Abstract

BACKGROUND The exact prevalence of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Adults (MIS-A) is largely unknown. Vague and multiple definitions and treatment options often add to the confusion on how to label the diagnosis with certainty. OBJECTIVES The objective of the study was to determine the demographic profile, clinical presentation, laboratory findings and outcomes of MIS-A in COVID-19. METHODS A systematic review was conducted after registering with PROSPERO. Multiple databases were systematically searched to encompass studies characterizing MIS-A from 1st January 2020 up to 31st August 2021. The inclusion criteria were- to incorporate all published or in press peer-reviewed articles reporting cases of MIS-A. We accepted the following types of studies: case reports, case-control, case series, cross-sectional studies and letters to the editors that incorporated clinical, laboratory, imaging, as well as the hospital course of MIS-A patients. The exclusion criteria for the review were- articles not in English, only abstracts published, no data on MIS-A and articles which have focus on COVID-19, and not MIS-A. Two independent authors screened the articles, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. RESULTS A total of 53 articles were included in this review with a sample size of 79 cases. Majority of the patients were males (73.4%) with mean age of 31.67±10.02 years. Fever (100%) and skin rash (57.8%) were the two most common presenting symptoms. Echocardiographic data was available for 73 patients of whom 41 (73.2%) had reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. Cardiovascular system was most frequently involved (81%) followed by gastrointestinal (73.4%) and mucocutaneous (51.9%) involvement. Anti-inflammatory therapies used in treatment included steroids (60.2%), intravenous immunoglobulin (37.2%) and biologics (10.2%). Mean duration of the hospital stay was 11.67±8.08 days. Data regarding the outcomes was available for all 79 subjects of whom 4 (5.1%) died during course of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS Emergence of MIS-A calls for further large-scale studies to establish standard case definitions and definite treatment guidelines.

