, we offer recommendations on the optimization of leukemia management during high-risk COVID-19 periods.

negative: Considerations for the Development of Nasal Dosage Forms The anatomy and physiology of the nasal cavity provide unique advantages for accessing targets for local, systemic, and potentially central nervous system drug delivery. This chapter discusses these advantages and the challenges that must be overcome to reach these targets. The chapter then comprehensively reviews nasal dosage forms, analytical testing, and regulatory requirements in the context of existing nasal spray products. Since nasal sprays are moving towards being preservative-free, the chapter covers specialized methods of achieving a sterile product, namely, formulation strategies, manufacturing strategies, and the device landscape that support this upcoming platform. Finally, the chapter reviews various pathways for regulatory approval around the world, for brand and generic, with particular emphasis on the growing acceptance of in vitro data for locally acting nasal spray products.

negative: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19: implications for cardiac safety

negative: Therapeutic use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 and other viral infections: A narrative review Abstract The rapidly spreading Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), represents an unprecedented serious challenge to the global public health community. The extremely rapid international spread of the disease with significant morbidity and mortality made finding possible therapeutic interventions a global priority. While approved specific antiviral drugs against SARS-CoV-2 are still lacking, a large number of existing drugs are being explored as a possible treatment for COVID-19 infected patients. Recent publications have re-examined the use of Chloroquine (CQ) and/or Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a potential therapeutic option for these patients. In an attempt to explore the evidence that supports their use in COVID-19 patients, we comprehensively reviewed the previous studies which used CQ or HCQ as an antiviral treatment. Both CQ and HCQ demonstrated promising in vitro results, however, such data have not yet been translated into meaningful in vivo studies. While few clinical trials have suggested some beneficial effects of CQ and HCQ in COVID-19 patients, most of the reported data are still preliminary. Given the current uncertainty, it is worth being mindful of the potential risks and strictly rational the use of these drugs in COVID-19 patients until further high quality randomized clinical trials are available to clarify their role in the treatment or prevention of COVID-19.

negative: Synergism between porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) and Salmonella choleraesuis in swine Abstract Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) and Salmonella choleraesuis are two leading causes of economic loss in the swine industry. While respiratory disease is common in both S. choleraesuis and PRRSV infections, the factors that contribute to its development remain largely undefined. We investigated the interaction of PRRSV, S. choleraesuis, and stress in 5-week-old swine. All combinations of three factors (inoculation with S. choleraesuis on Day 0, PRRSV on Day 3, and treatment with dexamethasone on Days 3–7) were used to produce eight treatment groups in two independent trials. Fecal samples, tonsil and nasal swabs, serum samples and postmortem tissues were collected for bacteriologic and virologic examinations. No clinical signs were observed in pigs inoculated with only PRRSV or only S. choleraesuis. In contrast, pigs which were dually infected with S. choleraesuis and PRRSV exhibited unthriftiness, rough hair coats, dyspnea, and diarrhea. The pigs which received all three treatment factors were the most severely affected and 43% (three of seven) of the animals in this group died. Individuals in this group shed significantly higher quantities of S. choleraesuis in feces and had significantly higher serum PRRSV titers compared to other treatments (p ≤0.05). In addition, S. choleraesuis and PRRSV were shed longer and by more pigs in this group than other groups and S. choleraesuis was recovered from more tissues in this group on Day 21 post inoculation. These results suggested that PRRSV, S. choleraesuis, and dexamethasone acted synergistically to produce a syndrome similar to that observed in the field.

negative: Immune Thrombocytopenia Purpura Secondary to COVID-19 A 73-year-old female with past medical history of essential hypertension, hyperlipidemia, seasonal allergies, and chronic back pain presented to the hospital with complaints of headaches, fevers, fatigue, generalized body aches, shortness of breath, and diarrhea. Initial complete blood count was remarkable for leukopenia with an absolute lymph count of 0.60 K/µL and severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 3 K/µL). She was tested for COVID-19 via nasopharyngeal swab polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing and found positive. Additional labs showed an elevated D-dimer, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, and lactate dehydrogenase. Vitamin B12 and folate levels were obtained and found to be normal. Peripheral smear showed no schistocytes or additional hematologic abnormalities apart from thrombocytopenia. The patient was transfused one unit of platelets with no improvement in platelet count. Fibrinogen count was obtained and found in normal range at 458 mg/dL. Prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), and international normalized ratio (INR) were all found to be normal. Immune thrombocytopenia purpura (ITP) was suspected and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) was administered at a dose of 1 g/kg/day for two doses. By day 4, the patient had marked response to treatment with platelet recovery to 105 K/µL and subsequently discharged by day 5 with complete resolution of symptoms and platelet count of 146 K/µL. Twenty-eight days after discharge, she presented to hematology clinic with platelet count of 8 K/µL. Repeat nasopharyngeal swab PCR COVID testing was negative and she was treated with IVIG and pulse dexamethasone with prompt response, confirming suspicion of underlying, undiagnosed ITP prior to COVID infection.

negative: Corticosteroids for pain relief in sore throat: systematic review and meta-analysis Objective To evaluate whether systemic corticosteroids improve symptoms of sore throat in adults and children. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Cochrane Central, Medline, Embase, Database of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE), NHS Health Economics Database, and bibliographies. Outcome measures Percentage of patients with complete resolution at 24 and 48 hours, mean time to onset of pain relief, mean time to complete resolution of symptoms, days missed from work or school, recurrence, and adverse events. Results We included eight trials, consisting of 743 patients in total (369 children, 374 adults). 348 (47%) had exudative sore throat, and 330 (44%) were positive for group A β-haemolytic streptococcus. In addition to antibiotics and analgesia, corticosteroids significantly increased the likelihood of complete resolution of pain at 24 hours (four trials) by more than three times (relative risk 3.2, 95% confidence interval 2.0 to 5.1), and at 48 hours (three trials) to a lesser extent (1.7, 1.3 to 2.1). Corticosteroids (six trials) reduced mean time to onset of pain relief by more than 6 hours (95% confidence interval 3.4 to 9.3, P<0.001), although significant heterogeneity was present. The mean time to complete resolution was inconsistent across trials and a pooled analysis was not undertaken. Reporting of other outcomes was limited. Conclusions Corticosteroids provide symptomatic relief of pain in sore throat, in addition to antibiotic therapy, mainly in participants with severe or exudative sore throat.

negative: Coronavirus activates a stem cell-mediated defense mechanism that reactivates dormant tuberculosis: implications in COVID-19 pandemic We postulate that similar to bacteria, adult stem cells may also exhibit an innate defense mechanism to protect their niche. Here, we provide preliminary data on stem cell based innate defense against a mouse model of coronavirus, murine hepatitis virus-1 (MHV-1) infection. In a mouse model of mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) mediated Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) dormancy, MHV-1 infection in the lung exhibited 20 fold lower viral loads than the healthy control mice, suggesting the potential enhancement of an anti-MHV-1 defense by Mtb. This defense mechanism involves the in vivo expansion and reprogramming of CD271+MSCs in the lung to an enhanced stemness phenotype. The reprogrammed MSCs facilitate the activation of stemness genes, intracellular Mtb replication, and extracellular release of Mtb. The conditioned media of the reprogrammed MSCs exhibit direct anti-viral activity in an in vitro model of MHV-1 induced toxicity to type II alveolar epithelial cells. Thus, our data suggest that reprogrammed MSCs exert a unique innate defense against MHV-1 by activating dormant Mtb. The molecular details of this anti-viral defense mechanism against coronavirus could be further studied to develop a vaccine against COVID-19.

negative: Extracellular vesicles from mesenchymal stem cells as a Covid-19 treatment

negative: Unlikely SARS-CoV-2 vertical transmission from mother to child: A case report Abstract As the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) rapidly spread across China and to more than 70 countries, an increasing number of pregnant women were affected. The vertical transmission potential of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is of great concern to the obstetrics, neonatologists, and public health agencies. Though some studies indicated the risk of vertical transmission is low, few cases have been reported with comprehensive serial tests from multiple specimens. In this case, a female preterm infant was born to a mother with confirmed COVID-19. She presented with mild respiratory distress and received general management and a short period of nasal continuous positive airway pressure support. During her stay at the hospital, a series of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic test from her throat and anal swab, serum, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, and urine were negative. The nucleic acid test from the mother's amniotic fluid, vaginal secretions, cord blood, placenta, serum, anal swab, and breast milk were also negative. The most comprehensively tested case reported to date confirmed that the vertical transmission of COVID is unlikely, but still, more evidence is needed.

negative: Management of Adenoviral Keratoconjunctivitis: Challenges and Solutions Human adenovirus (HAdV) is the most common cause of infectious conjunctivitis, accounting for up to 75% of all conjunctivitis cases and affecting people of all ages and demographics. In addition to ocular complications, it can cause systemic infections in the form of gastroenteritis, respiratory disease, and dissemination in immunocompromised individuals. HAdV causes lytic infection of the mucoepithelial cells of the conjunctiva and cornea, as well as latent infection of lymphoid and adenoid cells. Epidemic keratoconjunctivitis (EKC) is the most severe ocular manifestation of HAdV infection, in which the presence of subepithelial infiltrates (SEIs) in the cornea is a hallmark feature of corneal involvement. SEIs have the tendency to recur and may lead to long-term visual disability. HAdV persistence and dissemination are linked to sporadic outbreaks of adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis. There is no FDA-approved antiviral for treating adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis, and as such, solutions should be proffered to handle the challenges associated with viral persistence and dissemination. Several treatment modalities have been investigated, both systemically and locally, to not only mitigate symptoms but reduce the course of the infection and prevent the risk of long-term complications. These options include systemic and topical antivirals, in-office povidone-iodine irrigation (PVI), immunoglobulin-based therapy, anti-inflammatory therapy, and immunotherapy. More recently, combination PVI/dexamethasone ophthalmic formulations have shown favorable outcomes and were well tolerated in clinical trials for the treatment of EKC. Possible, future treatment considerations include sialic acid analogs, cold atmospheric plasma, N-chlorotaurine, and benzalkonium chloride. Continued investigation and evaluation of treatment are warranted to reduce the economic burden and potential long-term visual debilitation in affected patients. This review will focus on how persistence and dissemination of HAdV pose a significant challenge to the management of adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis. Furthermore, current and future trends in prophylactic and therapeutic modalities for adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis will be discussed.

negative: Meta-analyses including non-randomized studies of therapeutic interventions: a methodological review BACKGROUND: There is an increasing number of meta-analyses including data from non-randomized studies for therapeutic evaluation. We aimed to systematically assess the methods used in meta-analyses including non-randomized studies evaluating therapeutic interventions. METHODS: For this methodological review, we searched MEDLINE via PubMed, from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013 for meta-analyses including at least one non-randomized study evaluating therapeutic interventions. Etiological assessments and meta-analyses with no comparison group were excluded. Two reviewers independently assessed the general characteristics and key methodological components of the systematic review process and meta-analysis methods. RESULTS: One hundred eighty eight meta-analyses were selected: 119 included both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSI) and 69 only NRSI. Half of the meta-analyses (n = 92, 49 %) evaluated non-pharmacological interventions. “Grey literature” was searched for 72 meta-analyses (38 %). An assessment of methodological quality or risk of bias was reported in 135 meta-analyses (72 %) but this assessment considered the risk of confounding bias in only 33 meta-analyses (18 %). In 130 meta-analyses (69 %), the design of each NRSI was not clearly specified. In 131 (70 %), whether crude or adjusted estimates of treatment effect for NRSI were combined was unclear or not reported. Heterogeneity across studies was assessed in 182 meta-analyses (97 %) and further explored in 157 (84 %). Reporting bias was assessed in 127 (68 %). CONCLUSIONS: Some key methodological components of the systematic review process—search for grey literature, description of the type of NRSI included, assessment of risk of confounding bias and reporting of whether crude or adjusted estimates were combined—are not adequately carried out or reported in meta-analyses including NRSI.

negative: Remdesivir Efficacy in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review Background: Researchers are working hard to find an effective treatment for the new coronavirus 2019. We performed a comprehensive systematic review to investigate the latest clinical evidence on the treatment efficacy and safety of Remdesivir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods: We performed a systematic search of the Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Google scholar, and MedRxiv for relevant observational and interventional studies. Measured outcomes were mortality rates, improvement rates, time to clinical improvement, all adverse event rates and severe adverse event rates. Results: 3 RCTs and 2 cohorts were included in our study. In 2 cohort studies, patients received Remdesivir for 10 days. 2 RCTs evaluated 10-day treatment of Remdesivir efficacy versus placebo group and the other RCT compared its 5-day regimen versus 10-day regimen. Visual inspection of the forest plots revealed that Remdesivir efficacy was not much different in reducing 28-day mortality versus 14-day mortality rates. Besides, 10-day treatment regimen overpowers 5-day treatment and placebo in decreasing time to clinical improvement. All adverse event rates did not have significant difference; however, severe adverse event rate was lower in 5-day Remdesivir group compared to 10-day and placebo groups. Conclusion: 5-day course of Remdesivir therapy in COVID-19 patients is probably efficacious and safe and patients without invasive mechanical ventilation benefit the most. Treatment can be extended to 10 days if satisfactory improvement is not seen by day 5. Most benefits from Remdesivir therapy take place in the first 14 days of the start of the treatment.

negative: Complementary and alternative medicine for the treatment of bronchiolitis in infants: A systematic review BACKGROUND: Bronchiolitis is a common cause of hospitalization among infants. The limited effectiveness of conventional medication has prompted the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) as alternative or adjunctive therapy for the management of bronchiolitis. AIMS: To determine the effectiveness and safety of CAM for the treatment of bronchiolitis in infants aged less than 2 years. METHODS: A systematic electronic search was performed in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from their respective inception to June 30, 2016 for studies evaluating CAM as an intervention to treat bronchiolitis in infants (1 month to 2 years of age). The CAM could be any form of treatment defined by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) and was utilized either as a single agent or adjunctive therapy. The predefined primary outcome was length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes were time to resolution of bronchiolitis symptoms, adverse events, and all other clinical outcomes reported by the included studies. RESULTS: The review identified 11 studies (8 randomized controlled trials and 3 cohort studies) examining four herbal preparations and four supplements used either as adjunctive or alternative therapy for bronchiolitis in 904 infants. Most studies were of moderate quality. Among six studies reporting on length of stay, a significant benefit was found for Chinese herbal medicine compared to ribavirin in one cohort study (n = 66) and vitamin D compared to placebo in one randomized controlled trial (n = 89). Studies of Chinese herbal medicine (4 studies, n = 365), vitamin D (1 study, n = 89), N-acetylcysteine (1 study, n = 100), and magnesium (2 studies, n = 176) showed some benefits with respect to clinical severity scores, oxygen saturation, and other symptoms, although data were sparse for any single intervention and the outcomes assessed and reported varied across studies. Only five studies reported on adverse events; no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Among 11 studies examining the effect of CAM on inpatients with bronchiolitis, six reported on the review’s primary outcome of length of hospital stay. In general, findings did not show a significant benefit associated with the primary outcome. Preliminary evidence indicated that Chinese herbal medicine mixtures, vitamin D, N-acetylcysteine, and magnesium might be useful in managing the symptoms of bronchiolitis. However, the evidence was not sufficient or rigorous enough to formulate recommendations for the use of any CAM. Among studies that reported adverse events, no serious harms were noted.

negative: Incidence of coagulase-negative staphylococcal bacteremia among ICU patients: decontamination studies as a natural experiment The epidemiology of coagulase-negative staphylococcal (CNS) bacteremia among adult ICU patients remains unclear. Decontamination studies among ICU patients provide a unique opportunity to study the impacts of different diagnostic criteria, exposure to various decontamination interventions, and various other factors, on its incidence over three decades. Decontamination studies among ICU patients reporting CNS bacteremia incidence data were obtained mostly from recent systematic reviews. The CNS bacteremia incidence within component (control and intervention) groups of decontamination studies was benchmarked versus studies without intervention (observational groups). The impacts of antibiotic versus chlorhexidine decontamination interventions, control group concurrency, publication year, and diagnostic criteria were examined in meta-regression models. Among non-intervention (observational) studies which did versus did not specify stringent (≥ 2 positive blood cultures) diagnostic criteria, the mean CNS bacteremia incidence per 100 patients (and 95% CI; n) is 1.3 (0.9–2.0; n = 23) versus 3.6 (1.8–6.9; n = 8), respectively, giving an overall benchmark of 1.8 (1.2–2.4; n = 31). Versus the benchmark incidence, the mean incidence is high among concurrent control (5.7; 3.6–9.1%) and intervention (5.2; 3.6–6.9%), but not non-concurrent control (1.0; 0.4–3.9%) groups of 21 antibiotic studies, nor among eleven component groups of chlorhexidine studies. This high incidence remained apparent (p < 0.01) in meta-regression models adjusting for group wide factors such as diagnostic criteria and publication year. The incidence of CNS bacteremia within both intervention and concurrent (but not non-concurrent) control groups of antibiotic-based decontamination studies are unusually high even accounting for variable diagnostic criteria and other factors. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10096-019-03763-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: Clinical phenotypes of SARS-CoV-2: implications for clinicians and researchers Patients with COVID-19 present a broad spectrum of clinical presentation. Whereas hypoxaemia is the marker of severity, different strategies of management should be customised to five specific individual phenotypes. Many intubated patients present with phenotype 4, characterised by pulmonary hypoxic vasoconstriction, being associated with severe hypoxaemia with “normal” (>40 mL·cmH(2)O(−1)) lung compliance and likely representing pulmonary microvascular thrombosis. Phenotype 5 is often associated with high plasma procalcitonin and has low pulmonary compliance, Which is a result of co-infection or acute lung injury after noninvasive ventilation. Identifying these clinical phenotypes and applying a personalised approach would benefit the optimisation of therapies and improve outcomes.

negative: Rethinking the role of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID‐19 There are currently no proven or approved treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Early anecdotal reports and limited in vitro data led to the significant uptake of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), and to lesser extent chloroquine (CQ), for many patients with this disease. As an increasing number of patients with COVID‐19 are treated with these agents and more evidence accumulates, there continues to be no high‐quality clinical data showing a clear benefit of these agents for this disease. Moreover, these agents have the potential to cause harm, including a broad range of adverse events including serious cardiac side effects when combined with other agents. In addition, the known and potent immunomodulatory effects of these agents which support their use in the treatment of auto‐immune conditions, and provided a component in the original rationale for their use in patients with COVID‐19, may, in fact, undermine their utility in the context of the treatment of this respiratory viral infection. Specifically, the impact of HCQ on cytokine production and suppression of antigen presentation may have immunologic consequences that hamper innate and adaptive antiviral immune responses for patients with COVID‐19. Similarly, the reported in vitro inhibition of viral proliferation is largely derived from the blockade of viral fusion that initiates infection rather than the direct inhibition of viral replication as seen with nucleoside/tide analogs in other viral infections. Given these facts and the growing uncertainty about these agents for the treatment of COVID‐19, it is clear that at the very least thoughtful planning and data collection from randomized clinical trials are needed to understand what if any role these agents may have in this disease. In this article, we review the datasets that support or detract from the use of these agents for the treatment of COVID‐19 and render a data informed opinion that they should only be used with caution and in the context of carefully thought out clinical trials, or on a case‐by‐case basis after rigorous consideration of the risks and benefits of this therapeutic approach.

negative: Program and Abstracts for the 2007 Meeting of the Society for Glycobiology

negative: Identification of Repurposal Drugs and Adverse Drug Reactions for Various Courses of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Based on Single-cell RNA Sequencing Data With more than 3.8 million people infected Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), poses a critical threat to human health. There is no proven vaccine or specific drug to date, which highlights the urgent need for rapid development of therapeutics for COVID-19. To identify potentially repurposable drugs, we employed a systematic approach to mine candidates from U.S. FDA approved drugs and pre-clinical small-molecule compounds by integrating the gene expression perturbation data by chemicals from the Library of Integrated Network-Based Cellular Signatures (LINCS) project with publically available single-cell RNA sequencing dataset from mild and severe COVID-19 patients. We identified 281 FDA approved drugs that have the potential to be effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection, 10 of which are currently undergoing clinical trials to evaluate their efficacy against COVID-19. In conclusion, we have identified a list of repurposable anti-SARS- CoV-2 drugs using a systems biology approach.

negative: Hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin and in-hospital mortality or discharge in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection: a cohort study of 4,642 in-patients in France Objective To assess the clinical effectiveness of oral hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with or without azithromycin (AZI) in preventing death or leading to hospital discharge. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting An analysis of data from electronic medical records and administrative claim data from the French Assistance Publique - Hopitaux de Paris (AP-HP) data warehouse, in 39 public hospitals, Ile-de-France, France. Participants All adult inpatients with at least one PCR-documented SARS-CoV-2 RNA from a nasopharyngeal sample between February 1st, 2020 and April 6th, 2020 were eligible for analysis. The study population was restricted to patients who did not receive COVID-19 treatments assessed in ongoing trials, including antivirals and immunosuppressive drugs. End of follow-up was defined as the date of death, discharge home, day 28 after admission, whichever occurred first, or administrative censoring on May 4, 2020. Intervention Patients were further classified into 3 groups: (i) receiving HCQ alone, (ii) receiving HCQ together with AZI, and (iii) receiving neither HCQ nor AZI. Exposure to a HCQ/AZI combination was defined as a simultaneous prescription of the 2 treatments (more or less one day). Main outcome measures The primary outcome was all-cause 28-day mortality as a time-to-event endpoint under a competing risks survival analysis framework. The secondary outcome was 28-day discharge home. Augmented inverse probability of treatment weighted (AIPTW) estimates of the average treatment effect (ATE) were computed to account for confounding. Results A total of 4,642 patients (mean age: 66.1 +/- 18; males: 2,738 (59%)) were included, of whom 623 (13.4%) received HCQ alone, 227 (5.9%) received HCQ plus AZI, and 3,792 (81.7%) neither drug. Patients receiving "HCQ alone" or "HCQ plus AZI" were more likely younger, males, current smokers and overall presented with slightly more co-morbidities (obesity, diabetes, any chronic pulmonary diseases, liver diseases), while no major difference was apparent in biological parameters. After accounting for confounding, no statistically significant difference was observed between the "HCQ" and "Neither drug" groups for 28-day mortality: AIPTW absolute difference in ATE was +1.24% (-5.63 to 8.12), ratio in ATE 1.05 (0.77 to 1.33). 28-day discharge rates were statistically significantly higher in the "HCQ" group: AIPTW absolute difference in ATE (+11.1% [3.30 to 18.9]), ratio in ATE (1.25 [1.07 to 1.42]). As for the "HCQ+AZI" vs neither drug, trends for significant differences and ratios in AIPTW ATE were found suggesting higher mortality rates in the former group (difference in ATE +9.83% [-0.51 to 20.17], ratio in ATE 1.40 [0.98 to 1.81];p=0.062). Conclusions Using a large non-selected population of inpatients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection in 39 hospitals in France and robust methodological approaches, we found no evidence for efficacy of HCQ or HCQ combined with AZI on 28-day mortality. Our results suggested a possible excess risk of mortality associated with HCQ combined with AZI, but not with HCQ alone. Significantly higher rates of discharge home were observed in patients treated by HCQ, a novel finding warranting further confirmation in replicative studies. Altogether, our findings further support the need to complete currently undergoing randomized clinical trials.

negative: Neurological immunotherapy in the era of COVID-19 — looking for consensus in the literature The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is concerning for patients with neuroimmunological diseases who are receiving immunotherapy. Uncertainty remains about whether immunotherapies increase the risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or increase the risk of severe disease and death upon infection. National and international societies have developed guidelines and statements, but consensus does not exist in several areas. In this Review, we attempt to clarify where consensus exists and where uncertainty remains to inform management approaches based on the first principles of neuroimmunology. We identified key questions that have been addressed in the literature and collated the recommendations to generate a consensus calculation in a Delphi-like approach to summarize the information. We summarize the international recommendations, discuss them in light of the first available data from patients with COVID-19 receiving immunotherapy and provide an overview of management approaches in the COVID-19 era. We stress the principles of medicine in general and neuroimmunology in particular because, although the risk of viral infection has become more relevant, most of the considerations apply to the general management of neurological immunotherapy. We also give special consideration to immunosuppressive treatment and cell-depleting therapies that might increase susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection but reduce the risk of severe COVID-19.

negative: Efficacy of VRD(Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone) Consolidation Therapy and Maintenance Therapy with Immunomodulatory Drugs(Thalidomide or Lenalidomide) after Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation in the Era of Bortezomib-Containing Induction Therapy-A Single Institution Experience Autologous stem cell transplantation(ASCT)for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma(NDMM)has underwent recent improvements in combination with novel agents-containing induction and post-ASCT therapy. Since the approval of bortezomib for NDMM in Japan, we conducted the following regimen(BD arm)in transplant-eligible patients with NDMM: BD (bortezomib and dexamethasone)induction, ASCT, VRD consolidation, and maintenance therapy with immunomodulatory drugs(IMIDs). The efficacy and safety of the BD arm were compared to those of patients treated with vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone(VAD)induction followed by ASCT(VAD arm)retrospectively. Thirty-three patients were treated with the BD arm, and 92 patients with the VAD arm. Thirty-one patients in the BD arm proceeded to ASCT. Thereafter, 23 and 17 patients received VRD consolidation and IMIDs maintenance therapy, respectively. The rates of complete response/Bvery good partial response after ASCT, consolidation, and maintenance therapy were 43%/61%, 76%/90% and 87%/93%, respectively. The response rates after ASCT did not differ between BD and VAD arms. The median PFS was 46.2 months(BD arm)and 30.6 months(VAD arm)(HR 0.48[0.27-0.85], p=0.0106). The median OS was not-reached(BD arm)and 90.6 months(VAD arm)(HR 0.21[0.05-0.87], p=0.0172). VRD consolidation and IMIDs maintenance therapies improved disease status after ASCT and prolonged PFS and OS.

negative: Experimental inoculation of adult dairy cows with bovine coronavirus and detection of coronavirus in feces by RT-PCR A reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) targeting a 407 bp fragment of the nucleocapsid gene of bovine coronavirus (BCV) was developed for detection of BCV RNA in feces of experimentally inoculated cattle. The sensitivity and specificity of the RT-PCR were confirmed using tissue culture-adapted BCV strains and feces of 2 calves inoculated with BCV. Ten nonpregant, BCV seropositive, adult dairy cows were inoculated with winter dysentery (WD) (n = 8) or calf diarrhea (CD) (n = 2) strains of BCV intranasally and orally (n = 2) or through a surgically-placed duodenal catheter (n = 8) with and without dexamethasone treatment or feeding ice water. The 6 cows inoculated with BCV intranasally and through a duodenal catheter (2 of 2 cows given CD BCV and 4 of 6 cows given WD BCV) developed mild diarrhea, and BCV was detected in diarrheal feces by RT-PCR, ELISA or immune electron microscopy. These results suggest that CD and WD strains of BCV can cause diarrhea in adult cows in conjunction with host or environmental factors and that RT-PCR might be useful to diagnose BCV infections in calves and adult cows.

negative: Tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study BACKGROUND: No therapy is approved for COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this study was to assess the role of tocilizumab in reducing the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation and death in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who received standard of care treatment. METHODS: This retrospective, observational cohort study included adults (≥18 years) with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who were admitted to tertiary care centres in Bologna and Reggio Emilia, Italy, between Feb 21 and March 24, 2020, and a tertiary care centre in Modena, Italy, between Feb 21 and April 30, 2020. All patients were treated with the standard of care (ie, supplemental oxygen, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, antiretrovirals, and low molecular weight heparin), and a non-randomly selected subset of patients also received tocilizumab. Tocilizumab was given either intravenously at 8 mg/kg bodyweight (up to a maximum of 800 mg) in two infusions, 12 h apart, or subcutaneously at 162 mg administered in two simultaneous doses, one in each thigh (ie, 324 mg in total), when the intravenous formulation was unavailable. The primary endpoint was a composite of invasive mechanical ventilation or death. Treatment groups were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis after adjusting for sex, age, recruiting centre, duration of symptoms, and baseline Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. FINDINGS: Of 1351 patients admitted, 544 (40%) had severe COVID-19 pneumonia and were included in the study. 57 (16%) of 365 patients in the standard care group needed mechanical ventilation, compared with 33 (18%) of 179 patients treated with tocilizumab (p=0·41; 16 [18%] of 88 patients treated intravenously and 17 [19%] of 91 patients treated subcutaneously). 73 (20%) patients in the standard care group died, compared with 13 (7%; p<0·0001) patients treated with tocilizumab (six [7%] treated intravenously and seven [8%] treated subcutaneously). After adjustment for sex, age, recruiting centre, duration of symptoms, and SOFA score, tocilizumab treatment was associated with a reduced risk of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (adjusted hazard ratio 0·61, 95% CI 0·40–0·92; p=0·020). 24 (13%) of 179 patients treated with tocilizumab were diagnosed with new infections, versus 14 (4%) of 365 patients treated with standard of care alone (p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Treatment with tocilizumab, whether administered intravenously or subcutaneously, might reduce the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation or death in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. FUNDING: None.

negative: Remdesivir use in patients with coronavirus COVID-19 disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has led to significant global mortality and morbidity. Until now, no treatment has proven to be effective in COVID-19. To explore whether the use of remdesivir, initially an experimental broad-spectrum antiviral, is effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigating its use. Methods A rapid search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE medical databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials. A systematic approach was used to screen, abstract, and critically appraise the studies. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method was applied to rate the certainty and quality of the evidence reported per study. Results Two RCTs studies were identified (n=1,299). A fixed-effects meta-analysis revealed reductions in mortality (RR=0.69, 0.49 to 0.99), time to clinical improvement (3.95 less days, from 3.86 days less to 4.05 less days ), serious adverse events (RR=0.77, 0.63 to 0.94) and all adverse events (RR=0.87, 0.79 to 0.96). Conclusion In this rapid systematic review, we present pooled evidence from the 2 included RCT studies that reveal that remdesivir has a modest yet significant reduction in mortality and significantly improves the time to recovery, as well as significantly reduced risk in adverse events and serious adverse events. It is more than likely that as an antiviral, remdesivir is not sufficient on its own and may be suitable in combination with other antivirals or treatments such as convalescent plasma. Research is ongoing to clarify and contextual these promising findings.

negative: Telepsychotherapy: a leaflet for psychotherapists in the age of COVID-19. A review of the evidence COVID-19 outbreak imposes the adoption of extraordinary containment measures, including the strict necessity to limit interpersonal contact. Face-to-face psychotherapy collides with this requirement and, above all, it might endanger both therapists and patients’ safety. Telepsychotherapy might come to the aid, ensuring therapeutic continuity and the possibility to reach people who might benefit of extra psychological support. Infectious outbreaks have been indeed associated with major psychopathological outcomes. The aim of the present work is to review the most recent experimental evidence about telepsychotherapy, focusing on its effectiveness, possible determinants of efficacy and therapists/patients’ attitudes, to rapidly inform psychotherapists. Out of the 857 records found, 18 studies have been included in the review. Our results show that, despite therapists and public’s skepticism, telepsychotherapy is a trustworthy alternative to be adopted, which can be used efficaciously to treat common mental-health disorders such as anxiety, depression and post-traumatic distress. As well as in the traditional setting, a higher number of sessions and the proper management of patients’ expectations seem to be associated with better outcomes. On the contrary, low familiarity with web-based means of communication and technical issues might reduce specifically the effectiveness of telepsychotherapy.

negative: Renin-angiotensin system blockers and outcomes during hydroxychloroquine treatment in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia

negative: Hydrocortisone and bronchopulmonary dysplasia: variables associated with response in premature infants OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to evaluate hydrocortisone’s efficacy for decreasing respiratory support in premature infants with developing bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Secondary objectives included assessment of the impact of intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), maternal history of chorioamnionitis, side effects and route of administration associated with hydrocortisone’s efficacy. Dexamethasone as second-line treatment to decrease respiratory support was reviewed. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of preterm infants requiring respiratory support receiving hydrocortisone. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients were included. Successful extubation was achieved in 50% of intubated patients after hydrocortisone treatment with no major complications. In our small study, history of maternal chorioamnionitis, IUGR or route of administration did not affect the response. Rescue dexamethasone after hydrocortisone therapy was ineffective in the ten patients who failed extubation following hydrocortisone. CONCLUSION: Hydrocortisone is effective in decreasing respiratory support in patients with developing BPD without major complications. Randomized studies are warranted to confirm our findings.

negative: Covering coronavirus—emerging tools for the fight against the common enemy

negative: Severe Immune Thrombocytopenia Complicated by Intracerebral Haemorrhage Associated with Coronavirus Infection: A Case Report and Literature Review Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) is an autoimmune disorder that causes isolated thrombocytopenia. Many viruses have been identified as triggering the autoimmune process, including HIV, MCV, EBV, parvovirus, rubella and measles. However, ITP in association with coronavirus infection has not previously been reported. We describe the case of a healthy man who presented with severe ITP complicated by intracranial haemorrhage following upper respiratory tract infection. An infection screen revealed coronavirus infection. LEARNING POINTS: Coronavirus can cause severe immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). Intracerebral haemorrhage is an uncommon presentation of ITP. Intravenous immunoglobulin and steroids are very effective treatments for severe ITP.

negative: Should chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine be used to treat COVID-19? A rapid review BACKGROUND: On the 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that COVID-19 was a pandemic. To date, there are no medical treatments for COVID-19 with proven effectiveness. Novel treatments and/or vaccines will take time to be developed and distributed to patients. In light of this, there has been growing interest in the use of existing medications, such as chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), as potential treatments of this disease. AIM: To establish the current evidence for the effectiveness of CQ and HCQ in treating COVID-19. DESIGN & SETTING: A rapid review of the literature was conducted. METHOD: Electronic searches in PubMed and Google Scholar were conducted on 21 March 2020. A further search was conducted in Google for relevant literature on 28 March 2020. RESULTS: There is limited evidence of in vitro activity of CQ/HCQ against SARS-CoV-2. A number of in vivo clinical trials are underway. The empirical data available from two of these trials reveal conflicting results. Both trials are characterised by small numbers of participants (n = 30 and n = 36) and suffer methodological limitations. No medium or long-term follow-up data is available. CONCLUSION: At present, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether CQ/HCQ are safe and effective treatments for COVID-19. High quality, adequately powered randomised clinical trials in primary and secondary care settings are urgently required to guide policymakers and clinicians. These studies should report medium- and long-term follow-up results, and safety data.

negative: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in COVID-19: should they be used as standard therapy? The pandemic of the new coronavirus, known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has urged the nations to an unprecedented world-wide reaction, including an accelerated exploration of therapeutic options. In the absence of a vaccine and specifically designed antivirals, the medical community has proposed the use of various previously available medications in order to reduce the number of patients requiring prolonged hospitalizations, oxygen therapy, and mechanical ventilation and to decrease mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are among the proposed drugs and are the most widely used so far, despite the lack of robust evidence on their usefulness. The objective of this article is to review and discuss the possible role of these drugs in the therapy of COVID-19.

negative: Rethinking the role of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 There are currently no proven or approved treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Early anecdotal reports and limited in vitro data led to the significant uptake of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), and to lesser extent chloroquine (CQ), for many patients with this disease. As an increasing number of patients with COVID-19 are treated with these agents and more evidence accumulates, there continues to be no high-quality clinical data showing a clear benefit of these agents for this disease. Moreover, these agents have the potential to cause harm, including a broad range of adverse events including serious cardiac side effects when combined with other agents. In addition, the known and potent immunomodulatory effects of these agents which support their use in the treatment of auto-immune conditions, and provided a component in the original rationale for their use in patients with COVID-19, may, in fact, undermine their utility in the context of the treatment of this respiratory viral infection. Specifically, the impact of HCQ on cytokine production and suppression of antigen presentation may have immunologic consequences that hamper innate and adaptive antiviral immune responses for patients with COVID-19. Similarly, the reported in vitro inhibition of viral proliferation is largely derived from the blockade of viral fusion that initiates infection rather than the direct inhibition of viral replication as seen with nucleoside/tide analogs in other viral infections. Given these facts and the growing uncertainty about these agents for the treatment of COVID-19, it is clear that at the very least thoughtful planning and data collection from randomized clinical trials are needed to understand what if any role these agents may have in this disease. In this article, we review the datasets that support or detract from the use of these agents for the treatment of COVID-19 and render a data informed opinion that they should only be used with caution and in the context of carefully thought out clinical trials, or on a case-by-case basis after rigorous consideration of the risks and benefits of this therapeutic approach.

negative: The outbreak pattern of SARS cases in China as revealed by a mathematical model Abstract Since it first appeared in China's Guangdong Province, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) has caused serious damages to many parts of the world, especially Asia. Little is known about its epidemiology. We developed a modified discrete SIR model including susceptible individuals, non-hospitalized SARS persons; hospitalized patients, cured hospital patients, and those who have died due to SARS infection. Here, we demonstrate the effective reproduction number is determined by infection rates and infectious period of hospitalized and non-hospitalized SARS patients. Both infection rate and the effective reproductive number of the SARS virus are significantly negatively correlated with the total number of cumulative cases, indicating that the control measures implemented in China are effective, and the outbreak pattern of accumulative SARS cases in China is a logistic growth curve. We estimate the basic reproduction number R 0 of SARS virus is 2.87 in mainland of China, very close to the estimations in Singapore and Hong Kong.

negative: A Review: Does Complement or the Contact System Have a Role in Protection or Pathogenesis of COVID-19? INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 presentation may include a profound increase in cytokines and associated pneumonia, rapidly progressing to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This so-called cytokine storm often leads to refractory edema, respiratory arrest, and death. At present, anti-IL-6, antiviral therapy, convalescent plasma, hydroxychloroquine, and azithromycin among others are being investigated as potential treatments for COVID-19. As the disease etiology and precise therapeutic interventions are still not definitively defined, we wanted to review the roles that complement and the contact system may have in either the treatment or pathogenesis of the disease. METHODS: We searched the recent literature (PubMed) on complement and coronavirus; contact system and coronavirus; bradykinin and coronavirus; and angiotensin receptor and coronavirus. The manuscript complies with ethics guidelines and was deemed exempt from institutional review board approval according to Human Subjects Protection Office guidelines. RESULTS: Mouse models are available for the study of coronavirus and complement. Although complement is effective in protecting against many viruses, it does not seem to be protective against coronavirus. C3 knockout mice infected with SARS-CoV had less lung disease than wild-type mice, suggesting that complement may play a role in coronavirus pathogenesis. Some evidence suggests that the observed pulmonary edema may be bradykinin-induced and could be the reason that corticosteroids, antihistamines, and other traditional interventions for edema are not effective. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is a co-receptor for SARS-CoV-2, and studies thus far have not concluded a benefit or risk associated with the use of either ACE-inhibitors or angiotensin receptor antagonists. Activation of complement and the contact system, through generation of bradykinin, may play a role in the SARS-CoV-2-induced pulmonary edema, and our search suggests that further work is necessary to confirm our suspicions.

negative: Feasibility of Long-Term Proteasome Inhibition in Multiple Myeloma by In-Class Transition from Bortezomib to Ixazomib BACKGROUND: The ongoing US MM-6 study is investigating in-class transition (iCT) from parenteral bortezomib-based induction to all-oral ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (ixazomib-Rd) with the aim of increasing proteasome inhibitor (PI)-based treatment adherence/duration while maintaining quality of life (QoL) and improving outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: US community sites are enrolling non-transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients with no evidence of progressive disease after 3 cycles of bortezomib-based therapy to receive ixazomib-Rd (up to 39 cycles or until progression/toxicity). Patients use mobile/wearable digital devices to collect actigraphy (activity/sleep) data and electronically complete QoL/treatment satisfaction/medication adherence questionnaires. Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS); key secondary endpoints include response rates and therapy duration. RESULTS: At data cutoff, 84 patients had been treated (median age 73 years; 44% ≥ 75 years; 49% male; 15% black/African American; 10% Hispanic/Latino); 62% of patients remain on therapy. Mean duration of total PI therapy was 10.1 months and of ixazomib-Rd was 7.3 months. With 8 months median follow-up, 12-month PFS rate was 86% (95% confidence interval, 73–93) from both the start of bortezomib-based treatment and the start of ixazomib-Rd. Overall response rate was 62% (complete response [CR], 4%; very good partial response [VGPR], 25%; partial response [PR], 33%) after bortezomib-based induction and 70% (CR, 26%; VGPR, 29%; PR, 15%) after iCT. The ixazomib-Rd safety profile was consistent with previous clinical trial data. QoL/treatment satisfaction were maintained. CONCLUSION: US MM-6 patients are representative of the real-world US MM population; iCT may permit prolonged PI-based therapy with promising efficacy, without impacting patients’ QoL/treatment satisfaction.

negative: Diagnosis and treatment of community‐acquired pneumonia in adults: 2016 clinical practice guidelines by the Chinese Thoracic Society, Chinese Medical Association Community‐acquired pneumonia (CAP) in adults is an infectious disease with high morbidity in China and the rest of the world. With the changing pattern in the etiological profile of CAP and advances in medical techniques in diagnosis and treatment over time, Chinese Thoracic Society of Chinese Medical Association updated its CAP guideline in 2016 to address the standard management of CAP in Chinese adults. Extensive and comprehensive literature search was made to collect the data and evidence for experts to review and evaluate the level of evidence. Corresponding recommendations are provided appropriately based on the level of evidence. This updated guideline covers comprehensive topics on CAP, including aetiology, antimicrobial resistance profile, diagnosis, empirical and targeted treatments, adjunctive and supportive therapies, as well as prophylaxis. The recommendations may help clinicians manage CAP patients more effectively and efficiently. CAP in pediatric patients and immunocompromised adults is beyond the scope of this guideline. This guideline is only applicable for the immunocompetent CAP patients aged 18 years and older. The recommendations on selection of antimicrobial agents and the dosing regimens are not mandatory. The clinicians are recommended to prescribe and adjust antimicrobial therapies primarily based on their local etiological profile and results of susceptibility testing, with reference to this guideline.

negative: SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19: a primer for cardiologists In the late autumn of 2019, a new potentially lethal human coronavirus designated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, China. The pandemic spread of this zoonotic virus has created a global health emergency and an unprecedented socioeconomic crisis. The severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the illness caused by SARS-CoV‑2, is highly variable. Most patients (~85%) develop no or mild symptoms, while others become seriously ill, some succumbing to disease-related complications. In this review, the SARS-CoV‑2 life cycle, its transmission and the clinical and immunological features of COVID-19 are described. In addition, an overview is presented of the virological assays for detecting ongoing SARS-CoV‑2 infections and the serological tests for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody detection. Also discussed are the different approaches to developing a COVID-19 vaccine and the perspectives of treating COVID-19 with antiviral drugs, immunomodulatory agents and anticoagulants/antithrombotics. Finally, the cardiovascular manifestations of COVID-19 are briefly touched upon. While there is still much to learn about SARS-CoV‑2, the tremendous recent advances in biomedical technology and knowledge and the huge amount of research into COVID-19 raise the hope that a remedy for this disease will soon be found. COVID-19 will nonetheless have a lasting impact on human society. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-020-01475-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: Lopinavir-Ritonavir in treatment of COVID-19: A dynamic systematic benefit-risk assessment Background: COVID-19 is an ongoing, global public health crisis for which safe and effective treatments need to be identified. The benefit-risk balance for use of lopinavir-ritonavir in COVID-19 needs to be monitored on an ongoing basis, therefore a systematic benefit-risk assessment was designed and conducted. A key objective of this study was to provide a platform for a dynamic systematic benefit-risk evaluation; although initially this evaluation is likely to contain limited information, it is required due to the urgent unmet public need. Importantly it allows additional data to be incorporated as it becomes available, and re-evaluation of the benefit-risk profile. Methods: A systematic benefit-risk assessment was conducted using the Benefit-Risk Action team (BRAT) framework. The exposure of interest was lopinavir-ritonavir treatment in COVID-19 compared to standard of care, placebo or other treatments. A literature search was conducted in PubMed and EmBase to identify peer-reviewed papers reporting clinical outcomes. Two clinicians constructed a value tree and ranked key benefits and risks in order of considered clinical importance. Results: In comparison to standard of care, data for several key benefits and risks were identified for lopinavir-ritonavir. Time to clinical improvement was not significantly different for lopinavir-ritonavir in comparison to standard of care (HR=1.31, 95% CI:0.95, 1.80). There appeared to be fewer serious adverse events with lopinavir-ritonavir (20%) vs standard of care (32%). In particular, there were fewer cases of acute respiratory distress syndrome with lopinavir-ritonavir compared to standard of care (13% vs 27%). Limited data were available for comparison of lopinavir-ritonavir to other treatments. Conclusions: Based on currently available data, there was no clear benefit for use of lopinavir-ritonavir compared to standard of care in severe COVID-19. Risk data suggested a possible decrease in serious adverse events, including acute respiratory distress syndrome. Overall, the benefit-risk profile for lopinavir-ritonavir in severe COVID-19 cannot be considered positive until further efficacy and effectiveness data become available.

negative: Our Response to COVID-19 as Endocrinologists and Diabetologists

negative: Nanobiotechnological modules as molecular target tracker for the treatment and prevention of malaria: options and opportunity Malaria is one of the major infectious diseases that remains a constant challenge to human being mainly due to the emergence of drug-resistant strains of parasite and also the availability of drugs, which are non-specific for their pharmacodynamic activity and known to be associated with multiple side effects. The disease has acquired endemic proportions in tropical countries where the hygienic conditions are not satisfactory while the environmental conditions favor the proliferation of parasite and its transmission, particularly through the female anopheles. It is obvious that to square up the problems, there is a need for designing and development of more effective drugs, which can combat the drug-resistant strains of the parasite. Molecular biology of the parasite and its homing into host cellular tropics provide multiple drug targets that could judiciously be considered for engineering and designing of new generation antimalarial drugs and also drug delivery systems. Though the recent reports document that against malaria parasite the vaccine could be developed, nevertheless, due to smart mutational change overs by the parasite, it is able to bypass the immune surveillance. The developed vaccine therefore failed to assure absolute protection against the malarial infection. In the conventional mode of treatment antimalarial drugs, the dose and dosage regimen that is followed at large crops up the contraindicative manifestations, and hence compromising the effective treatment. The emerging trends and new updates in contemporary biological sciences, material sciences, and drug delivery domain have enabled us with the availability of a multitude of mode and modules which could plunge upon the nanotechnology in particular to treat this challenging infection. The nanotechnology-based option may be tuned or customized as per the requirements to mark and target i.e. the infected RBCs, for targeted drug delivery. [Figure: see text]

negative: The Imperfect Cytokine Storm: Severe COVID-19 with ARDS in Patient on Durable LVAD Support Abstract As health systems worldwide grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, patients on durable LVAD support represent a unique population at risk for the disease. We outline such a patient who developed COVID-19 complicated by “cytokine storm” with severe ARDS and myocardial injury; and describe the challenges that arose during management.

negative: Current knowledge about the antivirals remdesivir (GS-5734) and GS-441524 as therapeutic options for coronaviruses Abstract Recent international epidemics of coronavirus-associated illnesses underscore the urgent medical and public health need for vaccine development and regulatory body approved therapies. In particular, the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has quickly intensified interest in developing treatment options to mitigate impact on human life. Remdesivir (GS-5734™) is a broad-spectrum antiviral drug that is now being tested as a potential treatment for COVID-19 in international, multi-site clinical trials. Currently available evidence about the antiviral effects of remdesivir against coronaviruses is primarily based on in vitro and in vivo studies (including some on a chemically related compound, GS-441524™), which have demonstrated largely favorable findings. As the pandemic progresses, information from human compassionate use cases will continue to accumulate before the clinical trials are concluded. It is imperative for public health practitioners and the One Health community to stay up to date on the most promising potential therapeutic options that are under investigation. Thus, the purpose of this review is to synthesize the knowledge to date about remdesivir as a therapeutic option for coronaviruses, with a special focus on information relevant to the One Health community.

negative: “Hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis.” BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS: The role of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of COVID-19 is not fully known. We studied the efficacy of HCQ compared to the control in COVID-19 subjects on a. viral clearance measured by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and, b. death due to all cause. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and MedRxiv database were searched using the specific keywords up to April 30, 2020. Studies that met our objectives were assessed for the risk of bias applying various tools as indicated. Three studies each that reported the outcome of viral clearance by RT-PCR and death due to all cause, were meta-analyzed by applying inverse variance-weighted averages of logarithmic risk ratio (RR) using a random effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using the I(2) statistic and funnel plots, respectively. RESULTS: Meta-analysis of 3 studies (n = 210) on viral clearance assessed by RT-PCR showed no benefit (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.38; p = 0.74), although with a moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 61.7%, p = 0.07). While meta-analysis of 3 studies (n = 474) showed a significant increase in death with HCQ, compared to the control (RR, 2.17; 95% 1.32 to 3.57; p = 0.002), without any heterogeneity (I(2) = 0.0%, p = 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: No benefit on viral clearance but a significant increase in mortality was observed with HCQ compared to control in patients with COVID-19.

negative: Cannabis and cannabinoids for the treatment of people with chronic noncancer pain conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled and observational studies. This review examines evidence for the effectiveness of cannabinoids in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) and addresses gaps in the literature by: considering differences in outcomes based on cannabinoid type and specific CNCP condition; including all study designs; and following IMMPACT guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched in July 2017. Analyses were conducted using Revman 5.3 and Stata 15.0. A total of 91 publications containing 104 studies were eligible (n = 9958 participants), including 47 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 57 observational studies. Forty-eight studies examined neuropathic pain, 7 studies examined fibromyalgia, 1 rheumatoid arthritis, and 48 other CNCP (13 multiple sclerosis-related pain, 6 visceral pain, and 29 samples with mixed or undefined CNCP). Across RCTs, pooled event rates (PERs) for 30% reduction in pain were 29.0% (cannabinoids) vs 25.9% (placebo); significant effect for cannabinoids was found; number needed to treat to benefit was 24 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15-61); for 50% reduction in pain, PERs were 18.2% vs 14.4%; no significant difference was observed. Pooled change in pain intensity (standardised mean difference: -0.14, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.08) was equivalent to a 3 mm reduction on a 100 mm visual analogue scale greater than placebo groups. In RCTs, PERs for all-cause adverse events were 81.2% vs 66.2%; number needed to treat to harm: 6 (95% CI 5-8). There were no significant impacts on physical or emotional functioning, and low-quality evidence of improved sleep and patient global impression of change. Evidence for effectiveness of cannabinoids in CNCP is limited. Effects suggest that number needed to treat to benefit is high, and number needed to treat to harm is low, with limited impact on other domains. It seems unlikely that cannabinoids are highly effective medicines for CNCP.

negative: Hydroxychloroquine as prophylaxis or treatment for COVID-19: What does the evidence say? Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), an antimalarial has been proposed as possible treatment for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). India has approved the use of HCQ for prophylaxis of asymptomatic health workers treating suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases, and asymptomatic household contacts of confirmed patients. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued Emergency Use Authorization for the use of HCQ to treat COVID-19 in adolescents and adults. In this review, we go over the available evidence for and against HCQ's use as prophylaxis or treatment for COVID-19, especially in the Indian context.

negative: Fulminant hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis secondary to a reactivated EBV infection: A case report Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is an aggressive inflammatory syndrome that results from inappropriate activation of the immune system. HLH has a high mortality if not treated. We describe a case of a fulminant HLH, associated with a reactivation of an EBV infection. The patient responded well to steroid treatment.

negative: Immunomodulatory effects in vivo of recombinant porcine interferon gamma on leukocyte functions of immunosuppressed pigs. Immunological parameters of porcine peripheral blood mononuclear cells after in vivo injections of recombinant porcine interferon gamma (rPoIFN gamma) were studied in pigs immunosuppressed by dexamethasone (6 mg/kg body weight in a single injection). A 2-d period of rPoIFN gamma injected alone and intramuscularly at a dose of 1 microgram/kg body weight increased interleukin 1 (IL1) production (P less than 0.05). Recombinant porcine IFN gamma also reversed the immunosuppressive effects of dexamethasone on: i), lymphocyte responsiveness to mitogens: PHA (P less than 0.03), ConA (P less than 0.053); ii), IL1 production; and iii), IL2 production (P less than 0.05). However, rPoIFN gamma had no effect on neutrophilia induced by dexamethasone. These data show that rPoIFN gamma modulates leukocyte functions of pigs in vivo.

negative: Gynecologic oncology at the time of COVID-19 outbreak The World Health Organization (WHO) classified the novel coronavirus (i.e., coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) as a global public health emergency. COVID-19 threatens to curtail patient access to evidence-based treatment. Medicine is changing, basically due to the limited available resources. In the field of gynecologic oncology, we have to re-design our treatments' paradigm. During COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, the highest priority is to achieve the maximum benefit from less demanding procedures. Extensive procedures should be avoided, in order to reduce hospitalization and postoperative events that might increase the in-hospital spread of the virus. There are ongoing concerns on the use of laparoscopic procedures, related to the possible contamination of the staff working in the operation room. Other minimally invasive techniques, including, vaginal surgery as well as robotic-assisted and isobaric procedures would be preferred over laparoscopy. A fair allocation of resources is paramount adequate treatments.

negative: The COVID-19 pandemic: is our medicine still evidence-based? There is no randomized controlled trial that demonstrated the efficacy of antiviral therapy against COVID-19 yet. However, physicians are prescribing different drugs to a large part of COVID-19 population in the hope they will cure them. This does not reflect the evidence-based medicine approach. What we need is more evidence-based knowledge about what routine care practices we should to apply to ameliorate symptoms of patients and fight COVID-19 pathology.

negative: Efficacy and safety of antiviral treatment for COVID-19 from evidence in studies of SARS-CoV-2 and other acute viral infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis BACKGROUND: Antiviral medications are being given empirically to some patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To support the development of a COVID-19 management guideline, we conducted a systematic review that addressed the benefits and harms of 7 antiviral treatments for COVID-19. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed and 3 Chinese databases (CNKI, WANFANG and SinoMed) through Apr. 19, medRxiv and Chinaxiv through Apr. 27, and Chongqing VIP through Apr. 30, 2020. We included studies of ribavirin, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, umifenovir (arbidol), favipravir, interferon and lopinavir/ritonavir. If direct evidence from COVID-19 studies was not available, we included indirect evidence from studies of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) for efficacy outcomes and other acute respiratory viral infections for safety outcomes. RESULTS: In patients with nonsevere COVID-19 illness, the death rate was extremely low, precluding an important effect on mortality. We found only very low-quality evidence with little or no suggestion of benefit for most treatments and outcomes in both nonsevere and severe COVID-19. An exception was treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir, for which we found low-quality evidence for a decrease in length of stay in the intensive care unit (risk difference 5 d shorter, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0 to 9 d) and hospital stay (risk difference 1 d shorter, 95% CI 0 to 2 d). For safety outcomes, evidence was of low or very low quality, with the exception of treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir for which moderate-quality evidence suggested likely increases in diarrhea, nausea and vomiting. INTERPRETATION: To date, persuasive evidence of important benefit in COVID-19 does not exist for any antiviral treatments, although for each treatment evidence has not excluded important benefit. Additional randomized controlled trials involving patients with COVID-19 will be needed before such treatments can be administered with confidence.

negative: Season of birth, clinical manifestations and Dexamethasone Suppression Test in unipolar major depression. BACKGROUND Reports in the literature suggest that the season of birth might constitute a risk factor for the development of a major psychiatric disorder, possibly because of the effect environmental factors have during the second trimester of gestation. The aim of the current paper was to study the possible relationship of the season of birth and current clinical symptoms in unipolar major depression. METHODS The study sample included 45 DSM-IV major depressive patients and 90 matched controls. The SCAN v. 2.0, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAS) were used to assess symptomatology, and the 1 mg Dexamethasone Suppression Test (DST) was used to subcategorize patients. RESULTS Depressed patients as a whole did not show differences in birth season from controls. However, those patients born during the spring manifested higher HDRS while those born during the summer manifested the lowest HAS scores. DST non-suppressors were almost exclusively (90%) likely to be born during autumn and winter. No effect from the season of birth was found concerning the current severity of suicidal ideation or attempts. DISCUSSION The current study is the first in this area of research using modern and rigid diagnostic methodology and a biological marker (DST) to categorize patients. Its disadvantages are the lack of data concerning DST in controls and a relatively small size of patient sample. The results confirm the effect of seasonality of birth on patients suffering from specific types of depression.

negative: Should Clinicians Use Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine Alone or in Combination With Azithromycin for the Prophylaxis or Treatment of COVID-19? Living Practice Points From the American College of Physicians (Version 1)

negative: A case report of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy during steroid treatment for ANCA-associated renal vasculitis. CASE REPORT an 80-year-old woman presented with rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis and was admitted to our hospital. Myeloperoxidase-specific antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (MPO-ANCA) was positive. We diagnosed ANCA-associated renal vasculitis (ANCA-RV). Treatment was initiated with intravenous methylprednisolone pulse therapy, followed by prednisolone (PSL) at 30 mg/day. We gradually reduced the PSL dose to 7.5 mg/day over 6 months. At that time, the patient developed disturbances of consciousness which progressed subacutely. MRI revealed regions of patchy white matter with an increased signal on T2-weighted, fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequences and diffusion-weighted sequences. JC virus DNA was detected in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), leading to a diagnosis of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). PML is a rare infectious demyelinating disease of the central nervous system caused by JC virus infection, occurring in highly immunosuppressed individuals such as HIV-infected patients and patients using some biological agents, and having a very poor prognosis. In the present case, PML may have been associated with steroid use, although there are very few case reports of PML in patients taking only steroids. We report progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy during steroid treatment of ANCA-RV. When patients show progressive disturbance of consciousness during treatment for ANCA-RV, we need to take PML into consideration for differential diagnosis.

negative: Potential Benefits and Harms of Novel Antidiabetic Drugs during COVID-19 Crisis Patients with diabetes have been reported to have enhanced susceptibility to severe or fatal COVID-19 infections, including a high risk of being admitted to intensive care units with respiratory failure and septic complications. Given the global prevalence of diabetes, affecting over 450 million people worldwide and still on the rise, the emerging COVID-19 crisis poses a serious threat to an extremely large vulnerable population. However, the broad heterogeneity and complexity of this dysmetabolic condition, with reference to etiologic mechanisms, degree of glycemic derangement and comorbid associations, along with the extensive sexual dimorphism in immune responses, can hamper any patient generalization. Even more relevant, and irrespective of glucose-lowering activities, DPP4 inhibitors and GLP1 receptor agonists may have a favorable impact on the modulation of viral entry and overproduction of inflammatory cytokines during COVID-19 infection, although current evidence is limited and not univocal. Conversely, SGLT2 inhibitors may increase the likelihood of COVID-19-related ketoacidosis decompensation among patients with severe insulin deficiency. Mindful of their widespread popularity in the management of diabetes, addressing potential benefits and harms of novel antidiabetic drugs to clinical prognosis at the time of a COVID-19 pandemic deserves careful consideration.

negative: Pangolin homology associated with 2019-nCoV To explore potential intermediate host of a novel coronavirus is vital to rapidly control continuous COVID-19 spread. We found genomic and evolutionary evidences of the occurrence of 2019-nCoV-like coronavirus (named as Pangolin-CoV) from dead Malayan Pangolins. Pangolin-CoV is 91.02% and 90.55% identical at the whole genome level to 2019-nCoV and BatCoV RaTG13, respectively. Pangolin-CoV is the lowest common ancestor of 2019-nCoV and RaTG13. The S1 protein of Pangolin-CoV is much more closely related to 2019-nCoV than RaTG13. Five key amino-acid residues involved in the interaction with human ACE2 are completely consistent between Pangolin-CoV and 2019-nCoV but four amino-acid mutations occur in RaTG13. It indicates Pangolin-CoV has similar pathogenic potential to 2019-nCoV, and would be helpful to trace the origin and probable intermediate host of 2019-nCoV.

negative: Efficacy of remdesivir versus placebo for the treatment of COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Background: In spite of the global containment on prevention efforts, the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is continuing to rise, with 1.1 million confirmed cases and 60,124 deaths recorded worldwide since 04 April 2020. The outbreak has a significant threat to international health and economy. At present, there is no approved vaccine or treatment for the disease, while efforts are underway. Remdesivir, a nucleotide-analogue antiviral drug developed for Ebola, is determined to prevent and stop infections with COVID-19, while results are yet controversial. Here, we aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the effectiveness of remdesivir and placebo in patients with COVID-19. Method and analysis: We will search MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google scholar databases without restriction in year of publication. We will include randomized controlled trials that assessed the effectiveness of remdesivir versus placebo for patients confirmed with COVID-19. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA 2015) guidelines for the design and reporting of the results. The primary endpoint will be time to clinical recovery. The secondary endpoints will be all cause mortality, discharged date, frequency of respiratory progression, and treatment-emergent adverse events. Two independent authors will perform study selection, data extraction, and methodology quality assessment. RevMan 5.3 software will be used for statistical analysis. Random/fixed effect model will be carried out to calculate mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes between remdesivir and placebo. Ethics and dissemination: This study does not require ethical approval, because no participants data will be involved in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The findings of this study will be published in reputable and peer-reviewed journal. Registration: This review protocol is submitted in PROSPERO database for registration and we will include the registration number in the revised version of the manuscript. Keywords: 2019 novel coronavirus, 2019-nCoV, Coronavirus diseases 2019, COVID-19, SARS-cov-2, Remdesivir, Randomized Controlled Trials. Systematic review, Meta-analysis, protocol

negative: The Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System in Coronavirus Infection – current considerations during the pandemic

negative: Repurposing cefuroxime for treatment of COVID-19: a scoping review of in silico studies Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), is a novel human Coronavirus that is responsible for about 300,000 deaths worldwide. To date, there is no confirmed treatment or vaccine prevention strategy against COVID-19. Due to the urgent need for effective treatment, drug repurposing is regarded as the immediate option. Potential drugs can often be identified via in silico drug screening experiments. Consequently, there has been an explosion of in silico experiments to find drug candidates or investigate anecdotal claims. One drug with several anecdotal accounts of benefit is Cefuroxime. The aim of this study was to identify and summarize in silico evidence for possible activity of Cefuroxime against SARS-CoV-2.To this end, we performed a scoping review of literature of in silico drug repurposing experiments for SARS-CoV-2 using PRISMA-ScR. We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, and Google Scholar for original studies published between 1st Feb, 2020 and 15th May, 2020 that screened drug libraries, and identified Cefuroxime as a top-ranked potential inhibitor drug against SARS-CoV-2 proteins. Six studies were identified. These studies reported Cefuroxime as a potential inhibitor of 3 key SARS-CoV-2 proteins; main protease, RNA dependent RNA polymerase, and ACE2-Spike complex. We provided a summary of the methodology and findings of the identified studies. Our scoping review identified significant in silico evidence that Cefuroxime may be a potential multi-target inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2. Further in vitro and in vivo studies are required to evaluate the potential of Cefuroxime for COVID-19. Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma

negative: Quantifying treatment effects of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for COVID-19: a secondary analysis of an open label non-randomized clinical trial (Gautret et al, 2020) Human infections with a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) were first identified via syndromic surveillance in December of 2019 in Wuhan China. Since identification, infections (coronavirus disease-2019; COVID-19) caused by this novel pathogen have spread globally, with more than 250,000 confirmed cases as of March 21, 2020. An open-label clinical trial has just concluded, suggesting improved resolution of viremia with use of two existing therapies: hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as monotherapy, and in combination with azithromycin (HCQ-AZ). The results of this important trial have major implications for global policy in the rapid scale-up and response to this pandemic. The authors present results with p-values for differences in proportions between the study arms, but their analysis is not able to provide effect size estimates. To address this gap, more modern analytical methods including survival models, have been applied to these data, and show modest to no impact of HCQ treatment, with more significant effects from the HCQ-AZ combination, potentially suggesting a role for co-infections in COVID-19 pathogenesis. The trial of Gautret and colleagues, with consideration of the effect sizes, and p-values from multiple models, does not provide sufficient evidence to support wide-scale rollout of HCQ monotherapy for the treatment of COVID-19; larger randomized studies should be considered. The trial of Gautret and colleagues, with consideration of the effect sizes, and p-values from multiple models, does not provide sufficient evidence to support wide-scale rollout of HCQ monotherapy for the treatment of COVID-19; larger randomized studies should be considered. These data also suggest further randomized-controlled studies of HCQ-AZ combination therapy should be undertaken.

negative: Treatment and preliminary outcomes of 150 acute care patients with COVID-19 in a rural health system in the Dakotas The majority of available US-published reports present populations with community spread in urban areas. The objective of this report is to describe a rural healthcare system's utilisation of therapeutic options available to treat Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and subsequent patient outcomes. A total of 150 patients were treated for COVID-19 at three hospitals in the Dakotas from 21 March 2020 to 30 April 2020. The most common pharmacological treatment regimens administered were zinc, hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin and convalescent plasma. Adjunctive treatments included therapeutic anticoagulation, tocilizumab and corticosteroids. As of 1 June 2020, 127 patients have survived to hospital discharge, 12 patients remain hospitalised and 11 patients have expired. The efficacy of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin use has yet to be determined but was not without risks of corrected QT interval prolongation and arrhythmias in our cohort. We did not appreciate any adverse effects that appeared related to tocilizumab or convalescent plasma administration in those patient subsets. These findings may provide insight into disease severity and treatment options in the rural setting with limited resources to participate in clinical trials and encourage larger comparative studies evaluating treatment efficacy.

negative: COVID-19 IN 7 MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS PATIENTS IN TREATMENT WITH ANTI-CD20 THERAPIES BACKGROUND AND AIM: In December 2019, the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were detected in Wuhan. Within two months, it had begun to spread around the world in what became an unprecedented pandemic. Patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) in a state of immunosuppression may be considered at risk for complications in the COVID-19 pandemic, although there is increasing evidence postulating a possible protective role of selective immunosuppression. One group of such immunosuppressants used in MS comprises the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) ocrelizumab and rituximab. Anti-CD20 mAbs bind to the surface of B cells, causing their depletion. We describe our experience in seven cases of patients with multiple sclerosis who have been affected by SARS-COV-2 (with a clinical/serological diagnosis or PCR diagnosis) and who were being treated with anti-CD20+ monoclonal antibodies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We review the development of patients during infection as well as the resolution of their clinical picture. We also analyze the serology status against SARS-CoV-2 after resolution of the infection. RESULTS: Although the severity of the clinical pictures was variable, patients' development was good. Not all patients, however, developed antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with anti-CD20+ have adequate resolution of COVID-19 despite the fact that the presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was not detected in all cases. It is possible that the presence of humoral immunity is not always necessary fora good clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

negative: Twitter activity about treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic: case studies of remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, and convalescent plasma. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, the public has been eager for news about promising treatments, and social media has played a large role in information dissemination. In this paper, our objectives are to characterize the public discussion of treatments on Twitter, and demonstrate the utility of these discussions for public health surveillance. We pulled tweets related to three promising COVID-19 treatments (hydroxychloroquine, remdevisir and convalescent plasma), between the dates of February 28th and May 22nd using the Twitter public API. We characterize treatment tweet trends over this time period. Most major tweet/retweet/sentiment trends correlated to public announcement made by the white house and/or to new clinical trial evidence about treatments. Most of the websites people shared in treatment-related tweets were non-scientific media sources that leaned conservative. Hydroxychloroquine was the most discussed treatment on Twitter, and over 10% of hydroxychloroquine tweets mentioned an adverse drug reaction. There is a gap between the public attention/discussion around COVID-19 treatments and their evidence. Twitter data can and should be used public health surveillance during this pandemic, as it is informative for monitoring adverse drug reactions, especially as many people avoid going to hospitals/doctors.

negative: Letter To the Editor: [Our Response to COVID-19 as Endocrinologists and Diabetologists]

negative: Viruses as precipitants of asthma symptoms. I. Epidemiology Christopher Robin had wheezles and sneezles, they bundled him into his bed. They gave him what goes with a cold in the nose, and some more for a cold in the head. They wondered if wheezles could turn into measles, if measles would turn into mumps; They examined his chest for a rash, and the rest of his body for swellings and lumps. They sent for some doctors in sneezles and wheezles, to tell them what ought to be done. All sorts and conditions of famous physicians came hurrying round at a run. They all made a note of the state of his throat, they asked if he suffered from thirst; They asked if the sneezles came after the wheezles, or if the first sneezle came first. They said, ‘If you teazle a sneezle or wheezle, a measle may easily grow. But humour or pleazle the wheezle or sneezle, the measle will certainly go.’ They expounded the reazles for sneezles and wheezles, the manner of measles when new. They said ‘If he freezles in draughts and in breezles, then PHTHEEZLES may even ensue.’ Christopher Robin got up in the morning, the sneezles had vanished away. And the look in his eye seemed to say to the sky, ‘Now, how to amuse them today?’ A. A. Milne, Now We Are Six, 1927.

negative: QT prolongation in a diverse, urban population of COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, or azithromycin PURPOSE: Hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, and azithromycin have been used for treatment of COVID-19, but may cause QT prolongation. Minority populations are disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. This study evaluates the risk of QT prolongation and subsequent outcomes after administration of these medications in largely underrepresented minority COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We conducted an observational study on hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the Montefiore Health System (Bronx, NY). We examined electrocardiograms (ECG) pre/post-medication initiation to evaluate QTc, HR, QRS duration, and presence of other arrhythmias. RESULTS: One hundred five patients (mean age 67 years; 44.8% F) were analyzed. The median time from the first dose of any treatment to post-medication ECG was 2 days (IQR: 1–3). QTc in men increased from baseline (440 vs 455 ms, p < 0.001), as well as in women (438 vs 463 ms, p < 0.001). The proportion of patients with QT prolongation increased significantly (14.3% vs 34.3%, p < 0.001) even when adjusted for electrolyte abnormalities. The number of patients whose QTc > 500 ms was significantly increased after treatment (16.2% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.01). Patients with either QTc > 500 ms or an increase of 60 ms had a higher frequency of death (47.6% vs. 22.6%, p = 0.02) with an odds ratio of 3.1 (95% CI: 1.1–8.7). Adjusting for race/ethnicity yielded no significant associations. CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, and/or azithromycin were associated with QTc prolongation but did not result in fatal arrhythmias. Our findings suggest that any harm is unlikely to outweigh potential benefits of treatment. Careful risk-benefit analyses for individual patients should guide the use of these medications. Randomized control trials are necessary to evaluate their efficacies.

negative: The effect of dexamethasone-induced immunosuppression on the development of faecal antibody and recovery from and resistance to rotavirus infection Rotavirus-naive and rotavirus-immune gnotobiotic calves were treated with high doses of dexamethasone (DX) to suppress the immune system. Calves were then infected with a virulent rotavirus inoculum, J-160, to investigate the role of immune responses both in recovery from primary rotavirus infection and in resistance to secondary rotavirus infection. Treatment of calves with DX markedly suppressed in vitro responsiveness of peripheral blood lymphocytes to mitogens within 48 h of the start of DX treatment. Suppression was similar in rotavirus-naive and rotavirus-immune calves. In contrast, the effect of DX treatment on specific antibody responses differed depending on when DX treatment started in relation to rotavirus infection. When DX treatment commenced prior to primary rotavirus infection both systemic and local specific antibody responses were inhibited. These calves, in which mitogen and antibody responses were suppressed, exhibited greater clinical signs than did control calves after infection with virulent rotavirus, but virus excretion was affected in only one of the two calves. When DX treatment was started after primary rotavirus infection but before secondary infection, systemic and local antibody responses to the primary infection and to the challenge infection were not affected. These calves resisted challenge with virulent virus as did DX-untreated rotavirus-immune calves, even though mitogen responses were suppressed. We conclude that in a primary rotavirus infection, virus excretion ceased when both antibody and mitogen responses were suppressed. Resistance to secondary rotavirus infection occurred when mitogen responsiveness was suppressed, but when antibody levels were normal. Thus, no evidence was obtained that fully functional cell-mediated immune mechanisms are essential for resistance to rotavirus infection. Evidence was provided for the ability of parenteral treatment with DX to suppress mucosal as well as systemic antibody responses.

negative: COVID-19, hypertension and cardiovascular diseases: Should we change the therapy? The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has spread all around the world in a very short period of time. Recent data are showing significant prevalence of arterial hypertension and cardiovascular diseases (CVD) among patients with COVID-19, which raised many questions about higher susceptibility of patients with these comorbidities to the novel coronavirus, as well as the role of hypertension and CVD in progression and the prognosis of COVID-19 patients. There is a very limited amount of data, usually obtained from a small population, regarding the effect of the underlying disease on the outcome in patients with COVID-19. The evaluation of the treatment of these comorbidities at baseline and during COVID-19 is scarce and the results are conflicting. Hypertension and CVD, after the adjustment for other clinical and demographic parameters, primarily age, did not remain independent predictors of the lethal outcome in COVID-19 patients. Some investigations speculated about the association between the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) and susceptibility to COVID-19, as well as the relationship between RAAS inhibitors and the adverse outcome in these patients. Withdrawing or switching RAAS inhibitors would have uncertain benefits, but it would definitely have many disadvantages such as uncontrolled hypertension, cardiac function deterioration and renal function impairment, which could potentially induce more complications in patients with COVID-19 than the infection of coronavirus itself. The aim of this review article was to summarize the prevalence of hypertension and CVD in patients with COVID-19, their influence on the outcome and the effect of treatment of hypertension and CVD in COVID-19 patients.

negative: Exercise in isolating during novel coronavirus 19 - A case report of bilateral ocular trauma from elastic resistant bands

negative: Common Pediatric Respiratory Emergencies Pediatric respiratory illnesses are a huge burden to emergency departments worldwide. This article reviews the latest evidence in the epidemiology, assessment, management, and disposition of children presenting to the emergency department with asthma, croup, bronchiolitis, and pneumonia.

negative: Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial Summary Background No specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models. Methods We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2–10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir–ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656. Findings Between Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87–1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95–2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early. Interpretation In this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies. Funding Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.

negative: Repositioning PARP inhibitors for SARS-CoV-2 infection(COVID-19); a new multi-pronged therapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome? Clinically approved PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have a mild adverse effect profile and are well tolerated as continuous daily oral therapy. We review the evidence that justifies the repurposing of PARPi to block the proliferation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and combat the life-threatening sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by several mechanisms. PARPi can effectively decrease IL-6, IL-1 and TNF-α levels (key interleukins in SARS-CoV-2-induced cytokine storm) and can alleviate subsequent lung fibrosis, as demonstrated in murine experiments and clinical trials. PARPi can tune macrophages towards a tolerogenic phenotype. PARPi may also counteract SARS-CoV-2-induced and inflammation-induced cell death and support cell survival. PARPi is effective in animal models of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), asthma and ventilator-induced lung injury. PARPi may potentiate the effectiveness of tocilizumab, anakinra, sarilumab, adalimumab, canakinumab or siltuximab therapy. The evidence suggests that PARPi would benefit COVID-19 patients and trials should be undertaken.

negative: Dexamethasone contributes to the patient management after ambulatory laryngeal microsurgery by reducing sore throat. This study was planned to evaluate the preventive effect of dexamethasone for sore throat after ambulatory laryngeal microsurgery. One hundred and ten patients scheduled for ambulatory laryngeal microsurgery under general anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups, group S1 and group D1. Patients in the group D1 were injected with 0.2 mg/kg of intravenous dexamethasone before the induction of anesthesia. The incidences and severities of sore throat were measured using verbal rating scale (VRS) at 1 h and through phone calls at 6 h after the operation. The patients who requested analgesics in the recovery room were measured VRS shortly before administration of medicine. The patients in group S1 and group D1 who did not receive rescue analgesics were enrolled in group S6 and group D6, respectively, and evaluated 6 h after the surgery. There were no significant differences in the incidence and severity scores of sore throat during 1 h after the end of operation between group S1 and group D1. But at 6 h, the patients in the group D6 had lower incidence of sore throat than those in group S6 significantly (P = 0.003). Furthermore, the patients in the group D6 had lower severity of sore throat than those in group S6 significantly at 6 h (P = 0.001). In conclusion, prophylactic administration of intravenous dexamethasone is appeared to have efficacy for the management of sore throat in the early post-discharge period following ambulatory laryngeal microsurgery.

negative: Cancer patients affected by COVID-19: Experience from Milan, Lombardy OBJECTIVE: SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is continuing to spread. There are growing concerns on the impact of COVID-19 in cancer patients. Several papers reporting recommendations and guidelines are published. But few data on cancer patients affected by COVID-19 are available. METHODS: This is a retrospective study including all consecutive patients affected by gynecological cancer who developed COVID-19. All patients were treated in an academic setting (in Milan, Lombardy, Italy) between February and March 2020. RESULTS: Overall, 355 patients had active treatment during the study period due to newly diagnosed or recurrent gynecological disease. Among those, 19 (5.3%) patients affected developed COVID-19. All patients were asymptomatic at the time of COVID-19 detection. Six patients were diagnosed before starting planned treatments; while the remaining 13 were diagnosed for COVID-19 after their started their treatments. Considering the first group of six patients, one patient died due to COVID-19 3 days after the diagnosis; while the other patients recovered from COVID-19 after a median of three weeks. The latter group of 13 patients (treatments started) included five patients who underwent surgery and eight patients who underwent chemotherapy. Focusing on five patients who were diagnosed after surgery, we observed that two patients died during postoperative course, while in other two cases prolonged hospitalization was needed. One patient had no issues. Chemotherapy was delayed for the remaining patents without sequelae. CONCLUSIONS: Our report highlights that COVID-19 impacts the quality of treatments for cancer patients. Mortality rate is high, especially after surgery. More important, patients under active treatment for cancer are at high risk of developing severe evolution of COVID-19. Prioritizing patients journey during COVID-19 is of paramount importance.

negative: Relapsing macrophage activating syndrome in a 15-year-old girl with Still's disease: a case report INTRODUCTION: Macrophage activating syndrome is a severe, potentially life-threatening condition that may accompany Still's disease. It is characterized by fever, hepatosplenomegaly, lymphadenopathy, severe cytopenia, serious liver dysfunction, coagulopathy and neurologic involvement. The principal treatment for patients with this syndrome includes etoposide 150 mg/2 M twice a week for two weeks, dexamethasone 10 mg/2 M for two weeks and cyclosporine 3 mg/kg to 5 mg/kg for a longer period. Cases of relapse of macrophage activating syndrome are relatively rare. CASE PRESENTATION: We describe the case of a 15-year-old Iraqi girl with Still's disease who developed macrophage activating syndrome with acute respiratory distress syndrome that required resuscitation and mechanical ventilation. Following intensive treatment, including high dose steroids and cyclosporine, the patient improved significantly. Two weeks after cyclosporine was discontinued, however, she was readmitted with an acute relapse of macrophage activating syndrome manifested by spiking fever, arthralgias, maculopapular rash and leukocytosis. This time the patient recovered following the reintroduction of treatment with cyclosporine and the addition of mycophenolate mofetil (Cellcept). CONCLUSION: We believe that cyclosporine is a cornerstone for the treatment of Still's disease. We recommend continuing this medication for several weeks following the patient's clinical recovery in order to prevent macrophage activating syndrome relapses.

negative: Pigment Epithelium-Derived Factor (PEDF) Protects Osteoblastic Cell Line from Glucocorticoid-Induced Apoptosis via PEDF-R Pigment epithelial-derived factor (PEDF) is known as a widely expressed multifunctional secreted glycoprotein whose biological actions are cell-type dependent. Recent studies demonstrated that PEDF displays cytoprotective activity in several cell types. However, it remains unknown whether PEDF is involved in glucocorticoid-induced osteoblast death. The aim of this study was to examine the role of PEDF in osteoblast survival in response to dexamethasone, an active glucocorticoid analogue, and explore the underlying mechanism. In the present study, dexamethasone (DEX) was used to induce MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblast apoptosis. PEDF mRNA and protein levels and cell apoptosis were determined respectively. Then PEDF receptor (PEDF-R)- and lysophosphatidic acid (LPA)-related signal transductions were assessed. Here we show that DEX down-regulates PEDF expression, which contributes to osteoblast apoptosis. As a result, exogenous recombinant PEDF (rPEDF) inhibited DEX-induced cell apoptosis. We confirmed that PEDF-R was expressed on MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblast membrane and could bind to PEDF which increased the level of LPA and activated the phosphorylation of Akt. Our results suggest that PEDF attenuated DEX-induced apoptosis in MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblasts through LPA-dependent Akt activation via PEDF-R.

negative: Pericarditis and myocarditis long after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a cross-sectional descriptive study in health-care workers Background: Cardiac sequelae of past SARS-CoV-2 infection are still poorly documented. We conducted a cross-sectional study in health-care workers to report evidence of pericarditis and myocarditis after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods We studied 139 health-care workers with confirmed past SARS-CoV-2 infection (103 diagnosed by RT-PCR and 36 by serology). Participants underwent clinical assessment, electrocardiography, laboratory tests including immune cell profiling and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging. Pericarditis was diagnosed when classical criteria were present, and the diagnosis of myocarditis was based on the updated CMR Lake-Louise-Criteria. Results: Median age was 52 years (IQR 41-57), 100 (72%) were women, and 23 (16%) were previously hospitalized for Covid-19 pneumonia. At examination (10.4 [9.3-11.0] weeks after infection-like symptoms), all participants presented hemodynamic stability. Chest pain, dyspnoea or palpitations were observed in 58 (42%) participants; electrocardiographic abnormalities in 69 (50%); NT-pro-BNP was elevated in 11 (8%); troponin in 1 (1%); and CMR abnormalities in 104 (75%). Isolated pericarditis was diagnosed in 4 (3%) participants, myopericarditis in 15 (11%) and isolated myocarditis in 36 (26%). Participants diagnosed by RT-PCR were more likely to still present symptoms than participants diagnosed by serology (73 [71%] vs 18 [50%]; p=0.027); nonetheless, the prevalence of pericarditis or myocarditis was high in both groups (44 [43%] vs 11 [31%]; p=0.238). Most participants (101 [73%]) showed altered immune cell counts in blood, particularly decreased eosinophil (37 [27%]; p<0.001) and increased CD4-CD8-/loT alpha beta-cell numbers (24 [17%]; p<0.001). Pericarditis was associated with elevated CD4-CD8-/loT alpha beta-cell numbers (p=0.011), while participants diagnosed with myopericarditis or myocarditis had lower (p<0.05) plasmacytoid dendritic cell, NK-cell and plasma cell counts and lower anti-SARS-CoV-2-IgG antibody levels (p=0.027). Conclusions: Pericarditis and myocarditis with clinical stability are frequent long after SARS-CoV-2 infection, even in presently asymptomatic subjects. These observations will probably apply to the general population infected and may indicate that cardiac sequelae might occur late in association with an altered (delayed) innate and adaptative immune response.

negative: Doxycycline as a potential partner of COVID-19 therapies Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a major public health challenge, and the current antiviral arsenal for treatment is limited, with questionable efficacy. Major efforts are under way for discovery of new effective agents, but the validation of new potential treatments for COVID-19 may take a long time. Therefore, the repurposing of existing drugs for new indications is needed. In this article, we argue for the potential benefits of using doxycycline with either hydroxycholoroquine or other putative agents for COVID-19 treatment, as doxycycline has antiviral and anti-inflammatory activities by dampening the cytokine storm and to prevent lung damage.

negative: COVID-19: global consequences for oncology

negative: Difference of coagulation features between severe pneumonia induced by SARS-CoV2 and non-SARS-CoV2 Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is commonly complicated with coagulopathy, the difference of coagulation features between severe pneumonia induced by SARS-CoV2 and non-SARS-CoV2 has not been analyzed. Coagulation results and clinical features of consecutive patients with severe pneumonia induced by SARS-CoV2 (COVID group) and non-SARS-CoV2 (non-COVID group) in Tongji hospital were retrospectively analyzed and compared. Whether patients with elevated D-dimer could benefit from anticoagulant treatment was evaluated. There were 449 COVID patients and 104 non-COVID patients enrolled into the study. The 28-day mortality in COVID group was approximately twofold of mortality in non-COVID group (29.8% vs. 15.4%, P = 0.003), COVID group were older (65.1 ± 12.0 vs. 58.4 ± 18.0, years, P < 0.001) and with higher platelet count (215 ± 100 vs. 188 ± 98, ×10(9)/L, P = 0.015), comparing to non-COVID group. The 28-day mortality of heparin users were lower than nonusers In COVID group with D-dimer > 3.0 μg/mL (32.8% vs. 52.4%, P = 0.017). Patients with severe pneumonia induced by SARS-CoV2 had higher platelet count than those induced by non-SARS-CoV2, and only the former with markedly elevated D-dimer may benefit from anticoagulant treatment.

negative: Critical Illness Stress-induced Immune Suppression Despite the use of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended practices to minimize infection risk, nosocomial sepsis and multiple organ failure (MOF) remain a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients. It is well documented that the use of immunosuppressant therapies dramatically increases this risk in patients with cancer, transplantation, and immunologic disease. Although immune monitoring has yet to be universally embraced, withdrawal of immunosuppressant therapies and use of immune restoration therapies is the standard of care when these patients develop sepsis. Critical illness stress can also induce a level of immunosuppression which is as life-threatening as is seen in the purposefully immunosuppressed patient. This chapter reviews the role of critical illness stress-induced immunosuppression in the development of nosocomial sepsis and MOF, and outlines clinical strategies which can be employed to maintain and restore immune function, and reduce morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients.

negative: SARS‐CoV‐2 and human milk: What is the evidence? The novel coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 has emerged as one of the most compelling and concerning public health challenges of our time. To address the myriad issues generated by this pandemic, an interdisciplinary breadth of research, clinical and public health communities has rapidly engaged to collectively find answers and solutions. One area of active inquiry is understanding the mode(s) of SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission. Although respiratory droplets are a known mechanism of transmission, other mechanisms are likely. Of particular importance to global health is the possibility of vertical transmission from infected mothers to infants through breastfeeding or consumption of human milk. However, there is limited published literature related to vertical transmission of any human coronaviruses (including SARS‐CoV‐2) via human milk and/or breastfeeding. Results of the literature search reported here (finalized on 17 April 2020) revealed a single study providing some evidence of vertical transmission of human coronavirus 229E; a single study evaluating presence of SARS‐CoV in human milk (it was negative); and no published data on MERS‐CoV and human milk. We identified 13 studies reporting human milk tested for SARS‐CoV‐2; one study (a non‐peer‐reviewed preprint) detected the virus in one milk sample, and another study detected SARS‐CoV‐2 specific IgG in milk. Importantly, none of the studies on coronaviruses and human milk report validation of their collection and analytical methods for use in human milk. These reports are evaluated here, and their implications related to the possibility of vertical transmission of coronaviruses (in particular, SARS‐CoV‐2) during breastfeeding are discussed.

negative: Dose-escalation trial of budesonide in surfactant for prevention of bronchopulmonary dysplasia in extremely low gestational age high-risk newborns (SASSIE) BACKGROUND: Initial trials of lung-targeted budesonide (0.25 mg/kg) in surfactant to prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in premature infants have shown benefit; however, the optimal safe dose is unknown. METHODS: Dose-escalation study of budesonide (0.025, 0.05, 0.10 mg/kg) in calfactatant in extremely low gestational age neonates (ELGANs) requiring intubation at 3−14 days. Tracheal aspirate (TA) cytokines, blood budesonide concentrations, and untargeted blood metabolomics were measured. Outcomes were compared with matched infants receiving surfactant in the Trial Of Late SURFactant (TOLSURF). RESULTS: Twenty-four infants with mean gestational age 25.0 weeks and 743 g birth weight requiring mechanical ventilation were enrolled at mean age 6 days. Budesonide was detected in the blood of all infants with a half-life of 3.4 h. Of 11 infants with elevated TA cytokine levels at baseline, treatment was associated with sustained decrease (mean 65%) at all three dosing levels. There were time- and dose-dependent decreases in blood cortisol concentrations and changes in total blood metabolites. Respiratory outcomes did not differ from the historic controls. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide/surfactant had no clinical respiratory benefit at any dosing levels for intubated ELGANs. One-tenth the dose used in previous trials had minimal systemic metabolic effects and appeared effective for lung-targeted anti-inflammatory action.

negative: COVID-19 in 7 multiple sclerosis patients in treatment with ANTI-CD20 therapies BACKGROUND AND AIM: In December 2019, the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were detected in Wuhan. Within two months, it had begun to spread around the world in what became an unprecedented pandemic. Patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) in a state of immunosuppression may be considered at risk for complications in the COVID-19 pandemic, although there is increasing evidence postulating a possible protective role of selective immunosuppression. One group of such immunosuppressants used in MS comprises the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) ocrelizumab and rituximab. Anti-CD20 mAbs bind to the surface of B cells, causing their depletion. We describe our experience in seven cases of patients with multiple sclerosis who have been affected by SARS-COV-2 (with a clinical/serological diagnosis or PCR diagnosis) and who were being treated with anti-CD20+ monoclonal antibodies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We review the development of patients during infection as well as the resolution of their clinical picture. We also analyze the serology status against SARS-CoV-2 after resolution of the infection. RESULTS: Although the severity of the clinical pictures was variable, patients' development was good. Not all patients, however, developed antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with anti-CD20+ have adequate resolution of COVID-19 despite the fact that the presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was not detected in all cases. It is possible that the presence of humoral immunity is not always necessary fora good clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

negative: Effects of topical dexamethasone in postoperative sore throat. BACKGROUND Postoperative sore throat (POST) is a complication that undermines patient satisfaction and increases discomfort in the postoperative period. The present study examined the effects of dexamethasone gargle and endotracheal tube cuff soaking on the incidence and severity of POST. METHODS Ninety patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly allocated into three groups: 0.9% normal saline gargling and tube soaking (group C), 0.05% dexamethasone solution gargling and 0.9% normal saline tube soaking (group G), 0.9% normal saline gargling and 0.05% dexamethasone tube soaking (group S). The incidence and severity of POST were then assessed and recorded at 24 hours after surgery. RESULTS The total incidence of POST was significantly different among the groups (P < 0.05), and group S exhibited a significantly lower incidence of POST than group C (P < 0.0167). In addition, the POST intensity of group G and group S was less severe than those of group C (Both P < 0.0167). CONCLUSIONS Among patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, those who gargled with 0.05% dexamethasone solution exhibited lower severity of POST than the control group, and those whose endotracheal tube cuff was soaked in the dexamethasone solution before intubation exhibited significantly lower incidence and severity of POST than the control group.

negative: Potential benefits and risks of omega-3 fatty acids supplementation to patients with COVID-19 Studies have shown that infection, excessive coagulation, cytokine storm, leukopenia, lymphopenia, hypoxemia and oxidative stress have also been observed in critically ill Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) patients in addition to the onset symptoms. There are still no approved drugs or vaccines. Dietary supplements could possibly improve the patient's recovery. Omega-3 fatty acids, specifically eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), present an anti-inflammatory effect that could ameliorate some patients need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. EPA and DHA replace arachidonic acid (ARA) in the phospholipid membranes. When oxidized by enzymes, EPA and DHA contribute to the synthesis of less inflammatory eicosanoids and specialized pro-resolving lipid mediators (SPMs), such as resolvins, maresins and protectins. This reduces inflammation. In contrast, some studies have reported that EPA and DHA can make cell membranes more susceptible to non-enzymatic oxidation mediated by reactive oxygen species, leading to the formation of potentially toxic oxidation products and increasing the oxidative stress. Although the inflammatory resolution improved by EPA and DHA could contribute to the recovery of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, Omega-3 fatty acids supplementation cannot be recommended before randomized and controlled trials are carried out.

negative: New insights on the antiviral effects of chloroquine against coronavirus: what to expect for COVID-19? ABSTRACT Recently, a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), officially known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), emerged in China. Despite drastic containment measures, the spread of this virus is ongoing. SARS-CoV-2 is the aetiological agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) characterised by pulmonary infection in humans. The efforts of international health authorities have since focused on rapid diagnosis and isolation of patients as well as the search for therapies able to counter the most severe effects of the disease. In the absence of a known efficient therapy and because of the situation of a public-health emergency, it made sense to investigate the possible effect of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine against SARS-CoV-2 since this molecule was previously described as a potent inhibitor of most coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-1. Preliminary trials of chloroquine repurposing in the treatment of COVID-19 in China have been encouraging, leading to several new trials. Here we discuss the possible mechanisms of chloroquine interference with the SARS-CoV-2 replication cycle.

negative: The effect of COVID-19 on global population and its fatality rate: Retrospective study by online database OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a current new virulent disease rising its transmission and fatality with each passing day in the worldwide population. COVID-19 is emerged as a respiratory infection and a suspicious origin of animals and transmission to human in Wuhan, China on December 2019. Later this, the virus was transmitted from person to person through droplets and contacts. The World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China have taken immediate action to reduce transmission and fatality associated with COVID-19 as minimum as possible. However, action has failed to stop transmission of COVID-19 from China to other countries. Since there was no chain break of the virus, the chances are more to increase the case number and fatality. Hence, the study has been designed to perceive the current effect of COVID-19 on the global population and its fatality. The study also focused on review related to treatment for COVID-19. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Online database of epidemic disease COVID-19 cases number was collected from www.channelnewsasia.com on 7(th) April 2020. This data was used to observe the past and present circumstances in the global population and its fatality. The effect of treatment on COVID-19 was reviewed from the few databases of clinical trials (antiviral and antibacterial drugs). RESULTS: The online data are used to observe a significant increase ratio of COVID-19 cases and its fatality rate in worldwide as well as country wise. The COVID-19 cases are high in the United States (27.5%), whereas the fatality rate is high in Italy (12.47%). The prevalence of COVID-19 is expected to be reaching 4 million by the end of April 2020 and the fatality rate also might be reached high. CONCLUSION: We have come to the conclusion that the effect of COVID-19 on the global population is significantly increased and the fatality rate also elevated (2.48% to 5.52%). The hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin combination treatment has shown significant improvement in patients with COVID-19 compared to treat with other drugs.

negative: Molecular targets for COVID-19 drug development: Enlightening Nigerians about the pandemic and future treatment There is little or no research initiated on enlightening Nigerians about the pathogenesis, targets for drug development, and drug repositioning for SARS-CoV-2 infection. COVID-19 is a viral infection causing symptoms like dry cough, sore throat, nasal congestion, tiredness, fever, loss of taste and smell etc. Th disease was first reported in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. The infection is caused by SARS-CoV-2, which is the third introduction of a highly pathogenic coronavirus into the human population. Coronaviruses are viruses with a positive RNA envelope assigned to α, β, γ, and δ genera. Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 belongs to the β genus. The four structural proteins of β coronavirus are membrane (M), envelope (E), spike (S), and nucleocapsid (N) protein, mediation of coronavirus host infection is established by spike (S) protein. Therefore, the search for drug development targets and repositioning of existing therapeutics is essential for fighting the present pandemic. It was reviewed that therapeutics targeting SARS-CoV-2 binding to ACE2 receptor, viral RNA synthesis and replication, 3CLpro, RdRp, and helicase will play a crucial role in the development of treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Furthermore, the RdRp and spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 are the most promising targets for drug development and repositioning and vaccine development. Remdesivir combination with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine are promising drug repositioning for the treatment of COVID-19, and mRNA-1273 targeting spike protein is the promising vaccine. However, as patient management and drug repositioning are taking place, it is imperative to identify other promising targets used by SARS-CoV-2 to establish infection, to develop novel therapeutics.

negative: Corticosteroids combined with continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration for treatment of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome caused by Puumala virus infection Reported here are two cases of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome caused by Puumala virus infection, which rapidly resolved after initiation of corticosteroid treatment combined with continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration. These cases emphasize the role of the inflammatory response in the pathogenesis of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome.

negative: Remdesivir in treatment of COVID-19: A systematic benefit-risk assessment Background: There is a need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) rapidly, given the current, ongoing pandemic. A systematic benefit-risk assessment was designed and conducted to strengthen the ongoing understanding of the benefit-risk balance for remdesivir in COVID-19 treatment by using a structured method which uses all available data. Methods: The Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used to assess the overall benefit-risk of the use of remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19 compared to standard of care, placebo or other treatments. We searched PubMed,Google Scholar and government agency websites to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking remdesivir for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. Results: Several key benefits and risks for use of remdesivir in COVID-19 compared to placebo have been identified. In one trial, the benefit of time to clinical improvement was not statistically significant (21 vs 23 days, HR=1.23, 95% CI: 0.87, 1.75), although the study was underpowered. In another trial, a shorter time to recovery in patients treated with remdesivir was observed (11 vs 15 days), with non-significant reduced mortality risk (8% vs 12%). Risk data were only available from one trial. This trial reported fewer serious adverse events in patients taking remdesivir (18%) comparted to the placebo group (26%), however more patients in the remdesivir group discontinued treatment as a result of an adverse event compared to those patients receiving placebo (12% vs 5%). Conclusions: Preliminary clinical trial results suggest a favourable benefit-risk profile for remdesivir compared to placebo, however there is limited safety data available at the current time. The current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks for which further data are needed. Ongoing clinical trial data can be incorporated into the framework when available to provide an updated benefit-risk assessment.

negative: Identifying and managing osteoporosis before and after COVID-19: rise of the remote consultation? SUMMARY: The COVID-19 pandemic is influencing methods of healthcare delivery. In this short review, we discuss the evidence for remote healthcare delivery in the context of osteoporosis. INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly had, and will continue to have, a significant impact on the lives of people living with, and at risk of, osteoporosis and those caring for them. With osteoporosis outpatient and Fracture Liaison Services on pause, healthcare organisations have already moved to delivering new and follow-up consultations remotely, where staffing permits, by telephone or video. METHODS: In this review, we consider different models of remote care delivery, the evidence for their use, and the possible implications of COVID-19 on osteoporosis services. RESULTS: Telemedicine is a global term used to describe any use of telecommunication systems to deliver healthcare from a distance and encompasses a range of different scenarios from remote clinical data transfer to remote clinician-patient interactions. Across a range of conditions and contexts, there remains unclear evidence on the acceptability of telemedicine and the effect on healthcare costs. Within the context of osteoporosis management, there is some limited evidence to suggest telemedicine approaches are acceptable to patients but unclear evidence on whether telemedicine approaches support informed drug adherence. Gaps in the evidence pertain to the acceptability and benefits of using telemedicine in populations with hearing, cognitive, or visual impairments and in those with limited health literacy. CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for further health service evaluation and research to address the impact of remote healthcare delivery during COVID-19 outbreak on patient care, and in the longer term, to identify acceptability and cost- and clinical-effectiveness of remote care delivery on outcomes of relevance to people living with osteoporosis.

negative: Off-Label Real World Experience Using Tocilizumab for Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 Disease in a Regional Community Health System: A Case-Control Study Objective: To determine if Tocilizumab treatment in patients hospitalized with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent COVID-19 disease provides short-term survival benefit. Design: Case-control, observational study that includes an observation period from arrival to discharge or inpatient death. Both Cox proportional hazards and average treatment effects models were used to determine survival and treatment benefits. Setting: Three Cone Health acute care hospitals including one COVID dedicated facility. Patients: Patients admitted with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 from March 16, 2020 through April 22, 2020. Exposure: Tocilizumab dosed at either 400 mg fixed dose or 8 mg/kg weight-based dose with maximum single dose of 800mg. Measurements and Main Results: Overall, 86 patients were admitted during the observation period with confirmed COVID-19 disease. Of these, 21 received Tocilizumab during the hospital stay. Both the Cox model and treatment effects models showed short-term survival benefit. There was an associated 75% reduction in the risk of inpatient death when treated (HR 0.25; 95% CI 0.07-0.90) in the Cox model. This association was confirmed in the treatment effects model where we found a 52.7% reduced risk of dying while hospitalized compared to those not treated (RR 0.472; 95% CI 0.449-0.497). In both models, we show short-term survival benefit in patients with severe COVID-19 illness.

negative: Hämophagozytische Lymphohistiozytose bei unspezifischer Virusinfektion Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH), also known as hemophagocytic syndrome or macrophage activation syndrome within a pre-existing rheumatological disease, remains undiagnosed in over 70% of all cases in intensive care units (ICU) due to the sepsis-like clinical presentation. This report describes the case of a 30-year-old previously healthy male patient who was admitted to the normal infectiology ward of the Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin with unclear fever after a 3‑month journey around Asian and South America. The patient was transferred to the ICU after 3 days because of respiratory failure. Due to the immediate diagnostics of HLH and initiation of specific immunosuppressive treatment with dexamethasone, immunoglobulins and anakinra, the patient completely recovered and could finally be discharged after a 2‑week stay in hospital. Furthermore, the current diagnostic and therapeutic options are discussed. Ferritin is a decisive diagnostic marker that should be determined in every patient with unclear organ failure.

negative: New insights in equine steroidogenesis: an in-depth look at steroid signaling in the placenta Steroid production varies widely among species, with these differences becoming more pronounced during pregnancy. As a result, each species has its own distinct pattern of steroids, steroidogenic enzymes, receptors, and transporters to support its individual physiological requirements. Although the circulating steroid profile is well characterized during equine pregnancy, there is much yet to be explored regarding the factors that support steroidogenesis and steroid signaling. To obtain a holistic view of steroid-related transcripts, we sequenced chorioallantois (45 days, 4 months, 6 months, 10 months, 11 months, and post-partum) and endometrium (4 months, 6 months, 10 months, 11 months, and diestrus) throughout gestation, then looked in-depth at transcripts related to steroid synthesis, conjugation, transportation, and signaling. Key findings include: 1) differential expression of HSD17B isoforms among tissues (HSD17B1 high in the chorioallantois, while HSD17B2 is the dominant form in the endometrium) 2) a novel isoform with homology to SULT1A1 is the predominant sulfotransferase transcript in the chorioallantois; and 3) nuclear estrogen (ESR1, ESR2) and progesterone (PGR) expression is minimal to nonexistant in the chorioallantois and pregnant endometrium. Additionally, several hypotheses have been formed, including the possibility that the 45-day chorioallantois is able to synthesize steroids de novo from acetate and that horses utilize glucuronidation to clear estrogens from the endometrium during estrous, but not during pregnancy. In summary, these findings represent an in-depth look at equine steroid-related transcripts through gestation, providing novel hypotheses and future directions for equine endocrine research.

negative: Covid-19: what treatments are being investigated?