Abstract

Introduction; Pulmonary fibrosis is a frequently reported COVID-19 sequela in which the exact prevalence and risk factors are yet to be established. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the prevalence of post-COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis (PCPF) and the potential risk factors. Methods; CINAHL, PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were searched to identify English language studies published up to December 3, 2021. Results; The systematic search initially revealed a total of 618 articles - of which only 13 studies reporting 2018 patients were included in this study. Among the patients, 1047 (51.9%) were male and 971 (48.1%) were female. The mean age was 54.5 years (15-94). The prevalence of PCPF was 44.9%. The mean age was 59 years in fibrotic patients and 48.5 years in non-fibrotic patients. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was the only comorbidity associated with PCPF. Fibrotic patients more commonly suffered from persistent symptoms of dyspnea, cough, chest pain, fatigue, and myalgia (p-value < 0.05). Factors related to COVID-19 severity that were associated with PCPF development included computed tomography score of ≥18, ICU admission, invasive/non-invasive mechanical ventilation, longer hospitalization period, and steroid, antibiotic and immunoglobulin treatments (p-value < 0.05). Parenchymal bands (284/341), ground-glass opacities (552/753), interlobular septal thickening (220/381), and consolidation (197/319) were the most common lung abnormalities found in fibrotic patients. Conclusion, About 44.9% of COVID-19 survivors appear to have developed pulmonary fibrosis. Factors related to COVID-19 severity were significantly associated with PCPF development.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Passive immunotherapy using hyperimmune intravenous immunoglobulin (hIVIG) to SARS-CoV-2, derived from recovered donors, is a potential rapidly available, specific therapy for an outbreak infection such as SARS-CoV-2. Findings from randomised clinical trials of hIVIG for the treatment of COVID-19 are limited. METHODS In this international randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who had been symptomatic for up to 12 days and did not have acute end-organ failure were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either hIVIG or an equivalent volume of saline as placebo, in addition to remdesivir, when not contraindicated, and other standard clinical care. Randomisation was stratified by site pharmacy; schedules were prepared using a mass-weighted urn design. Infusions were prepared and masked by trial pharmacists; all other investigators, research staff, and trial participants were masked to group allocation. Follow-up was for 28 days. The primary outcome was measured at day 7 by a seven-category ordinal endpoint that considered pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications and ranged from no limiting symptoms to death. Deaths and adverse events, including organ failure and serious infections, were used to define composite safety outcomes at days 7 and 28. Prespecified subgroup analyses were carried out for efficacy and safety outcomes by duration of symptoms, the presence of anti-spike neutralising antibodies, and other baseline factors. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population, which included all randomly assigned participants who met eligibility criteria and received all or part of the assigned study product infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04546581. FINDINGS From Oct 8, 2020, to Feb 10, 2021, 593 participants (n=301 hIVIG, n=292 placebo) were enrolled at 63 sites in 11 countries; 579 patients were included in the mITT analysis. Compared with placebo, the hIVIG group did not have significantly greater odds of a more favourable outcome at day 7; the adjusted OR was 1·06 (95% CI 0·77-1·45; p=0·72). Infusions were well tolerated, although infusion reactions were more common in the hIVIG group (18·6% vs 9·5% for placebo; p=0·002). The percentage with the composite safety outcome at day 7 was similar for the hIVIG (24%) and placebo groups (25%; OR 0·98, 95% CI 0·66-1·46; p=0·91). The ORs for the day 7 ordinal outcome did not vary for subgroups considered, but there was evidence of heterogeneity of the treatment effect for the day 7 composite safety outcome: risk was greater for hIVIG compared with placebo for patients who were antibody positive (OR 2·21, 95% CI 1·14-4·29); for patients who were antibody negative, the OR was 0·51 (0·29-0·90; p(interaction)=0·001). INTERPRETATION When administered with standard of care including remdesivir, SARS-CoV-2 hIVIG did not demonstrate efficacy among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 without end-organ failure. The safety of hIVIG might vary by the presence of endogenous neutralising antibodies at entry. FUNDING US National Institutes of Health.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The efficacy of recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO) in sparing red blood cell (RBC) transfusions in children with hemolytic uremic syndrome related to Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC-HUS) is uncertain. METHODS We conducted a pilot randomized controlled open trial between December 2018 and January 2021. Children were randomized to the intervention (subcutaneous rHuEPO 50 U/kg three times weekly until discharge + RBC transfusion if hemoglobin ≤ 7 g/dL and/or hemodynamic instability) or to the control arm (RBC transfusion if hemoglobin ≤ 7 g/dL and/or hemodynamic instability). Primary outcome was the number of RBC transfusions received during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes were to explore whether baseline EPO levels were adequate to the degree of anemia, to correlate selected acute phase parameters with the number of RBC transfusions, and to assess possible adverse events. RESULTS Twelve patients per arm were included; they were comparable at recruitment and throughout the disease course. Median number of RBC transfusions was similar between groups (1.5, p = 0.76). Most patients had baseline EPO levels adequate to the degree of anemia, which did not correlate with the number of transfusions (r = 0.19, p = 0.44). Conversely, baseline (r = 0.73, p = 0.032) and maximum lactic dehydrogenase levels (r = 0.78, p = 0.003), creatinine peak (r = 0.71, p = 0.03) and dialysis duration (r = 0.7, p = 0.04) correlated significantly with RBC requirements. No side effects were recorded. CONCLUSION In children with STEC-HUS, the administration of rHuEPO did not reduce the number of RBC transfusions. Larger studies addressing higher doses and similar severity of kidney failure at rHuEPO initiation (e.g. at start of dialysis) are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03776851. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Thrombocytopenia, bleeding and plasma leakage are major complications of dengue. Activation of endogenous sialidases with desialylation of platelets and endothelial cells may underlie these complications. We aimed to assess the effects of the neuraminidase inhibitor oseltamivir on platelet recovery and plasma leakage in dengue. METHODS We performed a phase 2, double-blind, multicenter, randomized trial in adult dengue patients with thrombocytopenia (<70,000/μl) and a duration of illness ≤ 6 days. Oseltamivir phosphate 75mg BID or placebo were given for a maximum of five days. Primary outcomes were the time to platelet recovery (≥ 100,000/μl) or discharge from hospital and the course of measures of plasma leakage. RESULTS A total of 70 patients were enrolled; the primary outcome could be assessed in 64 patients (31 oseltamivir; 33 placebo). Time to platelet count ≥100,000/μl (n = 55) or discharge (n = 9) were similar in the oseltamivir and placebo group (3.0 days [95% confidence interval, 2.7 to 3.3] vs. 2.9 days [2.5 to 3.3], P = 0.055). The kinetics of platelet count and parameters of plasma leakage (gall bladder thickness, hematocrit, plasma albumin, syndecan-1) were also similar between the groups. DISCUSSION In this trial, adjunctive therapy with oseltamivir phosphate had no effect on platelet recovery or plasma leakage parameters. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN35227717.

Abstract

BACKGROUND There is limited information available regarding the management of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) associated with SARS-CoV-2. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the optimal treatment using IVIG alone versus IVIG plus glucocorticoids. METHODS PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched along with other secondary searches. Studies published within the time frame of January 2020 to August 2021 were included. We screened records, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the studies using NOS. Studies that directly compare the two treatment groups were included. Analyses were conducted using the random-effects model (DerSimonian-Laird analysis) if I (2) > 50% and fixed-effects model was used if I (2) < 50%. RESULTS We included three studies in the final quantitative analysis. The initial therapy with the IVIG plus glucocorticoids group significantly lowered the risk of treatment failure (OR 0.57, 95% CI (0.42, 0.79), I (2) 45.36%) and the need for adjunctive immunomodulatory therapy (OR 0.27, 95% CI (0.20, 0.37), I (2) 0.0%). The combination therapy showed no significant reduction in occurrence of left ventricular dysfunction (OR 0.79, 95% CI (0.34, 1.87), I (2) 58.44%) and the need for inotropic support (OR 0.83, 95% CI (0.35, 1.99), I (2) 75.40%). CONCLUSION This study supports the use of IVIG with glucocorticoids compared to IVIG alone, as the combination therapy significantly lowered the risk of treatment failure and the need for adjunctive immunomodulatory therapy.

Abstract

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of using potential drugs: remdesivir and glucocorticoid in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19 and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in treating MIS-C. We searched seven databases, three preprint platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google from December 1, 2019, to August 5, 2021, to collect evidence of remdesivir, glucocorticoid, and IVIG which were used in children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C. A total of nine cohort studies and one case series study were included in this systematic review. In terms of remdesivir, the meta-analysis of single-arm cohort studies have shown that after the treatment, 54.7% (95%CI, 10.3 to 99.1%) experienced adverse events, 5.6% (95%CI, 1.2 to 10.1%) died, and 27.0% (95%CI, 0 to 73.0%) needed extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or invasive mechanical ventilation. As for glucocorticoids, the results of the meta-analysis showed that the fixed-effect summary odds ratio for the association with mortality was 2.79 (95%CI, 0.13 to 60.87), and the mechanical ventilation rate was 3.12 (95%CI, 0.80 to 12.08) for glucocorticoids compared with the control group. In terms of IVIG, most of the included cohort studies showed that for MIS-C patients with more severe clinical symptoms, IVIG combined with methylprednisolone could achieve better clinical efficacy than IVIG alone.Conclusions: Overall, the current evidence in the included studies is insignificant and of low quality. It is recommended to conduct high-quality randomized controlled trials of remdesivir, glucocorticoids, and IVIG in children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C to provide substantial evidence for the development of guidelines. What is Known: • The efficacy and safety of using potential drugs such as remdesivir, glucocorticoid, and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19/MIS-C are unclear. What is New: • Overall, the current evidence cannot adequately demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of using remdesivir, glucocorticoids, and IVIG in treating children and adolescents with COVID-19 or MIS-C. • We are calling for the publication of high-quality clinical trials and provide substantial evidence for the development of guidelines.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Primary cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection during pregnancy carries a risk of congenital infection and possible severe sequelae. There is no established intervention for preventing congenital CMV infection. METHODS In this multicenter, double-blind trial, pregnant women with primary CMV infection diagnosed before 24 weeks' gestation were randomly assigned to receive a monthly infusion of CMV hyperimmune globulin (at a dose of 100 mg per kilogram of body weight) or matching placebo until delivery. The primary outcome was a composite of congenital CMV infection or fetal or neonatal death if CMV testing of the fetus or neonate was not performed. RESULTS From 2012 to 2018, a total of 206,082 pregnant women were screened for primary CMV infection before 23 weeks of gestation; of the 712 participants (0.35%) who tested positive, 399 (56%) underwent randomization. The trial was stopped early for futility. Data on the primary outcome were available for 394 participants; a primary outcome event occurred in the fetus or neonate of 46 of 203 women (22.7%) in the group that received hyperimmune globulin and of 37 of 191 women (19.4%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80 to 1.72; P = 0.42). Death occurred in 4.9% of fetuses or neonates in the hyperimmune globulin group and in 2.6% in the placebo group (relative risk, 1.88; 95% CI, 0.66 to 5.41), preterm birth occurred in 12.2% and 8.3%, respectively (relative risk, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.81 to 2.67), and birth weight below the 5th percentile occurred in 10.3% and 5.4% (relative risk, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.92 to 3.99). One participant in the hyperimmune globulin group had a severe allergic reaction to the first infusion. Participants who received hyperimmune globulin had a higher incidence of headaches and shaking chills while receiving infusions than participants who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS Among pregnant women, administration of CMV hyperimmune globulin starting before 24 weeks' gestation did not result in a lower incidence of a composite of congenital CMV infection or perinatal death than placebo. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01376778.).