negative: Anti-Inflammatory and Anti-Allergic Activities of Pentaherb Formula, Moutan Cortex (Danpi) and Gallic Acid Pentaherb formula (PHF) has been proven to improve the quality of life of children with atopic dermatitis without side effects. The aim of this study was to elucidate the potential anti-inflammatory and anti-allergic activities of PHF, Moutan Cortex (Danpi/DP) and gallic acid (GA) using human basophils (KU812 cells), which are crucial effector cells in allergic inflammation. PHF, DP and GA could significantly suppress the expression of allergic inflammatory cytokine IL-33-upregulated intercellular adhesion molecule (ICAM)-1, and the release of chemokines CCL2, CCL5, CXCL8 and inflammatory cytokine IL-6 from KU812 cells (all p < 0.05). With the combined use of dexamethasone (0.01 μg/mL) and GA (10 μg/mL), the suppression of ICAM-1 expression and CCL5 and IL-6 release of IL-33-activated KU812 cells were significantly greater than the use of GA alone (all p < 0.05). The suppression of the IL-33-induced activation of intracellular signalling molecules p38 mitogen activated protein kinase, nuclear factor-κB and c-Jun amino-terminal kinase in GA-treated KU812 cells could be the underlying mechanism for the suppression on ICAM-1, chemokines and cytokines. The combined use of dexamethasone with the natural products PHF or DP or GA might therefore enhance the development of a novel therapeutic modality for allergic inflammatory diseases with high potency and fewer side effects.

negative: The use of debates as an active learning tool in a college of pharmacy healthcare delivery course Abstract Background and purpose To describe the use of debates, and to evaluate student performance and perceptions, when student debates are incorporated as an active learning tool in a required pharmacy healthcare delivery course. Educational activity and setting Student live debates replaced 15% of a traditional lecture-based course. Twelve healthcare controversies were debated by student teams each year. Student perception of debate utility and opinion on topics, pre- and post-debate, were measured via a voluntary survey. Both peer and instructor's assessments of team performances, as well as individual student performance on the debate-based questions on course exams, contributed to course grade. Findings The average survey response rates were 76% (2014) and 86% (2015). Fifteen-54% of student respondents changed their opinion on individual debate topics due to the debates. Although exam performance on debate-based questions was no better than on lecture-based questions, respondents who found the debates useful or very useful in mastering course material increased by 19% post versus pre-debate surveys. Summary Debates are an effective active learning tool for engaging students in controversial subjects. Assessment of student performance should include student and instructor evaluations, and can be incorporated into the course grade.

negative: “Monoclonal-Type” Plastic Antibodies for COVID-19 Treatment: What Is the Idea? In late December 2019, an outbreak due to a novel coronavirus, initially called 2019-nCoV, was reported in Wuhan, China [...].

negative: 19 treatment regimens? Abstract The pandemic of COVID-19 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) poses a significant threat to global health. Currently, no specific prophylactic and therapeutic treatment is available. No evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that a treatment may ameliorate the clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19 exists with the only exception of preliminary evidence from remdesivir trials. Here, we present evidence from the literature and a compelling hypothesis on the potential immunomodulatory, iron chelating and anti-oxidant effects of iron chelators in the treatment of COVID-19 and its complications. Interestingly, iron chelation has been shown in vitro to suppress endothelial inflammation in viral infection, which is the main pathophysiologic mechanism behind systemic organ involvement induced by SARS-CoV-2, by inhibiting IL-6 synthesis through decreasing NF-kB. Iron chelators exhibit iron chelating, antiviral and immunomodulatory effects in vitro and in vivo, particularly against RNA viruses. These agents could attenuate ARDS and help control SARS-CoV-2 via multiple mechanisms including: 1) inhibition of viral replication; 2) decrease of iron availability; 3) upregulation of B cells; 4) improvement of the neutralizing anti-viral antibody titer; 5) inhibition of endothelial inflammation and 6) prevention of pulmonary fibrosis and lung decline via reduction of pulmonary iron accumulation. Both retrospective analyses of data in electronic health records, as well as proof of concept studies in humans and large RCTs are needed to fully elucidate the efficacy and safety of iron chelating agents in the therapeutic armamentarium of COVID-19, probably as an adjunctive treatment.

negative: Potential impact of COVID-19 on colorectal disease management Abstract The current recommendations for management of colorectal diseases are still evolving, due to the limited experience on this issue. As the new coronavirus can be transmitted through breath droplets, by contact and orofecally, there is no consensus of how this fact may affect the investigation and treatment of anorectal diseases. Thus, high-quality multicenter studies are urgently needed to provide better information to both patients and the multiprofessional team, in order to build an effective pandemic response plan in our specialty. As a greater operative risk for infected patients has already been demonstrated, the next step lies on the identification of new therapeutic strategies that could minimize this effect on an individual basis. There is a present understanding that the COVID-19 pandemic should change some traditional practices. Therefore, the surgical treatment of suspected or known COVID-19 case demands specific insights. This article analyses potential influences regarding the treatment of patients with Colorectal Cancer (CRC) and Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD). At present, elective surgery must be avoided, and the colorectal surgeon must carefully evaluate the risks and benefits of such decision. Within this context, a change towards nonsurgical and less aggressive modalities of CRC treatment may help to postpone definitive treatment. We also discuss the concerns regarding the viral infection among the IBD population, the influence on clinical symptoms and the proposed modifications on therapeutic schemes.

negative: Malaria and the HIV virus: is there any interaction?

negative: CryptoDex: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial of adjunctive dexamethasone in HIV-infected adults with cryptococcal meningitis: study protocol for a randomised control trial BACKGROUND: Cryptococcal meningitis (CM) is a severe AIDS-defining illness with 90-day case mortality as high as 70% in sub-Saharan Africa, despite treatment. It is the leading cause of death in HIV patients in Asia and Africa. No major advance has been made in the treatment of CM since the 1970s. The mainstays of induction therapy are amphotericin B and flucytosine, but these are often poorly available where the disease burden is highest. Adjunctive treatments, such as dexamethasone, have had dramatic effects on mortality in other neurologic infections, but are untested in CM. Given the high death rates in patients receiving current optimal treatment, and the lack of new agents on the horizon, adjuvant treatments, which offer the potential to reduce mortality in CM, should be tested. The principal research question posed by this study is as follows: does adding dexamethasone to standard antifungal therapy for CM reduce mortality? Dexamethasone is a cheap, readily available, and practicable intervention. METHOD: A double-blind placebo-controlled trial with parallel arms in which patients are randomised to receive either dexamethasone or placebo, in addition to local standard of care. The study recruits patients in both Asia and Africa to ensure the relevance of its results to the populations in which the disease burden is highest. The 10-week mortality risk in the control group is expected to be between 30% and 50%, depending on location, and the target hazard ratio of 0.7 corresponds to absolute risk reductions in mortality from 30% to 22%, or from 50% to 38%. Assuming an overall 10-week mortality of at least 30% in our study population, recruitment of 824 patients will be sufficient to observe the expected number of deaths. Allowing for some loss to follow-up, the total sample size for this study is 880 patients. To generate robust evidence across both continents, we aim to recruit roughly similar numbers of patients from each continent. The primary end point is 10-week mortality. Ethical approval has been obtained from Oxford University’s Tropical Research Ethics Committee (OxTREC), and as locally mandated at each site. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN59144167 26-July-2012

negative: COVID‐19‐associated immune thrombocytopenia Thrombocytopenia is a risk factor for increased morbidity and mortality in patients with the new severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus, SARS‐CoV‐2 infection (COVID‐19 infection).(1) Thrombocytopenia in COVID‐19 patients may be caused by disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), sepsis or drug‐induced. Recently a single case report suggested immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) may be associated with COVID‐19 infection.(2) ITP is a rare autoimmune disease characterized by a platelet count < 100x10(9)/L, leading to an increased bleeding risk.(3) Several risk factors have been described for ITP including environmental (e.g. infection, malignancy and drugs) and genetic predisposition.(4) We report here the first case series of three patients with ITP associated with COVID‐19 infection.

negative: Inhibition of cytokine signaling by ruxolitinib and implications for COVID-19 treatment Approximately 15% of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience severe disease, and 5% progress to critical stage that can result in rapid death. No vaccines or antiviral treatments have yet proven effective against COVID-19. Patients with severe COVID-19 experience elevated plasma levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, which can result in cytokine storm, followed by massive immune cell infiltration into the lungs leading to alveolar damage, decreased lung function, and rapid progression to death. As many of the elevated cytokines signal through Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2, inhibition of these pathways with ruxolitinib has the potential to mitigate the COVID-19–associated cytokine storm and reduce mortality. This is supported by preclinical and clinical data from other diseases with hyperinflammatory states, where ruxolitinib has been shown to reduce cytokine levels and improve outcomes. The urgent need for treatments for patients with severe disease support expedited investigation of ruxolitinib for patients with COVID-19.

negative: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Cancer Patients The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become the most talked-about clinical entity in early 2020. As an infection that spreads easily and has a significant mortality rate, it has caused global panic rarely seen before. Many of the measures taken by governments worldwide will have long-lasting impacts on the wellbeing of the population at large. It has been widely reported that the most vulnerable patients have been most negatively affected by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). In this study, we have tried to search the currently available data on the outcomes of infected cancer patients. Most of the data points to the very challenging nature of treating such patients. Their overall outcomes seem to be worse than in the general population, and it may be difficult to differentiate which potential complications are a result of the primary oncologic disease versus the infection. Management presents its own set of challenges, including but not limited to, deciding whether postponing cancer treatment until the infection resolves is going to benefit the patient and how to organize all aspects of patient care when social contact is as limited as it is for patients newly diagnosed with COVID-19. We believe that as more data becomes available, it is going to be necessary to publish detailed guidelines on how to approach this unique clinical challenge.

negative: Cromolyns: treatment for the common cold?

negative: Glycyrrhizin Inhibits Interleukin-8 Production and Nuclear Factor–κ B Activity in Lung Epithelial Cells, but Not Through Glucocorticoid Receptors Abstract This study was designed to examine the glucocorticoid-like inhibitory effect of glycyrrhizin (GL) on interleukin (IL)-8 production in A549 lung epithelial cells. GL, as well as dexamethasone (DEX) inhibited both tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α –and IL-1β –induced IL-8 production, mRNA expression, and promoter activity in A549 cells. Both GL and DEX inhibited transactivation of nuclear factor (NF)-κ B, without inhibiting translocation of the NF-κ B p65 subunit to the nucleus. However, the effect of GL was insensitive to RU486, a GR antagonist, and to GR knockdown by siRNA. Furthermore, only GL inhibited DNA binding of p65 to the IL-8 promoter region. These findings indicated that GL had a glucocorticoid-like inhibitory effect on IL-8 production via a mechanism that differs from that of glucocorticoids.

negative: Therapeutic efficacy of Qingfei Paidu decoction combined with antiviral drugs in the treatment of corona virus disease 2019: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis. BACKGROUND The corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a global pandemic, there are no specific drugs and vaccines for epidemic control at present. More and more clinical practice shows that traditional Chinese medicine has played an important role in the outbreak. Among them, Qingfei Paidu decoction (QPD) combined with antiviral drugs can enhance the therapeutic efficacy for COVID-19. However, there is still a lack of comprehensive and systematic evidence, which urgently requires us to verify its therapeutic efficacy. Hence, we provide a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS We will search the studies in MEDLINE/PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, VIP database, the Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Database and Chinese Science Citation Database. Searches are limited to clinical studies published in Chinese and English. Next, the quality of each study is assessed according to the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Then, the outcome data are recorded and pooled by Review Manager 5.3 and STATA 16.0 software. RESULTS The systematic review and meta-analysis aims to review and pool current clinical outcomes of QPD combined with antiviral drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. CONCLUSION This study will provide a high-quality evidence of QPD for the treatment on COVID-19 patients. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42020182409.

negative: Anti-inflammatory effect of Houttuynia cordata injection Abstract Houttuynia cordata (Saururaceae) injection (HCI) is a traditional Chinese medicine used in China. It was chosen as one of eight types of traditional Chinese medicine that play a unique role in severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) owing to the effect of curbing inflammation. In order to validate this plausible anti-inflammatory property, the chemical composition of HCI has been analysed by GC/MS, 22 components were identified, and the inflammation induced by carrageenan in the rat pleurisy model and by xylene in the mice ear edema model was adopted to study the anti-inflammatory activity of HCI. Injection of carrageenan into the pleural cavity elicited an acute inflammatory response characterized by protein rich fluid accumulation and leukocyte infiltration in the pleural cavity. The peak inflammatory response was obtained at 24h when the fluid volume, protein concentration, C-reactive protein and cell infiltration were maximums. The results showed that these parameters were attenuated by HCI at any dose and touched bottom at dose of 0.54ml/100g, although less strong than dexamethasone. This drug was also effective in inhibiting xylene induced ear edema, and the percentage of inhibition came to 50% at dose of 80μl/20g. The results clearly indicate that HCI have anti-inflammatory activity.

negative: Effects of Tocilizumab in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Quasi-Experimental Study Critically ill patients with COVID-19 may suffer from a cytokine release syndrome (CRS) characterized by remarkably high levels of interleukin 6 (IL-6). We assessed the effects of tocilizumab, an IL-6 receptor antagonist, on intra-hospital mortality and development of positive cultures in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU. In this study, patients with COVID 19 admitted in the ICU who were treated with tocilizumab plus standard care were enrolled and compared to controls. Main outcome: 1) intra-hospital mortality; Secondary Outcomes: 1) the need for renal replacement therapy, 2) use of antibiotics and positive culture, and 3) inflammatory and oxygenation markers. Results: There was no difference in mortality, need for renal replacement therapy, use of antibiotics or positive cultures between the two groups. The use of corticosteroids was more frequent in the treatment group. Levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and WBC (white blood cells) counts declined significantly faster in the treatment group. Oxygenation markers rose significantly higher in patients in the tocilizumab group as compared to controls. Conclusion: tocilizumab was associated with rapid improvement in oxygenation and a faster decrease of CRP and WBC counts in patients with COVID-19 and should be evaluated as rescue therapy for patients with progressive disease

negative: Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine for Treatment or Prophylaxis of COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review. BACKGROUND Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have antiviral effects in vitro against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). PURPOSE To summarize evidence about the benefits and harms of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the treatment or prophylaxis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DATA SOURCES PubMed (via MEDLINE), EMBASE (via Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, bioRxiv, Preprints, ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry from 1 December 2019 until 8 May 2020. STUDY SELECTION Studies in any language reporting efficacy or safety outcomes from hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine use in any setting in adults or children with suspected COVID-19 or at risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. DATA EXTRACTION Independent, dually performed data extraction and quality assessments. DATA SYNTHESIS Four randomized controlled trials, 10 cohort studies, and 9 case series assessed treatment effects of the medications, but no studies evaluated prophylaxis. Evidence was conflicting and insufficient regarding the effect of hydroxychloroquine on such outcomes as all-cause mortality, progression to severe disease, clinical symptoms, and upper respiratory virologic clearance with antigen testing. Several studies found that patients receiving hydroxychloroquine developed a QTc interval of 500 ms or greater, but the proportion of patients with this finding varied among the studies. Two studies assessed the efficacy of chloroquine; 1 trial, which compared higher-dose (600 mg twice daily for 10 days) with lower-dose (450 mg twice daily on day 1 and once daily for 4 days) therapy, was stopped owing to concern that the higher dose therapy increased lethality and QTc interval prolongation. An observational study that compared adults with COVID-19 receiving chloroquine phosphate 500 mg once or twice daily with patients not receiving chloroquine found minor fever resolution and virologic clearance benefits with chloroquine. LIMITATION There were few controlled studies, and control for confounding was inadequate in observational studies. CONCLUSION Evidence on the benefits and harms of using hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19 is very weak and conflicting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

negative: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative impact of the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on outcomes important to patients with COVID 19. DESIGN: This is the protocol of a living systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), trial registries, grey literature and in a centralised repository in L-OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L-OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L-OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS: We will follow a common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews, already published and submitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation). We will include randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine - as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs - versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will perform random-effects meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it if the conclusions change or there are substantial updates. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.

negative: Efficacy and safety of multiple doses of NEPA without dexamethasone in preventing nausea and vomiting induced by multiple-day and high-dose chemotherapy in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a phase IIa, multicenter study. Despite the availability of several antiemetics, clinical findings show that control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) continues to be a serious concern for hematological patients, mainly for those receiving multiple-day (MD) and high-dose (HD) chemotherapy (CT). For CINV prophylaxis, 5-hydroxytryptamine type-3 receptor antagonists (5HT3-RAs) and neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists (NK1-RAs) are usually administered together with dexamethasone, which may increase the risk of serious infections in patients undergoing myeloablative treatment. The rationale of this multicenter, open-label and phase IIa study was to explore the efficacy of multiple doses of NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) given as an every-other-day regimen without dexamethasone in preventing CINV in patients with relapsed-refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (R/R-NHL), eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and treated with MD-HD-CT. Seventy patients participated to the study. According to the adopted Fleming one-stage design, the primary endpoint of this study was achieved. The CR values were 87.1% (primary endpoint, overall phase: days 1-8), 88.6% (acute phase: days 1-6), and 98.6% (delayed phase: days 7-8), while complete control (CR with no more than mild nausea) was 85.7% (overall phase), 88.6% (acute phase), and 95.7% (delayed phase). Moderate and severe episodes of nausea were reported by less than 10% of patients in the overall phase and less than 5% in both the acute and delayed phases. Regarding safety, NEPA was well tolerated with only one adverse event (constipation) evaluated as possibly related to NEPA administration. In conclusion, our study demonstrated that multiple alternate dosing of NEPA without the addition of dexamethasone is highly effective for preventing nausea and vomiting in this difficult setting, with a good tolerability profile.

negative: Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in Disguise Novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) pandemic is currently one of the most influential topics as it not only impacts the field of medicine but most importantly, it affects the lives of many individuals throughout the world. We report an interesting 2019-nCoV case in a tertiary community hospital with the initial concern of acute pyelonephritis without respiratory symptoms that ultimately led to the quarantine of a number of healthcare providers. This case emphasizes the importance of radiological evidence in diagnosing 2019-nCoV in the setting of an initial atypical presentation. It also serves as an example of how healthcare providers may need to increase their suspicion for COVID-19 to ensure self-protection and prompt diagnosis in the era of an ongoing pandemic.

negative: No evidence for the effectiveness of systemic corticosteroids in acute pharyngitis, community-acquired pneumonia and acute otitis media Corticosteroids have been used to treat infectious diseases for more than 50 years but, although it has been shown that they are highly effective in improving the clinical course of some diseases, their effects have not been clearly defined in others. Nevertheless, they are still used by a considerable number of physicians. This review analyses the role of systemic corticosteroids in the treatment of acute pharyngitis (AP), community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and acute otitis media (AOM). A number of trials involving patients with AP have been carried out, but most are marred by methodological flaws that do not allow any firm conclusions to be drawn. The number of trials involving CAP patients is even higher, and the data suggest that corticosteroids may reduce the risk of death only in patients with severe disease. There are very few data concerning AOM, and there is currently no reason for prescribing corticosteroids to treat it. Overall, the data showed that there is, currently, no indication for the universal use of systemic corticosteroids in any of the reviewed diseases and, further, high-quality studies of all of these respiratory tract infections are needed in order to identify the patients for whom the prescription of corticosteroids is rationally acceptable.

negative: IFN-γ–induced protein 10 is a novel biomarker of rhinovirus-induced asthma exacerbations Background Rhinovirus-induced acute asthma is the most frequent trigger for asthma exacerbations. Objective We assessed which inflammatory mediators were released from bronchial epithelial cells (BECs) after infection with rhinovirus and then determined whether they were also present in subjects with acute virus-induced asthma, with the aim to identify a biomarker or biomarkers for acute virus-induced asthma. Methods BECs were obtained from bronchial brushings of steroid-naive asthmatic subjects and healthy nonatopic control subjects. Cells were infected with rhinovirus 16. Inflammatory mediators were measured by means of flow cytometry with a cytometric bead array. Subjects with acute asthma and virus infection were recruited; they were characterized clinically by using lung function tests and had blood taken to measure the inflammatory mediators identified as important by the BEC experiments. Results IFN-γ–induced protein 10 (IP-10) and RANTES were released in the greatest quantities, followed by IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α. Dexamethasone treatment of BECs only partially suppressed IP-10 and TNF-α but was more effective at suppressing RANTES, IL-6, and IL-8. In acute clinical asthma serum IP-10 levels were increased to a greater extent in those with acute virus-induced asthma (median of 604 pg/mL compared with 167 pg/mL in those with non–virus-induced acute asthma, P < .01). Increased serum IP-10 levels were predictive of virus-induced asthma (odds ratio, 44.3 [95% CI, 3.9-100.3]). Increased serum IP-10 levels were strongly associated with more severe airflow obstruction (r = −0.8; P < .01). Conclusions IP-10 release is specific to acute virus-induced asthma. Clinical implications Measurement of serum IP-10 could be used to predict a viral trigger to acute asthma.

negative: Level 3 guideline on the treatment of patients with severe/multiple injuries: AWMF Register-Nr. 012/019

negative: Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine for Treatment or Prophylaxis of COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have antiviral effects in vitro against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). PURPOSE: To summarize evidence about the benefits and harms of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the treatment or prophylaxis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DATA SOURCES: PubMed (via MEDLINE), EMBASE (via Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, bioRxiv, Preprints, ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry from 1 December 2019 until 8 May 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Studies in any language reporting efficacy or safety outcomes from hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine use in any setting in adults or children with suspected COVID-19 or at risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. DATA EXTRACTION: Independent, dually performed data extraction and quality assessments. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four randomized controlled trials, 10 cohort studies, and 9 case series assessed treatment effects of the medications, but no studies evaluated prophylaxis. Evidence was conflicting and insufficient regarding the effect of hydroxychloroquine on such outcomes as all-cause mortality, progression to severe disease, clinical symptoms, and upper respiratory virologic clearance with antigen testing. Several studies found that patients receiving hydroxychloroquine developed a QTc interval of 500 ms or greater, but the proportion of patients with this finding varied among the studies. Two studies assessed the efficacy of chloroquine; 1 trial, which compared higher-dose (600 mg twice daily for 10 days) with lower-dose (450 mg twice daily on day 1 and once daily for 4 days) therapy, was stopped owing to concern that the higher dose therapy increased lethality and QTc interval prolongation. An observational study that compared adults with COVID-19 receiving chloroquine phosphate 500 mg once or twice daily with patients not receiving chloroquine found minor fever resolution and virologic clearance benefits with chloroquine. LIMITATION: There were few controlled studies, and control for confounding was inadequate in observational studies. CONCLUSION: Evidence on the benefits and harms of using hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19 is very weak and conflicting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

negative: Chloroquine: Can it be a Novel Drug for COVID-19 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. The United States Food and Drug Administration has not approved any drug or vaccine for the treatment of COVID-19; however, reports have emerged from different parts of the world about the potential therapeutic benefits of existing drugs. Chloroquine and phosphate hydroxychloroquine are the drugs currently in the limelight, and recently, the National Task Force for COVID-19 constituted by the Indian Council of Medical Research has recommended the use of antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 infection in selected high-risk individuals. This short write-up explores the potential efficacy and established safety of chloroquine in COVID-19.

negative: Myeloma care adaptations in the UK during SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic: Challenges and measurable outcomes Following the emergence of COVID-19 as a global pandemic, cancer clinicians have been faced with the challenge of continuing to manage patients, with limited data to inform practice (Poortmans et al 2020). Recently, a large prospective cohort study of 800 cancer patients diagnosed with symptomatic COVID-19 demonstrated a mortality rate of 28%, which was largely driven by age, co-morbidities and being a male (Lee et al 2020).

negative: COVID-19, Asthma, and Inhaled Corticosteroids: Another Beneficial Effect of Inhaled Corticosteroids?

negative: A review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic? BACKGROUND: Repurposing broad-spectrum antivirals is an immediate treatment opportunity for 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Favipiravir is an antiviral previously indicated for influenza and Ebola, which has shown some promise in early trials for treatment of COVID-19. We aim to review existing favipiravir safety evidence, which is vital to informing the potential future use of favipiravir in COVID-19. METHODS: A search was conducted across EMBASE and MEDLINE databases, supplemented by relevant grey-literature and ClinicalTrials.gov. All studies assessing the use of favipiravir in humans by 27 March 2020 were considered for inclusion. Further analysis of available safety data from phase 2 and 3 studies was undertaken. Data extracted were adverse events (AEs) grade 1–4, serious AEs and discontinuation for AEs. Specific AEs of interest highlighted in early-phase studies, including gastrointestinal AEs and hyperuricaemia, were also examined. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were identified as potential sources of evidence of the clinical safety of favipiravir. Six were phase 2 and 3 studies reporting relevant safety data for statistical comparison, representing a total of 4299 participants, an estimated 175 person-years-of-follow-up (PYFU). Comparator drugs were oseltamivir, umifenovir, lopinavir/ritonavir or placebo. Study follow-up was between 5 and 21 days. The proportions of grade 1–4 AEs on favipiravir was 28.2% vs 28.4% (P = n.s.) in the comparison arms. The proportion of discontinuations due to AEs on favipiravir was 1.1% vs 1.2% (P = n.s.) in the comparison arms. For serious AEs the proportion was 0.4% in both arms (P = n.s.). There were significantly fewer gastrointestinal AEs occurring on favipiravir vs comparators [8.7% vs 11.5%; P = 0.003]. Favipiravir showed significantly more uric acid elevations than comparators [5.8% vs 1.3%; P<0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS: Favipiravir demonstrates a favourable safety profile regarding total and serious AEs. However, safety concerns remain: hyperuricaemia, teratogenicity and QTc prolongation have not yet been adequately studied. Favipiravir may be safe and tolerable in short-term use, but more evidence is needed to assess the longer-term effects of treatment. Given the limitations of the evidence and unresolved safety concerns, caution is warranted in the widespread use of favipiravir against pandemic COVID-19.

negative: No evidence of clinical benefits of early treatment of COVID-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: Comment on “Early treatment of COVID-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: A retrospective analysis of 1061 cases in Marseille, France”

negative: Challenges of autoimmune rheumatic disease treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic: a review Summary Since December 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic has become a major public health problem. To date, there is no evidence of a higher incidence of COVID in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases and we support the approach of maintaining chronic rheumatological treatments. However, once infected there is a small but significant increased risk of mortality. Among the different treatments, NSAIDs are associated with higher rates of complications, but data for other drugs are conflicting or incomplete. The use of certain drugs for autoimmune inflammatory rheumatisms appears to be a potentially interesting options for the treatment. The rationale for their use is based on the immune system runaway and the secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines (Il1, IL6, TNFα) in severe forms of the disease. Notably, patients on chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for their autoimmune rheumatic disease are not protected from COVID-19.

negative: Commentary on “Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open label non-randomized clinical trial” by Gautret et al The results of a clinical trial comparing hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin to the standard of care for the treatment of COVID-19 were recently published by Philippe Gautret et al. This study provides outstanding results for the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin over the standard of care, but the evidence was deemed insufficiently robust to warrant a public health decision to widen the use of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19. We provide a scientific critical review of the Gautret et al. publication, put the results in the context of the current knowledge, provide an evaluation of the validity of the results (from a methodologic perspective), and discuss public health implications. The study has a number of limitations, including small sample size, lack of comparability between patients in active treatment and control arms, lack of blinding, use of interim analyses without controlling for the risk of type 1 error, use of analysis in the per-protocol population instead of the intention-to-treat population, and inconsistencies between the study protocol and article. However, none of these observations is of a nature to reverse the conclusions. The study brings useful knowledge consistent with available evidence and clinical practice from China and South Korea, which could have prompted quicker policy decision-making.

negative: Anakinra in COVID-19: important considerations for clinical trials

negative: COVID-19: An Update on the Epidemiological, Clinical, Preventive and Therapeutic Evidence and Guidelines of Integrative Chinese-Western Medicine for the Management of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Disease. As of 22 February 2020, more than 77662 cases of confirmed COVID-19 have been documented globally with over 2360 deaths. Common presentations of confirmed cases include fever, fatigue, dry cough, upper airway congestion, sputum production, shortness of breath, myalgia/arthralgia with lymphopenia, prolonged prothrombin time, elevated C-reactive protein, and elevated lactate dehydrogenase. The reported severe/critical case ratio is approximately 7-10% and median time to intensive care admission is 9.5-10.5 days with mortality of around 1-2% varied geographically. Similar to outbreaks of other newly identified virus, there is no proven regimen from conventional medicine and most reports managed the patients with lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, beta-interferon, glucocorticoid and supportive treatment with remdesivir undergoing clinical trial. In China, Chinese medicine is proposed as a treatment option by national and provincial guidelines with substantial utilization. We reviewed the latest national and provincial clinical guidelines, retrospective cohort studies, and case series regarding the treatment of COVID-19 by add-on Chinese medicine. We have also reviewed the clinical evidence generated from SARS and H1N1 management with hypothesized mechanisms and latest in silico findings to identify candidate Chinese medicines for the consideration of possible trials and management. Given the paucity of strongly evidence-based regimens, the available data suggest that Chinese medicine could be considered as an adjunctive therapeutic option in the management of COVID-19.

negative: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the management of COVID-19: Much kerfuffle but little evidence Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are drugs that have shown in vitro activity on the replication of certain coronaviruses. In the context of the SARS-Cov-2 epidemic, the virus responsible for the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), these two drugs have been proposed as possible treatments. The results of the first clinical studies evaluating the effect of hydroxychloroquine do not support any efficacy of this drug in patients with COVID-19, due to major methodological weaknesses. Yet, these preliminary studies have aroused considerable media interest, raising fears of massive and uncontrolled use. In the absence of evidence of clinical benefits, the main risk is of exposing patients unnecessarily to the well-known adverse effects of hydroxychloroquine, with a possibly increased risk in the specific setting of COVID-19. In addition, widespread use outside of any recommendation risks compromising the completion of good quality clinical trials. The chloroquine hype, fueled by low-quality studies and media announcements, has yielded to the implementation of more than 150 studies worldwide. This represents a waste of resources and a loss of opportunity for other drugs to be properly evaluated. In the context of emergency, rigorous trials are more than ever needed in order to have, as soon as possible, reliable data on drugs that are possibly effective against the disease. Meanwhile, serious adverse drug reactions have been reported in patients with COVID-19 receiving hydroxychloroquine, justifying to limit its prescription, and to perform suitable cardiac and therapeutic drug monitoring.

negative: A case of erythema multiforme major in a patient with COVID 19: The role of corticosteroid treatment

negative: How are adversities during COVID-19 affecting mental health? Differential associations for worries and experiences and implications for policy Background: There are concerns that COVID-19 is having adverse effects on mental health. But it remains unclear whether this is being caused by worries over potential adversities due to the pandemic, or the toll of experiencing adverse events. Aims: To explore the time-varying longitudinal relationship between (i) worries about adversity, and (ii) experience of adversity, and both anxiety and depression and test the moderating role of socio-economic position. Methods: Data from 35,784 UK adults in the UCL COVID -19 Social Study (a panel study collecting data weekly during the Covid-19 pandemic) were analysed from 01/04/2020-28/04/2020. The sample was well-stratified and weighted to population proportions of gender, age, ethnicity, education and geographical location. Fixed effects regression was used to explore within-person variation over time. Results: Cumulative number of worries and experience of adversities were both related to higher levels of anxiety and depression. Number of worries were associated more with anxiety than depression, but number of experiences were equally related to anxiety and depression. Individuals of lower socio-economic position were more negatively affected psychologically by adverse experiences. Conclusions: Measures over the first few weeks of lockdown in the UK appear to have been insufficient at reassuring people given we are still seeing clear associations with poor mental health both for cumulative worries and also for a range of specific worries relating to finance, access to essentials, personal safety and COVID-19. Interventions are required that both seek to prevent adverse events (e.g. redundancies) and that reassure individuals and support adaptive coping strategies.

negative: Inflammation and primary demyelination induced by the intraspinal injection of lipopolysaccharide Inflammation is a prominent feature of several disorders characterized by primary demyelination, but it is not clear whether a relationship exists between inflammation and myelin damage. We have found that substantial demyelination results from the focal inflammatory lesion caused by the injection of lipopolysaccharide (LPS; 200 ng) directly into the rat dorsal funiculus. Within 24 h, such injections caused a focal inflammatory response consisting of a substantial number of polymorphonuclear cells and ED1-positive and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS)-positive macrophages/microglia. The number of inflammatory cells was substantially reduced by day 7. OX-52-positive T-cells were less frequently observed but were present in the meninges at 8 h, reached a maximum in the dorsal funiculus at 7 days, and were rare at 14 days. The inflammation was followed by the appearance of a large lesion of primary demyelination that encompassed up to ∼75% of the cross-sectional area of the dorsal funiculus. Treatment with dexamethasone significantly reduced the number of cells expressing iNOS, but did not prevent the demyelination. By 28 days the lesions were largely remyelinated, usually by Schwann cells. These changes were not observed in control, saline-injected animals. We conclude that the intraspinal injection of LPS results in inflammation and subsequently in prominent demyelination. The mechanisms underlying the demyelination are not clear, but it is notable that it typically begins with disruption of the adaxonal myelin. Indeed, there is an early loss of myelin-associated glycoprotein within the lesion, despite the persistence of proteolipid protein. This combination is a feature of the pattern III lesion recently described in multiple sclerosis (Lucchinetti et al., 2000), and we therefore suggest that LPS-induced demyelination may serve as the first experimental model available for the study of this type of multiple sclerosis lesion.

negative: Site verification and modeling of desiccant-based system as an alternative to conventional air-conditioning systems for wet markets Abstract Desiccant cooling system for active humidity control and to conserve energy has been in commercial applications for over two decades. However, its use in humid wet markets has never been examined. A gas-fired desiccant cooling system has been installed in a wet market in Hong Kong. In this study, the annual energy saving in conjunction with the use of desiccant cooling system was investigated by in-situ measurements, site surveys and simulations. The verified computer model was used for further simulations. It was found that for the use of a minimum ventilation rate of 10.3 L/s/person, the use of desiccant cooling system as compared to conventional system saved 4% of the energy and could achieve the desired space conditions. A parametric study under various ventilation rates indicated that use of desiccant cooling system in wet markets in hot and humid Hong Kong would lead to energy and energy cost savings, as well as CO2 emission reduction amounting from 1% to 13%. The savings were more evident when wet markets were designed for a ventilation rate of 20 L/s/person. Furthermore, the actual occupancy profile, and lighting and small power densities determined in this study would be useful for future studies on wet market.

negative: Ventilation Techniques and Risk for Transmission of Coronavirus Disease, Including COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review of Multiple Streams of Evidence BACKGROUND: Mechanical ventilation is used to treat respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). PURPOSE: To review multiple streams of evidence regarding the benefits and harms of ventilation techniques for coronavirus infections, including that causing COVID-19. (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020178187) DATA SOURCES: 21 standard, World Health Organization–specific and COVID-19–specific databases, without language restrictions, until 1 May 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Studies of any design and language comparing different oxygenation approaches in patients with coronavirus infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), or with hypoxemic respiratory failure. Animal, mechanistic, laboratory, and preclinical evidence was gathered regarding aerosol dispersion of coronavirus. Studies evaluating risk for virus transmission to health care workers from aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Independent and duplicate screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment (GRADE for certainty of evidence and AMSTAR 2 for included systematic reviews). DATA SYNTHESIS: 123 studies were eligible (45 on COVID-19, 70 on SARS, 8 on MERS), but only 5 studies (1 on COVID-19, 3 on SARS, 1 on MERS) adjusted for important confounders. A study in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 reported slightly higher mortality with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) than with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), but 2 opposing studies, 1 in patients with MERS and 1 in patients with SARS, suggest a reduction in mortality with NIV (very low-certainty evidence). Two studies in patients with SARS report a reduction in mortality with NIV compared with no mechanical ventilation (low-certainty evidence). Two systematic reviews suggest a large reduction in mortality with NIV compared with conventional oxygen therapy. Other included studies suggest increased odds of transmission from AGPs. LIMITATION: Direct studies in COVID-19 are limited and poorly reported. CONCLUSION: Indirect and low-certainty evidence suggests that use of NIV, similar to IMV, probably reduces mortality but may increase the risk for transmission of COVID-19 to health care workers. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: World Health Organization.

negative: The efficacy and safety of Jinhua Qinggan granule (JHQG) in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis BACKGROUND: Currently, the global number of infected novel coronavirus has exceeded 2.6 million and the death toll has exceeded 170,000, but the specific drug for the treatment of COVID-19 has been not appears. In the process of fighting COVID-19 in China, JHQG has been promoted by the Chinese government and widely used in the treatment of COVID-19. The purpose of this study is to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of JHQG for COVID-19. METHODS: We are going to search the electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Web of Science (WOS), Google scholar, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical literature Database (CBM), Chinese Scientific and Journal Database (VIP), Wan Fang database (Wanfang) for published clinical trails and search clinical trials register platforms of Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) and ClinicalTrials.gov (www.ClinicalTrials.gov/) for ongoing trials of Jinhua Qinggan granule for COVID-19. The primary outcomes of the included studies contain Clinical symptom disappearance rate and the secondary outcomes obtain: TCM syndrome scale score, Hamilton anxiety scale score, and adverse events. We will use RevMan V5.3 software to perform the calculations. PRISMA-P checklist was used in writing this report. RESULTS: The study results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. CONCLUSION: This study will provide a high-quality evidence of the efficacy and safety of Jinhua Qinggan granule on patients with COVID-19. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020181919.

negative: A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 PURPOSE: COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) is a public health emergency of international concern. As of this time, there is no known effective pharmaceutical treatment, although it is much needed for patient contracting the severe form of the disease. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the evidence regarding chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and three trial Registries were searched for studies on the use of chloroquine in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: We included six articles (one narrative letter, one in-vitro study, one editorial, expert consensus paper, two national guideline documents) and 23 ongoing clinical trials in China. Chloroquine seems to be effective in limiting the replication of SARS-CoV-2 (virus causing COVID-19) in vitro. CONCLUSIONS: There is rationale, pre-clinical evidence of effectiveness and evidence of safety from long-time clinical use for other indications to justify clinical research on chloroquine in patients with COVID-19. However, clinical use should either adhere to the Monitored Emergency Use of Unregistered Interventions (MEURI) framework or be ethically approved as a trial as stated by the World Health Organization. Safety data and data from high-quality clinical trials are urgently needed.

negative: Acute Symptomatic Seizures in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: Is There an Association? BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) emerged as a global pandemic. Historically, the group of human coronaviruses can also affect the central nervous system leading to neurological symptoms; however, the causative mechanisms of the neurological manifestations of COVID-19 disease are not well known. Seizures have not been directly reported as a part of COVID-19 outside of patients with previously known brain injury or epilepsy. We report two cases of acute symptomatic seizures, in non-epileptic patients, associated with severe COVID-19 disease. CASE PRESENTATIONS: Two advanced-age, non-epileptic, male patients presented to our northeast Ohio-based health system with concern for infection in Mid-March 2020. Both had a history of lung disease and during their hospitalization tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. They developed acute encephalopathy days into their hospitalization with clinical and electrographic seizures. Resolution of seizures was achieved with levetiracetam. DISCUSSION: Patients with COVID-19 disease are at an elevated risk for seizures, and the mechanism of these seizures is likely multifactorial. Clinical (motor) seizures may not be readily detected in this population due to the expansive utilization of sedatives and paralytics for respiratory optimization strategies. Many of these patients are also not electrographically monitored for seizures due to limited resources, multifactorial risk for acute encephalopathy, and the risk of cross-contamination. Previously, several neurological symptoms were seen in patients with more advanced COVID-19 disease, and these were thought to be secondary to multi-system organ failure and/or disseminated intravascular coagulopathy-related brain injury. However, these patients may also have an advanced breakdown of the blood-brain barrier precipitated by pro-inflammatory cytokine reactions. The neurotropic effect and neuroinvasiveness of SARS-Coronavirus-2 have not been directly established. CONCLUSIONS: Acute symptomatic seizures are possible in patients with COVID-19 disease. These seizures are likely multifactorial in origin, including cortical irritation due to blood-brain barrier breakdown, precipitated by the cytokine reaction as a part of the viral infection. Patients with clinical signs of seizures or otherwise unexplained encephalopathy may benefit from electroencephalography monitoring and/or empiric anti-epileptic therapy. Further studies are needed to elucidate the risk of seizures and benefit of monitoring in this population.

negative: Is hydroxychloroquine beneficial for COVID-19 patients? The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first reported in December 2019. As similar cases rapidly emerged around the world(1–3), the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a public health emergency of international concern on January 30, 2020 and pronounced the rapidly spreading coronavirus outbreak as a pandemic on March 11, 2020(4). The virus has reached almost all countries of the globe. As of June 3, 2020, the accumulated confirmed cases reached 6,479,405 with more than 383,013 deaths worldwide. The urgent and emergency care of COVID-19 patients calls for effective drugs, in addition to the beneficial effects of remdesivir(5), to control the disease and halt the pandemic.

negative: Cancer recurrence and hyperglycemia with dexamethasone for postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis: more moot points?

negative: Effects of service changes affecting distance/time to access urgent and emergency care facilities on patient outcomes: a systematic review BACKGROUND: Reconfiguration of urgent and emergency care services often increases travel time/distance for patients to reach an appropriate facility. Evidence of the effects of reconfiguration is important for local communities and commissioners and providers of health services. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the evidence regarding effects of service reconfigurations that increase the time/distance for some patients to reach an urgent and emergency care (UEC) facility. We searched seven bibliographic databases from 2000 to February 2019 and used citation tracking and reference lists to identify additional studies. We included studies of any design that compared outcomes for people with conditions requiring emergency treatment before and after service reconfiguration with an associated change in travel time/distance to access UEC. Studies had to be conducted in the UK or other developed countries. Data extraction and quality assessment (using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for quasi-experimental studies) were undertaken by a single reviewer with a sample checked for accuracy and consistency. We performed a narrative synthesis of the included studies. Overall strength of evidence was assessed using a previously published method that considers volume, quality and consistency. RESULTS: We included 12 studies, of which six were conducted in the USA, two in the UK and four in other European countries. The studies used a variety of observational designs, with before–after and cohort designs being most common. Only two studies included an independent control site/sites where no reconfiguration had taken place. The reconfigurations evaluated in these studies reported relatively small effects on average travel times/distance. DISCUSSION: For studies of general UEC populations, there was no convincing evidence as to whether reconfiguration affected mortality risk. However, evidence of increased risk was identified from studies of patients with acute myocardial infarction, particularly 1 to 4 years after reconfiguration. Evidence for other conditions was inconsistent or very limited. CONCLUSIONS: We found insufficient evidence to determine whether increased distance to UEC increases mortality risk for the general population of people requiring UEC, although this conclusion may not extend to people with specific conditions.

negative: Acute Symptomatic Seizures in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: Is There an Association? BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) emerged as a global pandemic. Historically, the group of human coronaviruses can also affect the central nervous system leading to neurological symptoms; however, the causative mechanisms of the neurological manifestations of COVID-19 disease are not well known. Seizures have not been directly reported as a part of COVID-19 outside of patients with previously known brain injury or epilepsy. We report two cases of acute symptomatic seizures, in non-epileptic patients, associated with severe COVID-19 disease. CASE PRESENTATIONS: Two advanced-age, non-epileptic, male patients presented to our northeast Ohio-based health system with concern for infection in Mid-March 2020. Both had a history of lung disease and during their hospitalization tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. They developed acute encephalopathy days into their hospitalization with clinical and electrographic seizures. Resolution of seizures was achieved with levetiracetam. DISCUSSION: Patients with COVID-19 disease are at an elevated risk for seizures, and the mechanism of these seizures is likely multifactorial. Clinical (motor) seizures may not be readily detected in this population due to the expansive utilization of sedatives and paralytics for respiratory optimization strategies. Many of these patients are also not electrographically monitored for seizures due to limited resources, multifactorial risk for acute encephalopathy, and the risk of cross-contamination. Previously, several neurological symptoms were seen in patients with more advanced COVID-19 disease, and these were thought to be secondary to multi-system organ failure and/or disseminated intravascular coagulopathy-related brain injury. However, these patients may also have an advanced breakdown of the blood–brain barrier precipitated by pro-inflammatory cytokine reactions. The neurotropic effect and neuroinvasiveness of SARS-Coronavirus-2 have not been directly established. CONCLUSIONS: Acute symptomatic seizures are possible in patients with COVID-19 disease. These seizures are likely multifactorial in origin, including cortical irritation due to blood–brain barrier breakdown, precipitated by the cytokine reaction as a part of the viral infection. Patients with clinical signs of seizures or otherwise unexplained encephalopathy may benefit from electroencephalography monitoring and/or empiric anti-epileptic therapy. Further studies are needed to elucidate the risk of seizures and benefit of monitoring in this population.

negative: Meditsinskaya reabilitatsiya patsientov s pnevmoniyami, assotsiirovannymi s novoi koronavirusnoi infektsiei COVID-19./ [Medical rehabilitation of patients with pneumonia associated with the new COVID-19 coronavirus infection] Effective medical rehabilitation of patients with pneumonia caused by the new SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus is critical for the recovery and optimization of emergency and specialty care outcomes. In this regard, it is relevant to develop a scientifically based medical rehabilitation program for patients with the coronavirus infectious disease COVID-19, whose composition and structure includes methods and tools that have proven effectiveness. AIM: To develop evidence-based approaches to medical rehabilitation for patients with pneumonia associated with the new COVID-19 coronavirus infection. RESULTS: The clinical effects and suggested mechanisms of action of rehabilitation technologies in patients with pneumonia, including those associated with the new COVID-19 coronavirus infection, are considered in Detail. The most studied of the physical methods that have a proven effect are physical exercises, breathing exercises, the complex effect of factors of resort therapy, hydrotherapy, which affect the main clinical manifestations of the underlying disease, astheno-neurotic syndrome and increasing immunity. Clinical recommendations for medical rehabilitation are proposed and its promising methods are considered. CONCLUSION: Regular generalization and analysis of high-quality randomized controlled clinical trials to evaluate various physical methods of treatment of patients with pneumonia associated with the new COVID-19 coronavirus infection is Necessary, which serve as a basis for the development of future valid clinical recommendations. Timely and adequate specialized medical rehabilitation care is critical to maintaining the health, reducing disability and mortality of patients with pneumonia associated with the new COVID-19 coronavirus infection.

negative: The COVIRL-001 Trial: A multicentre, prospective, randomised trial comparing standard of care (SOC) alone, SOC plus hydroxychloroquine monotherapy or SOC plus a combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in the treatment of non- critical, SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive population not requiring immediate resuscitation or ventilation but who have evidence of clinical decline: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

negative: Influenza virus-related critical illness: prevention, diagnosis, treatment Annual seasonal influenza epidemics of variable severity result in significant morbidity and mortality in the United States (U.S.) and worldwide. In temperate climate countries, including the U.S., influenza activity peaks during the winter months. Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons in the U.S. aged 6 months and older, and among those at increased risk for influenza-related complications in other parts of the world (e.g. young children, elderly). Observational studies have reported effectiveness of influenza vaccination to reduce the risks of severe disease requiring hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and death. A diagnosis of influenza should be considered in critically ill patients admitted with complications such as exacerbation of underlying chronic comorbidities, community-acquired pneumonia, and respiratory failure during influenza season. Molecular tests are recommended for influenza testing of respiratory specimens in hospitalized patients. Antigen detection assays are not recommended in critically ill patients because of lower sensitivity; negative results of these tests should not be used to make clinical decisions, and respiratory specimens should be tested for influenza by molecular assays. Because critically ill patients with lower respiratory tract disease may have cleared influenza virus in the upper respiratory tract, but have prolonged influenza viral replication in the lower respiratory tract, an endotracheal aspirate (preferentially) or bronchoalveolar lavage fluid specimen (if collected for other diagnostic purposes) should be tested by molecular assay for detection of influenza viruses. Observational studies have reported that antiviral treatment of critically ill adult influenza patients with a neuraminidase inhibitor is associated with survival benefit. Since earlier initiation of antiviral treatment is associated with the greatest clinical benefit, standard-dose oseltamivir (75 mg twice daily in adults) for enteric administration is recommended as soon as possible as it is well absorbed in critically ill patients. Based upon observational data that suggest harms, adjunctive corticosteroid treatment is currently not recommended for children or adults hospitalized with influenza, including critically ill patients, unless clinically indicated for another reason, such as treatment of asthma or COPD exacerbation, or septic shock. A number of pharmaceutical agents are in development for treatment of severe influenza.

negative: Chinese society of cardiology expert consensus statement on the diagnosis and treatment of adult fulminant myocarditis Fulminant myocarditis is primarily caused by infection with any number of a variety of viruses. It arises quickly, progresses rapidly, and may lead to severe heart failure or circulatory failure presenting as rapid-onset hypotension and cardiogenic shock, with mortality rates as high as 50%–70%. Most importantly, there are no treatment options, guidelines or an expert consensus statement. Here, we provide the first expert consensus, the Chinese Society of Cardiology Expert Consensus Statement on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Fulminant Myocarditis, based on data from our recent clinical trial (NCT03268642). In this statement, we describe the clinical features and diagnostic criteria of fulminant myocarditis, and importantly, for the first time, we describe a new treatment regimen termed life support-based comprehensive treatment regimen. The core content of this treatment regimen includes (i) mechanical life support (applications of mechanical respirators and circulatory support systems, including intraaortic balloon pump and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, (ii) immunological modulation by using sufficient doses of glucocorticoid, immunoglobulin and (iii) antiviral reagents using neuraminidase inhibitor. The proper application of this treatment regimen may and has helped to save the lives of many patients with fulminant myocarditis.

negative: On the evolutionary epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 There is no doubt that the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 that causes COVID-19 is mutating and thus has the potential to adapt during the current pandemic. Whether this evolution will lead to changes in the transmission, the duration, or the severity of the disease is not clear. This has led to considerable scientific and media debate, from raising alarms about evolutionary change to dismissing it. Here we review what little is currently known about the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 and extend existing evolutionary theory to consider how selection might be acting upon the virus during the COVID-19 pandemic. While there is currently no definitive evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is undergoing further adaptation, continued, evidence-based, analysis of evolutionary change is important so that public health measures can be adjusted in response to substantive changes in the infectivity or severity of COVID-19.

negative: Cell-based therapies for COVID-19: A living systematic review OBJECTIVE: This living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the available evidence on the role of cell-based therapies in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. DATA SOURCES: We conducted searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L-OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L-OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L-OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. All the searches covered the period until April 23, 2020 (one day before submission). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS: We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We searched for randomised trials evaluating the effect of cell-based therapies versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Anticipating the lack of randomised trials directly addressing this question, we also searched for trials evaluating other coronavirus infections, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19. Two reviewers independently screened each study for eligibility. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it every time the conclusions change or whenever there are substantial updates. RESULTS: We screened 1,043 records but no study was considered eligible. We identified 61 ongoing studies, including 39 randomised trials evaluating different types of cell-based therapies in COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any studies that met our inclusion criteria and hence there is no evidence to support or refute the use of cell-based therapies in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. A substantial number of ongoing studies should provide valuable evidence to inform researchers and decision makers in the near future. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020179711

negative: The competing risk between in-hospital mortality and recovery: A pitfall in COVID-19 survival analysis research Background Many studies investigating mortality and recovery in COVID-19 have been published recently. The majority of these studies used the standard Cox Proportional Hazards (Cox PH) model without taking into account the presence of competing risks. This study investigates, through extensive simulations, the bias in estimating the hazard ratio (HR) of death due to COVID-19 and the absolute risk reduction (ARR) when competing risks are not taken into consideration, and suggests an alternative method. Methods We simulated data for a fictive clinical trial in COVID-19 patients, to mimic recent trials involving the use of Hydroxychloroquine, Remdesivir, and convalescent plasma therapy for example. The primary outcome is the time from randomization until death due to COVID-19. Six scenarios representing different situations of the effect of treatment on death and its competing event recovery were considered. The HR of death and the 28-day ARR were estimated using the Cox PH model and the Fine and Gray (FG) model which takes competing risks into account. The estimates were then compared to their corresponding true values and the magnitude of misestimation quantified. Results The Cox PH model misestimated the true HR of death in the majority of the scenarios. The magnitude of this misestimation increased when the process of recovery was faster and/or the chance of recovery was higher. In some cases, this model has also incorrectly shown a harmful effect of treatment when it was in fact beneficial. The true 28-day ARR of death was also misestimated, and this misestimation increased in magnitude when the process of recovery was faster. The results obtained from the FG competing risks model are all consistent and show no misestimation or changes in direction for both the HR and the 28-day ARR of death. Conclusion There is a substantial risk of misleading results in COVID-19 research if recovery and death are not considered as competing risk events. We strongly suggest the use of a competing risk approach to re-analyze relevant published data that have used the Cox PH model.

negative: Three cases of idiopathic eosinophilic enteritis with chronic obstinate diarrhea in Japanese Black fattening cattle Eosinophilic enteritis (EOE) is a type of inflammatory bowel disease and is characterized clinically by chronic obstinate diarrhea. Three Japanese Black (JB) fattening cattle (2 males and 1 female) on different cattle farms presented with chronic episodic diarrhea without fever or dehydration. Soft reddish spherical carneous tissues (1−3 cm) were occasionally excreted within the diarrheic feces. Administration of antibiotics, antidiarrheal drugs and vermicides had no therapeutic effect, but dexamethasone improved the fecal characteristics. The symptoms persisted until the animals were slaughtered at 27–30 months of age. Histopathological examination of the intestines revealed marked eosinophilic infiltration in the lamina propria and submucosa. From these findings, we diagnosed these cattle as the first cases of EOE in JB cattle.

negative: A review of treatment modalities for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) has been a focus of international attention since its identification in 2012. Epidemiologically it is characterized by sporadic community cases, which are amplified by hospital-based outbreaks. Healthcare facilities in 27 countries from most continents have experienced imported cases, with the most significant outbreak involving 186 cases in Korea. The mortality internationally is 36% and guidance for clinical management has yet to be developed. Most facilities and healthcare providers outside of the Middle East receiving patients have no or little experience in the clinical management of MERS. When a case does occur there is likely little time for a critical appraisal of the literature and putative pharmacological options. We identified published literature on the management of both MERS-CoV and the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) through searches of PubMed and WHO and the US CDC websites up to 30 April 2016. A total of 101 publications were retrieved for critical appraisal. Most published literature on therapeutics for MERS are in vitro experiments, animal studies and case reports. Current treatment options for MERS can be categorized as: immunotherapy with virus-specific antibodies in convalescent plasma; polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies produced in vitro or in genetically modified animals; and antiviral agents. The use of any therapeutics in MERS-CoV remains investigational. The therapeutic agents with potential benefits and warranting further investigation include convalescent plasma, interferon-β/ribavirin combination therapy and lopinavir. Corticosteroids, ribavirin monotherapy and mycophenolic acid likely have toxicities that exceed potential benefits.

negative: Effects of COVID-19 Infection during Pregnancy and Neonatal Prognosis: What Is the Evidence? Background: This study’s aims are to assess the current evidence presented in the literature regarding the potential risks of COVID-19 infection among pregnant women and consequent fetal transmission. Methods: a systematic literature review assessing papers published in the most comprehensive databases in the field of health intended to answer the question, “What are the effects of COVID-19 infection during pregnancy, and what is the neonatal prognosis?” Results: 49 papers published in 2020 were eligible, presenting low levels of evidence. A total of 755 pregnant women and 598 infants were assessed; more than half of pregnant women had C-sections (379/65%). Only 493 (82%) infants were tested for SARS-CoV-2, nine (2%) of whom tested positive. There is, however, no evidence of vertical transmission based on what has been assessed so far, considering there are knowledge gaps concerning the care provided during and after delivery, as well as a lack of suitable biological samples for testing SARS-CoV-2. Conclusions: We cannot rule out potential worsening of the clinical conditions of pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2, whether the infection is associated with comorbidities or not, due to the occurrence of respiratory disorders, cardiac rhythm disturbances, and acid-base imbalance, among others. We recommend relentless monitoring of all pregnant women in addition to testing them before delivery or the first contact with newborns.

negative: Could Intravenous Immunoglobulin Collected from Recovered Coronavirus Patients Protect against COVID-19 and Strengthen the Immune System of New Patients? The emergence of the novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China, which causes severe respiratory tract infections in humans (COVID-19), has become a global health concern. Most coronaviruses infect animals but can evolve into strains that cross the species barrier and infect humans. At the present, there is no single specific vaccine or efficient antiviral therapy against COVID-19. Recently, we showed that intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment reduces inflammation of intestinal epithelial cells and eliminates overgrowth of the opportunistic human fungal pathogen Candida albicans in the murine gut. Immunotherapy with IVIg could be employed to neutralize COVID-19. However, the efficacy of IVIg would be better if the immune IgG antibodies were collected from patients who have recovered from COVID-19 in the same city, or the surrounding area, in order to increase the chance of neutralizing the virus. These immune IgG antibodies will be specific against COVID-19 by boosting the immune response in newly infected patients. Different procedures may be used to remove or inactivate any possible pathogens from the plasma of recovered coronavirus patient derived immune IgG, including solvent/detergent, 60 °C heat-treatment, and nanofiltration. Overall, immunotherapy with immune IgG antibodies combined with antiviral drugs may be an alternative treatment against COVID-19 until stronger options such as vaccines are available.

negative: Heparin as a Therapy for COVID-19: Current Evidence and Future Possibilities. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), the clinical syndrome associated with infection by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has impacted nearly every country in the world. Despite an unprecedented focus of scientific investigation, there is a paucity of evidence-based pharmacotherapies against this disease. Due to this lack of data-driven treatment strategies, broad variations in practice patterns have emerged. Observed hypercoagulability in COVID-19 patients has created debate within the critical care community on the therapeutic utility of heparin. We seek to provide an overview of the data supporting the therapeutic use of heparin, both unfractionated and low molecular weight, as an anticoagulant for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additionally, we review preclinical evidence establishing biological plausibility for heparin and synthetic heparin-like drugs as therapies for COVID-19 through anti-viral and anti-inflammatory effects. Finally, we discuss known adverse effects and theoretical off-target effects that may temper enthusiasm for the adoption of heparin as a therapy in COVID-19 without confirmatory prospective randomized controlled trials. Despite previous failures of anticoagulants in critical illness, plausibility of heparin for COVID-19 is sufficiently robust to justify urgent randomized controlled trials to determine the safety and effectiveness of this therapy.

negative: SARS: Systematic Review of Treatment Effects BACKGROUND: The SARS outbreak of 2002–2003 presented clinicians with a new, life-threatening disease for which they had no experience in treating and no research on the effectiveness of treatment options. The World Health Organization (WHO) expert panel on SARS treatment requested a systematic review and comprehensive summary of treatments used for SARS-infected patients in order to guide future treatment and identify priorities for research. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In response to the WHO request we conducted a systematic review of the published literature on ribavirin, corticosteroids, lopinavir and ritonavir (LPV/r), type I interferon (IFN), intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and SARS convalescent plasma from both in vitro studies and in SARS patients. We also searched for clinical trial evidence of treatment for acute respiratory distress syndrome. Sources of data were the literature databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to February 2005. Data from publications were extracted and evidence within studies was classified using predefined criteria. In total, 54 SARS treatment studies, 15 in vitro studies, and three acute respiratory distress syndrome studies met our inclusion criteria. Within in vitro studies, ribavirin, lopinavir, and type I IFN showed inhibition of SARS-CoV in tissue culture. In SARS-infected patient reports on ribavirin, 26 studies were classified as inconclusive, and four showed possible harm. Seven studies of convalescent plasma or IVIG, three of IFN type I, and two of LPV/r were inconclusive. In 29 studies of steroid use, 25 were inconclusive and four were classified as causing possible harm. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an extensive literature reporting on SARS treatments, it was not possible to determine whether treatments benefited patients during the SARS outbreak. Some may have been harmful. Clinical trials should be designed to validate a standard protocol for dosage and timing, and to accrue data in real time during future outbreaks to monitor specific adverse effects and help inform treatment.

negative: Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine for patients admitted to intensive care due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)—protocol of randomised controlled trial AZIQUINE-ICU BACKGROUND: Novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is known to be susceptible in vitro to exposure to hydroxychloroquine and its effect has been found to be potentiated by azithromycin. We hypothesise that early administration of hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin can prevent respiratory deterioration in patients admitted to intensive care due to rapidly progressive COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Design: Prospective, multi-centre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial (RCT). Participants: Adult (> 18 years) within 24 h of admission to the intensive care unit with proven or suspected COVID-19 infection, whether or not mechanically ventilated. Exclusion criteria include duration symptoms of febrile disease for ≥ 1 week, treatment limitations in place or moribund patients, allergy or intolerance of any study treatment, and pregnancy. Interventions: Patients will be randomised in 1:1:1 ratio to receive Hydroxychloroquine 800 mg orally in two doses followed by 400 mg daily in two doses and azithromycin 500 mg orally in one dose followed by 250 mg in one dose for a total of 5 days (HC-A group) or hydroxychloroquine + placebo (HC group) or placebo + placebo (C-group) in addition to the best standard of care, which may evolve during the trial period but will not differ between groups. Primary outcome is the composite percentage of patients alive and not on end-of-life pathway who are free of mechanical ventilation at day 14. Secondary outcomes: The percentage of patients who were prevented from needing intubation until day 14, ICU length of stay, and mortality (in hospital) at day 28 and 90. DISCUSSION: Although both investigational drugs are often administered off label to patients with severe COVID-19, at present, there is no data from RCTs on their safety and efficacy. In vitro and observational trial suggests their potential to limit viral replication and the damage to lungs as the most common reason for ICU admission. Therefore, patients most likely to benefit from the treatment are those with severe but early disease. This trial is designed and powered to investigate whether the treatment in this cohort of patients leads to improved clinical patient-centred outcomes, such as mechanical ventilation-free survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov: NCT04339816 (Registered on 9 April 2020, amended on 22 June 2020); Eudra CT number: 2020-001456-18 (Registered on 29 March 2020).

negative: A case of Listeria monocytogenes meningitis complicated by Hydrocephalus and Intraventricular hemorrhage: A review of treatment options and outcomes Listeria monocytogenes is a gram-positive bacillus known to cause various human infections including central nervous system infections. The most common central nervous system manifestations are meningitis and rhomboencephalitis, however rare complications including hydrocephalus and intracerebral hemorrhage can occur and are associated with increased mortality and incidence of lasting neurologic sequelae. The mortality ranges from 17 % to greater than 30 % in patients with neurological involvement [[1], [2], [3]]. Various case reports have studied the differing treatment approaches and outcomes of patients who experienced these complications, and there is still no consensus on optimal treatment approaches. In this paper, we report a case of Listeria meningitis complicated by both acute hydrocephalus and intracerebral hemorrhage and analyze the factors that led to a favorable outcome by reviewing the existing literature.

negative: Tafenoquine inhibits replication of SARS-Cov-2 at pharmacologically relevant concentrations in vitro Tafenoquine [TQ] exhibited EC50/90s of ~ 2.6/5.1 μM against SARS-CoV-2 in VERO E6 cells and was 4-fold more potent than hydroxychloroquine [HCQ]. Time-of-addition experiments were consistent with a different mechanism for TQ v HCQ. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling suggested that lung unbound concentrations of TQ in COVID-19 patients may exceed the EC90 for at least 8 weeks after administration. The therapeutic potential for TQ in management of COVID-19 should be further evaluated.

negative: Immunogenicity of trimeric autotransporter adhesins and their potential as vaccine targets The current problem of increasing antibiotic resistance and the resurgence of numerous infections indicate the need for novel vaccination strategies more than ever. In vaccine development, the search for and the selection of adequate vaccine antigens is the first important step. In recent years, bacterial outer membrane proteins have become of major interest, as they are the main proteins interacting with the extracellular environment. Trimeric autotransporter adhesins (TAAs) are important virulence factors in many Gram-negative bacteria, are localised on the bacterial surface, and mediate the first adherence to host cells in the course of infection. One example is the Neisseria adhesin A (NadA), which is currently used as a subunit in a licensed vaccine against Neisseria meningitidis. Other TAAs that seem promising vaccine candidates are the Acinetobacter trimeric autotransporter (Ata), the Haemophilus influenzae adhesin (Hia), and TAAs of the genus Bartonella. Here, we review the suitability of various TAAs as vaccine candidates.

negative: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, often in combination with a second-generation macrolide, are being widely used for treatment of COVID-19, despite no conclusive evidence of their benefit. Although generally safe when used for approved indications such as autoimmune disease or malaria, the safety and benefit of these treatment regimens are poorly evaluated in COVID-19. METHODS: We did a multinational registry analysis of the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19. The registry comprised data from 671 hospitals in six continents. We included patients hospitalised between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020, with a positive laboratory finding for SARS-CoV-2. Patients who received one of the treatments of interest within 48 h of diagnosis were included in one of four treatment groups (chloroquine alone, chloroquine with a macrolide, hydroxychloroquine alone, or hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide), and patients who received none of these treatments formed the control group. Patients for whom one of the treatments of interest was initiated more than 48 h after diagnosis or while they were on mechanical ventilation, as well as patients who received remdesivir, were excluded. The main outcomes of interest were in-hospital mortality and the occurrence of de-novo ventricular arrhythmias (non-sustained or sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation). FINDINGS: 96 032 patients (mean age 53·8 years, 46·3% women) with COVID-19 were hospitalised during the study period and met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 14 888 patients were in the treatment groups (1868 received chloroquine, 3783 received chloroquine with a macrolide, 3016 received hydroxychloroquine, and 6221 received hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide) and 81 144 patients were in the control group. 10 698 (11·1%) patients died in hospital. After controlling for multiple confounding factors (age, sex, race or ethnicity, body-mass index, underlying cardiovascular disease and its risk factors, diabetes, underlying lung disease, smoking, immunosuppressed condition, and baseline disease severity), when compared with mortality in the control group (9·3%), hydroxychloroquine (18·0%; hazard ratio 1·335, 95% CI 1·223–1·457), hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide (23·8%; 1·447, 1·368–1·531), chloroquine (16·4%; 1·365, 1·218–1·531), and chloroquine with a macrolide (22·2%; 1·368, 1·273–1·469) were each independently associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Compared with the control group (0·3%), hydroxychloroquine (6·1%; 2·369, 1·935–2·900), hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide (8·1%; 5·106, 4·106–5·983), chloroquine (4·3%; 3·561, 2·760–4·596), and chloroquine with a macrolide (6·5%; 4·011, 3·344–4·812) were independently associated with an increased risk of de-novo ventricular arrhythmia during hospitalisation. INTERPRETATION: We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID-19. FUNDING: William Harvey Distinguished Chair in Advanced Cardiovascular Medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital.

negative: Growth of exocrine acinar cells on a reconstituted basement membrane gel Methods have been developed for culturing a dividing population of morphologically differentiated rat parotid, lacrimal, and pancreatic acinar cells in vitro. Isolated acinar cells were plated onto tissue culture dishes coated with a three-dimensional, reconstituted basement membrane gel. After attachment in Ham’s nutrient mixture F12, the cells were cultured at 35°C in F12 supplemented with 10% heat inactivated rat serum, epidermal growth factor, dexamethasone, insulin, transferrin, selenium, putrescine, reduced glutathione, ascorbate, penicillin, streptomycin, and the appropriate secretagogue. Under these conditions, the cells attached rapidly and DNA synthesis was initiated within 2 to 3 d. Although the cells flattened on the substratum, they continued to maintain their differentiated morphology. The cells contained secretory granules, and the secretory enzymes peroxidase and amylase could be detected. The use of a reconstituted basement membrane gel proved critical for the attachment and growth of exocrine acinar cells.

negative: An evaluation of contaminated complete feed as a vehicle for porcine epidemic diarrhea virus infection of naïve pigs following consumption via natural feeding behavior: proof of concept BACKGROUND: Since its initial detection in May 2013, porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) has spread rapidly throughout the US swine industry. Initially, contaminated feed was proposed as a risk factor for PEDV; however, data were not available to support this theory. Here we provide proof of concept of this risk by describing a novel means for recovering PEDV-contaminated complete feed material from commercial swine sites and conducting an in vivo experiment to prove its infectivity. RESULTS: For on-farm detection of PEDV RNA in feed, paint rollers were used to collect material from at-risk feed bins from 3 clinically affected breeding herds. This material was tested by PCR and determined to be positive for PEDV-RNA (Ct = 19.50-22.20 range). To test infectivity, this material was pooled (Ct = 20.65) and a Treatment group of 3-week old PEDV-naïve piglets were allowed to consume it via natural feeding behavior. For the purpose of a Positive control, piglets were allowed to ingest feed spiked with stock PEDV (Ct = 18.23) while the negative control group received PEDV-free feed. Clinical signs of PEDV infection (vomiting and diarrhea) and viral shedding were observed in both the Positive control and Treatment group’ post-consumption with virus and microscopic lesions detected in intestinal samples No evidence of infection was observed in the Negative controls. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide proof of concept that contaminated complete feed can serve as a vehicle for PEDV infection of naïve pigs using natural feeding behavior.

negative: COVID-19 in a severe eosinophilic asthmatic receiving benralizumab - a case study Introduction: Only little is known about COVID-19 in patients with asthma. There is no data on COVID-19 in patients with severe asthma or patients with asthma who are treated with monoclonal antibodies.Case Study: Here, we present the case of a severe eosinophilic asthmatic in whom benralizumab treatment, an anti-IL-5R monoclonal antibody, was initiated 2 years ago. Prior to benralizumab treatment, every viral infection had resulted in a prolonged course of oral corticosteroids (OCS). Since initiation of benralizumab, the patient has had good asthma control. Mid-March 2020, the patient developed high fever.Results: A SARS-CoV-2-PCR (nasopharyngeal swab) was positive. The patient's symptoms subsided after few days. No OCS was needed. The asthma control questionnaire 6-item scale worsened moderately in the week of the infection and returned to normal levels thereafter. The asthma control test, measuring longer term asthma control, showed no decline.Conclusion: The course of COVID-19 was very mild in this particular patient with severe eosinophilic asthma. So far, there is no evidence that would suggest a more severe course of COVID-19 in patients with asthma. It is worth noting, that prior to the initiation of benralizumab this patient had multiple exacerbations per year triggered by viral infections (4/year), which all required OCS. Whilst only anecdotal, this case study provides the first evidence to support the current recommendation of continuing monoclonal antibodies in patients with severe asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic.

negative: Effect of advanced nursing care on psychological disorder in patients with COVID-19: A protocol of systematic review BACKGROUND: This study will explore the effect of advanced nursing care (ANC) on psychological disorder (PD) in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This study will search the following electronic databases up to June 30, 2020: Cochrane Library, PUBMED, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, OpenGrey, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, CNKI, and WANGFANG. We will not impose any language limitations. Two authors will independently identify titles/abstracts and full-text of all potential studies, and will collect data from eligible studies. Additionally, study quality will be assessed by Cochrane risk of bias. If necessary, we will conduct meta-analysis if sufficient trials are included. RESULTS: This study will explore the effect of ANC on PD in patients with COVID-19 through outcome indicators. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study may supply summarized evidence of ANC for the management of PD in COVID-19. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42020187610.

negative: Exploring alternative medicine options for the prevention or treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)- A systematic scoping review Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Symptoms include fever, cough, shortness of breath, muscle pain, pneumonia, and multi-organ failure. The infection spreads from one person to another via respiratory droplets. Alternative medicine (AMs) viz., Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Unani, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), are being promoted for the prevention of COVID-19. The aim of this systematic scoping review was to identify and summarize the scientific evidences promoting the use of AMs for the prevention of COVID-19. Methods: A comprehensive search of electronic search engines (PubMed and Web of Science) was performed. In addition, freewheeling searches of the government health ministries and government websites was done to retrieve the available information. Records available until 12th March 2020 were considered. Reports proposing the use of AMs for prevention or treatment of COVID-19 across all countries were included. Screening (primary and secondary) of the records and data extraction from the eligible studies were done by a single reviewer followed by a random quality check (10%) by the second reviewer. Results: Overall, 8 records (7 from China and 1 from India) exploring the use of AMs for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 were identified. Different medicines were explored by different AM systems. Conclusions: Several AMs options are proposed for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. However, their efficacy and safety still needs scientific validation through rigorous randomized controlled trials. This review may help inform decisions about the importance of research and development of AMs for COVID-19 prevention and treatment.

negative: Misdiagnosis of scrub typhus complicated by hemophagocytic syndrome BACKGROUND: This study sought to analyze the cases of clinical misdiagnosis of scrub typhus complicated by hemophagocytic syndrome. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records for diagnoses, clinical course, chest X-ray findings, laboratory data, and antibiotic therapy. RESULTS: All nine patients were misdiagnosed at the outpatient department between 07/2009 and 07/2017. They were diagnosed with septicemia and hemophagocytic syndrome, sepsis and hemophagocytic syndrome, severe infection, hepatitis and hemophagocytic syndrome, or upper respiratory tract infection. Among the nine patients, hepatic function examination showed decreased albumin and elevated C-reactive protein levels in all patients; alanine aminotransferase was increased and platelets were decreased in eight patients. Weil-Felix reaction was positive in three of nine patients. Indirect immunofluorescence demonstrated positive IgM antibody and EB virus-IgM in all nine patients; Mycoplasma pneumoniae antibody was positive in seven patients. All nine patients underwent chest computed tomography; no abnormality was found in two patients. Patch shadow with increased density was found in seven patients, including four patients with right pleural effusion and two with bilateral pleural effusion. Bone marrow biopsy was performed in all nine patients and hemophagocytic cells were seen. The nine misdiagnosed cases were given multiple broad-spectrum antibiotics either successively or concomitantly before and after admission, but no effective antibiotics against Orientis tsutsugamushi were applied. After diagnosis was corrected to scrub typhus, five patients were switched to chloramphenicol and dexamethasone, two patients were given azithromycin and dexamethasone, and two patients were treated with chloramphenicol. Body temperature returned to normal within 2–3 days and the children were quickly relieved from their condition. CONCLUSION: Hemophagocytic syndrome may be the presenting clinical feature of scrub typhus and initially mask the disease. Initial misdiagnosis is common and includes septicemia and hemophagocytic syndrome. The eschar is a useful diagnostic clue and febrile patients without any localizing signs should be thoroughly examined for its presence.

negative: Galloyl-Hexahydroxydiphenoyl (HHDP)-Glucose Isolated From Punica granatum L. Leaves Protects Against Lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-Induced Acute Lung Injury in BALB/c Mice The hydroalcoholic extract and ethyl acetate fraction of Punica granatum leaves have been known to exhibit anti-inflammatory activities. In this study, we investigated the therapeutic effects of galloyl-hexahydroxydiphenoyl (HHDP)-glucose isolated from pomegranate leaves on lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced acute lung injury (ALI) in mice. Male BALB/c mice were treated with different doses of galloyl-HHDP-glucose (5, 50, and 100 mg/Kg) or dexamethasone at 5 mg/Kg (per os) 6 h after intra-tracheal instillation of LPS. Vehicle-treated mice were used as controls. Twenty-four hours after LPS challenge, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), and lung samples were collected for analyses. They were evaluated by monitoring the expression of NF-κB, JNK, and cytokine genes and proteins, as well as cell migration and lung function. All doses of galloyl-HHDP-glucose inhibited LPS-induced JNK and NF-κB activation. Likewise, the galloyl-HHDP-glucose-treated animals presented reduced expression of the TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β genes in the lungs and reduced TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1β, and IL-8 protein levels when compared with the vehicle-treated LPS-challenged mice. In addition, the ALI mice treated with galloyl-HHDP-glucose also presented reduced lung inflammatory cell accumulation, especially that of neutrophils, in their BALF and lungs. In addition, galloyl-HHDP-glucose treatment markedly ameliorated the LPS-induced pulmonary mechanism complications and attenuated weight loss. Overall, we showed for the first time that galloyl-HHDP-glucose protects against ALI, and may be useful for treating ALI and other inflammatory disorders.

negative: Update on treatment of COVID-19: ongoing studies between promising and disappointing results The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. We are facing a new virus, so several antiviral agents previously used to treat other coronavirus infections such as SARS and MERS are being considered as the first potential candidates to treat COVID-19. Thus, several agents have been used by the beginning of the current outbreak in China first and all over the word successively, as reported in several different guidelines and therapeutic recommendations. At the same time, a great number of clinical trials have been launched to investigate the potential efficacy therapies for COVID-19 highlighting the urgent need to get as quickly as possible high-quality evidence. Through PubMed, we explored the relevant articles published on treatment of COVID-19 and on trials ongoing up to April 15, 2020.

negative: Heparin as a Therapy for COVID-19: Current Evidence and Future Possibilities Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), the clinical syndrome associated with infection by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has impacted nearly every country in the world. Despite an unprecedented focus of scientific investigation, there is a paucity of evidence-based pharmacotherapies against this disease. Due to this lack of data-driven treatment strategies, broad variations in practice patterns have emerged. Observed hypercoagulability in COVID-19 patients has created debate within the critical care community on the therapeutic utility of heparin. We seek to provide an overview of the data supporting the therapeutic use of heparin, both unfractionated and low molecular weight, as an anticoagulant for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additionally, we review preclinical evidence establishing biological plausibility for heparin and synthetic heparin-like drugs as therapies for COVID-19 through anti-viral and anti-inflammatory effects. Finally, we discuss known adverse effects and theoretical off-target effects that may temper enthusiasm for the adoption of heparin as a therapy in COVID-19 without confirmatory prospective randomized controlled trials. Despite previous failures of anticoagulants in critical illness, plausibility of heparin for COVID-19 is sufficiently robust to justify urgent randomized controlled trials to determine the safety and effectiveness of this therapy.

negative: Potential therapeutic approach for the hormonal treatment of lacrimal gland dysfunction in Sjögren's syndrome

negative: A Randomized, Double-blind, Non-inferiority Trial of Magnesium Sulphate versus Dexamethasone for Prevention of Postoperative Sore Throat after Lumbar Spinal Surgery in the Prone Position. BACKGROUND Postoperative sore throat (POST) is a frequent complication of tracheal intubation, particularly after surgery in the prone position. We designed this study to validate the non-inferiority of magnesium sulphate against dexamethasone for prevention of POST after lumbar spinal surgery. METHODS One hundred and forty-six patients were randomly allocated to receive either magnesium or dexamethasone. Before anesthetic induction, the magnesium group (n = 73) received magnesium sulphate 30 mg/kg followed by 10 mg/kg/h by continuous infusion until the end of surgery. The dexamethasone group (n = 73) received dexamethasone 8 mg. The primary endpoint was the overall incidence of POST, which was assessed serially over 48 hr postoperatively. The predefined margin of non-inferiority for magnesium against dexamethasone was 15%. RESULTS Overall incidences of POST at rest (50.7% versus 49.3% in the magnesium and dexamethasone group, respectively, p = 0.869) and swallowing (65.8% versus 61.6% in the magnesium and dexamethasone group, respectively, p = 0.606) were not different between the groups. The upper limit of the 90% confidence interval, which must be lower than the predefined margin of non-inferiority to prove the non-inferiority of magnesium sulphate against dexamethasone, for at rest and swallowing were 14.97% (p = 0.0496) and 17.19% (p = 0.0854), respectively. The incidences and severities of POST and hoarseness were also not different between the groups throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS Prophylactic magnesium sulphate appears to be non-inferior to dexamethasone for the prevention of POST at rest in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery in the prone position.

negative: Synthesis of adenine dinucleosides SAM analogs as specific inhibitors of SARS-CoV nsp14 RNA cap guanine-N7-methyltransferase The spreading of new viruses is known to provoke global human health threat. The current COVID-19 pandemic caused by the recently emerged coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is one significant and unfortunate example of what the world will have to face in the future with emerging viruses in absence of appropriate treatment. The discovery of potent and specific antiviral inhibitors and/or vaccines to fight these massive outbreaks is an urgent research priority. Enzymes involved in the capping pathway of viruses and more specifically RNA N7- or 2’O-methyltransferases (MTases) are now admitted as potential targets for antiviral chemotherapy. We designed bisubstrate inhibitors by mimicking the transition state of the 2’-O-methylation of the cap RNA in order to block viral 2’-O MTases. This work resulted in the synthesis of 16 adenine dinucleosides with both adenosines connected by various nitrogen-containing linkers. Unexpectedly, all the bisubstrate compounds were barely active against 2’-O MTases of several flaviviruses or SARS-CoV but surprisingly, seven of them showed efficient and specific inhibition against SARS-CoV N7-MTase (nsp14) in the micromolar to submicromolar range. The most active nsp14 inhibitor identified is as potent as but particularly more specific than the broad-spectrum MTase inhibitor, sinefungin. Molecular docking suggests that the inhibitor binds to a pocket formed by the S-adenosyl methionine (SAM) and cap RNA binding sites, conserved among SARS-CoV nsp14. These dinucleoside SAM analogs will serve as starting points for the development of next inhibitors for SARS-CoV-2 nsp14 N7-MTase.

negative: AhR and IDO1 in pathogenesis of Covid-19 and the "Systemic AhR Activation Syndrome" Translational review and therapeutic perspectives. Covid-19 is the acute illness caused by SARS-CoV-2 with initial clinical symptoms such as cough, fever, malaise, headache, and anosmia. After entry into cells, corona viruses (CoV) activate aryl hydrocarbon receptors (AhRs) by an indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO1)-independent mechanism, bypassing the IDO1-kynurenine-AhR pathway. The IDO1-kynurenine-AhR signaling pathway is used by multiple viral, microbial and parasitic pathogens to activate AhRs and to establish infections. AhRs enhance their own activity through an IDO1-AhR-IDO1 positive feedback loop prolonging activation induced by pathogens. Direct activation of AhRs by CoV induces immediate and simultaneous up-regulation of diverse AhR-dependent downstream effectors, and this, in turn, results in a "Systemic AhR Activation Syndrome" (SAAS) consisting of inflammation, thromboembolism, and fibrosis, culminating in multiple organ injuries, and death. Activation of AhRs by CoV may lead to diverse sets of phenotypic disease pictures depending on time after infection, overall state of health, hormonal balance, age, gender, comorbidities, but also diet and environmental factors modulating AhRs. We hypothesize that elimination of factors known to up-regulate AhRs, or implementation of measures known to down-regulate AhRs, should decrease severity of infection. Although therapies selectively down-regulating both AhR and IDO1 are currently lacking, medications in clinical use such as dexamethasone may down-regulate both AhR and IDO1 genes, as calcitriol/vitamin D3 may down-regulate the AhR gene, and tocopherol/vitamin E may down-regulate the IDO1 gene. Supplementation of calcitriol should therefore be subjected to epidemiological studies and tested in prospective trials for prevention of CoV infections, as should tocopherol, whereas dexamethasone could be tried in interventional trials. Because lack of physical exercise activates AhRs via the IDO1-kynurenine-AhR signaling pathway increasing risk of infection, physical exercise should be encouraged during quarantines and stay-at-home orders during pandemic outbreaks. Understanding which factors affect gene expression of both AhR and IDO1 may help in designing therapies to prevent and treat humans suffering from Covid-19.

negative: Vitamin D and COVID-19 Epidemiological data report that several countries with a high prevalence of hypovitaminosis D may have increased susceptibility to complications and mortality due to COVID-19 infection. These reports, however, have limitations given that they derive from observational studies. Nevertheless, while awaiting more robust data, clinicians should treat patients with vitamin D deficiency irrespective of whether or not it has a link with respiratory infections.

negative: Preliminary evidence from a multicenter prospective observational study of the safety and efficacy of chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 BACKGROUND: Effective therapies are urgently needed for the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Chloroquine has been proved to have antiviral effect against coronavirus in vitro. In this study, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of chloroquine with different doses in COVID-19. METHOD: In this multicenter prospective observational study, we enrolled patients older than 18 years old with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection excluding critical cases from 12 hospitals in Guangdong and Hubei Provinces. Eligible patients received chloroquine phosphate 500 mg, orally, once (half dose) or twice (full dose) daily. Patients treated with non-chloroquine therapy were included as historical controls. The primary endpoint is the time to undetectable viral RNA. Secondary outcomes include the proportion of patients with undetectable viral RNA by day 10 and 14, hospitalization time, duration of fever, and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 197 patients completed chloroquine treatment, and 176 patients were included as historical controls. The median time to achieve an undetectable viral RNA was shorter in chloroquine than in non-chloroquine (absolute difference in medians -6.0 days; 95% CI -6.0 to -4.0). The duration of fever is shorter in chloroquine (geometric mean ratio 0.6; 95% CI 0.5 to 0.8). No serious adverse events were observed in the chloroquine group. Patients treated with half dose experienced lower rate of adverse events than with full dose. CONCLUSIONS: Although randomised trials are needed for further evaluation, this study provides evidence for safety and efficacy of chloroquine in COVID-19 and suggests that chloroquine can be a cost-effective therapy for combating the COVID-19 pandemic.

negative: Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science Summary The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a profound effect on all aspects of society, including mental health and physical health. We explore the psychological, social, and neuroscientific effects of COVID-19 and set out the immediate priorities and longer-term strategies for mental health science research. These priorities were informed by surveys of the public and an expert panel convened by the UK Academy of Medical Sciences and the mental health research charity, MQ: Transforming Mental Health, in the first weeks of the pandemic in the UK in March, 2020. We urge UK research funding agencies to work with researchers, people with lived experience, and others to establish a high level coordination group to ensure that these research priorities are addressed, and to allow new ones to be identified over time. The need to maintain high-quality research standards is imperative. International collaboration and a global perspective will be beneficial. An immediate priority is collecting high-quality data on the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic across the whole population and vulnerable groups, and on brain function, cognition, and mental health of patients with COVID-19. There is an urgent need for research to address how mental health consequences for vulnerable groups can be mitigated under pandemic conditions, and on the impact of repeated media consumption and health messaging around COVID-19. Discovery, evaluation, and refinement of mechanistically driven interventions to address the psychological, social, and neuroscientific aspects of the pandemic are required. Rising to this challenge will require integration across disciplines and sectors, and should be done together with people with lived experience. New funding will be required to meet these priorities, and it can be efficiently leveraged by the UK's world-leading infrastructure. This Position Paper provides a strategy that may be both adapted for, and integrated with, research efforts in other countries.

negative: Convalescent plasma transfusion for the treatment of COVID‐19: Systematic review The recent emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has reassessed the usefulness of historic convalescent plasma transfusion (CPT). This review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of CPT therapy in COVID‐19 patients based on the publications reported till date. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review on convalescent plasma on clinically relevant outcomes in individuals with COVID‐19. PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline databases were searched upto 19 April 2020. All records were screened as per the protocol eligibility criteria. We included five studies reporting CPT to COVID‐19 patients. The main findings from available data are as follows: (a) Convalescent plasma may reduce mortality in critically ill patients, (b) Increase in neutralizing antibody titers and disappearance of SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA was observed in almost all the patients after CPT therapy, and (c) Beneficial effect on clinical symptoms after administration of convalescent plasma. Based on the limited scientific data, CPT therapy in COVID‐19 patients appears safe, clinically effective, and reduces mortality. Well‐designed large multicenter clinical trial studies should be conducted urgently to establish the efficacy of CPT to COVID‐19 patients.

negative: An interferon‐γ‐related cytokine storm in SARS patients Fourteen cytokines or chemokines were analyzed on 88 RT‐PCR‐confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) patients. IFN‐γ, IL‐18, TGF‐β, IL‐6, IP‐10, MCP‐1, MIG, and IL‐8, but not of TNF‐α, IL‐2, IL‐4, IL‐10, IL‐13, or TNFRI, were highly elevated in the acute phase sera of Taiwan SARS patients. IFN‐γ was significantly higher in the Ab(+) group than in the Ab(−) group. IFN‐γ, IL‐18, MCP‐1, MIG, and IP‐10 were already elevated at early days post fever onset. Furthermore, levels of IL‐18, IP‐10, MIG, and MCP‐1 were significantly higher in the death group than in the survival group. For the survival group, IFN‐γ and MCP‐1 were inversely associated with circulating lymphocytes count and monocytes count, but positively associated with circulating neutrophils count. It is concluded that an interferon‐γ‐related cytokine storm was induced post SARS coronavirus infection, and this cytokine storm might be involved in the immunopathological damage in SARS patients. J. Med. Virol. 75:185–194, 2005. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

negative: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Patients In December 2019, a novel coronavirus called severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Severe complications have been reported to occur in 33% of patients with COVID-19 and include acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute renal failure, acute respiratory injury, septic shock, and severe pneumonia. Currently, there is no specific treatment or approved vaccine against COVID-19 and many clinical trials are currently investigating potential medications to treat COVID-19. The immunosuppressed status of some cancer patients (whether caused by the disease itself or the treatment) increases their risk of infection compared with the general population. This short review aims to focus on the impact of COVID-19 on a cancer patient and discuss management options and recommendation in addition to highlighting the currently available clinical guidelines and resources.

negative: COVID-19 and cancer: Looking for evidence

negative: Croup Summary Most children who present with acute onset of barky cough, stridor, and chest-wall indrawing have croup. A careful history and physical examination is the best method to confirm the diagnosis and to rule out potentially serious alternative disorders such as bacterial tracheitis and other rare causes of upper-airway obstruction. Epinephrine delivered via a nebuliser is effective for temporary relief of symptoms of airway obstruction. Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment, and benefit is seen in children with all levels of severity of croup, including mild cases.

negative: Experiences and lesson strategies for cardiology from the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China, by 'on the scene' cardiologists

negative: Use of inhibitors of the renin angiotensin system and COVID-19 prognosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis Background: controversy has arisen in the scientific community on whether the use of renin angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors in the context of COVID-19 would be of benefit or harmful. A meta-analysis of eligible studies comparing the occurrence of severe and fatal COVID-19 in infected patients who were under treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) vs no treatment or other antihypertensives was conducted. Methods: PubMed, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library, MedRxiv and BioRxiv were searched for relevant studies. Fixed-effect models or random-effect models were used depending on the heterogeneity between estimates. Results: a total of fifteen studies with 21,614 patients were included. The use of RAS inhibitors was associated with a non-significant 20% decreased risk of the composite outcome (death, admission to intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation requirement or progression to severe or critical pneumonia): RR 0.81 (95%CI: 0.63-1.04), p=0.10, I2=82%. In a subgroup analysis that included hypertensive subjects only, ACEI/ARB were associated with a 27% significant decrease in the risk of the composite outcome (RR 0.73 (95%CI: 0.56-0.96), p=0.02, I2=65%). Conclusion: the results of this pooled analysis suggest that the use of ACEI/ARB does not worsen the prognosis, and could even be protective in hypertensive subjects. Patients should continue these drugs during their COVID-19 illness.

negative: Psychological Distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in France: a national assessment of at-risk populations Introduction More than 2.5 billion people in the world are currently in lockdowns to limit the spread of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Psychological Distress (PD) and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder have been reported after traumatic events, but the specific effect of pandemics is not well known. The aim of this study was to assess PD in France, a country where COVID-19 had such a dramatic impact that it required a country-wide lockdown. Patients and methods We recruited patients in 4 groups of chatbot users followed for breast cancer, asthma, depression and migraine. We used the Psychological Distress Index (PDI), a validated scale to measure PD during traumatic events, and correlated PD risk with patients characteristics in order to better identify the one who were the most at-risk. Results The study included 1771 participants. 91.25% (1616) were female with a mean age of 32.8 years (SD=13,71), 7.96% (141) were male with a mean age of 28.0 years (SD=8,14). In total, 38.06% (674) of the respondents had psychological distress (PDI [≥]15). An ANOVA analysis showed that sex (p=0.00132), unemployment (p=7.16x10-6) and depression (p=7.49x10-7) were significantly associated with a higher PDI score. Patients using their smartphone or computer more than one hour a day also had a higher PDI score (p=0.02588). Conclusion Prevalence of PD in at-risk patients is high. These patients are also at increased risk to develop Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Specific steps should be implemented to monitor and prevent PD through dedicated mental health policies if we want to limit the public health impact of COVID-19 in time.

negative: Why your Patients’ Believing Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine are 90% Effective for COVID‐19 is 100% Dangerous

negative: Comparison of dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. BACKGROUND Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Dexamethasone has been reported to reduce PONV. However, there is insufficient evidence regarding the effect of dexmedetomidine in decreasing PONV. This study was designed to compare the effects of a single dose of dexmedetomidine to dexamethasone for reducing PONV after LC. METHODS Eighty-six adult patients scheduled for LC were randomized to receive either single dose 1 µg/kg of dexmedetomidine (Dexmed group, N = 43) or 8 mg dexamethasone (Dexa group, N = 43) before skin incision. During the first 24 h postoperatively, the incidence and severity of PONV were assessed. Pain and sedation scores were assessed on arrival in the recovery room and early postoperatively. Analgesic and antiemetic consumption during the 24 h after surgery were calculated. Intra-operative and postoperative hemodynamics were recorded. RESULTS Twenty-one percent of the patients in the Dexmed group developed PONV compared to 28% in the Dexa group (P = 0.6). Severity of PONV was similar between the two groups (P = 0.07). Early postoperatively, pain severity was significantly lower in the Dexmed group, but sedation scores were significantly higher. The first analgesic request was significantly delayed in the Dexmed group (P = 0.02). The total amounts of intraoperative fentanyl and postoperative tramadol administered were significantly lower in the Dexmed group. No difference in ondansetron was noted between the two groups. Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were significantly lower in the Dexmed group after administration of dexmedetomidine. No major side effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS Dexmedetomidine reduces the incidence and severity of PONV, similar to dexamethasone. It is superior to dexamethasone in reducing postoperative pain and total analgesic consumption during the first 24 h after LC.

negative: Early corticosteroid treatment for severe pneumonia caused by 2009 H1N1 influenza virus

negative: Receptor-mediated induction of human dermal fibroblast ectoaminopeptidase N by glucocorticoids Aminopeptidase N was demonstrated in human dermal fibroblasts as an ectoenzyme. The enzyme has wide substrate specificity, with a K (m) of 0.63 mM and V (max) of 338 nmol min(−1) mg(−1). Addition of fetal calf serum to the culture medium increased aminopeptidase N activity up to 63% by 10% serum in a 48-h culture. Treatment of fibroblasts by dexamethasone increased ectoaminopeptidase N activity in a dose- and time-dependent manner. Maximal increase of aminopeptidase N occurred after treatment with 1 μM dexamethasone for 3 days. Actinomycin D, a blocker of RNA synthesis, and cycloheximide, an inhibitor of protein synthesis, did not alter basal aminopeptidase N activity. However, they prevented stimulation by dexamethasone. RU 38486, a glucocorticoid receptor antagonist, suppressed the dexamethasone-induced increase in aminopeptidase N activity. This study shows that human dermal fibroblasts contain ectoaminopeptidase N controlled by glucocorticoids through a receptor-mediated mechanism.

negative: Efficacy and safety of multiple doses of NEPA without dexamethasone in preventing nausea and vomiting induced by multiple-day and high-dose chemotherapy in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a phase IIa, multicenter study Despite the availability of several antiemetics, clinical findings show that control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) continues to be a serious concern for hematological patients, mainly for those receiving multiple-day (MD) and high-dose (HD) chemotherapy (CT). For CINV prophylaxis, 5-hydroxytryptamine type-3 receptor antagonists (5HT3-RAs) and neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists (NK1-RAs) are usually administered together with dexamethasone, which may increase the risk of serious infections in patients undergoing myeloablative treatment. The rationale of this multicenter, open-label and phase IIa study was to explore the efficacy of multiple doses of NEPA (netupitant/palonosetron) given as an every-other-day regimen without dexamethasone in preventing CINV in patients with relapsed-refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (R/R-NHL), eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and treated with MD-HD-CT. Seventy patients participated to the study. According to the adopted Fleming one-stage design, the primary endpoint of this study was achieved. The CR values were 87.1% (primary endpoint, overall phase: days 1-8), 88.6% (acute phase: days 1-6), and 98.6% (delayed phase: days 7-8), while complete control (CR with no more than mild nausea) was 85.7% (overall phase), 88.6% (acute phase), and 95.7% (delayed phase). Moderate and severe episodes of nausea were reported by less than 10% of patients in the overall phase and less than 5% in both the acute and delayed phases. Regarding safety, NEPA was well tolerated with only one adverse event (constipation) evaluated as possibly related to NEPA administration. In conclusion, our study demonstrated that multiple alternate dosing of NEPA without the addition of dexamethasone is highly effective for preventing nausea and vomiting in this difficult setting, with a good tolerability profile.

negative: Epidemic Models as Scaling Limits of Individual Dynamics Infection spread among individuals is modelled with a continuous time Markov chain, in which subject interactions depend on their distance in space. The well known SIR model and non local variants of the latter are then obtained as large scale limits of the individual based model in two different scaling regimes of the interaction.

negative: Improved survival outcome in SARs-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome patients with Tocilizumab administration ABSTRACT Background: The novel human coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARs-CoV-2), was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020. Hence, there is an urgency to find effective treatment. Of those patients afflicted in the United States, many have required treatment with ventilator secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Data are needed regarding the benefit of treatment and prevention of the cytokine storms in COVID-19 patients with Tocilizumab. Methods: Clinical outcomes data for patients admitted to Orange Regional Medical Center with confirmed COVID-19 from Mar 15, 2020 to Apr 20, 2020 were identified through electronic health record chart review. We conducted a retrospective case-control study in confirmed COVID 19 positive patients with ARDS requiring mechanical ventilation and compared outcome in terms of mortality and length of stay amongst those who received Tocilizumab as treatment modality opposed to those that did not. Results: A total of 94 patients with COVID-19 ARDS were analyzed. 44 were in the study group and 50 in the control group. We tried to match both group as close as possible in terms of age, sex, BMI and HS score- calculated using inflammatory markers- ferritin, triglycerides, AST and fibrinogen. The median age was 55.5 years in the study group and 66 in the control group, difference was not statistically significant. Average HS score was 114 in the Tocilizumab group and 92 in the control group, difference was statistically significant with P<0.0001. Also, the patients in the study group had elevated levels of IL-6, triglycerides, AST, ferritin which were statistically significant with p < 0.0001 when compared to the control group. Length of stay was longer, average 17.9 days in the Tocilizumab. Survival rate was much lower at 48 % in the control group and 61.36 % in patients who received Tocilizumab with significant P value of < 0.00001. The number needed to treat (NNT) was 7.48, if we treat 8 patients with Tocilizumab, 1 will not die. Conclusions: Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS) occurs in a large number of patients with severe COVID-19, which is also an important cause of death. IL- 6 is the key molecule of CRS, so IL-6R antagonist Tocilizumab may be of value in improving outcomes. In our study Tocilizumab group seemed to have improved survival outcome. Results have to be interpreted with caution since this is a retrospective study and mortality is affected by multiple, confounding factors. We await the results of ongoing randomized controlled trials to definitely answer the question of whether Tocilizumab improves survival in COVID-19 ARDS patients.

negative: New insights in equine steroidogenesis: an in-depth look at steroid signaling in the placenta. Steroid production varies widely among species, with these differences becoming more pronounced during pregnancy. As a result, each species has its own distinct pattern of steroids, steroidogenic enzymes, receptors, and transporters to support its individual physiological requirements. Although the circulating steroid profile is well characterized during equine pregnancy, there is much yet to be explored regarding the factors that support steroidogenesis and steroid signaling. To obtain a holistic view of steroid-related transcripts, we sequenced chorioallantois (45 days, 4 months, 6 months, 10 months, 11 months, and post-partum) and endometrium (4 months, 6 months, 10 months, 11 months, and diestrus) throughout gestation, then looked in-depth at transcripts related to steroid synthesis, conjugation, transportation, and signaling. Key findings include: 1) differential expression of HSD17B isoforms among tissues (HSD17B1 high in the chorioallantois, while HSD17B2 is the dominant form in the endometrium) 2) a novel isoform with homology to SULT1A1 is the predominant sulfotransferase transcript in the chorioallantois; and 3) nuclear estrogen (ESR1, ESR2) and progesterone (PGR) expression is minimal to nonexistant in the chorioallantois and pregnant endometrium. Additionally, several hypotheses have been formed, including the possibility that the 45-day chorioallantois is able to synthesize steroids de novo from acetate and that horses utilize glucuronidation to clear estrogens from the endometrium during estrous, but not during pregnancy. In summary, these findings represent an in-depth look at equine steroid-related transcripts through gestation, providing novel hypotheses and future directions for equine endocrine research.

negative: Oligonucleotide Therapeutics The idea of sequence-specific gene silencing by synthetic oligonucleotides targeting mRNA is at least 40 years old, but it was only in the mid-1980s when technical advances made the chemical synthesis of oligonucleotides possible that practical steps could be taken toward its implementation. The result was a deluge of experimental data in a variety of systems [1], most of which employed the phosphorothioate (PS) backbone modification, and much of which was ultimately, and unfortunately, uninterpretable.

negative: The immunology of COVID-19: is immune modulation an option for treatment? In December, 2019, an outbreak of COVID-19 emerged in Wuhan, China and quickly spread globally. As of May 7, 2020, there were 3 672 238 confirmed infections and 254 045 deaths attributed to COVID-19. Evidence has shown that there are asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19 who can transmit the disease to others. The virus incubation time shows a wide range (0–24 days) and the virus displays a high infectivity. It is therefore urgent to develop an effective therapy to treat patients with COVID-19 and to control the spread of the causative agent, severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Repurposing of approved drugs is widely adopted to fight newly emerged diseases such as COVID-19, as these drugs have known pharmacokinetic and safety profiles. As pathological examination has confirmed the involvement of immune hyperactivation and acute respiratory distress syndrome in fatal cases of COVID-19, several disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDS), such as hydroxychloroquine and tocilizumab, have been proposed as potential therapies for the treatment of COVID-19. In this Review, we discuss the immunological aspects of COVID-19 and the potential implication of DMARDs in treating this disease.

negative: [Chloroquine as a possible treatment for COVID-19]. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, chloroquine has been mentioned as a possible treatment. In vitro studies have shown anti-viral activity of chloroquine against SARS-CoV-2. Recently, the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment published treatment options for antiviral treatment for COVID-19 where chloroquine was suggested as first choice for off-label treatment, beside remdesivir en lopinavir/ritonavir. In this commentary, we provide a background and history of chloroquine, the evidence for antiviral efficacy of chloroquine and the arguments for off-label use of chloroquine in COVID-19.