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Enterovirus (EV) is a frequent cause of encephalitis. The optimal therapeutic approach remains a matter of debate. We present the case of an immunosuppressed patient with EV encephalitis successfully treated with IVIG and conduct a systematic review on the characteristics of EV encephalitis as well as the safety and efficacy of IVIG-therapy. METHODS We conducted a systematic review assessing PubMed, Cochrane Database, Biosis Previews and the ClinicalTrials.gov website to identify all reports on patients with EV encephalitis as of December 31, 2020. Main outcomes assessed were efficacy and safety of the respective therapeutic approach. RESULTS We included a total of 73 papers: one prospective trial, one retro- and prospective case series, one purely retrospective case series, and 70 case reports. The case reports cover a total of 101 patients. The immunosuppressed were at higher risk of contracting EV encephalitis and experiencing lethal courses. Hypogammaglobulinaemia particularly predisposes for EV disease, even with moderate reduction of serum IgG levels. IVIG therapy in the immunosuppressed may confer a survival advantage. CONCLUSIONS IVIG therapy is rarely associated with severe adverse events and may be considered in immunosuppressed patients with EV encephalitis. Future trials should investigate optimal IVIG dosing and route of application, the benefit of antibody-enriched IVIG preparations and the serum immunoglobulin level that should trigger prophylactic replacement.

Abstract

BACKGROUND For most viral encephalitides, therapy is merely supportive. Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) have been used as a prophylactic and therapeutic approach. We conduct a systematic review on the safety and efficacy of IVIG in viral encephalitis. METHODS We conducted a systematic review assessing PubMed, Cochrane Database, Biosis Previews and the ClinicalTrials.gov website to identify all reports on patients with viral encephalitis treated with IVIG as of May 31, 2019. The main outcomes assessed were therapeutic efficacy and safety. For an increased homogeneity of the population, atypical viral infections were excluded, as were reports on prophylactic IVIG use, intrathecal application of immunoglobulins, or use of antibody-enriched IVIG-preparations. Data were extracted from published studies. Descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS We included a total of 44 studies (39 case reports). The case reports cover a total of 53 patients. Our search retrieved two prospective and three retrospective studies. These show heterogeneous results as to the efficacy of IVIG therapy. Only one study reports a significant association between IVIG-use and death (odds ratio 0.032; 95% confidence interval 0.0033-0.3024; p = 0.0027). None of the studies report significant differences in the number of serious adverse events. CONCLUSION Data on the efficacy of IVIG-therapy is heterogeneous. While it seems generally safe, evident superiority compared to supportive treatment has not been demonstrated so far. Future trials should also investigate the optimal dosing and timing of IVIG and their benefit in the immunosuppressed.