negative: Role of Antidiarrhoeal Drugs as Adjunctive Therapies for Acute Diarrhoea in Children Acute diarrhoea is a leading cause of child mortality in developing countries. Principal pathogens include Escherichia coli, rotaviruses, and noroviruses. 90% of diarrhoeal deaths are attributable to inadequate sanitation. Acute diarrhoea is the second leading cause of overall childhood mortality and accounts for 18% of deaths among children under five. In 2004 an estimated 1.5 million children died from diarrhoea, with 80% of deaths occurring before the age of two. Treatment goals are to prevent dehydration and nutritional damage and to reduce duration and severity of diarrhoeal episodes. The recommended therapeutic regimen is to provide oral rehydration solutions (ORS) and to continue feeding. Although ORS effectively mitigates dehydration, it has no effect on the duration, severity, or frequency of diarrhoeal episodes. Adjuvant therapy with micronutrients, probiotics, or antidiarrhoeal agents may thus be useful. The WHO recommends the use of zinc tablets in association with ORS. The ESPGHAN/ESPID treatment guidelines consider the use of racecadotril, diosmectite, or probiotics as possible adjunctive therapy to ORS. Only racecadotril and diosmectite reduce stool output, but no treatment has yet been shown to reduce hospitalisation rate or mortality. Appropriate management with validated treatments may help reduce the health and economic burden of acute diarrhoea in children worldwide.

negative: Estimating the Risks from COVID-19 Infection in Adult Chemotherapy Patients The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) novel coronavirus represents a significant health risk, particularly in older patients. Cancer is one of the leading causes of death in most rich countries, and delivering chemotherapy may be associated with increased risk in the presence of a pandemic infection. Estimating this risk is crucial in making decisions about balancing risks and benefits from administering chemotherapy. However, there are no specific data about chemotherapy risks per se. Here we develop a simple model to estimate the potential harms in patients undergoing chemotherapy during a COVID outbreak. We use age-related case fatality rates as a basis for estimating risk, and use previous data from risk of death during influenza outbreaks to estimate the additional risk associated with chemotherapy. We use data from randomised trials to estimate benefit across a range of curative and palliative settings, and address the balance of benefit against the risk of harm. We then use those data to estimate the impact on national chemotherapy delivery patterns.

negative: Tracheal Infections Infectious processes of the trachea represent a distinct clinical entity with an evolving landscape owing to advances in airway management and vaccination practices. Untreated inflammatory processes of the trachea may present in the form of acute airway obstruction, potentially resulting in significant morbidity and even mortality. Therefore it is important to recognize the cardinal features of some of the common tracheal infectious processes to differentiate them from non-infectious pathology, as the latter is associated with a more indolent course. As with most other infectious processes of the airway, pathogens causing tracheal infection can be bacterial, viral or fungal in nature. Viral etiology represents the most common cause of laryngotracheal infection in a child. Bacterial infections of the trachea are responsible for more significant morbidity, including prolonged hospitalization, need for endotracheal intubation and even an occasional tracheostomy. The current chapter describes the clinical features and microbiology of tracheal infections at large, explores the utility of diagnostic tests, and provides an algorithm for management.

negative: Advances in the treatment of virus-induced asthma Viral exacerbations continue to represent the major burden in terms of morbidity, mortality and health care costs associated with asthma. Those at greatest risk for acute asthma are those with more severe airways disease and poor asthma control. It is this group with established asthma in whom acute exacerbations triggered by virus infections remain a serious cause of increased morbidity. A range of novel therapies are emerging to treat asthma and in particular target this group with poor disease control, and in most cases their efficacy is now being judged by their ability to reduce the frequency of acute exacerbations. Critical for the development of new treatment approaches is an improved understanding of virus-host interaction in the context of the asthmatic airway. This requires research into the virology of the disease in physiological models in conjunction with detailed phenotypic characterisation of asthma patients to identify targets amenable to therapeutic intervention.

negative: Mechanisms and evidence of vertical transmission of infections in pregnancy including SARS‐CoV‐2 There remain unanswered questions concerning mother‐to‐child‐transmission (MTCT) of SARS‐CoV‐2. Despite reports of neonatal COVID‐19, SARS‐CoV‐2 has not been consistently isolated in perinatal samples thus, definitive proof of transplacental infection is still lacking. To address these questions, we assessed investigative tools used to confirm maternal‐fetal infection and known protective mechanisms of the placental barrier that prevent transplacental pathogen migration. Forty studies of COVID‐19 pregnancies reviewed suggest a lack of consensus on diagnostic strategy for congenital infection. While RT‐PCR of neonatal swabs was universally performed, a wide range of clinical samples was screened including vaginal secretions (22.5%), amniotic fluid (35%), breast milk (22.5%) and umbilical cord blood. Neonatal COVID‐19 was reported in eight studies, two of which were based on the detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 IgM in neonatal blood. Histological examination demonstrated sparse viral particles, vascular malperfusion and inflammation in the placenta from pregnant women with COVID‐19. The paucity of placental co‐expression of ACE‐2 and TMPRSS2, two receptors involved in cytoplasmic entry of SARS‐CoV‐2, may explain its relative insensitivity to transplacental infection. Viral interactions may utilise membrane receptors other than ACE‐2 thus, tissue susceptibility may be broader than currently known. Further spatial‐temporal studies are needed to determine the true potential for transplacental migration. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

negative: Ebola Holding Units at government hospitals in Sierra Leone: evidence for a flexible and effective model for safe isolation, early treatment initiation, hospital safety and health system functioning The 2014-2015 West African outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) claimed the lives of more than 11,000 people and infected over 27,000 across seven countries. Traditional approaches to containing EVD proved inadequate and new approaches for controlling the outbreak were required. The Ministry of Health & Sanitation and King’s Sierra Leone Partnership developed a model for Ebola Holding Units (EHUs) at Government Hospitals in the capital city Freetown. The EHUs isolated screened or referred suspect patients, provided initial clinical care, undertook laboratory testing to confirm EVD status, referred onward positive cases to an Ebola Treatment Centre or negative cases to the general wards, and safely stored corpses pending collection by burial teams. Between 29th May 2014 and 19th January 2015, our five units had isolated approximately 37% (1159) of the 3097 confirmed cases within Western Urban and Rural district. Nosocomial transmission of EVD within the units appears lower than previously documented at other facilities and staff infection rates were also low. We found that EHUs are a flexible and effective model of rapid diagnosis, safe isolation and early initial treatment. We also demonstrated that it is possible for international partners and government facilities to collaborate closely during a humanitarian crisis.

negative: Chronic treatment with hydroxychloroquine and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Background: Hydroxychloroquine sulphate (HCQ) is being scrutinized for repositioning in the treatment and prevention of SARS-Cov-2 infection. This antimalarial drug is also chronically used to treat patients with autoimmune diseases. Methods: By analyzing the Portuguese anonymized data on private and public based medical prescriptions we have identified all cases chronically receiving HCQ for the management of diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, and other autoimmune diseases. Additionally, we have detected all laboratory confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and all laboratory confirmed negative cases in the Portuguese population (mandatorily registered in a centrally managed database). Cross linking the two sets of data has allowed us to compare the proportion of HCQ chronic treatment (at least 2 grams per month) in laboratory confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection with laboratory confirmed negative cases. Results: Out of 26,815 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, 77 (0.29%) were chronically treated with HCQ, while 1,215 (0.36%) out of 333,489 negative patients were receiving it chronically (P=0.04). After adjustment for age, sex, and chronic treatment with corticosteroids and/or immunosuppressants, the odds ratio of SARS-CoV-2 infection for chronic treatment with HCQ has been 0.51 (0.37-0.70). Conclusions: Our data suggest that chronic treatment with HCQ confer protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

negative: Because Every Drop Counts: Blood Donation During the COVID-19 Pandemic

negative: There are asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic patients infected with COVID-19. So what? Pandemic response implications Abstract Asymptomatic but infectious people have been reported in many infectious diseases. Asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic carriers would be a hidden reservoir of COVID-19. Aim This review identifies primary empirical evidence about the ability of asymptomatic carriers to infect others with COVID-19 pandemic and reflects on the implications for control measures. Methods A systematic review is followed by a narrative report and commentary inclusion criteria were: studies reporting primary data on asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic patients, who were considered to have passed on COVID-19 infection; and published in indexed journals or in peer review between January 1 and March 31, 2020. Results Nine articles reported on 83 asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic persons. Conclusions The evidence confirms COVID-19 transmission from people who were asymptomatic at the time. A series of implications for health service response are laid out. Keywords: Covid-19, Asymptomatic, Pre-symptomatic, Public Health

negative: A case report of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy during steroid treatment for ANCA-associated renal vasculitis CASE REPORT: an 80-year-old woman presented with rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis and was admitted to our hospital. Myeloperoxidase-specific antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (MPO-ANCA) was positive. We diagnosed ANCA-associated renal vasculitis (ANCA-RV). Treatment was initiated with intravenous methylprednisolone pulse therapy, followed by prednisolone (PSL) at 30 mg/day. We gradually reduced the PSL dose to 7.5 mg/day over 6 months. At that time, the patient developed disturbances of consciousness which progressed subacutely. MRI revealed regions of patchy white matter with an increased signal on T2-weighted, fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequences and diffusion-weighted sequences. JC virus DNA was detected in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), leading to a diagnosis of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). PML is a rare infectious demyelinating disease of the central nervous system caused by JC virus infection, occurring in highly immunosuppressed individuals such as HIV-infected patients and patients using some biological agents, and having a very poor prognosis. In the present case, PML may have been associated with steroid use, although there are very few case reports of PML in patients taking only steroids. We report progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy during steroid treatment of ANCA-RV. When patients show progressive disturbance of consciousness during treatment for ANCA-RV, we need to take PML into consideration for differential diagnosis.

negative: An Updated Systematic Review of the Therapeutic Role of Hydroxychloroquine in Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The world is currently experiencing the Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. There is no approved drug for the definitive treatment of the disease. Various drugs are being tried for the treatment of COVID-19, including hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). This study was performed to systematically review the therapeutic role of HCQ in COVID-19 from the available literature. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP (WHO), Cochrane Library databases, and two pre-print servers (medRxiv.org and Research Square) were searched for clinical studies that evaluated the therapeutic role of HCQ on COVID-19 until 10 May 2020. The available studies were critically analyzed and the data were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 663 articles were screened and 12 clinical studies (seven peer-reviewed and published studies and five non-peer-reviewed studies from pre-print servers) with a total sample size of 3543 patients were included. Some of the clinical studies demonstrated good virological and clinical outcomes with HCQ alone or in combination with azithromycin in COVID-19 patients, although the studies had major methodological limitations. Some of the other studies showed negative results with HCQ therapy along with the risk of adverse reactions. CONCLUSION: The results of efficacy and safety of HCQ in COVID-19, as obtained from the clinical studies, are not satisfactory, although many of these studies had major methodological limitations. Stronger evidence from well-designed robust randomized clinical trials is required before conclusively determining the role of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19. Clinical prudence is required in advocating HCQ as a therapeutic armamentarium in COVID-19. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40261-020-00927-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: SARS-CoV-2 and human milk: what is the evidence? The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has emerged as one of the most compelling public health challenges of our time. To address the myriad issues generated by this pandemic, an interdisciplinary breadth of research, clinical, and public health communities have rapidly engaged to find answers and solutions. One area of active inquiry is understanding the mode(s) of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. While respiratory droplets are a known mechanism of transmission, other mechanisms are possible. Of particular importance to global health is the possibility of vertical transmission from infected mothers to infants through breastfeeding or consumption of human milk. However, there is limited published literature related to vertical transmission of any human coronavirus (including SARS-CoV-2) via human milk and/or breastfeeding. There is a single study providing some evidence of vertical transmission of human coronavirus 229E, a single study evaluating presence of SARS-CoV in human milk (it was negative), and no published data on MERS-CoV and human milk. There are 9 case studies of human milk tested for SARS-CoV-2; none detected the virus. Importantly, none of the published studies on coronaviruses and human milk report validation of their analytical methods for use in human milk. These reports are evaluated here, and their implications related to the possibility of vertical transmission of coronaviruses (in particular, SARS-CoV-2) during breastfeeding are discussed.

negative: Update on treatment of COVID-19: ongoing studies between promising and disappointing results. The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. We are facing a new virus, so several antiviral agents previously used to treat other coronavirus infections such as SARS and MERS are being considered as the first potential candidates to treat COVID-19. Thus, several agents have been used by the beginning of the current outbreak in China first and all over the word successively, as reported in several different guidelines and therapeutic recommendations. At the same time, a great number of clinical trials have been launched to investigate the potential efficacy therapies for COVID-19 highlighting the urgent need to get as quickly as possible high-quality evidence. Through PubMed, we explored the relevant articles published on treatment of COVID-19 and on trials ongoing up to April 15, 2020.

negative: Recovery of a triazole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus in respiratory specimen of COVID-19 patient in ICU – A case report Although invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) is typically described in immunocompromised host, patient with severe influenzae can develop IPA. Similarly, patients with severe COVID-19 complicated with IPA are increasingly reported. Here, we describe a case of invasive aspergillosis with triazole-resistant A. fumigatus (TR34/L98H mutation) in a 56-year-old patient with COVID-19 in intensive care unit. This report highlights the need to define the available tools for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in severe COVID-19 patients.

negative: Remdesivir in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a simplified summary The pandemic of COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease-2019) is an extremely contagious respiratory illness due to a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. Certain drugs have several protein targets and many illnesses share overlapping molecular paths. In such cases, reusing drugs for more than one objective and finding their novice uses can considerably decrease the time in finding new cures for unforeseen diseases. Remdesivir has been recently a strong candidate for the treatment of Covid-19. In this commentary, we have portrayed the structure of the coronavirus in a simple way as well as the site where remdesivir acts. We have also displayed the ongoing clinical trials, as well as a published study that was conducted on compassionate base. The covid-19 pandemic might wean down by the end of summer 2020, but the risk of seasonality exists. Therefore, future disposal of agents such as remdesivir might be crucial for ensuring an efficient treatment, decrease mortality and allow early discharge. Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma

negative: Immune checkpoint inhibitors in SARS-CoV-2 infected cancer patients: the spark that ignites the fire?

negative: Current State of Research About Chinese Herbal Medicines (CHM) for the Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Scoping Review Background: There is currently no effective treatment against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The optimal selection of interventions targeting the virus is unknown. Therefore, evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to support specific treatment against COVID-19 is urgently needed. The use of Chinese herbal medicines (CHMs) might have a role in the treatment and symptomatic management of patients with COVID-19. It was aimed at providing an overview of the available evidence and ongoing trials concerning the effects of CHMs for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: This is a narrative review of relevant studies. Searches were conducted to identify documents published till April 22, 2020. Electronic databases, evidence-based collections, websites of relevant organizations, and trial registries were consulted. Results: A total of 25 guidelines on the treatment of patients with COVID-19 were identified. Four guidelines provided recommendations on the use of CHMs; these guidelines were developed in China and South Korea and were based on the consensus of experts exclusively. The remaining 21 guidelines provided no guidance on CHMs. No finished RCTs of CHMs for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 was found. According to the evidence evaluated in this review, a Cochrane review of CHMs for severe acute respiratory syndrome and five uncontrolled observational studies of the effects of CHMs in patients with COVID-19, the effects of CHMs for COVID-19 are unknown. A total of 52 ongoing clinical trials of CHM interventions for the treatment of COVID-19 were found. These trials will be carried out mostly in China (n = 51). Forty (77%) of the ongoing trials will be randomized, whereas 12 (23%) have an unclear sequence generation procedure. Forty-seven trials (90%) will have a sample size <400 participants. Conclusions: To the authors' knowledge, only the Chinese and the South Korean guidelines recommend CHMs as a treatment option for patients with COVID-19. These guidelines base their recommendations on the consensus of experts. Clinical guidelines or health authorities from other countries do not provide advice on CHMs. Due to the absence of RCT, there is currently no reliable evidence on the effects of any specific CHM intervention for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. A high number of clinical trials of different herbal products are being currently conducted in China.

negative: Effects of COVID-19 Infection during Pregnancy and Neonatal Prognosis: What Is the Evidence? BACKGROUND: This study's aims are to assess the current evidence presented in the literature regarding the potential risks of COVID-19 infection among pregnant women and consequent fetal transmission. METHODS: a systematic literature review assessing papers published in the most comprehensive databases in the field of health intended to answer the question, "What are the effects of COVID-19 infection during pregnancy, and what is the neonatal prognosis?" RESULTS: 49 papers published in 2020 were eligible, presenting low levels of evidence. A total of 755 pregnant women and 598 infants were assessed; more than half of pregnant women had C-sections (379/65%). Only 493 (82%) infants were tested for SARS-CoV-2, nine (2%) of whom tested positive. There is, however, no evidence of vertical transmission based on what has been assessed so far, considering there are knowledge gaps concerning the care provided during and after delivery, as well as a lack of suitable biological samples for testing SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: We cannot rule out potential worsening of the clinical conditions of pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2, whether the infection is associated with comorbidities or not, due to the occurrence of respiratory disorders, cardiac rhythm disturbances, and acid-base imbalance, among others. We recommend relentless monitoring of all pregnant women in addition to testing them before delivery or the first contact with newborns.

negative: Efficacy and safety of Lian-Hua Qing-Wen granule for COVID-2019: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Since the outbreak, the disease has caused more than 60,502 deaths worldwide. Lian-Hua Qing-Wen Granule (LHQWG) is widely used in treating COVID-19 in China. However, there is no evidence that LHQWG is effective for COVID-19. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive literature search will be conducted. Two methodological trained researchers will read the title, abstract and full texts and independently select the qualified literature according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. After assessment of the risk of bias and data extraction, we will conduct meta-analyses for outcomes related to COVID-19. The heterogeneity of data will be investigated by Cochrane X(2) and I(2) tests. Publication bias assessment will be conducted by funnel plot analysis and Egger test. RESULTS: The results of our research will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: Our study aims to systematically present the clinical evidence of LHQWG in treating COVID-19, which will be of significant meaning for further research and clinical practice. OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/27SBU.

negative: B lymphocyte and macrophage expression of carcinoembryonic antigen‐related adhesion molecules that serve as receptors for murine coronavirus The expression of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)‐related glycoproteins that have been associated with intercellular adhesion and that serve as receptors for mouse hepatitis virus (MHV) was analyzed in cells from the immune system of BALB/c mice using immunolabeling and RNA polymerase chain reaction amplification of receptor transcripts. These glycoproteins, which are called biliary glycoproteins, were highly expressed in B lymphocytes, including cells of the B‐la (CD5(+)) lineage, and in macrophages, but were not detectable in resting T lymphocytes. Similarly, murine cell lines of B cell and macrophage origin expressed messenger RNA encoding CEA‐related molecules, while the corresponding mRNA was only slightly detectable in a T cell line. These CEA‐related cell adhesion glycoproteins were also expressed in endothelial cells. Therefore, their specific interaction with their so far unknown ligand may be of functional importance in cellular interactions in the immune response. Monoclonal antibody directed against these glycoproteins blocked MHV‐A59 infection of the B cell‐derived SP20 cell line. Thus, the functional receptors for MHV on B lymphocytes, like those on murine fibroblasts, are isoforms of CEA‐related glycoproteins. Treatment of B cells with anti‐receptor antibody also blocked B cell‐mediated cytotoxicity against MHV‐A59‐infected fibroblasts, indicating that this phenomenon is mediated by interaction of viral attachment protein on the infected target cells with specific CEA‐related receptor glycoproteins on the effector B cells.

negative: The Efficacy of IL-6 Inhibitor Tocilizumab in Reducing Severe COVID-19 Mortality: A Systematic Review Without proven, targeted therapies against SARS-CoV-2, it is crucial to counter the known pathophysiological causes of severe COVID-19, potentially utilizing existing drugs. Severe COVID-19 is largely the result of a dysregulated immune response characterized by lymphocytopenia, neutrophilia and critical hypercytokinemia, also called a cytokine storm. The IL-6 inhibitor tocilizumab (TCZ) could potentially suppress effects of the pro-inflammatory cytokine which drives the cytokine storm and thereby lower mortality from the disease. This systematic analysis aimed to investigate and synthesize existing evidence for the efficacy of TCZ in reducing COVID-19 mortality. PubMed and SearchWorks searches were performed to locate clinical studies with primary data on TCZ treatment for severe COVID-19. 9 case-control studies comparing mortality between TCZ and standard of care (SOC) were identified for a qualitative synthesis. In all of the studies, the odds ratio of mortality from COVID-19 pointed towards lower fatality with TCZ versus the SOC and a combined random effects odds ratio calculation yielded an odds ratio of 0.482 (p<0.001, 95% CI 0.326-0.713). Additionally, 12 uncontrolled trials were identified for a qualitative analysis producing a raw combined mortality rate of 13.6%. Results from the systematic analysis provide positive evidence for the potential efficacy of TCZ, validating the merit and need for ongoing clinical trials of the drug to treat severe COVID-19.

negative: Google Trends reveals: Focus of interest in the population is on treatment options rather than theories about COVID-19 animal origin

negative: Tumor necrosis factor as a pharmacological target As indicated by its name, tumor necrosis factor (TNF), cloned in 1985, was originally described as a macrophage-derived endogenous mediator that can induce hemorrhagic necrosis of solid tumors and kill some tumor cell lines in vitro. Unfortunately, its promising use as an anticancer agent was biased by its toxicity, which was clear soon from the first clinical trials with TNF in cancer. Almost at the same time TNF was being developed as an anticancer drug, it became clear that TNF was identical to a mediator responsible for cachexia associated with sepsis, which was termed cachectin. This research led to the finding that TNF is, in fact, the main lethal mediator of sepsis and to the publication of a huge number of articles showing that TNF inhibits the toxic effects of bacterial endotoxins, which are now described as systemic inflammatory response. Although the clinical trials with anti-TNF in sepsis have not been successful thus far, undoubtedly as a result of the complexity of this clinical setting, these studies ultimately led to the identification of TNF as a key inflammatory mediator and to the development of anti-TNF molecules (soluble receptors and antibodies) for important diseases including rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn’s disease. On the other side, the mechanisms by which TNF and related molecules induce cell death have been studied in depth, and their knowledge might, in the future, suggest means of improve the therapeutic index of TNF in cancer.

negative: The hyperglycemic response to major noncardiac surgery and the added effect of steroid administration in patients with and without diabetes. BACKGROUND The pattern and magnitude of the hyperglycemic response to surgical stress, the added effect of low-dose steroids, and whether these differ in diabetics and nondiabetics remain unclear. We therefore tested 2 hypotheses: (1) that diabetics show a greater increase from preoperative to intraoperative glucose concentrations than nondiabetics; and (2) that steroid administration increases intraoperative hyperglycemia more so in diabetics compared with nondiabetics. METHODS Patients scheduled for major noncardiac surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled and randomized to preoperative IV 8 mg dexamethasone or placebo, stratified by diagnosis of diabetes. Patients were part of a larger underlying trial (the Dexamethasone, Light Anesthesia and Tight Glucose Control [DeLiT] Trial). IV insulin was given when glucose concentration exceeded 215 mg/dL. The primary outcome measure was the change in glucose from the preoperative to maximal intraoperative glucose concentration. We also report the time-dependent pattern of intraoperative hyperglycemia. RESULTS Ninety patients (23% with diabetes) were randomized to dexamethasone, and 95 (29% with diabetes) were given placebo. The mean ± SD change from preoperative to maximal intraoperative glucose concentration was 63 ± 69 mg/dL in diabetics and 72 ± 45 mg/dL in nondiabetics. The mean covariable-adjusted change (95% confidence interval) in nondiabetics was 29 (13, 46) mg/dL more than in diabetics (P < 0.001). For all patients combined, mean glucose increased slightly from preoperative to incision, substantially from incision to surgery midpoint, and then remained high and fairly stable through emergence, with nondiabetic patients showing a greater increase (P < 0.001). For nondiabetics, the mean increase in glucose concentration (97.5% CI) was 29 (9, 49) mg/dL more in patients given dexamethasone than placebo (P = 0.0012). However, there was no dexamethasone effect in diabetics (P = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS Treatment of intraoperative hyperglycemia should account for the hyperglycemic surgical stress response trend depending on the stage of surgery as well as the added effects of steroid administration. Denying steroid prophylaxis for postoperative nausea and vomiting for fear of hyperglycemic response should be reconsidered given the limited effect of steroids on intraoperative blood glucose concentrations.

negative: Multiple Myeloma in the Time of COVID-19 We provide our recommendations (not evidence based) for managing multiple myeloma patients during the pandemic of COVID-19. We do not recommend therapy for smoldering myeloma patients (standard or high risk). Screening for COVID-19 should be done in all patients before therapy. For standard-risk patients, we recommend the following: ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (IRd) (preferred), cyclophosphamide lenalidomide and dexamethasone (CRd), daratumumab lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd), lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd), or cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (CyBorD). For high-risk patients we recommend carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) (preferred) or RVd. Decreasing the dose of dexamethasone to 20 mg and giving bortezomib subcutaneously once a week is recommended. We recommend delaying autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), unless the patient has high-risk disease that is not responding well, or if the patient has plasma cell leukemia (PCL). Testing for COVID-19 should be done before ASCT. If a patient achieves a very good partial response or better, doses and frequency of drug administration can be modified. After 10–12 cycles, lenalidomide maintenance is recommended for standard-risk patients and bortezomib or ixazomib are recommended for high-risk patients. Daratumumab-based regimens are recommended for relapsed patients. Routine ASCT is not recommended for relapse during the epidemic unless the patient has an aggressive relapse or secondary PCL. Patients on current maintenance should continue their therapy.

negative: Clinical trials and the COVID-19 pandemic "...but why think? Why not try the experiment?..." John Hunter (1728-1793), in a letter to Edward Jenner. August 2nd, 1775. When Galen of Pergamum (2nd c. A.D.), physician, philosopher and experimentalist, sought to ascertain the therapeutic properties of Theriac, an antidote of repute against poisons, he resorted to an experiment. Theriac or Theriaca was a compound drug, containing in some versions used in antiquity numerous components; Galen's own composition included over 70 ingredients! One of its uses was as an antidote against snakebites, a frequent peril for the Roman armies marching on in sandals. Galen spent most of his life in Rome and was elevated to Imperial Physician at the court of Marcus Aurelius, who apparently took daily doses of Theriac, which among other components included opium. Describing the experiment to his friend Pison, Galen wrote, "as I could not possibly conduct a trial on humans, I experimented on roosters" For his experiment, Galen, studied two groups of roosters, but he doesn't tell us how many animals he included in each category. Both groups were exposed to poisonous snakebites. All roosters who were fed with theriac prior to exposure to viper bites survived, whereas in the second group that had not received prophylactic Theriac, all roosters died. Not only is Galen's methodology remarkable, preceding the modern randomised trial by eighteen centuries, but more importantly, it is notable for his ethical stance at a time when sensitivities about human rights, prevalent in our times, were largely absent in societies of widespread slavery. For example, Mithridates VI (132-63 BC), the King of Pontus who is credited with the first use of Theriac, tested its efficacy on criminals and slaves. For his experiment Galen used the random allocation of treatment, today's prospective randomised clinical trial, implemented in the evaluation of novel therapies, widely used internationally, particularly in cancer research! This experimental method used for ascertaining the efficacy of new drugs became established after the second half of the 20th century and is now firmly entrenched as a research tool. On the other hand, the retrieval of information from observational studies or non-randomised series is considered scientifically inferior and is often dismissed or ignored as irrelevant or anecdotal. Such is the compulsion for the randomised study that in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, respected physicians and scientists appeared in the media hesitant to recommend the use of protective facial masks, as there was no evidence of benefit for their use from prospective randomised studies in the general population! Logic had no place in the argument! COVID-19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 new corona virus, brought to the fore the randomised trial, as well as, the ethical dilemmas that surround the allocation of treatment at random, in the face of a devastating pandemic. Anthony Fauci, distinguished infectious diseases expert and an adviser to the President of the USA, at a recent briefing from the Situation Room of the White House, endorsed categorically and unreservedly the randomised trial for the evaluation of drugs potentially effective against SARS-CoV-2, in patients afflicted with COVID-19. A few days later on April 8th, 2020, Professor Sotiris Tsiodras, scientific advisor to the Greek Government for COVID-19 and an expert on infectious diseases, when asked by a journalist about chloroquine, he responded, "Antony Fauci is correct. Nevertheless, we give the drug to everyone, that is, not half of the patients will receive it, and the other half will not". If we accept that the randomised trial represents the unique, impregnable method of evaluating new treatments-several clinicians dispute this dogma. -the question arises how will treatments be allocated to patients? According to the Declaration of Helsinki participation of a subject in a clinical trial requires their explicit written consent. Will, a potentially hypoxic patient rapidly deteriorating, be able to understand what is being asked of them, and will that patient be in a position to provide consent? And if that patient refuses to be randomised, what are the options? Is it his/her right to request the active treatment that a fellow patient is receiving in the next bed? Although the Declaration of Helsinki allows the option of no treatment or even placebo, where no known treatment is available for a certain condition, such as COVID-19, it also emphasizes that "while the primary purpose of medical research is to generate new knowledge, this goal can never take precedence over the rights and interests of individual research subjects". Consider now the physicians and nurses on the first line of the battle against the pandemic; to the enormous pressures and risks that they experience daily, they may have to endure the added psychological burden of the randomised trial, knowing that half of their patients are receiving the promising drug, whilst the other half are denied the chance of potential benefit. When during the Medical Research Council's randomized trial of streptomycin, one senior physician contracted tuberculosis, the Medical Research Council obtained supplies for him outside the trial. In this brief instance of medical history, the equipoise, the scientific imperative, all arguments and other justifications for providing treatment at random, were thrown out of the window in favour of the human factor! Why is randomization necessary? Because-it is presumed-the process of randomising subjects, protects the study from the selective inclusion of patients with favourable characteristics, thus inadvertently allowing or facilitating a falsely favourable result for the drug or treatment under investigation. However, the process of randomising patients does not necessarily result in the randomisation of the characteristics of their disease. Exactly because of this, at the end of a randomised study, even if the prognostic variables are evenly represented and balanced in the strata, further confirmation of the result is sought with a statistical multifactorial analysis. Such multifactorial analyses can also be applied to a non-randomised group of patients engaged in the trial of a new drug. Since the middle of the 20th century a generation of physicians have been trained to dismiss, or are incapable of evaluating the validity of a treatment beyond the established etiquette of the randomised study. This, some have argued, constitutes intellectual indolence, it is not scientific robustness. Pandits foresee that the world will be different after the end of this pandemic. Perhaps human ingenuity will seek new investigative methods that will render the randomised clinical trial obsolete, both, on methodological and ethical grounds. Until then and even if we have to accept the scientific supremacy of the randomised study in the evaluation of novel therapies, the ethical considerations in the unprecedented circumstances of a relentless pandemic demand a more humane approach, befitting the beneficent precepts of the Hippocratic tradition.

negative: Timing of antiviral treatment initiation is critical to reduce SARS‐CoV‐2 viral load We modeled the viral dynamics of 13 untreated patients infected with SARS‐CoV‐2 to infer viral growth parameters and predict the effects of antiviral treatments. In order to reduce peak viral load by more than 2 logs, drug efficacy needs to be greater than 90% if treatment is administered after symptom onset; an efficacy of 60% could be sufficient if treatment is initiated before symptom onset. Given their pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties, current investigated drugs may be in a range of 6‐87% efficacy. They may help control virus if administered very early, but may not have a major effect in severe patients.

negative: Covid-19: research methods must be flexible in a crisis.

negative: Hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: an open-label, randomized, controlled trial Abstract Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) plus standard-of-care (SOC) compared with SOC alone in adult patients with COVID-19. Design Multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Setting 16 government-designated COVID-19 treatment centers in China through 11 to 29 in February 2020. Participants 150 patients hospitalized with COVID-19. 75 patients were assigned to HCQ plus SOC and 75 were assigned to SOC alone (control group). Interventions HCQ was administrated with a loading dose of 1, 200 mg daily for three days followed by a maintained dose of 800 mg daily for the remaining days (total treatment duration: 2 or 3 weeks for mild/moderate or severe patients, respectively). Main outcome measures The primary endpoint was the 28-day negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2. The assessed secondary endpoints were negative conversion rate at day 4, 7, 10, 14 or 21, the improvement rate of clinical symptoms within 28-day, normalization of C-reactive protein and blood lymphocyte count within 28-day. Primary and secondary analysis was by intention to treat. Adverse events were assessed in the safety population. Results The overall 28-day negative conversion rate was not different between SOC plus HCQ and SOC group (Kaplan-Meier estimates 85.4% versus 81.3%, P=0.341). Negative conversion rate at day 4, 7, 10, 14 or 21 was also similar between the two groups. No different 28-day symptoms alleviation rate was observed between the two groups. A significant efficacy of HCQ on alleviating symptoms was observed when the confounding effects of anti-viral agents were removed in the post-hoc analysis (Hazard ratio, 8.83, 95%CI, 1.09 to 71.3). This was further supported by a significantly greater reduction of CRP (6.986 in SOC plus HCQ versus 2.723 in SOC, milligram/liter, P=0.045) conferred by the addition of HCQ, which also led to more rapid recovery of lymphopenia, albeit no statistical significance. Adverse events were found in 8.8% of SOC and 30% of HCQ recipients with two serious adverse events. The most common adverse event in the HCQ recipients was diarrhea (10%). Conclusions The administration of HCQ did not result in a higher negative conversion rate but more alleviation of clinical symptoms than SOC alone in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 without receiving antiviral treatment, possibly through anti-inflammatory effects. Adverse events were significantly increased in HCQ recipients but no apparently increase of serious adverse events. Trial registration ChiCTR2000029868.

negative: Pre-emptive scalp infiltration with dexamethasone plus ropivacaine for postoperative pain after craniotomy: a protocol for a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Background: Approximately 55-87% of the patients undergoing craniotomy experience moderate to severe pain during the first 48 hrs after surgery, which negatively influences patients' postoperative rehabilitation. Recently, local infiltration of analgesia (LIA) has been widely performed clinically as a promising analgesic method that could avoid the side effects of analgesics but only has a short pain-free duration; researchers have clarified that the addition of dexamethasone to LIA could provide significant analgesic effects and significantly prolong the duration of analgesic effects without obvious complications for various types of surgeries. To date, no studies have evaluated the addition of dexamethasone to LIA for patients receiving craniotomy. The aim of the study was to test the hypothesis that pre-emptive scalp infiltration with a steroid (dexamethasone) plus a local anesthetic (ropivacaine) could achieve superior postoperative analgesic effects to a local anesthetic (ropivacaine) alone in adult patients undergoing a craniotomy. Study design and methods: This study is a randomized controlled trial that will include one intervention and one control group involving a total of 140 adults scheduled for elective craniotomy for resection of supratentorial tumors under general anesthesia and with an anticipated full recovery within 2 hrs postoperatively. The intervention will involve pre-emptive scalp infiltration with ropivacaine plus dexamethasone (the dexamethasone group) or ropivacaine alone (the control group), and the participants in both groups will complete a 6-month follow-up. The primary outcome will be the cumulative sufentanil consumption within 48 hrs postoperatively. Discussion: The intervention, if effective, this study will provide clinically important information on the role of dexamethasone in scalp infiltration for post-craniotomy pain management.

negative: COVID‐19 diagnosis and management: a comprehensive review Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS‐CoV)‐2, a novel coronavirus from the same family as SARS‐CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, has spread worldwide leading the World Health Organization to declare a pandemic. The disease caused by SARS‐CoV‐2, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), presents flu‐like symptoms which can become serious in high‐risk individuals. Here, we provide an overview of the known clinical features and treatment options for COVID‐19. We carried out a systematic literature search using the main online databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, UpToDate, Embase and Web of Science) with the following keywords: ‘COVID‐19’, ‘2019‐nCoV’, ‘coronavirus’ and ‘SARS‐CoV‐2’. We included publications from 1 January 2019 to 3 April 2020 which focused on clinical features and treatments. We found that infection is transmitted from human to human and through contact with contaminated environmental surfaces. Hand hygiene is fundamental to prevent contamination. Wearing personal protective equipment is recommended in specific environments. The main symptoms of COVID‐19 are fever, cough, fatigue, slight dyspnoea, sore throat, headache, conjunctivitis and gastrointestinal issues. Real‐time PCR is used as a diagnostic tool using nasal swab, tracheal aspirate or bronchoalveolar lavage samples. Computed tomography findings are important for both diagnosis and follow‐up. To date, there is no evidence of any effective treatment for COVID‐19. The main therapies being used to treat the disease are antiviral drugs, chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and respiratory therapy. In conclusion, although many therapies have been proposed, quarantine is the only intervention that appears to be effective in decreasing the contagion rate. Specifically designed randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the most appropriate evidence‐based treatment modality.

negative: Balancing evidence and frontline experience in the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic: current position of the Italian Society of anti-infective therapy (SITA) and the Italian Society of Pulmonology (SIP) Abstract Background SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has rapidly become epidemic in Italy and other European countries. The disease spectrum ranges from asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic presentations to acute respiratory failure. At the present time the absolute number of severe cases requiring ventilator support is reaching or even surpassing the intensive care unit bed capacity in the most affected regions and countries. Objectives To narratively summarize the available literature on the management of COVID-19, in the attempt to combine current evidence and frontline opinions and provide balanced answers to pressing clinical questions. Sources Inductive PubMed search for publications relevant to the topic. Content The available literature and the authors’ frontline-based opinion are summarized in brief narrative answers to selected clinical questions, plus a conclusive statement for each answer. Implications Many off-label antiviral and anti-inflammatory drugs are currently being administered to patients with COVID-19. Physicians must be aware that, being not supported by high-level evidence, these treatments may often be ethically justifiable only in those worsening patients unlikely to improve only with supportive care, and who cannot be enrolled in randomized clinical trials (RCT). Access to well-designed RCT should be expanded as much as possible, being the most secure way to change for the better our approach to COVID-19 patients.

negative: Efficacy and Safety of Bortezomib in Multiple Myeloma Patients with Hepatitis B: A Multicenter Retrospective Study BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety evidence of bortezomib in multiple myeloma (MM) patients with hepatitis B is vacant. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of bortezomib in MM patients with hepatitis B in China. METHODS: From 2006 to 2011, 739 newly diagnosed MM patients were screened for serum hepatitis B virus (HBV) biomarkers. HBV-infected patients were followed for HBV reactivation by monitoring of serum alanine transaminase (ALT) and HBV DNA load. The pattern of HBV reactivation in relation to bortezomib was evaluated. Seven hundred thirty-nine MM patients were included in this study. RESULTS: The prevalence of MM patients infected with HBV was 3.4% (n = 25), of which 17 cases were treated with bortezomib. Bortezomib had no significant influence on liver function (ALT before and after treatment: 36.69 ± 8.90 U/L vs. 11.31 ± 2.74 U/L, P = 0.19) and HBV DNA of MM patients with HBV (detectable HBV DNA percentage: 5.9% vs. 11.8%, P = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Bortezomib can be used safely and effectively in MM patients with hepatitis B. HBV prophylaxis and surveillance are recommended during the MM treatment.

negative: Systematic review of the registered clinical trials for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) BACKGROUND: Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have performed related clinical research. However, systematic reviews of the registered clinical trials are still lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials for COVID-19 to summarize their characteristics. METHODS: This study is based on the PRISMA recommendations in the Cochrane handbook. The Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify registered clinical trials related to COVID-19. The retrieval inception date was February 9, 2020. Two researchers independently selected the literature based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 75 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) for COVID-19 were identified. The majority of clinical trials were sponsored by Chinese hospitals. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and none of the registered clinical trials have been completed; 34 trials were early clinical exploratory trials or in the pre-experiment stage, 13 trials were phase III, and four trials were phase IV. The intervention methods included traditional Chinese medicine in 26 trials, Western medicine in 30 trials, and integrated traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine in 19 trials. The subjects were primarily non-critical adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The median sample size of the trials was 100 (IQR: 60–200), and the median length of the trial periods was 179 d (IQR: 94–366 d). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examinations. Overall, the methodological quality of both the interventional trials and observational studies was low. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive clinical trials on the treatment of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be performed in China. However, based on the uncertain methodological quality, small sample size, and long trial duration, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in the near future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for clinical trials of COVID-19 in the future.

negative: A Review: Does Complement or the Contact System Have a Role in Protection or Pathogenesis of COVID-19? INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 presentation may include a profound increase in cytokines and associated pneumonia, rapidly progressing to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This so-called cytokine storm often leads to refractory edema, respiratory arrest, and death. At present, anti-IL-6, antiviral therapy, convalescent plasma, hydroxychloroquine, and azithromycin among others are being investigated as potential treatments for COVID-19. As the disease etiology and precise therapeutic interventions are still not definitively defined, we wanted to review the roles that complement and the contact system may have in either the treatment or pathogenesis of the disease. METHODS: We searched the recent literature (PubMed) on complement and coronavirus; contact system and coronavirus; bradykinin and coronavirus; and angiotensin receptor and coronavirus. The manuscript complies with ethics guidelines and was deemed exempt from institutional review board approval according to Human Subjects Protection Office guidelines. RESULTS: Mouse models are available for the study of coronavirus and complement. Although complement is effective in protecting against many viruses, it does not seem to be protective against coronavirus. C3 knockout mice infected with SARS-CoV had less lung disease than wild-type mice, suggesting that complement may play a role in coronavirus pathogenesis. Some evidence suggests that the observed pulmonary edema may be bradykinin-induced and could be the reason that corticosteroids, antihistamines, and other traditional interventions for edema are not effective. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is a co-receptor for SARS-CoV-2, and studies thus far have not concluded a benefit or risk associated with the use of either ACE-inhibitors or angiotensin receptor antagonists. SUMMARY: Activation of complement and the contact system, through generation of bradykinin, may play a role in the SARS-CoV-2-induced pulmonary edema, and our search suggests that further work is necessary to confirm our suspicions.

negative: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the management of COVID-19: much kerfuffle but little evidence Summary Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are drugs that have shown in vitro activity on the replication of certain coronaviruses. In the context of the SARS-Cov-2 epidemic, the virus responsible for the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), these two drugs have been proposed as possible treatments. The results of the first clinical studies evaluating the effect of hydroxychloroquine do not support any efficacy of this drug in patients with COVID-19, due to major methodological weaknesses. Yet, these preliminary studies have aroused considerable media interest, raising fears of massive and uncontrolled use. In the absence of evidence of clinical benefits, the main risk is of exposing patients unnecessarily to the well-known adverse effects of hydroxychloroquine, with a possibly increased risk in the specific setting of COVID-19. In addition, widespread use outside of any recommendation risks compromising the completion of good quality clinical trials. The chloroquine hype, fueled by low-quality studies and media announcements, has yielded to the implementation of more than 150 studies worldwide. This represents a waste of resources and a loss of opportunity for other drugs to be properly evaluated. In the context of emergency, rigorous trials are more than ever needed in order to have, as soon as possible, reliable data on drugs that are possibly effective against the disease. Meanwhile, serious adverse drug reactions have been reported in patients with COVID-19 receiving hydroxychloroquine, justifying to limit its prescription, and to perform suitable cardiac and therapeutic drug monitoring.

negative: Living evidence in response to controversies about the use of antimalarials in COVID-19

negative: Is the kidney a target of SARS-CoV-2? The new disease produced by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) represents a major pandemic event nowadays. Since its origin in China in December 2019, there is compelling evidence that novel SARS-CoV-2 is a highly transmissible virus, and it is associated to a broad clinical spectrum going from subclinical presentation to severe respiratory distress and multiorgan failure. Like other coronaviruses, SARS-CoV-2 recognizes human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 as a cellular receptor that allows it to infect different host cells and likely disrupts renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system homeostasis. Particularly, a considerable incidence of many renal abnormalities associated to COVID-19 has been reported, including proteinuria, hematuria, and acute kidney injury. Moreover, it has been recently demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 can infect podocytes and tubular epithelial cells, which could contribute to the development of the aforementioned renal abnormalities. In this review, we discuss the biological aspects of SARS-CoV-2 infection, how understanding current knowledge about SARS-CoV-2 infection may partly explain the involvement of the kidneys in the pathophysiology of COVID-19, and what questions have arisen and remain to be explored.

negative: Effectiveness and safety of antiviral or antibody treatments for coronavirus: A rapid review Background: To identify safe and effective medical countermeasures (e.g., antivirals/antibodies) to address the current outbreak of a novel coronavirus (COVID-19) Methods: Comprehensive literature searches were developed by an experienced librarian for MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and biorxiv.org/medrxiv.org; additional searches for ongoing trials and unpublished studies were conducted in clinicaltrials.gov and the Global Infectious Diseases and Epidemiology Network (GIDEON). Title/abstract and full-text screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias appraisal were carried out by single reviewers. Results: 54 studies were included in the review: three controlled trials, 10 cohort studies, seven retrospective medical record/database studies, and 34 case reports or series. These studies included patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARs, n=33), middle east respiratory syndrome (MERS, n=16), COVID-19 (n=3), and unspecified coronavirus (n=2). The most common treatment was ribavirin (n=41), followed by oseltamivir (n=10) and the combination of lopinavir/ritonavir (n=7). Additional therapies included broad spectrum antibiotics (n=30), steroids (n=39) or various interferons (n=12). No eligible studies examining monoclonal antibodies for COVID-19 were identified. One trial found that ribavirin prophylactic treatment statistically significantly reduced risk of MERS infection in people who had been exposed to the virus. Of the 21 studies reporting rates of ICU admission in hospitalized SARS or MERS patients, none reported statistically significant results in favour of or against antiviral therapies. Of the 40 studies reporting mortality rates in hospitalized SARS or MERS patients, one cohort study (MERS) and one retrospective study (SARS) found a statistically significant increase in the mortality rate for patients treated with ribavirin. Eighteen studies reported potential drug-related adverse effects including gastrointestinal symptoms, anemia, and altered liver function in patients receiving ribavirin. Conclusion: The current evidence for the effectiveness and safety of antiviral therapies for coronavirus is inconclusive and suffers from a lack of well-designed prospective trials or observational studies, preventing any treatment recommendations from being made. However, it is clear that the existing body of evidence is weighted heavily towards ribavirin (41/54 studies), which has not shown conclusive evidence of effectiveness and may cause harmful adverse events so future investigations may consider focusing on other candidates for antiviral therapy.

negative: Repurposed immunomodulatory drugs for Covid-19 in pre-ICu patients - mulTi-Arm Therapeutic study in pre-ICu patients admitted with Covid-19 – Repurposed Drugs (TACTIC-R): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: To determine if a specific immunomodulatory intervention reduces progression of COVID-19-related disease to organ failure or death, compared to standard of care (SoC). TRIAL DESIGN: Randomised, parallel 3-arm (1:1:1 ratio), open-label, Phase IV platform trial of immunomodulatory therapies in patients with late stage 1 or stage 2 COVID-19-related disease, with a diagnosis based either on a positive assay or high suspicion of COVID-19 infection by clinical and/or radiological assessment. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 18 and over, with a clinical picture strongly suggestive of COVID-19-related disease (with/without a positive COVID-19 test) AND a Risk count (as defined below) >3 OR ≥3 if risk count includes “Radiographic severity score >3”. A risk count is calculated by the following features on admission (1 point for each): radiographic severity score >3, male gender, non-white ethnicity, diabetes, hypertension, neutrophils >8.0 x10(9)/L, age >40 years and CRP >40 mg/L. Patients should be considered an appropriate subject for intervention with immunomodulatory therapies in the opinion of the investigator and be able to be maintained on venous thromboembolism prophylaxis during the inpatient dosing period, according to local guidelines. The complete inclusion and exclusion criteria as detailed in the additional file 1 should be fulfilled. Patients will be enrolled prior to the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, cardiac or renal support. Participants will be recruited across multiple centres including initially at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, University Hospital of Wales, Gloucestershire Royal Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Each active comparator arm will be compared against standard of care (SoC). The immunomodulatory drugs were selected from a panel of licenced candidates by a drug evaluation committee, which considered potential efficacy, potential toxicity, scalability and novelty of each strategy. The initial active arms comprise baricitinib and ravulizumab. Baricitinib will be given 4 mg orally (once daily (OD)) on days 1-14 or until day of discharge. The dose will be reduced to 2 mg OD for patients aged > 75 years and those with an estimated Cockcroft Gault creatinine clearance of 30-60 ml/min. Ravulizumab will be administered intravenously once according to the licensed weight-based dosing regimen (see Additional file 1). Each active arm will be compared with standard of care alone. No comparisons will be made between active arms in this platform trial. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is the incidence (from baseline up to Day 14) of any one of the events (whichever comes first): death, invasive mechanical ventilation, extra corporeal membrane oxygenation, cardiovascular organ support (inotropes or balloon pump), or renal failure (estimated Cockcroft Gault creatinine clearance <15ml/min). RANDOMISATION: Eligible patients will be randomised using a central web-based randomisation service (Sealed Envelope) in a 1:1:1 ratio, stratified by site to one of the treatment arms or SoC. BLINDING (MASKING): This is an open-label trial. Data analysis will not be blinded. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): There is no fixed sample size for this study. Serial interim analyses will be triggered by an Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC), including analysis after 125 patients are recruited to each arm, 375 in total assuming 3 arms. Additional interim analyses are projected after 229 patients per arm, and potentially then after 469 per arm, but additional analyses may be triggered by the IDMC. TRIAL STATUS: TACTIC-R Protocol version number 2.0 date May 20, 2020, recruitment began May 7, 2020 and the end trial will be the date 18 months after the last patient’s last visit. The recruitment end date cannot yet be accurately predicted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT Number: 2020-001354-22 Registered: 6 May 2020 It was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04390464) and on ISRCTN (ISRCTN11188345) FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

negative: What Dentists Need to Know about COVID-19 Abstract This article aims at collecting all information needed for dentists regarding the COVID-19 pandemic throughout the world by reviewing articles published by now. In late 2019, a pneumonia outbreak of uncertain etiology happened in Wuhan, China. There were many reports related to a live-animal and seafood market, supporting that the pathogens were transferred from animals to humans, rapidly evolving into transmission from human to human. The pathogen was classified as 2019 Novel Corona Virus (2019-nCoV), and the disease was named COrona VIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given that COVID-19 has lately been detected in infected patients’ saliva, the COVID-19 outbreak is an alert that all dental and other health professionals must be vigilant in defending against the infectious disease spread, and it may enable to assess whether non-invasive saliva diagnostic for COVID-19. There has so far been no evidence from randomized controlled trials to prescribe any particular anti-nCoV treatment or vaccine, and COVID-19 management has been widely supportive. Since the ACE-2 was expressing on oral cavity mucosa, there is a potentially huge COVID-19 infectious vulnerability risk for oral cavity and brought up a proof for the future prevention procedure in dental practice and daily life. As a result, the whole dental teams should be vigilant and keep patients and themselves in a safe environment by following the guideline in this study.

negative: Serious Adverse Events Associated With Hydroxychloroquine Amidst COVID-19 Pandemic: Case Series and Literature Review COVID-19 represents a global health crisis. Several studies are evaluating potential therapies including hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) which is given to patients based on limited observational evidence. However, it can cause serious adverse events. Moreover, recent studies showed no benefits due to HCQ. We present two COVID-19 patients treated with HCQ and had adverse events.

negative: The Burden of COVID-19 in People Living with HIV: A Syndemic Perspective The emergence of the novel coronavirus disease known as COVID-19 creates another health burden for people living with HIV (PLWH) who face multiple morbidities and may be at heightened risk for severe physical health illness from COVID-19. Our abilities to address these morbidities in PLWH must be considered alongside the socially-produced burdens that both place this population at risk for COVID-19 and heighten the likelihood of adverse outcomes. These burdens can affect the physical, emotional, and social well-being of PLWH and interfere with the delivery of effective healthcare and access to HIV treatment. We posit that a syndemic framework can be used to conceptualize the potential impact of COVID-19 among PLWH to inform the development of health programming services.

negative: Medical treatment options for COVID-19 Therapeutic options for coronavirus disease 2019 are desperately needed to respond to the ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic. Both antiviral drugs and immunomodulators might have their place in the management of coronavirus disease 2019. Unfortunately, no drugs have been approved yet to treat infections with human coronaviruses. As it will take years to develop new therapies for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the current focus is on the repurposing of drugs that have been approved or are in development for other conditions. Several clinical trials have already been conducted or are currently ongoing to evaluate the efficacy of such drugs. Here, we discuss the potential of these therapies for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019.

negative: Glucocorticosteroid in Treatment of Severe Pneumonia Airway diseases such as pneumonia constitute a major health burden on a global scale; untreated pneumonia may develop to severe pneumonia and consequently lead to to fatal episodes of mortality and morbidity. The balance between inflammatory mediators is key for the outcome of the pulmonary infection; elimination of invading pathogen was marked by the release of cytokines and other inflammatory mediators from alveolar macrophages and glucocorticoid steroids (GCs) acting on the inflammatory component. Treatments of severe pneumonia with GCs have been developing for years with inconclusive results. In many cases GCs have been administered empirically without clinical evidence. Recent studies assess beneficial impact on treatment of severe pneumonia by suggesting specific dosage, period of administration, and tapered dosage.

negative: Thromboembolic risk and anticoagulant therapy in COVID‐19 patients: emerging evidence and call for action Emerging evidence shows that severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) can be complicated with coagulopathy, namely disseminated intravascular coagulation, which has a rather prothrombotic character with high risk of venous thromboembolism. The incidence of venous thromboembolism among COVID‐19 patients in intensive care units appears to be somewhat higher compared to that reported in other studies including such patients with other disease conditions. D‐dimer might help in early recognition of these high‐risk patients and also predict outcome. Preliminary data show that in patients with severe COVID‐19, anticoagulant therapy appears to be associated with lower mortality in the subpopulation meeting sepsis‐induced coagulopathy criteria or with markedly elevated d‐dimer. Recent recommendations suggest that all hospitalized COVID‐19 patients should receive thromboprophylaxis, or full therapeutic‐intensity anticoagulation if such an indication is present.

negative: Efficacy and safety of antiviral treatment for COVID-19 from evidence in studies of SARSCoV-2 and other acute viral infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BACKGROUND Antiviral medications are being given empirically to some patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To support the development of a COVID-19 management guideline, we conducted a systematic review that addressed the benefits and harms of 7 antiviral treatments for COVID-19. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed and 3 Chinese databases (CNKI, WANFANG and SinoMed) through Apr. 19, medRxiv and Chinaxiv through Apr. 27, and Chongqing VIP through Apr. 30, 2020. We included studies of ribavirin, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, umifenovir (arbidol), favipravir, interferon and lopinavir/ritonavir. If direct evidence from COVID-19 studies was not available, we included indirect evidence from studies of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) for efficacy outcomes and other acute respiratory viral infections for safety outcomes. RESULTS In patients with nonsevere COVID-19 illness, the death rate was extremely low, precluding an important effect on mortality. We found only very low-quality evidence with little or no suggestion of benefit for most treatments and outcomes in both nonsevere and severe COVID-19. An exception was treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir, for which we found low-quality evidence for a decrease in length of stay in the intensive care unit (risk difference 5 d shorter, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0 to 9 d) and hospital stay (risk difference 1 d shorter, 95% CI 0 to 2 d). For safety outcomes, evidence was of low or very low quality, with the exception of treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir for which moderate-quality evidence suggested likely increases in diarrhea, nausea and vomiting. INTERPRETATION To date, persuasive evidence of important benefit in COVID-19 does not exist for any antiviral treatments, although for each treatment evidence has not excluded important benefit. Additional randomized controlled trials involving patients with COVID-19 will be needed before such treatments can be administered with confidence.

negative: Similarities between COVID-19 and anti-MDA5 syndrome: what can we learn for better care? Since the end of 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has struck worldwide, leading to more than 7 million cases by June 2020, with an approximately 5.5% mortality rate, mainly due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) [1].

negative: Protecting Frontline Health Care Workers from COVID-19 with Hydroxychloroquine Pre-exposure Prophylaxis: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised placebo-controlled multisite trial in Toronto, Canada OBJECTIVES: Primary Objective: To determine if pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with 400mg hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), taken orally once daily reduces microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 among front line health care workers at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Secondary Objectives: To compare the following between study arms: adverse events; symptomatic COVID-19; duration of symptomatic COVID-19; days hospitalized attributed to COVID-19; respiratory failure attributable to COVID-19 requiring i) non-invasive ventilation or ii) intubation/mechanical ventilation; mortality attributed to COVID-19, number of days unable to work attributed to COVID-19, seroconversion (COVID-19 negative to COVID-19 positive over the study period); ability of participant plasma to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 virus in vitro; To describe short-term psychological distress associated with risk of COVID-19 exposure at 1, 60, 120 days of the study. To explore laboratory markers within participants with confirmed COVID-19: including circulating markers of host immune and endothelial activation in participant plasma and their correlation with disease severity and outcome TRIAL DESIGN: The HEROS study is a two-arm, parallel-group, individually randomized (1:1 allocation ratio), placebo controlled, participant and investigator-blinded, multi-site superiority trial of oral HCQ 400 mg taken once daily for 90 days as PrEP to prevent COVID-19 in health care workers at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. At 90 days, there is an open label extension wherein all participants are offered a one-month course of HCQ 400mg once daily for PrEP of COVID-19. PARTICIPANTS: Frontline HCWs aged 18 years of age or older, at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure (including staff of emergency departments, intensive care units, intubation teams, COVID-wards, and staff deployed to Long Term Care facilities) of five academic hospitals in downtown Toronto, Canada. Exclusion criteria include: currently pregnant, planning to become pregnant during the study period, and/or breast feeding; known hypersensitivity/allergy to hydroxychloroquine or to 4-aminoquinoline compounds; current use of hydroxychloroquine; known prolonged QT syndrome and/or baseline resting ECG with QTc>450 ms and/or concomitant medications which simultaneously may prolong the QTc that cannot be temporarily suspended/replaced; known pre-existing retinopathy, G6PD deficiency, porphyria, liver disease including cirrhosis, encephalopathy, hepatitis or alcoholism, diabetes on oral hypoglycemics or insulin, or renal insufficiency/failure; disclosure of self-administered use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine within 12 weeks prior to study; confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 at time of enrollment. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: hydroxychloroquine, 400mg (2 tablets) orally per day. Comparator: placebo, two tablets visually identical to the intervention, orally per day MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 (i.e. SARS-CoV-2 infection). This is a composite endpoint which includes positive results from any validated SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic assay including detection of viral RNA, and/or seroconversion. Participants will be assessed at baseline, and then undergo monthly follow-up at day 30, 60, and 90, 120. At each visit, participants will provide an oropharyngeal sample, blood sample, and will undergo electrocardiogram monitoring of the QTc interval. Secondary outcome measures include: adverse events; symptom duration of COVID-19; days of hospitalization attributed to COVID-19; respiratory failure requiring ventilator support attributed to COVID-19; mortality attributed to COVID-19; total days off work attributed to COVID-19; seropositivity (reactive serology by day 120); and short term psychological impact of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 at day 1, 60, 120 days using the K10, a validated measure of non-specific psychological distress. RANDOMISATION: Within each site, participants will be individually randomized to either the intervention arm with HCQ or the placebo arm using a fixed 1:1 allocation ratio using an interactive web-based response system to ensure concealment of allocation. Randomization schedules will be computer-generated and blocked using variable block sizes. BLINDING (MASKING): All participants, research coordinators, technicians, clinicians and investigators will be blinded to the participant allocation group. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) N=988, randomised into two groups of 494 patients. TRIAL STATUS: This summary describes protocol version No. 1.6, May 15, 2020. Recruitment is ongoing - started April 20, 2020 and anticipated end date is July 30, 2021 TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com Identifier: ISRCTN14326006, registered April 14, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

negative: Convalescent Plasma for COVID-19. A randomized clinical trial Background After recovery from COVID-19, most patients have anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies. Their convalescent plasma could be an inexpensive and widely available treatment for COVID-19. Methods The Convalescent-plasma-for-COVID (ConCOVID) study was a randomized trial comparing convalescent plasma with standard of care therapy in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in the Netherlands. Patients were randomized 1:1 and received 300ml of plasma with anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody titers of at least 1:80. The primary endpoint was day-60 mortality and key secondary endpoints were hospital stay and WHO 8-point disease severity scale improvement on day 15. Results The trial was halted prematurely after 86 patients were enrolled. Although symptomatic for only 10 days (IQR 6-15) at the time of inclusion, 53 of 66 patients tested had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at baseline. A SARS-CoV-2 plaque reduction neutralization test showed neutralizing antibodies in 44 of the 56 (79%) patients tested with median titers comparable to the 115 donors (1:160 vs 1:160, p=0.40). These observations caused concerns about the potential benefit of convalescent plasma in the study population and after discussion with the data safety monitoring board, the study was discontinued. No difference in mortality (p=0.95), hospital stay (p=0.68) or day-15 disease severity (p=0.58) was observed between plasma treated patients and patients on standard of care. Conclusion Most COVID-19 patients already have high neutralizing antibody titers at hospital admission. Screening for antibodies and prioritizing convalescent plasma to risk groups with recent symptom onset will be key to identify patients that may benefit from convalescent plasma. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04342182

negative: Clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with gastrointestinal symptoms

negative: Lithium as a candidate treatment for COVID-19: Promises and pitfalls The pandemic of respiratory illness caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-nCoV-2) is a global health crisis. Despite numerous preliminary results, there is as yet no treatment of proven efficacy for this condition. In this context, the pharmacological properties of lithium, better known as a treatment for mood disorders, merit closer examination. Lithium has shown in vitro efficacy at inhibiting the replication of coronaviruses responsible for gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases in animals. It has immunomodulatory properties that may be of additional benefit in moderating the host inflammatory response to the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Furthermore, there is evidence that lithium may exert a protective action against upper respiratory infections and influenza-like illnesses in patients taking it for other indications. These promising reports must be balanced against the narrow therapeutic index and high risk of toxicity associated with lithium therapy, its documented interactions with several commonly used drugs, and the absence of evidence of its efficacy against coronaviruses responsible for human disease. Nevertheless, naturalistic studies of the risk of COVID-19 in patients already receiving lithium could provide indirect evidence of its efficacy, and understanding the putative antiviral and immune-regulatory mechanisms of lithium in models of SARS-CoV-2 infection may provide leads for the development of safer and more effective treatments with a specific action against COVID-19.

negative: Effects of specific egg yolk immunoglobulin on pan-drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Abstract With the growing emergence of pan-drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (PDR-Ab) strains in clinical, new strategies for the treatment of PDR-Ab infections are urgently needed. Egg yolk immunoglobulin (IgY) as a convenient and inexpensive antibody has been widely applied to the therapy of infectious diseases. The aim of this study was to produce IgY specific to PDR-Ab and investigate its antibacterial effects in vitro and in vivo. IgYs specific to two PDR-Ab strains were produced by immunizing hens with formaldehyde inactivated PDR-Ab cells and isolated from yolks with a purity of 90% by water dilution, salt precipitations and ultrafiltration. IgYs showed high titers when subjected to an ELISA and inhibited the growth of PDR-Ab in a dose-dependent manner in liquid medium. Scanning electron microscopy assay showed structural modification and aggregation of PDR-Ab treated with specific IgYs. Freshly cultured PDR-Ab cells were nasally inhaled in BALB/c mice to induce acute pneumonia. The infected mice were intraperitoneally injected with specific IgYs using cefoperazone/sulbactam and dexamethasone as positive controls. The IgYs specific to PDR-Ab lowered the mortality of mice with PDR-Ab-induced acute pneumonia, decreased the level of TNF-α and IL-1β in serum and reduced inflammation in lung tissue. Specific IgY has the potential to be used as a new therapeutic approach for the treatment of A. baumannii-induced infections.

negative: Norwegian Coronavirus Disease 2019 (NO COVID-19) Pragmatic Open label Study to assess early use of hydroxychloroquine sulphate in moderately severe hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The hypothesis of the study is that treatment with hydroxychloroquine sulphate in hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is safe and will accelerate the virological clearance rate for patients with moderately severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) when compared to standard care. Furthermore, we hypothesize that early treatment with hydroxychloroquine sulphate is associated with more rapid resolve of clinical symptoms as assessed by the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), decreased admission rate to intensive care units and mortality, and improvement in protein biomarker profiles (C-reactive protein, markers of renal and hepatic injury, and established cardiac biomarkers like cardiac troponin and B-type natriuretic peptide). TRIAL DESIGN: The study is a two-arm, open label, pragmatic randomised controlled group sequential adaptive trial designed to assess the effect on viral loads and clinical outcome of hydroxychloroquine sulphate therapy in addition to standard care compared to standard care alone in patients with established Covid-19. By utilizing resources already paid for by the hospitals (physicians and nurses in daily clinical practice), this pragmatic trial can include a larger number of patients over a short period of time and at a lower cost than studies utilizing traditional randomized controlled trial designs with an external study organization. The pragmatic approach will enable swift initiation of randomisation and allocation to treatment. PARTICIPANTS: Patients will be recruited from all inpatients at Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. Electronic real-time surveillance of laboratory reports from the Department of Microbiology will be examined regularly for SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects. All of the following conditions must apply to the prospective patient at screening prior to inclusion: (1) Hospitalisation; (2) Adults 18 years or older; (3) Moderately severe Covid-19 disease (NEWS2 of 6 or less); (4) SARS-CoV-2 positive nasopharyngeal swab; (5) Expected time of hospitalisation > 48 hours; and (6) Signed informed consent must be obtained and documented according to Good Clinical Practice guidelines of the International Conference on Harmonization, and national/local regulations. Patients will be excluded from participation in the study if they meet any of the following criteria: (1) Requiring intensive care unit admission at screening; (2) History of psoriasis; (3) Known adverse reaction to hydroxychloroquine sulphate; (4) Pregnancy; or (5) Prolonged corrected QT interval (>450 ms). Clinical data, including standard hospital biochemistry, medical therapy, vital signs, NEWS2, and microbiology results (including blood culture results and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction [RT-PCR] for other upper airway viruses), will be automatically extracted from the hospital electronic records and merged with the study specific database. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Included patients will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to (1) standard care with the addition of 400 mg hydroxychloroquine sulphate (Plaquenil(TM)) twice daily for seven days or (2) standard care alone. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint of the study is the rate of decline in SARS-CoV-2 viral load in oropharyngeal samples as assessed by RT-PCR in samples collected at baseline, 48 and 96 hours after randomization and administration of drug for the intervention arm. Secondary endpoints include change in NEWS2 at 96 hours after randomisation, admission to intensive care unit, mortality (in-hospital, and at 30 and 90 days), duration of hospital admission, clinical status on a 7-point ordinal scale 14 days after randomization ([1] Death [2] Hospitalised, on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [3] Hospitalised, on non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen devices [4] Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen [5] Hospitalised, not requiring supplemental oxygen [6] Not hospitalized, but unable to resume normal activities [7] Not hospitalised, with resumption of normal activities), and improvement in protein biomarker profiles (C-reactive protein, markers of renal and hepatic injury, and established cardiac biomarkers like cardiac troponin and B-type natriuretic peptide) at 96 hours after randomization. RANDOMISATION: Eligible patients will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio, using a computer randomisation procedure. The allocation sequence has been prepared by an independent statistician. BLINDING (MASKING): Open label randomised controlled pragmatic trial without blinding, no active or placebo control. The virologist assessing viral load in the oropharyngeal samples and the statistician responsible for analysis of the data will be blinded to the treatment allocation for the statistical analyses. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): This is a group sequential adaptive trial where analyses are planned after 51, 101, 151 and 202 completed patients, with a maximum sample size of 202 patients (101 patients allocated to intervention and standard care and 101 patients allocated to standard care alone). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.3 (March 26, 2020). Recruitment of first patient on March 26, 2020, and 51 patients were included as per April 28, 2020. Study recruitment is anticipated to be completed by July 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04316377. Trial registered March 20, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

negative: Hypersensitivity reactions to biologics (part I): allergy as an important differential diagnosis in complex immune-derived adverse events PURPOSE: Biotechnological substances (BSs) are strongly relied upon to prevent rejection of transplanted organs, and to treat oncological, allergological, and other inflammatory diseases. Allergic reactions to partly foreign biologics can occur due to their potential immunogenicity. The severity of an immune response to a biological drug may range from no clinical significance to a severe, life-threatening anaphylactic reaction. METHODS: Detailed searches were performed on Pubmed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to include all available publications. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration, the European Medicines Agency, and British Columbia Cancer Agency Drug Manual databases were screened for hypersensitivity reaction (HSR), infusion reaction, injection site reaction, urticaria, and anaphylaxis for individual BSs. RESULTS: Treatment with BSs can cause various types of HSR. These are mentioned in the literature with definitions such as allergic reactions, anaphylactoid reactions, anaphylaxis, HSR, infusion reactions, injection site reactions, cytokine release syndrome, and urticaria. Due to the overlap in signs and symptoms in the reported descriptions, it is not always possible to differentiate these reactions properly according to their pathomechanism. Similarly, many data reported as anaphylaxis actually describe severe anaphylactic reactions (grades III or IV). CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for a simpler symptom- or system-based classification and scoring system to create an awareness for HSRs to BSs. A better understanding of the pathophysiology of HSRs and increased clinical experience in the treatment of side effects will provide timely control of unexpected reactions. As a result, immunotherapy with BSs will become safer in the future.

negative: Spontaneous and experimental myofibrillar hypoplasia and its relation to splayleg in newborn pigs Abstract The relation of myofibrillar hypoplasia to clinical splayleg was studied. A strain of Belgian Landrace sows was selected for this study because they produced pigs which had no myfibrillar hypoplasia. Myofibrillar hypoplasia could nevertheless by induced experimentally in these animals by dexamethasone treatment of the sows during late pregnancy. The lesion was observed without clinical signs and was compared to the myofibrillar hypoplasia in clinical cases of splayleg. The differences between these 2 groups may account for the appearance of clinical signs. These differences included the maturity of the myofibrils and the degree of autophagosomal glycogen breakdown.

negative: Favipiravir for treating novel coronavirus (COVID-19) patients: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials Introduction An outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) was reported in Wuhan, China in mid-December 2019, and declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020. Due to the unknown nature of the disease and the lack of specific drugs, several potential treatments were used for patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis will evaluate studies of the effects of Favipiravir in COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods and analysis We will search electronic databases including LitCovid hub, PubMed, Scopus, ISI web of Sciences, Cochrane, and Embase using keywords related to COVID-19 and Favipiravir. We will search the reference lists of all included studies and reviews. We will also search for clinical trial registries, such as clinicaltrial.gov for the ongoing clinical trials. Two investigators (MAZ and SH) will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full-text of included studies based on eligibility criteria. These investigators will also independently extract data and appraise the quality of studies. All potential discrepancies will be resolved through consultation with the third reviewer. Data synthesis will be conducted using the Review Manager software (version 5.3) or CMA (version 2). Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using a standard I2 test. A funnel plot, Egger test, and Begg test will be used for asymmetry to explore possible publication bias. Ethics and dissemination The findings of this systematic review with proportional meta-analysis will help to identify the safety and efficacy of Favipiravir for COVID-19 patients. Knowledge gained from this research will also assist physicians in selecting better treatment options and developing a guideline in this field.

negative: Macrophage activation syndrome in 13 children with systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis BACKGROUND: Macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) is a severe, potentially life-threatening condition induced by chronic rheumatic diseases, especially systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis (SoJIA) in childhood. This study aimed to analyze the clinical and laboratory characteristics of systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis (SoJIA) with macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) in 13 patients. METHODS: Clinical and laboratory data of 13 SoJIA patients with MAS treated in our hospital from January 2003 to October 2007 were analyzed. RESULTS: In the 13 patients, 9 were boys and 4 girls aged from 5 months to 12 years. Clinical manifestations were of no typical characteristics including persistent fever, anemia, arthritis, hepatosplenomegaly, lymph-adenopathy, dysfunction of the liver, abnormal fat metabolism, and hemophagocytic cells in the bone marrow. Two patients experienced acute respiratory distress syndrome, two had mutiorgan failure, and three died. The perforin A91V (NCBI:SNP rs35947132) gene in 6 patients was normal. Glucocorticoid and immunoimpressive therapy were effective in all patients and plasmapheresis used in one severe patient was also effective. CONCLUSIONS: MAS is a serious complication of JIA, especially systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis. It is essentially important to recognize and treat MAS earlier in order to lower the mortality.

negative: Cardiovascular Complications of COVID-19: Pharmacotherapy Perspective Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is spreading rapidly the world over. The disease was declared “pandemic” by the World Health Organization. An approved therapy for patients with COVID-19 has yet to emerge; however, there are some medications used in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection globally including hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, dexamethasone, protease inhibitors, and anti-inflammatory agents. Patients with underlying cardiovascular disease are at increased risk of mortality and morbidity from COVID-19. Moreover, patients with chronic stable states and even otherwise healthy individuals might sustain acute cardiovascular problems due to COVID-19 infection. This article seeks to review the latest evidence with a view to explaining possible pharmacotherapies for the cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 including acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, myocarditis, arrhythmias, and venous thromboembolism, as well as possible interactions between these medications and those currently administered (or under evaluation) in the treatment of COVID-19.

negative: Glucocorticoids inhibit neurogenic plasma extravasation and prevent virus-potentiated extravasation in the rat trachea. Capsaicin increases the permeability of blood vessels in the rat tracheal mucosa through a mechanism involving the release of tachykinins from sensory nerves. This capsaicin-induced increase in vascular permeability is potentiated by viral infections of the respiratory tract. The present study was done to determine whether this "neurogenic plasma extravasation" can be inhibited by glucocorticoids, to learn the time course of this inhibition, and to determine whether glucocorticoids can prevent the potentiating effect of viral respiratory infections on neurogenic plasma extravasation. Groups of pathogen-free F344 rats were treated with dexamethasone for 2 or 8 h (4 mg/kg i.p.) or 48 or 120 h (0.5-4 mg/kg per d i.p.). Another group of rats was treated with dexamethasone for 120 h following the intranasal inoculation of Sendai virus. The magnitude of plasma extravasation produced by capsaicin or substance P was assessed after this treatment by using Monastral blue pigment and Evans blue dye as intravascular tracers. We found that dexamethasone reduced, in a dose-dependent fashion, the magnitude of plasma extravasation produced in the rat trachea by capsaicin and substance P. Significant inhibition was produced by a dose of dexamethasone as small as 0.5 mg/kg i.p. The effect of dexamethasone had a latency of several hours and reached a maximum after 2 d of treatment. Furthermore, dexamethasone prevented the potentiation of neurogenic plasma extravasation usually present after 5 d of Sendai virus respiratory infection.

negative: Efficacy of an inactivated vaccine against clinical disease caused by canine coronavirus. Canine Coronavirus (CCV) is a causative agent of diarrhea in dogs. The reproduction of severe clinical disease with experimental CCV infection has been difficult. We have recently developed a CCV challenge model which reproduced clinical signs of disease in susceptible dogs. The following study was designed to determine whether immunization with an inactivated CCV vaccine would protect dogs from clinical disease induced using this model. Dogs (n = 13) were vaccinated with an inactivated CCV vaccine. Vaccinates and controls (n = 5) were orally inoculated with virulent CCV virus and treated with dexamethasone on days 0, 2, 4, and 6 after virus challenge. Control dogs developed clinical signs including diarrhea, dehydration, anorexia, depression, and nasal and ocular discharge. Diarrhea was noted in 80% of the controls and 60% progressed to a severe watery or bloody diarrhea that persisted for multiple days. Conversely, only 2/13 (15%) vaccinates developed mild diarrhea and none developed bloody diarrhea. The control dogs averaged 10.8 days of diarrhea compared to 1.4 days for vaccinates over the 21 day observation period. In addition to reduced clinical signs, the number of days of virus shedding and the level of CCV in feces was different for controls (100% shed virus) and vaccinates (38% shed virus). This study demonstrates that vaccination with an inactivated CCV vaccine can significantly reduce not only viral replication, but the occurrence of clinical disease following a virulent CCV infection.

negative: Reply to Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in patients with liver injury

negative: Is SARS-CoV-2 Vertically Transmitted? At the end of 2019, in Wuhan (China), the onset of a disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was observed. The disease, named COVID-19, has a wide spectrum of clinical presentations, ranging from asymptomatic or mild to critical, and for some patients the disease is even fatal. Apparently, being a child or being pregnant does not represent an additional risk for adverse outcomes. The purpose of this mini-review was to investigate what is in the scientific literature, so far, in regard to vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Data were obtained independently by the two authors, who carried out a systematic search in the PubMed, Embase, LILACS, Cochrane, Scopus and SciELO databases using the Medical Subject Heading terms “coronavirus,” “COVID-19,” and “vertical transmission.” Few studies about the vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 are found in the literature. In all case reports and case series, the mothers' infection occurred in the third trimester of pregnancy, there were no maternal deaths, and most neonates had a favorable clinical course. The virus was not detected in the neonate nasopharyngeal swab samples at birth, in the placenta, in the umbilical cord, in the amniotic fluid, in the breast milk or in the maternal vaginal swab samples in any of these articles. Only three papers reported neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection, but there is a bias that positive pharyngeal swab samples were collected at 36 h and on the 2nd, 4th, and 17th days of life. The possibility of intrauterine infection has been based mainly on the detection of IgM and IL-6 in the neonates' serum. In conclusion, to date, no convincing evidence has been found for vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

negative: COVID‐19: The Uninvited Guest in the Intensive Care Unit — Implications for Pharmacotherapy As the number of cases of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) rise in the United States (US), the number of severe cases (those requiring ICU admission) rise with it. Initially, the estimate for severe cases was approximated at 5% based on experience from China.1, 2 However, the World Health Organization's (WHO) estimate from China for severe and critical cases is near 20% (Table).3 The primary clinical feature of COVID-19 is pneumonia, the severity of which directs the clinical course; it has been estimated that, of patients admitted to the ICU, up to half may require either invasive or non-invasive ventilatory support.4 This has created an unprecedented situation for emergency and critical care medicine.

negative: Ethical issues related to the hydroxychloroquine treatment prescription for Covid-19 Abstract The 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), has led to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). To date, no drugs have demonstrated safety and efficacy in randomized controlled trials for patients with COVID-19. Although the association between Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin efficacy lack of solid evidence-base, several governments have adopted it for all virology confirmed Covid-19 cases even for those who are asymptomatic. In the following, we aim to discuss some of the ethical issues associated with the use of this treatment association. We mainly tried to discuss the following controversial questions: Is it ethical not to treat a patient while a treatment exists and is used for other indications than Covid-19 for which it’s not proven yet? If yes, is a randomized controlled trial to prove the hydroxychloroquine for the Covid-19 treatment, necessary, in the context of covid-19 pandemic? If No, is it the government’s right to decide the hydroxychloroquine treatment for all covid-19 patients? and what should be the physicians’ attitudes? Finally, what are the government, physicians, and patient’s rights and responsibilities? The paper conclude that, since health authorities in some countries recommended this off-label use treatment, physicians are challenged by the requirement of veracity while providing care to their patients and the implications of such a requirement; they are facing the challenge of balancing this guideline and their own conviction. Furthermore, the fundamental principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, and respect for persons should underlie any reflection process to address this dilemma. In addition, in a pandemic context, the limits between the government’s, practitioner’s and patient’s rights and obligations are not clear which could significantly endanger the universal ethical principles in clinical practice. It could also undermine any attempt to develop serious clinical trials to prove the considered off-label drug.

negative: Efficacy and safety of current therapeutic options for COVID-19 - lessons to be learnt from SARS and MERS epidemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis Abstract The rapidly progressing of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a global concern. This meta-analysis aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of current option of therapies for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS) besides COVID-19, in an attempt to identify promising therapy for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected patients. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), and WANFANG DATA for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective cohort, and retrospective cohort studies that evaluated therapies (hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir-based therapy, and ribavirin-based therapy, etc.) for SARS, MERS, and COVID-19. The primary outcomes were mortality, virological eradication and clinical improvement, and secondary outcomes were improvement of symptoms and chest radiography results, incidence of acute respiratory disease syndrome (ARDS), utilization of mechanical ventilation, and adverse events (AEs). Summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models, and the quality of evidence was appraised using GRADEpro. Eighteen articles (5 RCTs, 2 prospective cohort studies, and 11 retrospective cohort studies) involving 4,941 patients were included. Compared with control treatment, anti-coronary virus interventions significantly reduced mortality (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44-0.96; I 2 = 81.3%), remarkably ameliorate clinical improvement (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.05-2.19) and radiographical improvement (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11-2.36, I 2 = 11.0 %), without manifesting clear effect on virological eradication, incidence of ARDS, intubation, and AEs. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the combination of ribavirin and corticosteroids remarkably decreased mortality (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.27-0.68). The lopinavir/ritonavir-based combination showed superior virological eradication and radiographical improvement with reduced rate of ARDS. Likewise, hydroxychloroquine improved radiographical result. For safety, ribavirin could induce more bradycardia, anemia and transaminitis. Meanwhile, hydroxychloroquine could increase AEs rate especially diarrhea. Overall, the quality of evidence on most outcomes were very low. In conclusion, although we could not draw a clear conclusion for the recommendation of potential therapies for COVID-19 considering the very low quality of evidence and wide heterogeneity of interventions and indications, our results may help clinicians to comprehensively understand the advantages and drawbacks of each anti-coronavirus agents on efficacy and safety profiles. Lopinavir/ritonavir combinations might observe better virological eradication capability than other anti-coronavirus agents. Conversely, ribavirin might cause more safety concerns especially bradycardia. Thus, large RCTs objectively assessing the efficacy of antiviral therapies for SARS-CoV-2 infections should be conducted with high priority.

negative: COVID‐19 and renin‐angiotensin system inhibition: role of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) ‐ Is there any scientific evidence for controversy? Renin–angiotensin system (RAS) blockers are extensively used worldwide to treat many cardiovascular disorders, where they are effective in reducing both mortality and morbidity. These drugs are known to induce an increased expression of angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). ACE2 acts as receptor for the novel SARS coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) which raising the important issue of possible detrimental effects that RAS blockers could exert on the natural history and pathogenesis of the coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) and associated excessive inflammation, myocarditis and cardiac arrhythmias. We review the current knowledge on the interaction between SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and RAS blockers and suggest a scientific rationale for continuing RAS blockers therapy in patients with COVID‐19 infection.

negative: Association of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers with the Risk of Hospitalization and Death in Hypertensive Patients with Coronavirus Disease-19 BACKGROUND: Whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) Inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) mitigate or exacerbate SARS-CoV-2 infection remains uncertain. In a national study, we evaluated the association of ACE inhibitors and ARB with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) hospitalization and mortality among individuals with hypertension. METHODS: Among Medicare Advantage and commercially insured individuals, we identified 2,263 people with hypertension, receiving ≥1 antihypertensive agents, and who had a positive outpatient SARS-CoV-2 test (outpatient cohort). In a propensity score-matched analysis, we determined the association of ACE inhibitors and ARBs with the risk of hospitalization for COVID-19. In a second study of 7,933 individuals with hypertension who were hospitalized with COVID-19 (inpatient cohort), we tested the association of these medications with in-hospital mortality. We stratified all our assessments by insurance groups. RESULTS: Among individuals in the outpatient and inpatient cohorts, 31.9% and 29.8%, respectively, used ACE inhibitors and 32.3% and 28.1% used ARBs. In the outpatient study, over a median 30.0 (19.0 - 40.0) days after testing positive, 12.7% were hospitalized for COVID-19. In propensity score-matched analyses, neither ACE inhibitors (HR, 0.77 [0.53, 1.13], P = 0.18), nor ARBs (HR, 0.88 [0.61, 1.26], P = 0.48), were significantly associated with risk of hospitalization. In analyses stratified by insurance group, ACE inhibitors, but not ARBs, were associated with a significant lower risk of hospitalization in the Medicare group (HR, 0.61 [0.41, 0.93], P = 0.02), but not the commercially insured group (HR: 2.14 [0.82, 5.60], P = 0.12; P-interaction 0.09). In the inpatient study, 14.2% died, 59.5% survived to discharge, and 26.3% had an ongoing hospitalization. In propensity score-matched analyses, neither use of ACE inhibitor (0.97 [0.81, 1.16]; P = 0.74) nor ARB (1.15 [0.95, 1.38]; P = 0.15) was associated with risk of in-hospital mortality, in total or in the stratified analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ACE inhibitors and ARBs was not associated with the risk of hospitalization or mortality among those infected with SARS-CoV-2. However, there was a nearly 40% lower risk of hospitalization with the use of ACE inhibitors in the Medicare population. This finding merits a clinical trial to evaluate the potential role of ACE inhibitors in reducing the risk of hospitalization among older individuals, who are at an elevated risk of adverse outcomes with the infection.

negative: Dexamethasone and postoperative hyperglycemia in diabetics undergoing elective hip or knee arthroplasty: a case control study in 238 patients. Background Dexamethasone has been routinely used in the pre-operative setting to enhance analgesia and decrease the incidence of nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing primary arthroplasty. However, dexamethasone has the potential to increase blood glucose levels postoperatively, which is a known risk factor for complications after total joint arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of dexamethasone administration on post-operative blood glucose levels in diabetic patients after primary hip and knee arthroplasty. Methods This study was a retrospective review of 238 diabetic patients who underwent primary hip and knee arthroplasty between May 1, 2014 and September 30, 2016 at a single urban academic medical center. A total of 77 patients (32.4%) received dexamethasone and 161 (67.7%) did not. Oral hyperglycemic agents were held during the inpatient stay and blood glucose was controlled either with sliding scale insulin or home insulin regimens were continued. All analyses were adjusted for age, BMI, gender, type of diabetes, pre-operative diabetic medication, type of surgical procedure, and pre-operative HgbA1c level. The primary outcome was post-operative hyperglycemia within 72 h of surgery defined as any blood glucose level greater than or equal to 200 mg/dL. Results Post-operative hyperglycemia was observed in 17.1 and 20.6% of the measurements during the first 24 and 72 h respectively. After controlling for confounding variables, patients who received dexamethasone had 4.07 (95% CI: 2.46, 6.72) and 3.08 (95% CI: 2.34, 4.04) higher odds of post-operative hyperglycemia in the first 24 and 72 h respectively. Conclusions Dexamethasone administration in diabetic patients undergoing primary arthroplasty increases post-operative hyperglycemia during the first 24 and 72 h. While our data did not investigate causation, dexamethasone use in this patient population should be thoughtfully considered, as post-operative hyperglycemia is a known risk factor for complications.

negative: Chapter 20 The potential of exosomes as theragnostics in various clinical situations Abstract Exosomes are membrane-bound cargo measuring 30–140nm comprised of a lipid bilayer containing various proteins, RNAs, DNAs, and bioactive lipids that can be transferred between cells. They have been shown to be produced and released by many different types of healthy and diseased cells. Exosomes are secreted by all types of cells in culture, and are also found in various body fluids including blood, saliva, urine, and breast milk. Exosomes are essential for healthy physiological as well as pathological processes. In addition to their normal function, exosomes are involved in the development and progression of various diseases, potentiating cellular stress and damage. Pathogens take advantage of exosome release from infected host cells by manipulating host-derived exosomes to evade the immune system responses. Exosomes are involved in other pathological conditions such as neurodegenerative diseases, liver diseases, heart failure, cancer, diabetes, kidney diseases, osteoporosis and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Hence, we can exploit exosomes as biomarkers and vaccines and modify them rationally for therapeutic interventions including tissue engineering. Further studies on exosomes will explore their potential and provide new methodology for effective clinical diagnostics and therapeutic strategies: such uses can be called exosome theragnostics. This chapter reviews the potential theragnostic (diagnostic and therapeutic) application of exosomes in major organ systems in clinical fields.

negative: Morning and evening plasma melatonin and dexamethasone suppression test in patients with nonseasonal major depressive disorder from northern Greece (latitude 40-41.5 degrees ). INTRODUCTION The present study aimed to search for correlations between melatonin (MT) levels and the dexamethasone suppression test (DST) and clinical variables. METHODS Fifty depressed patients aged 21-60 years took part in the study. The Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry, version 2.0, and the International Personality Disorders Examination were used for diagnosis. Psychometric assessment included the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Hamilton Anxiety Scale, the General Assessment of Funtioning Scale, the Newcastle scales and the Diagnostic Melancholia Scale. The DST and 9.00 and 23.00 h MT values were assessed. Statistical analysis included Student's t test, Pearson product moment correlation coefficient and forward stepwise multiple linear regression analysis. RESULTS Melancholic patients had lower 23.00 h MT values in comparison to the rest of the patients and the atypical and 'undifferentiated' patients. CONCLUSION The current study shows that low MT values were closely related to melancholic depression. Distinct quality of mood, psychomotor agitation or retardation and anorexia or weight loss seemed to be responsible for this relationship.

negative: COVID‐19 presenting with immune thrombocytopenia: a case report and review of the literature Novel coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) may be associated with thrombocytopenia which might have different mechanisms in different patients and in different phases of the disease. Cytokine release, thrombotic consumption or autoimmune destruction are some leading etiologies of thrombocytopenia in COVID‐19. This case report presents a 41‐year‐old male COVID‐19 patient who had petechiae and purpura as the referral symptoms. Laboratory tests revealed isolated thrombocytopenia with no other additional pathologic findings. Most probable diagnosis was COVID‐19 induced immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) and high dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment generated a good response. There were four other recent publications with a total of eight cases in the literature. The presented case was discussed in comparison with those similar cases. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

negative: Systematic review of the efficacy and safety of antiretroviral drugs against SARS, MERS or COVID-19: initial assessment INTRODUCTION: Several antiretroviral drugs are being considered for the treatment of COVID-19, the disease caused by a newly identified coronavirus, (SARS-CoV-2). We systematically reviewed the clinical outcomes of using antiretroviral drugs for the prevention and treatment of coronaviruses and planned clinical trials. METHODS: Three databases were screened from inception to 30 March 2020 for studies reporting clinical outcomes of patients with SARS, MERS or COVID-19 treated with antiretrovirals. RESULTS: From an initial screen of 433 titles, two randomized trials and 24 observational studies provided clinical outcome data on the use of antiretroviral drugs; most studies reported outcomes using LPV/r as treatment. Of the 21 observational studies reporting treatment outcomes, there were three studies among patients with SARS, six studies among patients with MERS and 12 studies among patients with COVID-19. In one randomized trial 99 patients with severe COVID-19 illness were randomized to receive LPV/r (400/100 mg twice a day) and 100 patients to standard of care for 14 days: LPV/r was not associated with a statistically significant difference in time to clinical improvement, although LPV/r given within 12 days of symptoms was associated with shorter time to clinical improvement; 28 day mortality was numerically lower in the LPV/r group (14/99) compared to the control group (25/100), but this difference was not statistically significant. The second trial found no benefit. The certainty of the evidence for the randomized trials was low. In the observational studies 3 out of 361 patients who received LPV/r died; the certainty of evidence was very low. Three studies reported a possible protective effect of LPV/r as post-exposure prophylaxis. Again, the certainty of the evidence was very low due to uncertainty due to limited sample size. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the available evidence it is uncertain whether LPV/r and other antiretrovirals improve clinical outcomes or prevent infection among patients at high risk of acquiring COVID-19.

negative: Effectiveness of Ivermectin as add-on Therapy in COVID-19 Management (Pilot Trial) Background: To date no effective therapy has been demonstrated for COVID-19. In vitro, studies indicated that ivermectin (IVM) has antiviral effect. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of ivermectin (IVM) as add-on therapy to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and azithromycin (AZT) in treatment of COVID-19. Methods: This Pilot clinical trial conducted on hospitalized adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 diagnosed according to WHO interim guidance. Sixteen Patients received a single dose of IVM 200Mcg /kg on admission day as add on therapy to hydroxychloroquine ( HCQ)and Azithromycin (AZT) and were compared with 71 controls received HCQ and AZT matched in age, gender, clinical features, and comorbidities. The primary outcome was percentage of cured patients, defined as symptoms free to be discharged from the hospital and 2 consecutive negative PCR test from nasopharyngeal swabs at least 24 hours apart. The secondary outcomes were time to cure in both groups and evaluated by measuring time from admission of the patient to the hospital till discharge. Results: Of 87 patients included in the study,t he mean age {+/-} SD (range) of patients in the IVM group was similar to controls [44.87 {+/-} 10.64 (28-60) vs 45.23 {+/-} 18.47 (8-80) years, p=0.78] Majority of patients in both groups were male but statistically not significant [11(69%) versus 52 (73%), with male: female ratio 2.21 versus 2.7-, p=0.72) All the patients of IVM group were cured compared with the controls [ 16 (100 %) vs 69 (97.2 %)]. Two patients died in the controls. The mean time to stay in the hospital was significantly lower in IVM group compared with the controls (7.62 {+/-}2.75 versus 13.22 {+/-}.90 days, p=0.00005, effect size= 0.82). No adverse events were observed Conclusions : Add-on use of IVM to HCQ and AZT had better effectiveness, shorter hospital stay, and relatively safe compared with controls. however, a larger prospective study with longer follow up may be needed to validate these results.

negative: This journal issue contains abstracts that have been accepted for presentation as the 8th Annual Conference of the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL)

negative: COVID-19 in Children With Cancer in New York City.

negative: The incidence and management of persistent cystoid macular oedema following uncomplicated cataract surgery—a Scottish Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit study PURPOSE: Post-operative cystoid macular oedema (CMO) can cause deterioration of vision following routine cataract surgery. The incidence of persistent CMO (pCMO; defined as CMO present after 3 months) following uncomplicated surgery is uncertain. We wished to identify the incidence, management and visual outcomes of such patients. METHODS: A Scottish Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit (SOSU) questionnaire was sent monthly to every ophthalmic specialist in Scotland over an 18-month period from 1st January 2018 asking them to report all new patients with pCMO confirmed on OCT scanning following uncomplicated cataract surgery. A follow-up questionnaire was sent 9 months after initial presentation. RESULTS: Fourteen cases of pCMO were reported, giving an incidence of 2.2 cases of pCMO per 10,000 uncomplicated cataract surgeries. Mean age was 74.9 years (SD 10.2; range 44–86) with a male preponderance (72.7%). Two patients developed pCMO in each eye. Six cases (46.2%) had hypertension and one had diabetes. Three eyes required intracameral adjuncts (two iris hooks, one intracameral phenylephrine). Postoperative visual acuity (VA) at 3 months was logMAR 0.48 (0.2–0.8). Average mean central retinal thickness (CRT) at 3 months was 497microns (270–788). The most common initial treatment comprised topical steroids and topical NSAIDs (61.5%). Other management strategies included systemic steroids, intravitreal steroids and oral acetazolamide. At 1-year post-op, mean VA was logMAR 0.18 (0.1–0.3) with average mean CRT of 327microns (245–488). CONCLUSIONS: We identified a low incidence of pCMO following uncomplicated cataract surgery in Scotland (0.02%), with inconsistent and variable management regimes. A nationally agreed treatment protocol is required.

negative: COVID‐19 and diabetes: Is there enough evidence? The pandemic of COVID‐19, a disease caused by a novel coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2, is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Recent data showed that hypertension, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were the most prevalent comorbidities in COVID‐19 patients. Additionally, data indicate that hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases are important risk factors for progression and unfavorable outcome in COVID‐19 patients. There is only limited amount of data regarding follow‐up of these patients, and they provided conflicting results. The main limitation is a small number of participants and particularly those who experienced primary composite outcome (admission in intensive care unit, use of mechanical ventilation, or death). Additionally, the limited number of patients was essential obstacle for performing analysis that would include many confounding factors such as advanced age, smoking status, and obesity and potentially change conclusion. So far, there is no study that demonstrated independent predictive value of diabetes on mortality in COVID‐19 patients, but there are many speculations about the association between diabetes and susceptibility to novel coronavirus, as well as its impact on progression and prognosis of COVID‐19. The aim of this review article was to summarize the current knowledge about the relationship between diabetes and COVID‐19 and its role in outcome in these patients.

negative: Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis might be under-diagnosed in the COVID-19 era

negative: Mechanism of Fibronectin Binding to Human Trabecular Meshwork Exosomes and Its Modulation by Dexamethasone Exosomes are emerging as important mediators of cell-matrix interactions by means of specific adhesion proteins. Changes in the tissue-specific exosomal protein expression may underlie pathological conditions whereby extracellular matrix turnover and homeostasis is disrupted. Ocular hypertension due to extracellular matrix accumulation in the trabecular meshwork is a hallmark of glucocorticoid-induced glaucoma. In the trabecular meshwork, exosomal fibronectin mediates cell matrix interactions at cellular structures called “invadosomes”. Trabecular meshwork cells use invadosomes to turn over their surrounding matrix and maintain passageways for flow of aqueous humor. In this study, we observed that human trabecular meshwork explants treated with dexamethasone released exosomes with significantly reduced amounts of fibronectin bound per exosome. Further, we found that exosome-fibronectin binding is heparan sulfate-dependent, consistent with our observation that trabecular meshwork exosomes are enriched in the heparin/heparan sulfate binding annexins A2 and A6. In this way, dexamethasone-treated explants released exosomes with a significant reduction in annexin A2 and A6 per exosome. Interestingly, we did not detect exosomal matrix metalloproteinases, but we identified abundant dipeptidyl peptidase 4, a serine protease whose activity was reduced on exosomes isolated from dexamethasone-treated explants. Together, our findings demonstrate mechanistically how corticosteroid-induced alterations in exosomal adhesion cargo and properties can account for the pathological matrix accumulation seen in many glaucoma patients.

negative: Efficacy of VRD(Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone) Consolidation Therapy and Maintenance Therapy with Immunomodulatory Drugs(Thalidomide or Lenalidomide) after Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation in the Era of Bortezomib-Containing Induction Therapy-A Single Institution E Autologous stem cell transplantation(ASCT)for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma(NDMM)has underwent recent improvements in combination with novel agents-containing induction and post-ASCT therapy. Since the approval of bortezomib for NDMM in Japan, we conducted the following regimen(BD arm)in transplant-eligible patients with NDMM: BD (bortezomib and dexamethasone)induction, ASCT, VRD consolidation, and maintenance therapy with immunomodulatory drugs(IMIDs). The efficacy and safety of the BD arm were compared to those of patients treated with vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone(VAD)induction followed by ASCT(VAD arm)retrospectively. Thirty-three patients were treated with the BD arm, and 92 patients with the VAD arm. Thirty-one patients in the BD arm proceeded to ASCT. Thereafter, 23 and 17 patients received VRD consolidation and IMIDs maintenance therapy, respectively. The rates of complete response/Bvery good partial response after ASCT, consolidation, and maintenance therapy were 43%/61%, 76%/90% and 87%/93%, respectively. The response rates after ASCT did not differ between BD and VAD arms. The median PFS was 46.2 months(BD arm)and 30.6 months(VAD arm)(HR 0.48[0.27-0.85], p=0.0106). The median OS was not-reached(BD arm)and 90.6 months(VAD arm)(HR 0.21[0.05-0.87], p=0.0172). VRD consolidation and IMIDs maintenance therapies improved disease status after ASCT and prolonged PFS and OS.

negative: Systematic and Statistical Review of COVID19 Treatment Trials Objective: The following systematic review and meta-analysis compiles the current data regarding human controlled COVID-19 treatment trials. Methods: An electronic search of the literature compiled studies pertaining to human controlled treatment trials with COVID-19. Medications assessed included lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, hydroxychloroquine, favipiravir, and heparin. Statistical analyzes were performed for common viral clearance endpoints whenever possible. Results: Lopinavir/ritonavir showed no significant effect on viral clearance for COVID-19 cases (OR 0.95 [95% CI 0.50-1.83]). Hydroxychloroquine also showed no significant effect on COVID-19 viral clearance rates (OR 2.16 [95% CI 0.80-5.84]). Arbidol showed no seven-day (OR 1.63 [95% CI 0.76-3.50]) or 14-day viral (OR 5.37 [95% CI 0.35-83.30]) clearance difference compared to lopinavir/ritonavir. Review of literature showed no significant clinical improvement with lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, hydroxychloroquine, or remdesivir. Favipiravir showed quicker symptom improvement compared to lopinavir/ritonavir and arbidol. Heparin showed improvement with severe COVID-19 cases. Conclusion: Current medications do not show significant effect on COVID-19 viral clearance rates. Favipiravir shows favorable results compared to other tested medications. Heparin shows benefit for severe cases of COVID-19.

negative: Why tocilizumab could be an effective treatment for severe COVID-19? A severe pneumonia-associated respiratory syndrome caused by a new coronavirus was identified in December 2019 (COVID-19), spread rapidly and has become a world-wide public health challenge. About 25% of COVID-19 patients experienced severe complications including acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and even progressed into an intensive care unit (ICU) admission and died. The exploration for the mortality causes and advancing novel therapeutic development of severe COVID-19 is crucial at the moment. The biopsy samples analysis at autopsy suggested that increased alveolar exudate caused by aberrant host immune response and inflammatory cytokine storm probably impedes alveolar gas exchange and contributes to the high mortality of severe COVID-19 patients. Our research has identified that pathogenic T cells and inflammatory monocytes incite inflammatory storm with large amount of interleukin 6, therefore monoclonal antibody that targets the IL-6 pathways may potentially curb inflammatory storm. Moreover, Tocilizumab treatment that blocking IL-6 receptors showed inspiring clinical results including temperature returned to normal quickly and respiratory function improved. Therefore, we suggest that Tocilizumab is an effective treatment in severe patients of COVID-19 to calm the inflammatory storm and reduce mortality.

negative: Delivering pediatric oncology services during a COVID‐19 pandemic in India

negative: High-Altitude Pulmonary Edema High-altitude pulmonary edema (HAPE) is an uncommon form of pulmonary edema that occurs in healthy individuals within a few days of arrival at altitudes above 2,500–3,000 m. The crucial pathophysiology is an excessive hypoxia-mediated rise in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) or hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction (HPV) leading to increased microvascular hydrostatic pressures despite normal left atrial pressure. The resultant hydrostatic stress can cause both dynamic changes in the permeability of the alveolar capillary barrier and mechanical damage leading to leakage of large proteins and erythrocytes into the alveolar space in the absence of inflammation. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and pulmonary artery (PA) and microvascular pressure measurements in humans confirm that high capillary pressure induces a high-permeability non-inflammatory-type lung edema; a concept termed “capillary stress failure.” Measurements of endothelin and nitric oxide (NO) in exhaled air, NO metabolites in BAL fluid, and NO-dependent endothelial function in the systemic circulation all point to reduced NO availability and increased endothelin in hypoxia as a major cause of the excessive hypoxic PA pressure rise in HAPE-susceptible individuals. Other hypoxia-dependent differences in ventilatory control, sympathetic nervous system activation, endothelial function, and alveolar epithelial sodium and water reabsorption likely contribute additionally to the phenotype of HAPE susceptibility. Recent studies using magnetic resonance imaging in humans strongly suggest nonuniform regional hypoxic arteriolar vasoconstriction as an explanation for how HPV occurring predominantly at the arteriolar level can cause leakage. This compelling but not yet fully proven mechanism predicts that in areas of high blood flow due to lesser vasoconstriction edema will develop owing to pressures that exceed the structural and dynamic capacity of the alveolar capillary barrier to maintain normal alveolar fluid balance. Numerous strategies aimed at lowering HPV and possibly enhancing active alveolar fluid reabsorption are effective in preventing and treating HAPE. Much has been learned about HAPE in the past four decades such that what was once a mysterious alpine malady is now a well-characterized and preventable lung disease. This chapter will relate the history, pathophysiology, and treatment of HAPE, using it not only to illuminate the condition, but also for the broader lessons it offers in understanding pulmonary vascular regulation and lung fluid balance.

negative: Serotonin syndrome in two COVID-19 patients treated with lopinavir/ritonavir

negative: A systematic review of Anakinra, Tocilizumab, Sarilumab and Siltuximab for coronavirus-related infections Background There is accumulating evidence for an overly activated immune response characterised by the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines in severe Covid-19. Suppression of the inflammatory response with immunomodulatory therapies may be a potential therapeutic strategy. We systematically review and assess the effectiveness of specific interleukin-1 and -6 inhibitors for the treatment of coronavirus-related infections. Methods Electronic databases, pre-print servers and clinical trial registries were searched to identify current and ongoing studies of immunomodulatory agents (anakinra, sarilumab, siltuximab and tocilizumab) for the treatment of Covid-19 and other coronavirus related super infections. The co-primary outcome was time to hospital discharge (days) and severity on an ordinal scale measured at day 15. Results Five retrospective studies (tocilizumab, two case series and two case reports; siltuximab, one case series) were shortlisted for inclusion, totalling 59 patients. All studies had a moderate or high risk of bias, with multiple limitations. Insufficient data and inter-study heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis. Primary outcomes were inconsistently reported but suggest many patients experienced an improvement in status seven days following therapy. The case fatality ratio (CFR) of patients with severe Covid-19 included in our review was 6.8%, a figure substantially lower than that estimated in non-interventional case series. Of the studies measuring IL-6, all reported elevated baseline levels. Twenty-five ongoing registered clinical trials exploring immunomodulatory agents in Covid-19 were identified, although inconsistency in participants and endpoints are noted. Conclusion Inhibition of IL-6 with tocilizumab and siltuximab requires further evaluation in managing the assumed hyperinflammatory response associated with severe Covid-19. These early data are considered hypothesis generating and justify the need for well-designed randomised clinical studies.

negative: Parálisis facial periférica aislada en un paciente con COVID-19./ [Isolated peripheral facial paralysis in a patient with COVID-19]

negative: Antiviral mechanisms of candidate chemical medicines and traditional Chinese medicines for SARS-CoV-2 infection The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has rapidly become a global pandemic. Up to now, numerous medicines have been applied or approved for the prevention and control of the virus infection. However, the efficiency of each medicine or combination is completely different or still unknown. In this review, we discuss the types, characteristics, antiviral mechanisms, and shortcomings of recommended candidate medicines for SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as perspectives of the drugs for the disease treatment, which may provide a theoretical basis for drug screening and application.

negative: A Bayesian reanalysis of the effects of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin on viral carriage in patients with COVID-19 Gautret and colleagues reported results of a non-randomised open-label case series which examined the effects of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin on viral load in the upper respiratory tract of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) patients. The authors report that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) had significant virus reducing effects, and that dual treatment of both HCQ and azithromycin further enhanced virus reduction. This data has triggered speculation whether these drugs should be considered as candidates for the treatment of severe COVID-19. However, questions have been raised regarding the study's data integrity, statistical analyses, and experimental design. We therefore reanalysed the original data to interrogate the main claims of the paper. Here we apply Bayesian statistics to assess the robustness of the original papers claims by testing four variants of the data: 1) The original data; 2) Data including patients who deteriorated; 3) Data including patients who deteriorated with exclusion of untested patients in the comparison group; 4) Data that includes patients who deteriorated with the assumption that untested patients were negative. To ask if HCQ monotherapy is effective, we performed an A/B test for a model which assumes a positive effect, compared to a model of no effect. We find that the statistical evidence is highly sensitive to these data variants. Statistical evidence for the positive effect model ranged from strong for the original data (BF ~11), to moderate when including patients who deteriorated (BF ~4.35), to anecdotal when excluding untested patients (BF ~2), and to anecdotal negative evidence if untested patients were assumed positive (BF ~0.6). To assess whether HCQ is more effective when combined with AZ, we performed the same tests, and found only anecdotal evidence for the positive effect model for the original data (BF ~2.8), and moderate evidence for all other variants of the data (BF ~5.6). Our analyses only explore the effects of different assumptions about excluded and untested patients. These assumptions are not adequately reported, nor are they justified in the original paper, and we find that varying them causes substantive changes to the evidential support for the main claims of the original paper. This statistical uncertainty is exacerbated by the fact that the treatments were not randomised, and subject to several confounding variables including the patients' consent to treatment, different care centres, and clinical decision-making. Furthermore, while the viral load measurements were noisy, showing multiple reversals between test outcomes, there is greater certainty around other clinical outcomes such as the 4 patients who seriously deteriorated. The fact that all of these belonged to the HCQ monotherapy group should be assigned greater weight when evaluating the potential clinical efficacy of HCQ. Randomised controlled trials are currently underway, and will be critical in resolving this uncertainty as to whether HCQ and AZ are effective as a treatment for COVID-19.

negative: JAK Inhibition as a New Treatment Strategy for Patients with COVID-19 After the advent of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) commenced across the world. Understanding the Immunopathogenesis of COVID-19 is essential for interrupting viral infectivity and preventing aberrant immune responses before a vaccine can be developed. In this review, we provide the latest insights into the roles of angiotensin-converting enzyme II (ACE2) and Ang II receptor-1 (AT1-R) in this disease. Novel therapeutic strategies, including recombinant ACE2, ACE inhibitors, AT1-R blockers, and Ang 1–7 peptides, may prevent or reduce viruses-induced pulmonary, cardiac, and renal injuries. However, more studies are needed to clarify the efficacy of these therapeutics. Furthermore, considering the common role of the Janus kinase-signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK-STAT) pathway in AT1-R expressed on peripheral tissues and cytokine receptors on the surface of immune cells, potential targeting of this pathway using JAK inhibitors (JAKinibs) is suggested as a promising approach in patients with COVID-19 who are admitted to hospitals. In addition to antiviral therapy, potential ACE2- and AT1-R-inhibiting strategies, and other supportive care, we suggest other potential JAKinibs and novel anti-inflammatory combination therapies that affect the JAK-STAT pathway in patients with COVID-19. Since the combination of MTX and baricitinib leads to outstanding clinical outcomes, the addition of baricitinib to MTX might be a potential strategy.

negative: Efficacy and safety of antiviral treatment for COVID-19 from evidence in studies of SARSCoV-2 and other acute viral infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis BACKGROUND: Antiviral medications are being given empirically to some patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To support the development of a COVID-19 management guideline, we conducted a systematic review that addressed the benefits and harms of 7 antiviral treatments for COVID-19. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed and 3 Chinese databases (CNKI, WANFANG and SinoMed) through Apr. 19, medRxiv and Chinaxiv through Apr. 27, and Chongqing VIP through Apr. 30, 2020. We included studies of ribavirin, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, umifenovir (arbidol), favipravir, interferon and lopinavir/ritonavir. If direct evidence from COVID-19 studies was not available, we included indirect evidence from studies of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) for efficacy outcomes and other acute respiratory viral infections for safety outcomes. RESULTS: In patients with nonsevere COVID-19 illness, the death rate was extremely low, precluding an important effect on mortality. We found only very low-quality evidence with little or no suggestion of benefit for most treatments and outcomes in both nonsevere and severe COVID-19. An exception was treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir, for which we found low-quality evidence for a decrease in length of stay in the intensive care unit (risk difference 5 d shorter, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0 to 9 d) and hospital stay (risk difference 1 d shorter, 95% CI 0 to 2 d). For safety outcomes, evidence was of low or very low quality, with the exception of treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir for which moderate-quality evidence suggested likely increases in diarrhea, nausea and vomiting. INTERPRETATION: To date, persuasive evidence of important benefit in COVID-19 does not exist for any antiviral treatments, although for each treatment evidence has not excluded important benefit. Additional randomized controlled trials involving patients with COVID-19 will be needed before such treatments can be administered with confidence.

negative: Efficacy, safety and cost‐effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in children with COVID‐19: A call for evidence The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic poses a serious threat to public health and local economies around the globe. This has created an urgent need to identify effective medications for its prevention and treatment (1). Among these treatments, the off-label use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a less toxic derivate of chloroquine, has become a common practice among clinicians, including pediatricians, despite lack of evidence of its clinical efficacy for this indication (especially for pediatric patients) at present time (2).

negative: Hemorrhagic stroke and anticoagulation in COVID-19 Abstract Background and Purpose : Patients with the Coronavirus Disease of 2019 (COVID-19) are at increased risk for thrombotic events and mortality. Various anticoagulation regimens are now being considered for these patients. Anticoagulation is known to increase the risk for adverse bleeding events, of which intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is one of the most feared. We present a retrospective study of 33 patients positive for COVID-19 with neuroimaging-documented ICH and examine anticoagulation use in this population. Methods : Patients over the age of 18 with confirmed COVID-19 and radiographic evidence of ICH were included in this study. Evidence of hemorrhage was confirmed and categorized by a fellowship trained neuroradiologist. Electronic health records were analyzed for patient information including demographic data, medical history, hospital course, laboratory values, and medications. Results : We identified 33 COVID-19 positive patients with ICH, mean age 61.6 years (range 37 to 83 years), 21.2% of whom were female. Parenchymal hemorrhages with mass effect and herniation occurred in 5 (15.2%) patients, with a 100% mortality rate. Of the remaining 28 patients with ICH, 7 (25%) had punctate hemorrhages, 17 (60.7%) had small- moderate size hemorrhages, and 4 (14.3%) had a large single site of hemorrhage without evidence of herniation. Almost all patients received either therapeutic dose anticoagulation (in 22 [66.7%] patients) or prophylactic dose (in 3 [9.1] patients) prior to ICH discovery. Conclusions : Anticoagulation therapy may be considered in patients with COVID-19 though the risk of ICH should be taken into account when developing a treatment regimen.

negative: What is the best drug to treat COVID-19? The need for randomized controlled trials The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is currently the biggest public health challenge to the biomedical community of the last century Despite multiple public health measures, 1-3 there remains an urgent need for pharmacologic therapies to treat infected patients and minimize mortality, decrease pressures on intensive care units and health systems and optimally they should decrease subsequent transmission At the time of writing, there are no licensed drugs to treat COVID-19 and a search on clinicaltrials gov using ‘COVID-19’ as the input term, yielded 657 studies Drug-based interventions currently fall into categories including off label use which includes repurposed drugs, 4,5 and newer entities but both categories should be given in the context of clinical trials In Wuhan, China, then the epicentre of the pandemic, Cao et al under heroic circumstances, conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving 199 hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection including as an entry criteria oxygen saturation (SaO2) of 94% or less on air (ChiCTR2000029308) Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either lopinavir–ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice daily for 14 days, or standard care alone The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first 6 Even though their study showed no benefits with lopinavir–ritonavir treatment beyond standard care, this is exactly the sort of study that best informs our treatment options Following this, we were surprised to see the New England Journal of Medicine publishing a single arm study on 61 patients who received at least one dose of remdesevir, again with similar entry criteria of SaO2 <94% on air 7 Unlike the randomised trial by Cao et al , there was no accompanying editorial, but there was a subsequent an open letter discussing remdesevir studies from the CEO and Chairman of Gilead (https://www gilead com/stories/articles/an-open-letter-from-our-chairman-and-ceo) One presumes that the patients in the remdesevir single arm study, and several included in an earlier Lancet paper, 8 were recruited in perhaps easier conditions than those in Wuhan earlier this year Randomised trials are designed to precisely answer questions regarding toxicity and efficacy beyond standard of care and in the absence of an effective therapy it remains entirely reasonable and ethical at this point to perform a trial versus placebo They are much more informative than single arm studies which result in claims, perhaps borne from hope and/or desperation, that drugs work, 9 and such claims include those from physicians stating very high cure rates Clearly, recruiting patients recently diagnosed will have ‘cure rates’ usually in the high 90s%, unless one focuses on recruiting hospitalised patients and/or the elderly, frail, those with co-morbidities or a high body mass index, to name a few examples A well-known French microbiologist on social media has promoted the use of chloroquine to treat or prevent COVID-19 The FDA has approved it, although at the time of writing they haven’t explained the rationale behind the approval, and as a consequence patients, institutions and the worried public have demanded immediate chloroquine for all The resulting rush on chloroquine has led to severe shortages of the drug, and patients taking regular chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for lupus or other systemic diseases had to stop their treatment due to a lack of supply This drug has well known often serious toxicities;10 we note one small study was stopped due to potential cardiac complications (https://www nytimes com/2020/04/12/health/chloroquine-coronavirus-trump html) and we suggest it should only be taken in the context of a randomised or other clinical study This is not to suggest single arm studies are not helpful: they inform subsequent trials includi g dosage, duration and appropriate endpoints For example, we have observed11 that use of baricitinib for 10 days is associated with viral rebound in nasopharyngeal swabs in rapidly recovered and discharged patients, and thus have recommended longer use in the large randomised studies in which it is included, and we suggest again that comparisons between different therapies or placebo are likely to yield more informative results than randomised studies comparing 10 days of intravenous remdesevir with 5 days (https://benevolent ai/news/potential-treatment-for-covid-19-identified-by-benevolentai-usingartificial-intelligence-enters-clinical-testing And https://investor lilly com/news-releases/news-release-details/lilly-begins-clinical-testingtherapies-covid-19) With this in mind, we thoroughly congratulate the authors from Guangzhou, China, who successfully randomised 86 individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in a 2:2:1 design, to either lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol (a broad spectrum viral infusion inhibitor12) or placebo (NCT04252885) Because they included only mild-to-moderate patients, the pre-defined primary endpoint was the conversion at day 21 of positive-to-negative PCR tests for SARSCoV-2 from nasopharyngeal swabs The real time reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) method used was indeed appropriate as it was performed simultaneously on two target genes, ORF1ab and N genes, and positive and negative controls were used at each batch Negative conversion required 2 separate real time RT-PCR tests separated by 24 hours, and the entry criteria for the definition of mild-to-moderate including the absence of pneumonia are entirely appropriate Baseline criteria between the 3 groups were well-matched (a criticism of one of the hydroxychloroquine randomised studies is this was not the case13) and follow up was appropriate Their data helpfully shows there was no difference between any of the groups in the primary endpoint In the continuing search for safe and effective new therapies to treat patients with COVID-19, we require well-conducted ethical studies including prospective, randomised, placebocontrolled clinical studies such as this Although many drugs have predicted in vitro activity against the virus, the proposal that such drugs might provide more benefit than harm is not appropriate with no evidence base supporting efficacy in any patients infected with SARSCoV-2 A preprint reporting results from a randomised trial of the anti-viral favipravir versus arbidol in 240 adults has shown no difference in clinical recovery at 7 days, but cough and pyrexia were improved on favipravir 14 These authors and Li et al should be applauded for their efforts to add a useful randomised trial to the literature, albeit one that is negative It is critical to publish such studies International multicentre trials, such as Discovery (NCT04315948) and Solidarity (EudraCT Number 2020-000982-18), will randomise patients with COVID-19 to receive different drugs in adaptive study designs Such initiatives will provide the best and most relevant data to guide management of patients with COVID-19 Whether antiviral, immunomodulatory or antimalarial drugs could be effective in changing the disease course in patients with either mild or severe COVID-19 remains unknown When patients take these off-label and recover it is not known whether the drug was helpful in the disease course without randomisation Similarly, when patients deteriorate, we do not know if they should be continued or considered clinically ineffective and stopped Assessing viral loads by PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs as performed in the trial here, will help clarify the roles of these medicines going forwards

negative: Commentary: Could iron chelators prove to be useful as an adjunct to COVID-19 Treatment Regimens? The pandemic of COVID-19 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) poses a significant threat to global health. Currently, no specific prophylactic and therapeutic treatment is available. No evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that a treatment may ameliorate the clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19 exists with the only exception of preliminary evidence from remdesivir trials. Here, we present evidence from the literature and a compelling hypothesis on the potential immunomodulatory, iron chelating and anti-oxidant effects of iron chelators in the treatment of COVID-19 and its complications. Interestingly, iron chelation has been shown in vitro to suppress endothelial inflammation in viral infection, which is the main pathophysiologic mechanism behind systemic organ involvement induced by SARS-CoV-2, by inhibiting IL-6 synthesis through decreasing NF-kB. Iron chelators exhibit iron chelating, antiviral and immunomodulatory effects in vitro and in vivo, particularly against RNA viruses. These agents could attenuate ARDS and help control SARS-CoV-2 via multiple mechanisms including: 1) inhibition of viral replication; 2) decrease of iron availability; 3) upregulation of B cells; 4) improvement of the neutralizing anti-viral antibody titer; 5) inhibition of endothelial inflammation and 6) prevention of pulmonary fibrosis and lung decline via reduction of pulmonary iron accumulation. Both retrospective analyses of data in electronic health records, as well as proof of concept studies in humans and large RCTs are needed to fully elucidate the efficacy and safety of iron chelating agents in the therapeutic armamentarium of COVID-19, probably as an adjunctive treatment.

negative: Current Evidence of the Pharmacological Treatments for Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) A Scoping Review Background: As of May 2 2020, 3,267,184 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 229,971 COVID-19-caused deaths have been reported worldwide. Currently, there is limited clarity on the pharmacological treatments available for the novel coronavirus. We systematically identified the current evidence and ongoing research on the pharmacological treatments for COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a scoping review using PRISMA-ScR. Observational studies, including cohort studies and case series, as well as experimental studies, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were searched electronically on April 7, 2020 and by hand on May 1, 2020. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched along with seven trial registries. The inclusion criteria were patients with confirmed COVID-19 who received pharmacological therapies, including hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, tocilizumab, and favipiravir. Results: We identified 222 studies on pharmacological treatment of the novel coronavirus. We included 11 of these studies in this review, including the ones on hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine (one cohort), lopinavir/ritonavir (one RCT, three cohorts, and two case series), remdesivir (one RCT and one case series), tocilizumab (one case series), and favipiravir (one RCT). In the three RCTs carried out in China, both lopinavir/ritonavir and remdesivir did not show any significant earlier clinical improvement in case of severe infection [Hazard ratio (HR): 1.31, p=0.09 and HR: 1.24, p=0.24, respectively], The clinical recovery rate on day seven was not significantly different between the favipiravir and arbidol groups (p=0.14) for moderate patients, although the duration of pyrexia and cough in the favipiravir group was significantly shorter as compared to the arbidol group (p<0.01). There are 135 ongoing RCTs, including 72 for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, 29 for lopinavir/ritonavir, 14 for remdesivir, 16 for tocilizumab, and 4 for favipiravir. Conclusion: The clinical effectiveness and safety of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 remains unclear owing to the lack of large, high-quality RCTs. However, in the event of emerging infectious diseases, we need to repeatedly and systematically update the best available evidence to avoid misleading information.

negative: Dexamethasone, light anaesthesia, and tight glucose control (DeLiT) randomized controlled trial. BACKGROUND The inflammatory response to surgical tissue injury is associated with perioperative morbidity and mortality. We tested the primary hypotheses that major perioperative morbidity is reduced by three potential anti-inflammatory interventions: (i) low-dose dexamethasone, (ii) intensive intraoperative glucose control, and (iii) lighter anaesthesia. METHODS We enrolled patients having major non-cardiac surgery who were ≥40 yr old and had an ASA physical status ≤IV. In a three-way factorial design, patients were randomized to perioperative i.v. dexamethasone (a total of 14 mg tapered over 3 days) vs placebo, intensive vs conventional glucose control 80-110 vs 180-200 mg dl(-1), and lighter vs deeper anaesthesia (bispectral index target of 55 vs 35). The primary outcome was a collapsed composite of 15 major complications and 30 day mortality. Plasma high-sensitivity (hs) C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration was measured before operation and on the first and second postoperative days. RESULTS The overall incidence of the primary outcome was about 20%. The trial was stopped after the second interim analysis with 381 patients, at which all three interventions crossed the futility boundary for the primary outcome. No three-way (P=0.70) or two-way (all P>0.52) interactions among the interventions were found. There was a significantly smaller increase in hsCRP in patients given dexamethasone than placebo [maximum 108 (64) vs 155 (69) mg litre(-1), P<0.001], but none of the other two interventions differentially influenced the hsCRP response to surgery. CONCLUSIONS Among our three interventions, dexamethasone alone reduced inflammation. However, no intervention reduced the risk of major morbidity or 1 yr mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION IDENTIFIER: NCT00433251 at www.clinicaltrials.gov.

negative: A single center observational study of the clinical characteristics and short-term outcome of 20 kidney transplant patients admitted for SARS-CoV2 pneumonia. Abstract The outcome of SARS-CoV2 infection in patients who have received a kidney allograft and are being treated with immunosuppression is unclear. We describe 20 kidney transplant recipients (median age 59 years [inter quartile range 51-64 years], median age of transplant 13 years [9-20 years], baseline eGFR 36.5 [23-47.5]) with SARS-CoV2 induced pneumonia. At admission, all had immunosuppression withdrawn and were started on methylprednisolone 16 mg/day, all but one was commenced on antiviral therapy and hydroxychloroquine with doses adjusted for kidney function. At baseline, all patients presented fever but only one complained of difficulty in breathing. Half of patients showed chest radiographic evidence of bilateral infiltrates while the other half showed unilateral changes or no infiltrates. During a median follow-up of seven days, 87% experienced a radiological progression and among those 73% required escalation of oxygen therapy. Six patients developed acute kidney injury with one requiring hemodialysis. Six of 12 patients were treated with tocilizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to the IL-6 receptor. Overall, five kidney transplant recipients died after a median period of 15 days [15-19] from symptom onset. These preliminary findings describe a rapid clinical deterioration associated with chest radiographic deterioration and escalating oxygen requirement in renal transplant recipients with SARS-Cov2 pneumonia. Thus, in this limited cohort of long-term kidney transplant patients, SARS-CoV-2 induced pneumonia is characterized by high risk of progression and significant mortality.

negative: Early signs that COVID-19 is being contained in Australia • The COVID-19 pandemic is overwhelming many national healthcare networks. • Case fatality from COVID-19 infection in Australia is between 0.4% to 3.0%. • Strict public health measures were enforced to control this outbreak in Australia. • Australia is on its way joining China and South Korea in ‘flattening the curve’.

negative: Management of patients with multiple myeloma in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: a consensus paper from the European Myeloma Network (EMN) Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) seem to be at increased risk for more severe COVID-19 infection and associated complications due to their immunocompromised state, the older age and comorbidities. The European Myeloma Network has provided an expert consensus statement in order to guide therapeutic decisions in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patient education for personal hygiene and social distancing measures, along with treatment individualization, telemedicine and continuous surveillance for early diagnosis of COVID-19 are essential. In countries or local communities where COVID-19 infection is widely spread, MM patients should have a PCR test of nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 before hospital admission, starting a new treatment line, cell apheresis or ASCT in order to avoid ward or community spread and infections. Oral agent-based regimens should be considered, especially for the elderly and frail patients with standard risk disease, whereas de-intensified regimens for dexamethasone, bortezomib, carfilzomib and daratumumab should be used based on patient risk and response. Treatment initiation should not be postponed for patients with end organ damage, myeloma emergencies and aggressive relapses. Autologous (and especially allogeneic) transplantation should be delayed and extended induction should be administered, especially in standard risk patients and those with adequate MM response to induction. Watchful waiting should be considered for standard risk relapsed patients with low tumor burden, and slow biochemical relapses. The conduction of clinical trials should continue with appropriate adaptations to the current circumstances. Patients with MM and symptomatic COVID-19 disease should interrupt anti-myeloma treatment until recovery. For patients with positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, but with no symptoms for COVID-19, a 14-day quarantine should be considered if myeloma-related events allow the delay of treatment. The need for surveillance for drug interactions due to polypharmacy is highlighted. The participation in international COVID-19 cancer registries is greatly encouraged.

negative: COVID-19: Learning from Lessons To Guide Treatment and Prevention Interventions Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and first emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. Since then, the virus has rapidly spread to many countries. While the outbreak in China appears to be in decline, the disease has spread across the world, with a daily increase in the number of confirmed cases and infection-related deaths. Here, we highlight (i) the lessons that have been learnt so far and how they will benefit reducing the impact of COVID-19 disease and (ii) an update on the status of drug treatment and vaccine development to prevent COVID-19 and potential future related pandemics. Although the mortality rate is clearly higher than for influenza, the rate does seem to vary from country to country, possibly reflecting differences in how rapidly local health authorities respond to isolate and effectively care for the affected population. Drugs are urgently needed for both prophylaxis and the treatment of severely ill patients; however, no proven effective therapies for SARS-CoV-2 currently exist. A number of drugs that have been approved for other diseases are being tested for the treatment of COVID-19 patients, but there is an absence of data from appropriately designed clinical trials showing that these drugs, either alone or in combination, will prove effective. There is also a global urgency to develop a vaccine against COVID-19, but development and appropriate testing will take at least a year before such a vaccine will be globally available. This review summarizes the lessons learnt so far from the COVID-19 pandemic, examines the evidence regarding the drugs that are being tested for the treatment of COVID19, and describes the progress made in efforts to develop an effective vaccine.

negative: COVID-19 and RAS: Unravelling an Unclear Relationship The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) plays a main role in regulating blood pressure and electrolyte and liquid balance. Previous evidence suggests that RAS may represent an important target for the treatment of lung pathologies, especially for acute respiratory distress syndrome and chronic fibrotic disease. The scientific community has recently focused its attention on angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor 1 (AT1R) inhibitors and their possible benefit/harms for patients infected by Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) who experience pneumonia, but there are still some doubts about the effects of these drugs in this setting.

negative: Inhibition of Bruton tyrosine kinase in patients with severe COVID-19 Patients with severe COVID-19 have a hyperinflammatory immune response suggestive of macrophage activation. Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) regulates macrophage signaling and activation. Acalabrutinib, a selective BTK inhibitor, was administered off-label to 19 patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 (11 on supplemental oxygen; 8 on mechanical ventilation), 18 of whom had increasing oxygen requirements at baseline. Over a 10-14 day treatment course, acalabrutinib improved oxygenation in a majority of patients, often within 1-3 days, and had no discernable toxicity. Measures of inflammation – C-reactive protein and IL-6 – normalized quickly in most patients, as did lymphopenia, in correlation with improved oxygenation. At the end of acalabrutinib treatment, 8/11 (72.7%) patients in the supplemental oxygen cohort had been discharged on room air, and 4/8 (50%) patients in the mechanical ventilation cohort had been successfully extubated, with 2/8 (25%) discharged on room air. Ex vivo analysis revealed significantly elevated BTK activity, as evidenced by autophosphorylation, and increased IL-6 production in blood monocytes from patients with severe COVID-19 compared with blood monocytes from healthy volunteers. These results suggest that targeting excessive host inflammation with a BTK inhibitor is a therapeutic strategy in severe COVID-19 and has led to a confirmatory international prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

negative: Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Background: There is no effective therapy for COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) have been used for its treatment but their safety and efficacy remain uncertain. Objective: We performed a systematic review to synthesize the available data on the efficacy and safety of CQ and HCQ for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: Two reviewers searched for published and pre-published relevant articles between December 2019 to 8th June 2020. The data from the selected studies were abstracted and analyzed for efficacy and safety outcomes. Critical appraisal of the evidence was done by Cochrane risk of bias tool and Newcastle Ottawa scale. The quality of evidence was graded as per the GRADE approach. Results: We reviewed 12 observational and 3 randomized trials which included 10659 patients of whom 5713 received CQ/HCQ and 4966 received only standard of care. The efficacy of CQ/HCQ for COVID-19 was inconsistent across the studies. Meta-analysis of included studies revealed no significant reduction in mortality with HCQ use [RR 0.98 95% CI 0.66-1.46] , time to fever resolution [mean difference -0.54 days (-1.19-011)] or clinical deterioration/development of ARDS with HCQ [RR 0.90 95% CI 0.47-1.71]. There was a higher risk of ECG abnormalities/arrhythmia with HCQ/CQ [RR 1.46 95% CI 1.04 to 2.06]. The quality of evidence was graded as very low for these outcomes. Conclusions: The available evidence suggests that CQ or HCQ does not improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19. Well-designed randomized trials are required for assessing the efficacy and safety of HCQ and CQ for COVID-19.

negative: Hydroxychloroquine Versus COVID-19: A Rapid Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Background: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a major global issue with rising the number of infected individuals and mortality in recent months. Among all therapeutic approaches, arguments have raised about hydroxychloroquine efficacy in treatment of COVID-19. We aimed to overcome the controversies regarding effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in treatment of COVID-19, using a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar and medRxiv pre-print database using all available MeSH terms for COVID-19 and hydroxychloroquine. Two authors selected and assessed the quality of studies independently using related checklists. Data have been extracted from included studies and analyzed using CMA v. 2.2.064. heterogeneity was also assessed using I-squared test. Results: Seven studies including four clinical trials and three observational studies have entered into the study. The results of meta-analysis of clinical trials showed that there were no significant differences between patients who received the standard treatment with HCQ regimen and the patients that received the standard treatment without HCQ (RR: 1.44, 95% CI, 0.80-2.59). CT-Scan findings improved in 59% (95% CI 0.15-0.92) and nasopharyngeal culture following RT-PCR resulted negative in 76% (95% CI 0.56-0.89) of patients received hydroxychloroquine. Meta-analysis of observational studies showed 75% (95% CI, 0.54-0.88) of patients were discharged from the hospital, 34% (95% CI, 0.07-0.14) admitted to intensive care unit and 1.5% (95% CI, 0.03-0.83) have expired. Conclusion: This study indicated no clinical benefits regarding HCQ for treatment of COVID-19 patients. However, further large clinical trials should be taken into account in order to achieve more reliable findings.

negative: Indomethacin and resveratrol as potential treatment adjuncts for SARS‐CoV‐2/COVID‐19 The ongoing pandemic due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2, also known as COVID‐19) has led to unprecedented challenges for the global healthcare system. This novel coronavirus disease phenotype ranges from asymptomatic carriage to fulminant cytokine storm with respiratory failure, polyorgan dysfunction, and death. Severe disease is characterized by exuberant inflammation resulting from high circulating cytokines such as interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF). These inflammatory mediators are responsible for the detrimental effects on the immune, hematologic, respiratory, renal, gastrointestinal and other body systems. In addition to inhibition of viral replication, blunting this inflammatory response before overt cytokine storm is important to improve outcomes. Although there are upcoming promising agents such as remdesivir and convalescent plasma, inexpensive, safe, and widely available adjunct treatments to ameliorate disease burden would be welcome. Two potential antiinflammatory agents include indomethacin, which has been shown in experimental models to decrease canine coronavirus (CCoV) levels in dogs and exhibit antiviral activity against several other viruses, and the polyphenol, resveratrol, a potent antioxidant that has shown antiviral activity against several viruses.

negative: Does Adding of Hydroxychloroquine to the Standard Care Provide any Benefit in Reducing the Mortality among COVID-19 Patients?: a Systematic Review Hydroxychloroquine has been promoted for its use in treatment of COVID-19 patients based on in-vitro evidences. We searched the databases to include randomized and observational studies evaluating the effect of Hydroxychloroquine on mortality in COVID-19 patients. The outcome was summarized as odds ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).We used the inverse-variance method with a random effect model and assessed the heterogeneity using I(2) test. We used ROBINS-I tool to assess methodological quality of the included studies. We performed the meta-analysis using ‘Review manager software version 5.3’. We identified 6 observationalstudies satisfying the selection criteria. In all studies, Hydroxychloroquine was given as add on to the standard care and effect was compared with the standard care alone. A pooled analysis observed 251 deaths in 1331 participants of the Hydroxychloroquine arm and 363 deaths in 1577 participants of the control arm. There was no difference in odds of mortality events amongst Hydroxychloroquine and supportive care arm [1.25 (95% CI: 0.65, 2.38); I(2) = 80%]. A similar trend was observed with moderate risk of bias studies [0.95 (95% CI: 0.44, 2.06); I(2) = 85%]. The odds of mortality were significantly higher in patients treated with Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin than supportive care alone [2.34 (95% CI: 1.63, 3.34); I(2) = 0%]. A pooled analysis of recently published studies suggests no additional benefit for reducing mortality in COVID-19 patients when Hydroxychloroquine is given as add-on to the standard care. [Figure: see text] ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11481-020-09930-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: An evaluation of co-use of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin on cardiac outcomes: A pharmacoepidemiological study to inform use during the COVID19 pandemic Abstract Background Chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine (chloroquine) plus azithromycin is considered as therapy for COVID19. With benefit evaluations underway, safety concerns due to potential additive effects on QTc prolongation should be addressed. Objective We compared risk of cardiac adverse events between combinations of chloroquine and azithromycin and chloroquine and amoxicillin. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Medicare Supplemental Databases, 2005–2018. We included autoimmune disease patients aged ≥18 years initiating azithromycin or amoxicillin for ≥5 days during chloroquine treatment. Patients had continuous insurance coverage ≥6 months before combination use until 5 days thereafter or inpatient death. Two outcomes were sudden cardiac arrest/ventricular arrhythmias (SCA/VA) and cardiac symptoms. We followed patients for up to 5 days to estimate hazard ratios (HR). Covariates were adjusted using stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting. Results We identified two SVC/VA events among >145,000 combination users. The adjusted incidence of cardiac symptoms among azithromycin and amoxicillin users was 276 vs 254 per 10,000 person-years with an adjusted HR of 1.10 (95%CI, 0.62–1.95). Conclusion Combination use of chloroquine and azithromycin at routine doses did not show pronounced increases in arrhythmias in this real-world population, though small sample size and outcome rates limit conclusions.

negative: Integrated analysis of bulk multi omic and single-cell sequencing data confirms the molecular origin of hemodynamic changes in Covid-19 infection explaining coagulopathy and higher geriatric mortality Besides severe respiratory distress, recent reports in Covid-19 patients have found a strong association between platelet counts and patient survival. Along with hemodynamic changes such as prolonged clotting time, high fibrin degradation products and D-dimers, increased levels of monocytes with disturbed morphology have also been identified. In this study, through an integrated analysis of bulk RNA-sequencing data from Covid-19 patients with data from single-cell sequencing studies on lung tissues, we found that most of the cell-types that contributed to the altered gene expression were of hematopoietic origin. We also found that differentially expressed genes in Covid-19 patients formed a significant pool of the expressing genes in phagocytic cells such as Monocytes and Platelets. Interestingly, while we observed a general enrichment for Monocytes in Covid-19 patients, we found that the signal for FCGRA3+ Monocytes was depleted. Further, we found evidence that age-associated gene expression changes in Monocytes and Platelets, associated with inflammation, mirror gene expression changes in Covid-19 patients suggesting that pro-inflammatory signalling during aging may worsen the infection in older patients. We identified more than 20 genes that change in the same direction between Covid-19 infection and aging cells that may act as potential therapeutic targets. Of particular interest were IL2RG, GNLY and GMZA expressed in Platelets, which facilitates cytokine signalling in Monocytes through an interaction with Platelets. To understand whether infection can directly manipulate the biology of Monocytes and Platelets, we hypothesize that these non-ACE2 expressing cells may be infected by the virus through the phagocytic route. We observed that phagocytic cells such as Monocytes, T-cells, and Platelets have a significantly higher expression of genes that are a part of the Covid-19 viral interactome. Hence these cell-types may have an active rather than a reactive role in viral pathogenesis to manifest clinical symptoms such as coagulopathy. Therefore, our results present molecular evidence for pursuing both anti-inflammatory and anticoagulation therapy for better patient management especially in older patients.

negative: The proteasome as a druggable target with multiple therapeutic potentialities: Cutting and non-cutting edges Ubiquitin Proteasome System (UPS) is an adaptable and finely tuned system that sustains proteostasis network under a large variety of physiopathological conditions. Its dysregulation is often associated with the onset and progression of human diseases; hence, UPS modulation has emerged as a promising new avenue for the development of treatments of several relevant pathologies, such as cancer and neurodegeneration. The clinical interest in proteasome inhibition has considerably increased after the FDA approval in 2003 of bortezomib for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, which is now used in the front-line setting. Thereafter, two other proteasome inhibitors (carfilzomib and ixazomib), designed to overcome resistance to bortezomib, have been approved for treatment-experienced patients, and a variety of novel inhibitors are currently under preclinical and clinical investigation not only for haematological malignancies but also for solid tumours. However, since UPS collapse leads to toxic misfolded proteins accumulation, proteasome is attracting even more interest as a target for the care of neurodegenerative diseases, which are sustained by UPS impairment. Thus, conceptually, proteasome activation represents an innovative and largely unexplored target for drug development. According to a multidisciplinary approach, spanning from chemistry, biochemistry, molecular biology to pharmacology, this review will summarize the most recent available literature regarding different aspects of proteasome biology, focusing on structure, function and regulation of proteasome in physiological and pathological processes, mostly cancer and neurodegenerative diseases, connecting biochemical features and clinical studies of proteasome targeting drugs.

negative: Impact of the Coronavirus Infection in Pregnancy: A Preliminary Study of 141 Patients BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is the most challenging health crisis that we are facing today. Against the backdrop of this pandemic, it becomes imperative to study the effects of this infection on pregnancy and its outcome. Hence, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the effects of COVID-19 infection on the maternal morbidity and mortality, the course of labour as well as the neonatal outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 977 pregnant women were included in the study, from 1st April to 15th May 2020 at a tertiary care hospital. There were 141 women who tested COVID positive and remaining 836 patients were included in the COVID negative group. Findings were compared in both the groups. RESULTS: The incidence of COVID positive pregnant women was found to be 14.43%. More patients delivered by LSCS in the COVID positive and the COVID negative group (50%) as compared to COVID negative group (47%), (p > 0.05). Low APGAR score (0-3) was observed in 2(1.52%) neonates of COVID positive mothers and in 15 (1.91%) neonates of COVID negative mothers. Overall most of the babies were healthy. Out of all babies tested, 3 were detected positive initially which were retested on day 5 and were found to be negative. CONCLUSION: There is no significant effect of COVID infection on maternal and foetal outcome in pregnancy and there is no evidence of vertical transmission of the COVID-19 infection but long-term follow-up of these babies is recommended.

negative: [Quarantine Alone or in Combination with Other Public Health Measures to Control COVID-19: A Rapid Review (Review)]. BACKGROUND COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) is a new, rapidly emerging zoonotic infectious disease, that was reported to the World Health Organization for the first time on 31 December 2019. Currently, no effective pharmacological interventions or vaccines are available to treat or prevent COVID-19, therefore nonpharmacological public health measures are more in focus. OBJECTIVES The aim was to assess the effects of quarantine - alone or in combination with other measures - during coronavirus outbreaks. METHODS Because of the current COVID-19 pandemic, WHO commissioned a rapid review. To save time, the method of systematic reviews was slightly and with caution modified. This publication is a summary of the most important aspects of the rapid review, translated into German by members of the WHO Collaborating Centre at the Danube University Krems (Austria). RESULTS Overall, 29 studies were included. Ten modeling studies focused on COVID-19, 4 observational studies and 15 modeling studies focused on SARS and MERS. The modeling studies consistently reported a benefit of the simulated quarantine measures. For example, the models estimated that quarantine of people exposed to confirmed or suspected cases of COVID-19 prevented between 44 and 81% of the cases that would otherwise have happened and 31 to 63% of the deaths, when compared to no such measures. In regard to costs, the earlier the quarantine measures are implemented, the greater the cost savings will be. CONCLUSION Our confidence in the evidence is very limited. This is mainly because the COVID-19 studies based their models on the limited data that have been available in the early weeks of the pandemic and made different assumptions about the virus. The studies of SARS and MERS are not completely generalizable to COVID-19. Despite only having limited evidence, all the studies found quarantine to be important for controlling the spread of severe coronavirus diseases. Looking to the coming months, in order to maintain the best possible balance of measures, decision makers must continue to constantly monitor the outbreak situation and the impact of the measures they implement.

negative: Olfactory and taste disorders in COVID-19: a systematic review()() INTRODUCTION: The SARS-CoV-2 virus causes COVID-19, and it is responsible for the largest pandemic since the 1918 H1N1 influenza outbreak. The classic symptoms of the disease have been well defined by the World Health Organization; however, olfactory/gustatory disorders have been reported in some studies, but there are still several missing points in the understanding and in the consensus about the clinical management of these cases. OBJECTIVE: To identify evidence in the scientific literature about olfactory/gustatory disorders, their clinical presentation, prevalence and possible specific treatments associated with COVID-19. METHODS: A systematic review of articles published up to April 25, 2020 was performed in Medline, Cochrane Clinical Trials, ScienceDirect, Lilacs, Scopus and Google Schoolar, OpenGrey.eu, DissOnline, The New York Academy of Medicine and Reasearch Gate. Inclusion criteria: (1) Studies on patients with COVID-19; (2) Records of COVID-19 signs/symptoms, and olfactory/gustatory functions. Exclusion criteria: (1) Studies on non-human coronavirus; (2) Review articles; (3) Experimental studies (in animals or in vitro); (4) Olfactory/gustatory disorders initiated prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The risk assessment of bias of the selected studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Six articles from the 1788 records met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. A total of 1457 patients of different ethnicities were assessed; of them, 885 (60.7%) and 822 (56.4%) had smell and taste disorders, respectively, with women being most often affected. There were olfactory/gustatory disorders even without nasal obstruction/rhinorrhea and beginning even before the signs/symptoms of COVID-19; the recovery of smell/taste, when it occurs, usually happened in the first two weeks after COVID-19 resolution. There is evidence that olfactory/gustatory disorders are strong predictors of infection by SARS-CoV-2, and it is possible to recommend patient isolation, as early as of the medical consultation, preventing the spread of the virus. No scientific evidence has been identified for effective treatments for any of the disorders. CONCLUSION: Olfactory/gustatory disorders may occur at varying intensities and prior to the general symptoms of COVID-19 and should be considered as part of the clinical features of COVID-19, even in mild cases. There is still no scientific evidence of specific treatments for such disorders in COVID-19 disease.

negative: Therapeutic potential of ciclesonide inahalation for COVID-19 pneumonia: Report of three cases Abstract No specific and effective anti-viral treatment has been approved for COVID-19 so far. Systemic corticosteroid has been sometimes administered to severe infectious diseases combined with the specific treatment. However, as lack of the specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug, systemic steroid treatment has not been recommended for COVID-19. We report here three cases of the COVID-19 pneumonia successfully treated with ciclesonide inhalation. Rationale of the treatment is to mitigate the local inflammation with inhaled steroid that stays in the lung and to inhibit proliferation of the virus by antiviral activity. Larger and further studies are warranted to confirm the result of these cases.

negative: Genomics-guided molecular maps of coronavirus targets in human cells: a path toward the repurposing of existing drugs to mitigate the pandemic Human genes required for SARS-CoV-2 entry into human cells, ACE2 and FURIN, were employed as baits to build genomics-guided maps of up-stream regulatory elements, their expression and functions in human body, including pathophysiologically-relevant cell types. Genes acting as repressors and activators of the ACE2 and FURIN genes were identified based on the analyses of gene silencing and overexpression experiments as well as relevant transgenic mouse models. Panels of repressors (VDR; GATA5; SFTPC; HIF1a) and activators (HMGA2; INSIG1) were then employed to identify existing drugs that could be repurposed to mitigate the coronavirus infection. Present analyses identify Vitamin D and Quercetin as promising pandemic mitigation agents. Gene expression profiles of Vitamin D and Quercetin activities and their established safety records as over-the-counter medicinal substances suggest that they may represent viable candidates for further assessment and considerations of their potential as coronavirus pandemic mitigation agents. Notably, gene set enrichment analyses and expression profiling experiments identify multiple drugs, most notably testosterone, dexamethasone, and doxorubicin, smoking, and many disease conditions that appear to act as putative coronavirus infection-promoting agents. Discordant patterns of Testosterone versus Estradiol impacts on SCARS-CoV-2 targets suggest a plausible molecular explanation of the apparently higher male mortality during coronavirus pandemic.

negative: Autotransplantation for advanced lymphoma and Hodgkin's disease followed by post-transplant rituxan/GM-CSF or radiotherapy and consolidation chemotherapy Disease relapse occurs in 50% or more of patients who are autografted for relapsed or refractory lymphoma (NHL) or Hodgkin's disease (HD). The administration of non-cross-resistant therapies during the post-transplant phase could possibly control residual disease and delay or prevent its progression. To test this approach, 55 patients with relapsed/refractory or high-risk NHL or relapsed/refractory HD were enrolled in the following protocol: stem cell mobilization: cyclophosphamide (4.5 g/m(2)) + etoposide (2.0 g/m(2)) followed by GM-CSF or G-CSF; high-dose therapy: gemcitabine (1.0 g/m(2)) on day −5, BCNU (300 mg/m(2)) + gemcitabine (1.0 g/m(2)) on day −2, melphalan (140 mg/m(2)) on day −1, blood stem cell infusion on day 0; post-transplant immunotherapy (B cell NHL): rituxan (375 mg/m(2)) weekly for 4 weeks + GM-CSF (250 μg thrice weekly) (weeks 4–8); post-transplant involved-field radiotherapy (HD): 30–40 Gy to pre-transplant areas of disease (weeks 4–8); post-transplant consolidation chemotherapy (all patients): dexamethasone (40 mg daily)/cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m(2)/day)/etoposide (30 mg/m(2)/day)/cisplatin (15 mg/m(2)/day) by continuous intravenous infusion for 4 days + gemcitabine (1.0 g/m(2), day 3) (months 3 + 9) alternating with dexamethasone/paclitaxel (135 mg/m(2))/cisplatin (75 mg/m(2)) (months 6 + 12). Of the 33 patients with B cell lymphoma, 14 had primary refractory disease (42%), 12 had relapsed disease (36%) and seven had high-risk disease in first CR (21%). For the entire group, the 2-year Kaplan–Meier event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were 30% and 35%, respectively, while six of 33 patients (18%) died before day 100 from transplant-related complications. The rituxan/GM-CSF phase was well-tolerated by the 26 patients who were treated and led to radiographic responses in seven patients; an eighth patient with a blastic variant of mantle-cell lymphoma had clearance of marrow involvement after rituxan/GM-CSF. Of the 22 patients with relapsed/refractory HD (21 patients) or high-risk T cell lymphoblastic lymphoma (one patient), the 2-year Kaplan–Meier EFS and OS were 70% and 85%, respectively, while two of 22 patients (9%) died before day 100 from transplant-related complications. Eight patients received involved field radiation and seven had radiographic responses within the treatment fields. A total of 72 courses of post-transplant consolidation chemotherapy were administered to 26 of the 55 total patients. Transient grade 3–4 myelosuppression was common and one patient died from neutropenic sepsis, but no patients required an infusion of backup stem cells. After adjustment for known prognostic factors, the EFS for the cohort of HD patients was significantly better than the EFS for an historical cohort of HD patients autografted after BEAC (BCNU/etoposide/cytarabine/cyclophosphamide) without consolidation chemotherapy (P = 0.015). In conclusion, post-transplant consolidation therapy is feasible and well-tolerated for patients autografted for aggressive NHL and HD and may be associated with improved progression-free survival particularly for patients with HD. Bone Marrow Transplantation (2002) 29, 303–312. doi:10.1038/sj.bmt.1703363

negative: Emerging Regulatory Roles of Dual-Specificity Phosphatases in Inflammatory Airway Disease Inflammatory airway disease, such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), is a major health burden worldwide. These diseases cause large numbers of deaths each year due to airway obstruction, which is exacerbated by respiratory viral infection. The inflammatory response in the airway is mediated in part through the MAPK pathways: p38, JNK and ERK. These pathways also have roles in interferon production, viral replication, mucus production, and T cell responses, all of which are important processes in inflammatory airway disease. Dual-specificity phosphatases (DUSPs) are known to regulate the MAPKs, and roles for this family of proteins in the pathogenesis of airway disease are emerging. This review summarizes the function of DUSPs in regulation of cytokine expression, mucin production, and viral replication in the airway. The central role of DUSPs in T cell responses, including T cell activation, differentiation, and proliferation, will also be highlighted. In addition, the importance of this protein family in the lung, and the necessity of further investigation into their roles in airway disease, will be discussed.

negative: INFRAGLOTTIC AND BRONCHIAL INFECTIONS The Yankees are rapidly finding out the benefits of the telephone. A newly made grandmamma, we are told, was recently awakened by the bell at midnight, and told by her inexperienced daughter, “Baby has the croup. What shall I do with it?” Grandmamma replied she would call the family doctor, and would be there in a minute. Grandmamma woke the doctor, and told him the terrible news. He in turn asked to be put in telephone communication with the anxious mamma. “Lift the child to the telephone, and let me hear it cough,” he commands. The child is lifted, and it coughs. “That's not the croup,” he declares, and declines to leave his house on such small matters. He advises grandmamma also to stay in bed; and, all anxiety quieted, the trio settle down happy for the night.(138) Concerns over infraglottic and bronchial infections have been a source of anxiety and lost sleep for many children, parents, and physicians long before the advent of the telephone. The annual incidence of lower respiratory tract infections in children younger than 6 years old exceeds 5 million in the United States.(83) Despite the frequency of these infections, the often common and nonspecific clinical symptomatology, variable severity, and changing epidemiology over time all have contributed to our understanding and misunderstanding of these disorders. The anxiety of the relatives described in the opening passage is a poignant reminder that the diagnosis of diphtheritic croup at that time carried a mortality of around 25%.(62) By simple definition, laryngitis, tracheitis, bronchitis, and any combination of terms (e.g., laryngotracheitis, laryngotracheobronchitis [LTB], tracheobronchitis) represent inflammatory conditions of part or parts of the airway.42, 155 In this basic form, no specific causes, infectious or noninfectious, are implied by these terms.

negative: Zika Virus Infection in Dexamethasone-immunosuppressed Mice Demonstrating Disseminated Infection with Multi-organ Involvement Including Orchitis Effectively Treated by Recombinant Type I Interferons BACKGROUND: Disseminated or fatal Zika virus (ZIKV) infections were reported in immunosuppressed patients. Existing interferon-signaling/receptor-deficient mouse models may not be suitable for evaluating treatment effects of recombinant interferons. METHODS: We developed a novel mouse model for ZIKV infection by immunosuppressing BALB/c mice with dexamethasone. RESULTS: Dexamethasone-immunosuppressed male mice (6–8 weeks) developed disseminated infection as evidenced by the detection of ZIKV-NS1 protein expression and high viral loads in multiple organs. They had ≥ 10% weight loss and high clinical scores soon after dexamethasone withdrawal (10 dpi), which warranted euthanasia at 12 dpi. Viral loads in blood and most tissues at 5 dpi were significantly higher than those at 12 dpi (P < 0.05). Histological examination revealed prominent inflammatory infiltrates in multiple organs, and CD45 + and CD8 + inflammatory cells were seen in the testis. These findings suggested that clinical deterioration occurred during viral clearance by host immune response. Type I interferon treatments improved clinical outcome of mice (100% vs 0% survival). CONCLUSIONS: Besides virus dissemination, inflammation of various tissues, especially orchitis, may be potential complications of ZIKV infection with significant implications on disease transmission and male fertility. Interferon treatment should be considered in patients at high risks for ZIKV-associated complications when the potential benefits outweigh the side effects of treatment.

negative: Tracking changes in SARS-CoV-2 Spike: evidence that D614G increases infectivity of the COVID-19 virus Summary A SARS-CoV-2 variant carrying the Spike protein amino acid change D614G has become the most prevalent form in the global pandemic. Dynamic tracking of variant frequencies revealed a recurrent pattern of G614 increase at multiple geographic levels: national, regional and municipal. The shift occurred even in local epidemics where the original D614 form was well established prior to the introduction of the G614 variant. The consistency of this pattern was highly statistically significant, suggesting that the G614 variant may have a fitness advantage. We found that the G614 variant grows to higher titer as pseudotyped virions. In infected individuals G614 is associated with lower RT-PCR cycle thresholds, suggestive of higher upper respiratory tract viral loads, although not with increased disease severity. These findings illuminate changes important for a mechanistic understanding of the virus, and support continuing surveillance of Spike mutations to aid in the development of immunological interventions.

negative: Mesenchymal Stem Cell Infusion Shows Promise for Combating Coronavirus (COVID-19)- Induced Pneumonia A new study published by the journal Aging & Disease reported that intravenous administration of clinical-grade human mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) into patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) resulted in improved functional outcomes (Leng et al., Aging Dis, 11:216-228, 2020). This study demonstrated that intravenous infusion of MSCs is a safe and effective approach for treating patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, including elderly patients displaying severe pneumonia. COVID-19 is a severe acute respiratory illness caused by a new coronavirus named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Currently, treating COVID-19 patients, particularly those afflicted with severe pneumonia, is challenging as no specific drugs or vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are available. Therefore, MSC therapy inhibiting the overactivation of the immune system and promoting endogenous repair by improving the lung microenvironment after the SARS-CoV-2 infection found in this study is striking. Additional studies in a larger cohort of patients are needed to validate this therapeutic intervention further, however.

negative: COVID-19 and diabetes mellitus: A need for prudence in elderly patients from a pooled analysis OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the pooled estimate of diabetes prevalence in young (<50 years) versus elderly (>50 years) COVID-19 cohorts. METHODS: Studies published between December-2019 and March-2020 reporting demographic and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 cases were identified. A total of 11 studies included accounting for 2084 COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of diabetes in COVID-19 patients with a mean age>50 years was 13.2%, whereas studies with relatively younger patients (mean age <50 years) had a pooled prevalence of 9.0% CONCLUSION: The overall prevalence of diabetes in COVID-19 patients was found to be 13.2%. The intermingled effects of diabetes with other cardiovascular comorbidities warrant age-specific outcomes data including the impact of ongoing antidiabetic treatment.

negative: Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade in COVID-19: Good, Bad, or Indifferent? [Figure: see text]

negative: What dentists need to know about COVID-19 This article aims at collecting all information needed for dentists regarding the COVID-19 pandemic throughout the world by reviewing articles published by now. In late 2019, a pneumonia outbreak of uncertain etiology happened in Wuhan, China. There were many reports related to a live-animal and seafood market, supporting that the pathogens were transferred from animals to humans, rapidly evolving into transmission from human to human. The pathogen was classified as 2019 Novel Corona Virus (2019-nCoV), and the disease was named COrona VIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given that COVID-19 has lately been detected in infected patients' saliva, the COVID-19 outbreak is an alert that all dental and other health professionals must be vigilant in defending against the infectious disease spread, and it may enable to assess whether non-invasive saliva diagnostic for COVID-19. There has so far been no evidence from randomized controlled trials to prescribe any particular anti-nCoV treatment or vaccine, and COVID-19 management has been widely supportive. Since the ACE-2 was expressing on oral cavity mucosa, there is a potentially huge COVID-19 infectious vulnerability risk for oral cavity and brought up a proof for the future prevention procedure in dental practice and daily life. As a result, the whole dental teams should be vigilant and keep patients and themselves in a safe environment by following the guideline in this study.

negative: Are hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine effective in the treatment of SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19)? Data sources The authors of this rapid review did not disclose which electronic databases were included in their literature search. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for the data sources are not reported in the manuscript. Study selection The authors included six studies on the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in humans. Studies comprised of two randomised controlled trials, two non-randomised trials both of which were non-blinded and open-label and one that was uncontrolled, a prospective cohort study and an interim report. The authors did not report details of any studies that were excluded. Data extraction and synthesis The data extraction methodology was not reported and it is unclear if the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Treatment regimens and the study outcomes were extracted where available and overall findings were presented in a table. There were no comparable outcome measures; therefore, results were deemed unsuitable to combine and no statistical analyses were carried out. A narrative synthesis of each study is presented. Results The results of the studies in this rapid review are difficult to quantify as each study had different outcome parameters. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, results were not combined, and no statistical analysis was carried out. Narrative synthesis of each of the included studies identified important and significant limitations, precluding the studies from demonstrating a statistically significant difference in outcomes. Conclusions This review highlights the urgent need for more high quality evidence on the use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. The results of the studies included should be interpreted with caution due to the weak supporting data and numerous methodological limitations. The authors suggested that the studies be viewed as hypothesis-generating and should not be used in decision making around the recommendations and guidelines in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. There are currently several ongoing randomised controlled trials looking at the effectiveness and efficacy of these drugs on COVID-19. It is hoped the outcome of these studies can help guide future recommendations and national guidelines.

negative: What is the impact of COVID-19 on head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients? Data sources It is not made clear in this review the different databases selected or how they conducted their search. The studies used are from 1975-2020 Study selection The authors have performed a scoping review using 84 studies ranging from 1975-2020. The majority of these are from before the 2019-2020 COVID-19 outbreak period. This is indicative of the lack of evidence on this topic and exemplifies why a scoping review was carried out rather than a systematic review. The studies that were reviewed were predominately cohort and case studies. With regards to previous treatment outcomes, a few systematic reviews were included, but again, the novel nature of this outbreak means that largely, there are only cohort or case studies available for review. Data extraction and synthesis There are ten authors, with no indication of how many performed the literature review or if a mediator was involved in the final decision making on what papers would be reviewed. Results Excessive consumption of alcohol, history of tobacco use, an ageing population, and comorbidities such as cardiopulmonary issues are substantial risk factors for episodes of unfavourable respiratory outcomes. The risk of these outcomes is increased by some of the toxic effects of treatments such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Conclusions The COVID-19 outbreak has a potentially disproportionate impact on the cohort of head and neck cancer patients, and the respiratory effects this has on these patients may increase morbidity and mortality. It is important to include alcohol and smoking cessation, along with good oral hygiene instruction in the care of these patients.

negative: COVID-19, A Clinical Syndrome Manifesting as Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis

negative: Epidemic as a natural process Abstract Mathematical epidemiology is a well-recognized discipline to model infectious diseases. It also provides guidance for public health officials to limit outbreaks. Nevertheless, epidemics take societies by surprise every now and then, for example, when the Ebola virus epidemic raged seemingly unrestrained in Western Africa. We provide insight to this capricious character of nature by describing the epidemic as a natural process, i.e., a phenomenon governed by thermodynamics. Our account, based on statistical mechanics of open systems, clarifies that it is impossible to predict accurately epidemic courses because everything depends on everything else. Nonetheless, the thermodynamic theory yields a comprehensive and analytical view of the epidemic. The tenet subsumes various processes in a scale-free manner from the molecular to the societal levels. The holistic view accentuates overarching procedures in arresting and eradicating epidemics.

negative: IV Magnesium Sulfate for Bronchiolitis A Randomized Trial Background The goal of this study was to determine if IV magnesium, useful for severe pediatric asthma, reduces time to medical readiness for discharge in patients with bronchiolitis when added to supportive care. Methods We compared a single dose of 100 mg/kg of IV magnesium sulfate vs placebo for acute bronchiolitis. Patients received bronchodilator therapy, nebulized hypertonic saline, and 5 days of dexamethasone if there was eczema and/or a family history of asthma. Time to medical readiness for discharge was the primary efficacy outcome. Bronchiolitis severity scores and need for infirmary or hospital admission and for clinic revisits within 2 weeks were secondary outcomes. Cardiorespiratory instability onset was the safety outcome. Results A total of 162 previously healthy infants diagnosed with bronchiolitis aged 22 days to 17.6 months (median, 3.7 months) were enrolled. Approximately one-half of patients had eczema and/or a family history of asthma; 86.4% had positive findings on nasopharyngeal virus swabs. Geometric mean time until medical readiness for discharge was 24.1 h (95% CI, 20.0-29.1) for the 78 magnesium-treated patients and 25.3 h (95% CI, 20.3-31.5) for the 82 patients receiving placebo (ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.52-1.80]; P = .91). Mean bronchiolitis severity scores over time were similar for the two groups. The frequency of clinic visits in the subsequent 2 weeks (33.8% and 27.2%, respectively) was also similar. Fifteen magnesium recipients (19.5%) vs five placebo recipients (6.2%) were readmitted to the infirmary or hospital within 2 weeks (P = .016). No acute cardiorespiratory side effects were reported. Conclusions IV magnesium did not provide benefit for patients with acute bronchiolitis and may be harmful. Trial Registry ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02145520; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

negative: Clinical characteristics and predictors of survival in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 receiving tocilizumab Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can progress to cytokine storm that is associated with organ dysfunction and death. The purpose of the present study is to determine clinical characteristics associated with 28 day in-hospital survival in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that received tocilizumab. This was a retrospective observational cohort study conducted at a five hospital health system in Michigan, United States. Adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 that were admitted to the hospital and received tocilizumab for cytokine storm from March 1, 2020 through April 3, 2020 were included. Patients were grouped into survivors and non-survivors based on 28 day in-hospital mortality. Study day 0 was defined as the day tocilizumab was administered. Factors independently associated with in-hospital survival at 28 days after tocilizumab administration were assessed. Epidemiologic, demographic, laboratory, prognostic scores, treatment, and outcome data were collected and analyzed. Clinical response was collected and defined as a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status or discharged alive from the hospital. Of the 81 patients included, the median age was 64 (58–71) years and 56 (69.1%) were male. The 28 day in-hospital mortality was 43.2%. There were 46 (56.8%) patients in the survivors and 35 (43.2%) in the non-survivors group. On study day 0 no differences were noted in demographics, clinical characteristics, severity of illness scores, or treatments received between survivors and non-survivors. C-reactive protein was significantly higher in the non-survivors compared to survivors. Compared to non-survivors, recipients of tocilizumab within 12 days of symptom onset was independently associated with survival (adjusted OR: 0.296, 95% CI: 0.098–0.889). SOFA score ≥8 on day 0 was independently associated with mortality (adjusted OR: 2.842, 95% CI: 1.042–7.753). Clinical response occurred more commonly in survivors than non-survivors (80.4% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001). Improvements in the six-point ordinal scale and SOFA score were observed in survivors after tocilizumab. Early receipt of tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19 was an independent predictor for in-hospital survival at 28 days.

negative: Local infusion analgesia using intra-articular double lumen catheter after total knee arthroplasty: a double blinded randomized control study. PURPOSE Although intra-operative local infiltration analgesia has gained increasing popularity in joint replacement surgery, it is not clear whether postoperative local infusion analgesia using an indwelling catheter provides clinically important additional effects. We, therefore, conducted a randomized controlled trial to clarify the efficacy of the originally developed local infusion analgesia technique in total knee arthroplasty. METHODS Forty patients were randomly allocated to the local infusion analgesia or control group. Patients in the local infusion analgesia group received intermittent bolus intra-articular injection of analgesics consisting of ropivacaine, dexamethasone, and isepamicin until postoperative 48 h. Primary outcome was pain severity at rest using 100-mm visual analogue scale. RESULTS Pain severity in patients of the local infusion analgesia group was lower than control group, and there were significant differences between groups at POD1 (p = 0.025) and POD3 (p = 0.007). Reduction of postoperative pain was associated with a decrease in C-reactive protein level and earlier achievement of straight leg raise. In addition, postoperative drain volume was reduced in the local infusion analgesia group. CONCLUSION Although larger studies are needed to examine its safety, the local infusion analgesia alone provided clinically significant analgesic effects and rapid recovery in total knee arthroplasty.

negative: Update I. A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and safety of chloroquine (CQ)/hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for treatment or prophylaxis of COVID-19 in adult humans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE and two pre-print repositories (bioRxiv, medRxiv) were searched from inception to 8th June 2020 for RCTs and nonrandomized studies (retrospective and prospective, including single-arm, studies) addressing the use of CQ/HCQ in any dose or combination for COVID-19. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were included (6 RCTs, 26 nonrandomized, 29,192 participants). Two RCTs had high risk, two ‘some concerns’ and two low risk of bias (Rob2). Among nonrandomized studies with comparators, nine had high risk and five moderate risk of bias (ROBINS-I). Data synthesis was not possible. Low and moderate risk of bias studies suggest that treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 with CQ/HCQ may not reduce risk of death, compared to standard care. High dose regimens or combination with macrolides may be associated with harm. Postexposure prophylaxis may not reduce the rate of infection but the quality of the evidence is low. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COVID-19 should be treated with CQ/HCQ only if monitored and within the context of high quality RCTs. High quality data about efficacy/safety are urgently needed.

negative: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine effectiveness in human subjects during coronavirus: a systematic review In a search to find effective treatments for COVID-19, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have gained attention. We aim to provide evidence to support clinical decision-making regarding medication for the treatment of COVID-19 by carrying out a systematic review of the literature. The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, and HMIC were searched up to April 2020. Eligible study outcomes included: extubation or patient recovery. Relevant data were extracted and analysed by narrative synthesis. Our results included six studies in the review of which four studies were of good or fair quality. All eligible studies included were for coronavirus involving the use of either chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine to treat common symptoms such as fever, cough, shortness of breath and fatigue. Outcomes most commonly reported were improved lung function, viral clearance, and hospital discharge. Strong evidence to support the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 is lacking. Fast track trials are riddled with bias and may not conform to rigorous guidelines which may lead to inadequate data being reported. The use of these drugs in combination with other medications may be useful but without knowing which groups they are suited for and when they may cause more harm than good.

negative: Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis in children: a single institution experience of 28 patients. The aim of this study is to describe the clinical, laboratory, and neuroimaging features, treatment and outcome of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) in Taiwanese children to compare with two series from United States of America and Japan. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records and magnetic resonance images of 28 children, 23 boys and 5 girls, with ADEM between January 2001 and December 2009. Their mean age at disease onset was 6 years 9 months. Twenty four children experienced a prodromal illness. There was no special seasonal distribution in our patients. They presented mostly with impaired consciousness and headache. Cerebrospinal fluid samples of 21 patients were analyzed and none showed intrathecal oligoclonal bands. Magnetic resonance imaging showed variable findings: lesions with abnormal signal changes frequently found in the subcortical white matter of frontal and parietal lobes. No patient showed cortical gray matter involvement. We also found a high rate of deep gray matter involvement including thalami and basal ganglia. Treating with steroids was usually associated with a rapid recovery and both intravenous high dose methylprednisolone and dexamethasone had the same effect. All patients survived. Twenty three patients recovered completely with only mild sequelae in the remaining five children.

negative: The COVID-19 Pandemic and its Impact on the Cardio-Oncology Population PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV, COVID-19) is historically one of the most severe acute respiratory syndromes and pandemics to affect the globe in the twenty-first century. Originating in Wuhan, the virus rapidly spread and impacted subsets of populations with initial unclear risk factors contributing to worsening morbidity and mortality. Patients with diagnosis of cancer and undergoing treatment further represent a population at risk for worsening cardiopulmonary outcomes. This review explores specific risk factors, diagnoses, and treatment options that impact cardio-oncologic patients with COVID-19. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiple studies globally, including Italy, China, and the USA, have documented severe outcomes. Cancer patients are at increased risk of cardiac injury which itself is a risk factor for mortality. Additionally, elderly cancer patients undergoing recent anti-cancer treatment may be at greater risk for sustaining worse outcomes, although data remains suboptimal in this population. Major gaps remain regarding risk associated with type of cancer and type of anti-cancer treatment, as well as the layered risk of cardiovascular disease and cancer. Immunomodulatory therapies used to treat cytokine release syndrome secondary to anti-cancer therapies, as well as other agents being traditionally used to treat cardiovascular and cancer disease states, are being investigated for treatment of COVID-19. SUMMARY: Hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer have been associated with more severe COVID-19 infection and worse outcomes. Patients undergoing anti-cancer therapy or those who have suffered from coronavirus infection may develop long-standing changes, not limited to pulmonary fibrosis, hyperlipidemia, and worsening atherosclerosis. Those undergoing anti-cancer therapy are at theoretically increased susceptibility for infection, with type of cancer not necessarily dictating outcome. A review of the literature of patients with cardiovascular and/or cancer disease is presented, as well as proposed strategies to attenuate risk regarding treatment, management, and surveillance in this vulnerable population.

negative: Potential Role of Anti-interleukin (IL)-6 Drugs in the Treatment of COVID-19: Rationale, Clinical Evidence and Risks The epidemic due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been spreading globally, raising increasing concerns. This public health emergency has triggered a race to find medications to improve the prognosis of this disease. There is currently great interest in drug repositioning to manage SARS-CoV-2 infection, that is, the evaluation of the potential benefits of a drug that has already been proven safe and effective in humans for other approved indications. As interleukin-6 (IL-6) acts as a key driver of the inflammation associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), IL-6 and IL-6 receptor (IL-6R) inhibition appear to be promising targets for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. It is important to critically analyze the available evidence concerning the use of the available anti-IL-6 (siltuximab) and anti-IL-6R (tocilizumab and sarilumab) agents in COVID-19 patients, in terms of both benefit and risk. In this review, the pathogenesis of the cytokine storm induced by COVID-19, the role of IL-6 in this cytokine storm, the rationale for the use of anti-IL-6 agents, and key information on potential benefits and safety monitoring of these biologicals in COVID-19 patients is discussed.

negative: Decreased expression of type I (IFN-β) and type III (IFN-λ) interferons and interferon-stimulated genes in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with and without nasal polyps Background Little is known about antiviral responses in the sinonasal mucosal tissue of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Objective we investigated the presence of virus and the expression of Toll-like receptor (TLR) 3, TLR7, and interferon and interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) in healthy mucosal tissue of control subjects and the inflammatory sinus mucosal tissue of CRS patients, and evaluated whether levels of interferons and ISGs might be affected by CRS-related cytokines and by treatment with macrolides, dexamethasone, or TLR3 and TLR7 agonists. Methods The presence of virus in the sinonasal mucosa was evaluated with real-time PCR. The expression of interferons and ISGs in the sinonasal mucosa and in cultured epithelial cells treated with TH1 and TH2 cytokines, macrolides, dexamethasone, or TLR3 and TLR7 agonists were evaluated with real-time PCR and Western blotting. The expression of TLR3 and TLR7 in the sinonasal mucosa were evaluated with immunohistochemistry. Results Respiratory viruses were detected in 15% of samples. Interferons and ISGs are expressed in normal mucosa, but their levels were decreased in patients with CRS. Interferon and ISG levels were upregulated in cells treated with macrolides, dexamethasone, or TLR3 agonist, but some were decreased in cytokine-treated cells. TLR3 and TLR7 levels showed no significant difference between normal and inflammatory sinus mucosal tissue. Conclusion These results suggest that decreased levels of interferons and ISGs in patients with CRS might contribute to impairment of the antiviral innate response in inflammatory sinonasal epithelial cells. Macrolides and glucocorticoids might provide positive effects on the treatment of CRS by upregulating interferon and ISG expression.

negative: Prenatal dexamethasone and postnatal high-fat diet have a synergistic effect of elevating blood pressure through a distinct programming mechanism of systemic and adipose renin–angiotensin systems BACKGROUND: Hypertension may result from high-fat (HF) diet induced-obesity and overexposure to glucocorticoids in utero. Recent studies demonstrated the potent contribution of adipose tissue’s renin-angiotensin system (RAS) to systemic RAS, which plays a key role in regulating blood pressure (BP). In this study, we investigated the effects of prenatal dexamethasone (DEX) exposure and postnatal HF diet on RAS of adipose tissue. METHODS: RAS and BP of 6-month old rats exposed to prenatal DEX and/or postnatal HF diet were examined. RESULTS: Prenatal DEX plus postnatal HF exerted a synergistic effect on systolic BP. Prenatal DEX exposure suppressed plasma angiotensin (ANG) I and ANG II, whereas postnatal HF suppressed plasma ANG-(1–7) level. Prenatal DEX increased prorenin receptor and renin levels, but suppressed angiotensinogen (AGT) and angiotensin-converting-enzyme 1 (ACE1) mRNA expressions in adipose tissue. Postnatal HF increased AGT mRNA expression, but suppressed prorenin receptor, renin, ACE2, ANG II type 2 receptor (AT2R), and Mas receptor (MasR) mRNA expression levels. CONCLUSIONS: Prenatal GC exposure altered the ACE1/ANG II/ANG II type 1 receptor (AT1R) axis, whereas postnatal HF negatively impacted the ACE2/ANG-(1–7)/MasR axis. Prenatal DEX exposure and postnatal HF synergistically elevated BP through a distinct programming mechanism of systemic and adipose RAS. Adipose RAS might be a target for precise hypertension treatment. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12944-018-0701-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: Pomalidomide-Induced Pulmonary Toxicity in Multiple Myeloma

negative: Angiotensin receptor blockers for the treatment of covid-19 and its comorbidities

negative: IL‐1 blockade with anakinra in acute leukaemia patients with severe COVID‐19 pneumonia appears safe and may result in clinical improvement As of 17th May, 2020 the number of patients infected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) worldwide has exceeded 4.5 million (WHO 2020). A subgroup of patients with COVID‐19 pneumonia develop a hyperinflammatory syndrome which has a similar cytokine release profile to secondary haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) (Huang, et al 2020). Immunomodulatory drugs are hypothesised to abrogate the dysfunctional immune response in hyperinflammatory COVID‐19 and are currently being investigated in clinical trials. IL‐1 blockage with anakinra has been shown to be safe and is associated with clinical improvement in patients with hyperinflammatory COVID‐19 (Cavalli, et al 2020).

negative: Review: Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine for Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging viral infection causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have garnered unprecedented attention as potential therapeutic agents against COVID-19 following several small clinical trials, uncontrolled case series, and public figure endorsements. While there is a growing body of scientific data, there is also concern for harm, particularly QTc prolongation and cardiac arrhythmias. Here, we perform a rapid narrative review and discuss the strengths and limitations of existing in vitro and clinical studies. We call for additional randomized controlled trial evidence prior to the widespread incorporation of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine into national and international treatment guidelines.

negative: Reply to Gautret et al: hydroxychloroquine sulfate and azithromycin for COVID-19: what is the evidence and what are the risks? The severity of COVID-19 has resulted in a global rush to find the right antiviral treatment to conquer the pandemic and to treat patients. This requires reliable studies to support treatment. In a recently published study by Gautret et al. the authors concluded that hydroxychloroquine monotherapy and hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin reduced viral load. However, this trial has several major methodological issues, including the design, outcome measure and the statistical analyses. In this paper we discuss the background, clinical evidence, pharmacology and methodological issues related to this clinical trial. We understand the rush to release results, however in case conclusions are far reaching the evidence needs to be robust.

negative: Investigational treatments for COVID-19 may increase ventricular arrhythmia risk through drug interactions Many drugs that have been proposed for treatment of COVID-19 are reported to cause cardiac adverse events, including ventricular arrhythmias. In order to properly weigh risks against potential benefits, particularly when decisions must be made quickly, mathematical modeling of both drug disposition and drug action can be useful for predicting patient response and making informed decisions. Here we explored the potential effects on cardiac electrophysiology of 4 drugs proposed to treat COVID-19: lopinavir, ritonavir, chloroquine, and azithromycin, as well as combination therapy involving these drugs. Our study combined simulations of pharmacokinetics (PK) with quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) modeling of ventricular myocytes to predict potential cardiac adverse events caused by these treatments. Simulation results predicted that drug combinations can lead to greater cellular action potential prolongation, analogous to QT prolongation, compared with drugs given in isolation. The combination effect can result from both pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions. Importantly, simulations of different patient groups predicted that females with pre-existing heart disease are especially susceptible to drug-induced arrhythmias, compared males with disease or healthy individuals of either sex. Overall, the results illustrate how PK and QSP modeling may be combined to more precisely predict cardiac risks of COVID-19 therapies.

negative: Risk of severe COVID-19 in hypertensive patients treated with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors: Abstract Introduction There is controversy concerning the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers (ARB) for treating hypertensive patients with Covid-19. It has been hypothesized that these drugs might increase the risk of severe Covid-19, but some authors suggested that blocking the renin-angiotensin system might actually decrease this risk. Methods Retrospective cohort study of all the consecutive hypertensive patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in a health area. The outcome variable was hospitalization because of severe Covid-19. Results 539 subjects were diagnosed of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of these, 157 (29.1%) had hypertension and were included in the study. Sixty-nine cases (43.9%) were hospitalized because of severe Covid-19. In multivariable analysis older age, diabetes and hypertensive myocadiopathy were related to a higher risk of hospital admission. ARB treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of hospitalization (HR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.10 – 0.88). A similar albeit not significant trend was observed for ACEI. Conclusion ARB or ACEI treatment was not associated with a worse clinical outcome in consecutive hypertensive patients infected by SARS-CoV-2.

negative: Cytomegalovirus Reactivation in a Patient With Extensively Pretreated Multiple Myeloma During Daratumumab Treatment

negative: Could hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis be the core issue of severe COVID-19 cases? BACKGROUND: COVID-19, a disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), commonly presents as fever, cough, dyspnea, and myalgia or fatigue. Although the majority of patients with COVID-19 have mild symptoms, some are more prone to serious outcomes, including pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and even death. Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is a severe, life-threatening inflammatory syndrome associated with intense cytokine release (also known as a “cytokine storm”). Similar to COVID-19, HLH is characterized by aggressive course leading to multi-organ failure. MAIN TEXT: The purpose of this review article is to draw attention to the possibility of the complication of HLH in patients with the severe course of COVID-19. Indeed, some of the clinical characteristics observed in the more severe cases of COVID-19 are reminiscent of secondary HLH (which can be triggered by infections, malignancies, rheumatological diseases, or autoimmune/immunodeficiency conditions). The pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infection also suggests that HLH or a similar hyperinflammatory syndrome is the cause of the severe course of the infection. CONCLUSION: The pathogenesis and clinical symptoms of severe COVID-19 indicate that an increased inflammatory response corresponding to HLH is occurring. Therefore, patients with severe COVID-19 should be screened for hyperinflammation using standard laboratory tests to identify those for whom immunosuppressive therapy may improve outcomes.

negative: Suppression of bovine lymphocyte responses to mitogens following in vivo and in vitro treatment with dexamethasone Gnotobiotic calves given intramuscular injections of dexamethasone (DM, 0.5 mg kg(−1) day(−1)) showed marked changes in haematological parameters including a neutrophilia and a lymphopaenia. Not only was there a reduction in the numbers of circulating mononuclear cells, but there was also a significant (P<0.01) decrease in the in vitro responsiveness of the remaining circulating peripheral blood lymphocytes to the mitogens, phytohaemagglutinin (PHA), concanavalin A (ConA) and poke-weed mitogen (PWM). Responses to all three mitogens were suppressed to a similar degree. Analysis of the circulating mononuclear cell sub-populations before and during DM treatment demonstrated a selective depletion of B cells; the T lymphocyte sub-population that expresses the gamma/delta form of T cell receptor, are CD2(−), CD5(+), CD8(−), CD4(−) and constitute a major population in peripheral blood of calves. In vitro studies in gnotobiotic and conventional calves confirmed that DM was highly inhibitory for PHA responses but, in contrast to the in vivo findings, showed little effect of DM on ConA responses. Expression of surface antigens after 72 h in vitro culture in the presence of DM were little affected with the exception of BoCD8 and MHC II, which showed increased and decreased expression, respectively. These observations would suggest that distinct mechanisms are involved in glucocorticosteroid suppression of the responses to these two mitogens.

negative: Chronic shedding of bovine enteric coronavirus antigen-antibody complexes by clinically normal cows. Using an ELISA for the detection of virus-specific immune complexes, ten cows were found to be shedding bovine enteric coronavirus. The shedding patterns from five of these animals were followed for a period of 12 weeks, and all were found to be chronically shedding virus. Despite the presence of both faecal and serum antibody the infection was not cleared; therefore, the role of cell-mediated immunity (CMI) was investigated by immunosuppressing the chronically shedding cows with dexamethasone. No major role for CMI in maintaining the chronic infection could be determined, although immunosuppression did result in a temporary reduction in the shedding of virus-specific immune complexes.

negative: Coronavirus drugs: Using plasma from recovered patients as a treatment for COVID-19 The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has infected nearly 3,582,233 individuals with 248,558 deaths since it was first identified in human populations in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. No antiviral therapies or vaccines are available for their treatment or prevention. Passive immunization PI through broadly neutralizing antibodies that bind to the specific antigens of SARS-CoV 2 might be a potential solution to address the immediate health threat of COVID-19 pandemic while vaccines are being developed. The PI approach in treating COVID-19 is discussed herein, including a summary of its historical applications to confront epidemics.

negative: Could IL-17 represent a new therapeutic target for the treatment and/or management of COVID-19-related respiratory syndrome? This paper is dedicated to Sofia Maione born during COVID-19 outbreak. [Figure: see text]

negative: Globule leukocytes and mast cells in the rat trachea: their number, distribution, and response to compound 48/80 and dexamethasone Globule leukocytes in the epithelium of the rat trachea may be counterparts of mucosal mast cells that are located in the gastrointestinal tract. If they are indeed similar to mucosal mast cells, globule leukocytes would be expected to decrease in number in rats treated with dexamethasone but not in rats treated with compound 48/80, an agent which causes non-antigenic degranulation of connective tissue mast cells. In this study, we determined the number and compared the distribution of globule leukocytes and connective tissue mast cells in the tracheas of pathogen-free rats. We then determined whether the number of these two types of cells changes in rats treated for 5 days with compound 48/80, dexamethasone, a combination of compound 48/80 and dexamethasone, or saline. We identified globule leukocytes and mast cells in whole mounts and histological sections of rat tracheas by using a histochemical reaction that demonstrates the chymotrypsin-like protease (chloroacetate esterase) present in mast cell granules. Using this method, we found that aproximately 225000 globule leukocytes were present in the epithelium of the trachea. These cells were most abundant in the rostral trachea. Rats treated with dexamethasone had a 91% reduction in the number of globule leukocytes with protease-containing granules, but rats treated with compound 48/80 had a normal number of these cells. We found some 55000 connective tissue mast cells in the same tracheas. Mast cells were most abundant in the posterior membrane of the caudal trachea and in the lamina propria between cartilaginous rings. Rats treated with compound 48/80 had a 96% reduction in mast cells with protease-containing granules, but rats treated with dexamethasone had a normal complement of mast cells. We conclude that globule leukocytes are abundant in the tracheas of healthy rats, are similar in morphology and pharmacological responses to mucosal mast cells located in other organs of rats, and are more numerous than and have a different distribution than connective tissue mast cells. Globule leukocytes in the tracheal epithelium may have a role in respiratory defenses similar to that of mucosal mast cells in other organs.

negative: Remdesivir in Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Benefit–Risk Assessment INTRODUCTION: There is a need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) rapidly, given the current, ongoing pandemic. A systematic benefit–risk assessment was designed and conducted to examine the benefit–risk profile of remdesivir in COVID-19 patients compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. A key objective of this study was to provide a platform for a dynamic systematic benefit–risk evaluation, which starts with inevitably limited information (to meet the urgent unmet public health need worldwide), then update the benefit–risk evaluation as more data become available. METHODS: The Benefit–Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used to assess the overall benefit–risk of the use of remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19 compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and government agency websites to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking remdesivir for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. RESULTS: Using the BRAT method, several key benefits and risks for use of remdesivir in COVID-19 compared with placebo have been identified. In one trial, the benefit of time to clinical improvement was not statistically significant (21 vs 23 days, HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.87–1.75), although the study was underpowered. In another trial, a shorter time to recovery in patients treated with remdesivir was observed (11 vs 15 days), with non-significant reduced mortality risk (8% vs 12%). Risk data were only available from one trial. This trial reported fewer serious adverse events in patients taking remdesivir (18%) compared with the placebo group (26%); however, more patients in the remdesivir group discontinued treatment as a result of an adverse event compared with those patients receiving placebo (12% vs 5%). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary clinical trial results suggest that there may be a favourable benefit–risk profile for remdesivir compared with placebo in severe COVID-19 infection and further data on benefits would strengthen this evaluation. There is limited safety data for remdesivir, which should be obtained in further studies. The current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks for which further data are needed. Ongoing clinical trial data can be incorporated into the framework when available to provide an updated benefit–risk assessment.

negative: Diabetes during the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Global Call to Reconnect with Patients and Emphasize Lifestyle Changes and Optimise Glycemic and Blood Pressure Control

negative: Antimicrobial-associated harm in critical care: a narrative review The belief that, for the individual patient, the benefit of prompt and continued use of antimicrobials outweighs any potential harm is a significant barrier to improved stewardship of these vital agents. Antimicrobial stewardship may be perceived as utilitarian rationing, seeking to preserve the availability of effective antimicrobials by limiting the development of resistance in a manner which could conflict with the immediate treatment of the patient in need. This view does not account for the growing evidence of antimicrobial-associated harm to individual patients. This review sets out the evidence for antimicrobial-associated harm and how this should be balanced with the need for prompt and appropriate therapy in infection. It describes the mechanisms by which antimicrobials may harm patients including: mitochondrial toxicity; immune cell toxicity; adverse drug reactions; selection of resistant organisms within a given patient; and disruption of the microbiome. Finally, the article indicates how the harms of antimicrobials may be mitigated and identifies areas for research and development in this field.

negative: Investigational Therapies for the Treatment of COVID-19: Updates from Ongoing Clinical Trials

negative: Mitotane (o, p‘‐DDD) treatment in a cat with hyperadrenocorticism An 11‐year‐old male castrated Persian cat with spontaneous hyperadrenocorticism was presented. Both adrenals were grossly enlarged and calcified. A diagnosis of pituitary‐dependent hyperadrenocorticism was made. Signs of hyperadrenocorticism resolved with long‐term mitotane treatment. Concurrent diabetes mellitus resolved after 220 days of therapy. No severe adverse drug reactions were noted.

negative: COVID-19 in cardiac arrest and infection risk to rescuers: a systematic review Abstract Background There may be a risk of COVID-19 transmission to rescuers delivering treatment for cardiac arrest. The aim of this review was to identify the potential risk of transmission associated with key interventions (chest compressions, defibrillation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation) to inform international treatment recommendations. Methods We undertook a systematic review comprising three questions: 1) aerosol generation associated with key interventions; 2) risk of airborne infection transmission associated with key interventions; and 3) the effect of different personal protective equipment strategies. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the World Health Organisation COVID-19 database on 24th March 2020. Eligibility criteria were developed individually for each question. We assessed risk of bias for individual studies, and used the GRADE process to assess evidence certainty by outcome. Results We included eleven studies: two cohort studies, one case control study, five case reports, and three manikin randomised controlled trials. We did not find any direct evidence that chest compressions or defibrillation either are or are not associated with aerosol generation or transmission of infection. Data from manikin studies indicates that donning of personal protective equipment delays treatment delivery. Studies provided only indirect evidence, with no study describing patients with COVID-19. Evidence certainty was low or very low for all outcomes. Conclusion It is uncertain whether chest compressions or defibrillation cause aerosol generation or transmission of COVID-19 to rescuers. There is very limited evidence and a rapid need for further studies. Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020175594

negative: Effect of adjunctive tobramycin inhalation versus placebo on early clinical response in the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia: the VAPORISE randomized-controlled trial

negative: Rapid systematic review on clinical evidence of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19: critical assessment and recommendation for future clinical trials Purpose: This study aims to critically assess the published studies of Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for the treatment of COVID-19 and provide recommendations for future clinical trials for the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: A rapid systematic review was conducted by searching the PubMed, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases on April 13, 2020. Three clinical trial registry platforms, including ClinicalTrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register, and the Chinese Clinical Trial Register were also complementarily searched. Results: A total of 10 clinical studies were identified, including 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 comparative nonrandomized trial, 5 single-arm trials, and 1 interim analysis. The heterogeneity among studies of the baseline disease severity and reported endpoints made a pooled analysis impossible. CQ and HCQ (with or without azithromycin) showed significant therapeutic benefit in terms of virologic clearance rate, improvement in symptoms and imaging findings, time to clinical recovery, and length of hospital stay in 1 RCT, 4 single-arm trials, and the interim analysis, whereas no treatment benefit of CQ or HCQ was observed in the remaining 4 studies. Limitations of the included studies ranged from small sample size, to insufficient information concerning baseline patient characteristics, to potential for selection bias without detailing the rationale for exclusion, and presence of confounding factors. Conclusion: Based on the studies evaluated, there still lacked solid evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of HCQ and CQ as a treatment for COVID-19 with or without azithromycin. This emphasized the importance of robust RCTs investing HCQ/CQ to address the evidence uncertainties. Keywords: COVID-19, Systematic review, Clinical trial, Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine

negative: Update Alert: Should Clinicians Use Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine Alone or in Combination With Azithromycin for the Prophylaxis or Treatment of COVID-19? Living Practice Points From the American College of Physicians

negative: Chemotherapy-sparing treatment of haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis with intravenous immunoglobulins and corticosteroids. Haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) can be a rapidly fatal disease. Current treatment in adults is extrapolated from the HLH-2004 protocol that specifies a regimen of etoposide, dexamethasone and cyclosporine. However, HLH presents as a spectrum of disease severity. A therapeutic challenge arises for milder cases where the harms of potent chemotherapy such as etoposide may outweigh its benefit. We present a case of an adult with HLH who developed significant pancytopenia but was otherwise not critically ill and who responded to treatment with a chemotherapy-sparing approach consisting of intravenous immunoglobulins and corticosteroids alone. The case illustrates that tailored therapy may allow effective treatment of the disorder while minimising therapy-related toxicities.

negative: Transcatheter drug delivery through bronchial artery for COVID-19: is it fiction or could it come true? More than 1,200 active or recruiting clinical trials for novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments and vaccines are registered. Many drugs have shown promise for treatment of COVID-19. Nevertheless, up to date, no drugs have been confirmed as a definitive treatment for COVID-19. Trials such as the SOLIDARITY and RECOVERY are ongoing, and first results were announced in favour of therapy with dexamethasone with a significant trend showing greatest benefit among those patients requiring ventilation. The drawbacks of these trials include exposing the patients to drugs with well-documented systemic adverse effects or unknown complications of novel therapies without proof of clinical benefit. We present here the hypothesis that bronchial artery infusion could be an alternative for systemic drug infusion in COVID-19 trials with superadded benefits of high drug concentration and low systemic adverse effects. The concept of this idea has many uncertainties and no current clinical data to support. Perhaps, the technique should be first applied in animal models to determine its safety and calculate the effective dose of the drugs. Guidelines and reviews of pharmacotherapy for COVID-19 should be implemented for this fiction to come true.

negative: Convalescent Plasma Coupled With Medications for the Treatment of a Severe COVID-19 Patient: Drugs Analysis and Pharmaceutical Care Based on the Newly Established Guidelines for COVID-19 Remedy Given the extreme importance of the current pandemic caused by COVID-19 and due to the fact that scientists agree that there is no identified treatment, this paper analyzes in detail the treatment of a severe COVID-19 patient with convalescent plasma and drugs based on current guidelines for COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment. This can provide a reference for other medical institutions on rational drug use and pharmaceutical care for severe COVID-19 patients.

negative: COVID-19 diagnosis and management: a comprehensive review Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2, a novel coronavirus from the same family as SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, has spread worldwide leading the World Health Organization to declare a pandemic. The disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), presents flu-like symptoms which can become serious in high-risk individuals. Here, we provide an overview of the known clinical features and treatment options for COVID-19. We carried out a systematic literature search using the main online databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, UpToDate, Embase and Web of Science) with the following keywords: 'COVID-19', '2019-nCoV', 'coronavirus' and 'SARS-CoV-2'. We included publications from 1 January 2019 to 3 April 2020 which focused on clinical features and treatments. We found that infection is transmitted from human to human and through contact with contaminated environmental surfaces. Hand hygiene is fundamental to prevent contamination. Wearing personal protective equipment is recommended in specific environments. The main symptoms of COVID-19 are fever, cough, fatigue, slight dyspnoea, sore throat, headache, conjunctivitis and gastrointestinal issues. Real-time PCR is used as a diagnostic tool using nasal swab, tracheal aspirate or bronchoalveolar lavage samples. Computed tomography findings are important for both diagnosis and follow-up. To date, there is no evidence of any effective treatment for COVID-19. The main therapies being used to treat the disease are antiviral drugs, chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and respiratory therapy. In conclusion, although many therapies have been proposed, quarantine is the only intervention that appears to be effective in decreasing the contagion rate. Specifically designed randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the most appropriate evidence-based treatment modality.

negative: The COVID-19 Pandemic and its Impact on the Cardio-Oncology Population PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV, COVID-19) is historically one of the most severe acute respiratory syndromes and pandemics to affect the globe in the twenty-first century. Originating in Wuhan, the virus rapidly spread and impacted subsets of populations with initial unclear risk factors contributing to worsening morbidity and mortality. Patients with diagnosis of cancer and undergoing treatment further represent a population at risk for worsening cardiopulmonary outcomes. This review explores specific risk factors, diagnoses, and treatment options that impact cardio-oncologic patients with COVID-19. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiple studies globally, including Italy, China, and the USA, have documented severe outcomes. Cancer patients are at increased risk of cardiac injury which itself is a risk factor for mortality. Additionally, elderly cancer patients undergoing recent anti-cancer treatment may be at greater risk for sustaining worse outcomes, although data remains suboptimal in this population. Major gaps remain regarding risk associated with type of cancer and type of anti-cancer treatment, as well as the layered risk of cardiovascular disease and cancer. Immunomodulatory therapies used to treat cytokine release syndrome secondary to anti-cancer therapies, as well as other agents being traditionally used to treat cardiovascular and cancer disease states, are being investigated for treatment of COVID-19. Hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer have been associated with more severe COVID-19 infection and worse outcomes. Patients undergoing anti-cancer therapy or those who have suffered from coronavirus infection may develop long-standing changes, not limited to pulmonary fibrosis, hyperlipidemia, and worsening atherosclerosis. Those undergoing anti-cancer therapy are at theoretically increased susceptibility for infection, with type of cancer not necessarily dictating outcome. A review of the literature of patients with cardiovascular and/or cancer disease is presented, as well as proposed strategies to attenuate risk regarding treatment, management, and surveillance in this vulnerable population.

negative: Hydroxychloroquine and the treatment of Sjogren's Syndrome, Chronic Ulcerative Stomatitis, and Oral Lichen Planus in the age of COVID-19 The Federal Drug Administration has recently approved the off-label use of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for the treatment of COVID-19 infections. However, a recent study has not only failed to demonstrate HCQ efficacy but has documented an HCQ COVID-19 therapy serious side-effect of QT prolongation and secondary arrhythmia. HCQ has been utilized as an off-label drug and deemed safe and effective for such oral lesions as Sjogren's syndrome (SS), Chronic Ulcerative Stomatitis (CUS), and Oral Lichen Planus (OLP). As HCQ may be appropriately utilized for the off-label treatment of SS, CUS, and OLP, the relevant HCQ safety concerns such as dosage, drug-drug interactions, and QT prolongation and secondary arrhythmia are discussed. Due to the possibility of decreased pharmacy HCQ supplies, replacement drugs with respect to SS, CUS, and OLP patients being successfully treated with HCQ are also discussed.

negative: The effect of ketorolac and dexamethasone on the incidence of sore throat in women after thyroidectomy: a prospective double-blinded randomized trial. BACKGROUND We evaluated the effect of two drugs with anti-inflammatory action, dexamethasone and ketorolac, on reduction of postoperative sore throat (POST) after general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation in patients undergoing thyroidectomy. METHODS One hundred and ninety-two female patients scheduled to undergo general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation for thyroidectomy were enrolled in this prospective study. Participants were randomly allocated to receive intravenous medication; placebo (Group C, n = 45), ketorolac 30 mg immediately before intubation (Group Kpre, n = 47), ketorolac 30 mg at the end of surgery (Group Kpost, n = 45) and dexamethasone 10 mg (Group D, n = 43). The incidence and severity of POST and hoarseness were evaluated at 1, 6 and 24 hours after surgery. RESULTS Incidences and severities of POST at rest and during swallowing in first 6 hours after extubation were comparable among 4 groups. At 24 hours postextubation, the incidence (P = 0.002, 95% CI of proportion differences; 0.05-0.39) and severity (P = 0.008) of POST during swallowing were significantly lower in group D than in group C. Kpre and Kpost groups did not show a greater reduction in POST than group C, despite lower rescue analgesic requirement at 1 hour after extubation in group Kpre (P = 0.006; 95% CI of proportion differences; 0.07-0.38). No intergroup differences were observed in incidences of hoarseness or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Intravenous administration of dexamethasone 10 mg, but not ketorolac, before induction of anesthesia reduces the incidence and severity of POST during swallowing at 24 hours after thyroidectomy.

negative: Novel coronavirus: Australian GPs raise concerns about shortage of face masks

negative: Low frequency of CD3(+)CD4(+)CD161(+) T cells correlates with the occurrence of infections in refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma patients receiving lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone treatment The aim of this study was to explore the predictive implications of the composition of immune cell populations prior to lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone (Len-Dex) initiation for the occurrence of infections. We prospectively examined immune cell populations in peripheral blood taken at baseline of lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Len-dex) therapy and reviewed clinical and microbiology records in 90 patients with refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma (RRMM). Risk factors for infection were analyzed using logistic regression. During a median of 11 cycles of Len-dex treatment, 52 (57.8%) patients experienced at least 1 infection episode. Of a total of 92 episodes of infection, 58 (63%) episodes were clinically defined, 29 (31.5%) episodes were microbiologically defined, and 5 (5.4%) episodes were fever of unknown origin. Severe episodes were more frequently observed during the first 3 cycles. After adjusting for risk factors for infection based on univariate analyses, multivariate analyses showed that lower Hb (< 10 g/dL) was a clinically independent factor associated with occurrence of infections. Lower frequency (P = 0.044) and absolute count (P = 0.014) of circulating CD3(+)CD4(+)CD161(+) cells prior to Len-dex treatment were also associated with the occurrence of infection, especially during the first 3 cycles of Len-dex therapy. In addition to several clinical predictive factors, we found that CD3(+)CD4(+)CD161(+) cells may provide additional information for predicting the occurrence of infection in the early period of Len-dex therapy. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00277-018-3401-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: Risks and Impact of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin-Receptor Blockers on SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Adults: A Living Systematic Review BACKGROUND: The role of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) in COVID-19 disease susceptibility, severity, and treatment is unclear. PURPOSE: To evaluate, on an ongoing basis, whether use of ACEIs or ARBs either increases risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or is associated with worse COVID-19 disease outcomes, and to assess the efficacy of these medications for COVID-19 treatment. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (Ovid) and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 2003 to 4 May 2020, with planned ongoing surveillance for 1 year; the World Health Organization database of COVID-19 publications and medRxiv.org through 17 April 2020; and ClinicalTrials.gov to 24 April 2020, with planned ongoing surveillance. STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies and trials in adults that examined associations and effects of ACEIs or ARBs on risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease severity and mortality. DATA EXTRACTION: Single-reviewer abstraction confirmed by another reviewer, independent evaluation by 2 reviewers of study quality, and collective assessment of certainty of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Two retrospective cohort studies found that ACEI and ARB use was not associated with a higher likelihood of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and 1 case–control study found no association with COVID-19 illness in a large community (moderate-certainty evidence). Fourteen observational studies, involving a total of 23 565 adults with COVID-19, showed consistent evidence that neither medication was associated with more severe COVID-19 illness (high-certainty evidence). Four registered randomized trials plan to evaluate ACEIs and ARBs for treatment of COVID-19. LIMITATION: Half the studies were small and did not adjust for important confounding variables. CONCLUSION: High-certainty evidence suggests that ACEI or ARB use is not associated with more severe COVID-19 disease, and moderate-certainty evidence suggests no association between use of these medications and positive SARS-CoV-2 test results among symptomatic patients. Whether these medications increase the risk for mild or asymptomatic disease or are beneficial in COVID-19 treatment remains uncertain. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None. (PROSPERO: registration number pending)

negative: A model for 2019-nCoV infection with treatment The current emergence of coronavirus (2019-nCoV or COVID-19) puts the world in threat. 2019-nCoV remains the outbreak of SARS-CoV 2002-2003. The structural research on the receptor recognition by SARS-CoV has identified the key interactions between SARS-CoV spike protein and its host receptor, also known as angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). It controls both the cross-species and human-to-human transmissions of SARS-CoV. In this article, we have considered the infection dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the acute stage. Our aim is to propose and analyse a mathematical model for investigating the effect of CTL responses over the viral mutation to control the viral infection when a post-infection vaccine is administered at regular intervals. Dynamics of the system with and without impulses have been analysed using qualitative theory. Main findings are supported through numerical simulations.

negative: Systematic benefit-risk assessment for the use of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19: Establishing a framework for rapid decision-making Objectives: Given the current pandemic, there is an urgent need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease). A systematic benefit-risk assessment was designed and conducted to strengthen the ongoing monitoring of the benefit-risk balance for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 treatment. Methods: The overall benefit-risk of the use of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 compared to standard of care, placebo or other treatments was assessed using the Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework. We searched PubMed and Google Scholar to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. Results: Several potential key benefits and risks were identified for use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine in COVID-19 treatment. For the benefit of virological clearance, three studies were identified. A significant risk difference (RD) between hydroxychloroquine and the comparator group (standard of care) was found for only one study (RD=0.58, 95% CI: 0.17, 0.98). The risk difference was not significant for the other two studies (RD=-0.07, 95% CI:-0.75, 0.61 and RD=0.08, 95% CI:-0.74, 0.91). In addition, no significant risk difference between hydroxychloroquine and the comparator group (standard of care) was identified for the risk of abnormal liver function tests (LFTs) (RD=0.07, 95% CI: -0.28, 0.41). Conclusions: Overall, no conclusion can be made on the benefit-risk profile of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 compared to standard of care, placebo or other treatments at this time. Whilst the availability of comparative data are limited, the current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks. As further data from clinical trials and real world use on these benefits and risks becomes available, this can be incorporated into the framework for an ongoing benefit-risk assessment.

negative: Rapid resolution of cytokine release syndrome and favorable clinical course of severe COVID-19 in a kidney transplant recipient treated with tocilizumab

negative: Febrile Hypotensive Reactions Following ABVD Chemotherapy in Patients With EBV-associated Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma