-
1.
Methylprednisolone versus intravenous immunoglobulins in children with paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS): an open-label, multicentre, randomised trial
Welzel T, Atkinson A, Schöbi N, Andre MC, Bailey DGN, Blanchard-Rohner G, Buettcher M, Grazioli S, Koehler H, Perez MH, et al
The Lancet. Child & adolescent health. 2023
Abstract
BACKGROUND The emergence of paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS) led to the widespread use of anti-inflammatory treatments in the absence of evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We aimed to assess the effectiveness of intravenous methylprednisolone compared with intravenous immunoglobulins. METHODS This is an open-label, multicentre, two-arm RCT done at ten hospitals in Switzerland in children younger than 18 years hospitalised with PIMS-TS (defined as age <18 years; fever and biochemical evidence of inflammation, and single or multiorgan dysfunction; microbiologically proven or putative contact with SARS-CoV-2; and exclusion of any other probable disease). Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to intravenous methylprednisolone (10 mg/kg per day for 3 days) or intravenous immunoglobulins (2 g/kg as a single dose). The primary outcome was length of hospital stay censored at day 28, death, or discharge. Secondary outcomes included proportion and duration of organ support. Analyses were done by intention-to-treat. The study was registered with Swiss National Clinical Trials Portal (SNCTP000004720) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04826588). FINDINGS Between May 21, 2021, and April 15, 2022, 75 patients with a median age of 9·1 years (IQR 6·2-12·2) were included in the intention-to-treat population (37 in the methylprednisolone group and 38 in the intravenous immunoglobulins group). The median length of hospital stay was 6·0 days (IQR 4·0-8·0) in the methylprednisolone group and 6·0 days (IQR 5·0-8·8) in the intravenous immunoglobulins group (estimated effect size -0·037 of the log(10) transformed times, 95% CI -0·13 to 0·065, p=0·42). Fewer patients in the methylprednisolone group (ten [27%] of 37) required respiratory support compared with the intravenous immunoglobulin group (21 [55%] of 38, p=0·025). Need and duration of inotropes, admission to intensive care units, cardiac events after baseline, and major bleeding and thrombotic events were not significantly different between the study groups. INTERPRETATION In this RCT, treatment with methylprednisolone in children with PIMS-TS did not significantly affect the length of hospital stay compared with intravenous immunoglobulins. Intravenous methylprednisolone could be an acceptable first-line treatment in children with PIMS-TS. FUNDING NOMIS Foundation, Vontobel Foundation, and Gaydoul Foundation.
-
2.
Safety and efficacy of pharmacological approaches available for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C): a systematic review
Velusamy, Y., Vivekanandan, G., Romli, M. H., Shankar, A., Karuppiah, T., Yubbu, P.
The Turkish journal of pediatrics. 2023;65(5):719-738
Abstract
BACKGROUND To describe the existing pharmacological managements for Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) in a systematic way, to identify the available pharmacological managements in MIS-C, evaluate its safety and efficacy and identify the best treatment procedures for practice recommendation. METHODS A systematic search using six databases was conducted on August 18, 2021, updated in January 26th 2023. Terminologies that were used in this search are children, MIS-C/PIMS and SARS-CoV-2. A PRISMA flow diagram was used to report the study selection process. Quality analysis was done based on NOS and GRADE tools. Data synthesis was conducted by extracting the information on drugs used, efficacy and side effects. RESULTS From the 32 articles included, a total of 2331 children with MIS-C were studied. The main pharmacological approaches were immunomodulatory therapy, i.e., intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) (77.3%), steroids (60.5%), and a combination of IVIG and steroids (41.3%). IVIG and steroids were found to be potentially effective and safe treatments for MIS-C. Combination of IVIG and steroids was found favorable in severe cases with higher recovery rate. Refractory treatments include second dose of initial treatment and biological response modifier drugs like anakinra, tocilizumab, infliximab. A small number of studies investigating supportive treatment consisted of vasoactive, inotropic and anticoagulation. The mortality rate was 1.28% and only three studies reported side effects from the treatment. Evidence of outcome from GRADE were mostly at moderate, low and very low levels. CONCLUSIONS This review provides preliminary evidence to support the current standard treatment practices in managing MIS-C pharmacologically. However, comprehensive investigation is required using clinical trials to provide stronger outcome evidence.
-
3.
Immunomodulatory Therapy for MIS-C
Ouldali, N., Son, M. B. F., McArdle, A. J., Vito, O., Vaugon, E., Belot, A., Leblanc, C., Murray, N. L., Patel, M. M., Levin, M., et al
Pediatrics. 2023;152(1)
Abstract
CONTEXT Studies comparing initial therapy for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) provided conflicting results. OBJECTIVE To compare outcomes in MIS-C patients treated with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), glucocorticoids, or the combination thereof. DATA SOURCES Medline, Embase, CENTRAL and WOS, from January 2020 to February 2022. STUDY SELECTION Randomized or observational comparative studies including MIS-C patients <21 years. DATA EXTRACTION Two reviewers independently selected studies and obtained individual participant data. The main outcome was cardiovascular dysfunction (CD), defined as left ventricular ejection fraction < 55% or vasopressor requirement ≥ day 2 of initial therapy, analyzed with a propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS Of 2635 studies identified, 3 nonrandomized cohorts were included. The meta-analysis included 958 children. IVIG plus glucocorticoids group as compared with IVIG alone had improved CD (odds ratio [OR] 0.62 [0.42-0.91]). Glucocorticoids alone group as compared with IVIG alone did not have improved CD (OR 0.57 [0.31-1.05]). Glucocorticoids alone group as compared with IVIG plus glucocorticoids did not have improved CD (OR 0.67 [0.24-1.86]). Secondary analyses found better outcomes associated with IVIG plus glucocorticoids compared with glucocorticoids alone (fever ≥ day 2, need for secondary therapies) and better outcomes associated with glucocorticoids alone compared with IVIG alone (left ventricular ejection fraction < 55% ≥ day 2). LIMITATIONS Nonrandomized nature of included studies. CONCLUSIONS In a meta-analysis of MIS-C patients, IVIG plus glucocorticoids was associated with improved CD compared with IVIG alone. Glucocorticoids alone was not associated with improved CD compared with IVIG alone or IVIG plus glucocorticoids.
-
4.
Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Fatemi, B., Rezaei, S., Peikanpour, M., Dastan, F., Saffaei, A.
Research in pharmaceutical sciences. 2023;18(4):346-357
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Though controversial, many clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in COVID-19 cases. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis have been performed to evaluate the efficacy of IVIG in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH A systematic search was performed in electronic databases and preprint servers up to November 20, 2021. Since substantial heterogeneity was expected, a random-effects model was applied to pool effect size from included studies to calculate the standardized mean differences (SMDs) for the continuous variables and relative risks (RRs) for the dichotomous variable with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). FINDINGS/RESULTS Five randomized clinical trials and seven cohort studies were analyzed among the 12 eligible studies with a total of 2,156 patients. The pooled RR of mortality was 0.77 (CI 0.59-1.01, P-value = 0.06), and of mechanical ventilation was 1.50 (CI 0.29-7.83; P-value = 0.63) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group. The pooled SMD of hospital length of stay was 0.84 (CI -0.43-2.11; P-value = 0.20) and of ICU length of stay was -0.07 (CI -0.92-0.78; P-value = 0.86) in the IVIG group compared with the standard care group. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS This meta-analysis found that the IVIG therapy was not statistically different from the standard care group. Mortality, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and length of ICU stay were not significantly improved among IVIG recipients. However, statistical indifference is not equal to clinical indifference.
-
5.
Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) in severe/critical COVID-19 adult patients
Kwapisz D, Bogusławska J
Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie. 2023;163:114851
Abstract
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a huge obstacle to the health system due to the high rate of contagion. It is postulated that intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) can lower the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related inflammation and prevent the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The main advantages of IVIG treatment might be targeting cytokine storm in severe and critical COVID-19 by influences on complement, innate immune cells, effector T-cells, and Tregs. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs evaluating the safety and efficacy of IVIG in patients with severe/critical COVID-19 were performed. It seems that early administration of high-dose IVIG (in the acceleration phase of the disease) in severe or especially critical COVID-19 may be an effective therapeutic option, but there are no strong data to use it routinely. The results regarding mortality reduction are inconclusive. Additionally, IVIG treatment carries a risk of complications that should be considered when initiating treatment. However, given the COVID-19 mortality rate and limited therapeutic options, the use of IVIG is worth considering. This review summarizes the development and highlights recent advances in treatment with IVIG of severe/critically ill COVID-19 patients.
-
6.
Benefits of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin on mortality in patients with severe COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis
Liu, X., Zhang, Y., Lu, L., Li, X., Wu, Y., Yang, Y., Li, T., Cao, W.
Frontiers in Immunology. 2023;14:1116738
Abstract
BACKGROUND The clinical benefits of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) in treating COVID-19 remained controversial. METHODS We systematically searched databases up to February 17, 2022, for studies examining the efficacy of IVIg compared to routine care. Meta-analyses were conducted using the random-effects model. Subgroup analysis, meta-regression, and trial series analysis w ere performed to explore heterogeneity and statistical significance. RESULTS A total of 4,711 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (1,925 IVIg treated and 2786 control) were collected from 17 studies, including five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 12 cohort studies. The application of IVIg was not associated with all-cause mortality (RR= 0.89 [0.63, 1.26], P= 0.53; I(2) = 75%), the length of hospital stays (MD= 0.29 [-3.40, 6.44] days, P= 0.88; I2 = 96%), the needs for mechanical ventilation (RR= 0.93 ([0.73, 1.19], P= 0.31; I2 = 56%), or the incidence of adverse events (RR= 1.15 [0.99, 1.33], P= 0.06; I2 = 20%). Subgroup analyses showed that overall mortality among patients with severe COVID-19 was reduced in the high-dose IVIg subgroup (RR= 0.33 [0.13, 0.86], P= 0.02, I(2) = 68%; very low certainty). CONCLUSIONS Results of this study suggest that severe hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with high-dose IVIg would have a lower risk of death than patients with routine care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021231040, identifier CRD42021231040.
-
7.
Characteristics and conflicting recommendations of clinical practice guidelines for COVID-19 management in children: A scoping review
Quincho-Lopez A, Chávez-Rimache L, Montes-Alvis J, Taype-Rondan A, Alvarado-Gamarra G
Travel medicine and infectious disease. 2022;48:102354
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are statements that should be rigorously developed to guide clinicians' decision-making. However, given the scarce evidence for certain vulnerable groups like children, CPGs' recommendations formulation could be challenging. METHODS We conducted a scoping review of CPGs for COVID-19 management in children. Documents were included if they claimed to be a "clinical practice guideline", published between January and October 2021, and described the process followed to issue their recommendations. We assessed the quality using the "Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II" (AGREE-II) and described how the recommendations were reached. RESULTS We found five CPGs that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The median score on the overall AGREE-II evaluation was 61% (range: 49%-72%), and the score on the third domain referred to the rigor of methodological development was 52% (range: 25%-88%). Recommendations for remdesivir, tocilizumab, and intravenous immunoglobulin were heterogeneous across CPGs (in favor, against, no recommendation), as well as the methodologies used to present the evidence, perform the benefits/harms balance, and issue the recommendation. CONCLUSIONS Heterogeneous recommendations and justifications across CPGs were found in the three assessed topics. Future CPGs should describe in detail their evidence-to-decision process to issue reliable and transparent recommendations.
-
8.
The emerging threat of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A) in COVID-19: A systematic review
Kunal S, Ish P, Sakthivel P, Malhotra N, Gupta K
Heart & lung : the journal of critical care. 2022;54:7-18
-
-
Free full text
-
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.
-
9.
Efficacy of High-Dose Polyclonal Intravenous Immunoglobulin in COVID-19: A Systematic Review
Focosi, D., Franchini, M., Tuccori, M., Cruciani, M.
Vaccines. 2022;10(1)
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although several therapeutic strategies have been investigated, the optimal treatment approach for patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) remains to be elucidated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of polyclonal intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) therapy in COVID-19. METHODS A systematic literature search using appropriate medical subject heading (MeSH) terms was performed through Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, SCOPUS, OVID and Cochrane Library electronic databases. The main outcomes considered were mortality and safety of IVIG versus placebo/standard of care. This review was carried out in accordance with Cochrane methodology including the risk bias assessment and grading of the quality of evidence. Measures of treatment effect were mean differences (MD) together with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcome measures and risk ratio (RR) or MD for binary outcomes. Two reviewers independently extracted data from individual studies, and disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. RESULTS A total of 2401 COVID-19 patients from 10 studies (four randomized controlled trials (RCT) and six non-randomized controlled trials (non-RCTs)) were included in the analysis. Participants received IVIG or placebo/standard of care. The use of IVIG was not associated with a significantly reduced risk of death (RR 0.50, 95% CIs 0.18-1.36, p = 0.17 for RCTs; RR 0.95, 95% CIs 0.61-1.58, p = 0.94 for non-RCTs; low certainty of evidence). IVIG significantly reduced the length of hospital stay (MD -2.24, 95% CIs -3.20/-1.27; p = 0.00001; low certainty of evidence), although this difference was significant only for studies evaluating moderate COVID-19 patients. No significant difference was observed in the incidence of overall and serious adverse events between IVIG recipients and controls (very low certainty of evidence). CONCLUSIONS The current evidence from the literature does not support the use of IVIG in COVID-19 patients.
-
10.
COVID-19 associated vasculitis: A systematic review of case reports and case series
Wong K, Farooq Alam Shah MU, Khurshid M, Ullah I, Tahir MJ, Yousaf Z
Annals of medicine and surgery (2012). 2022;:103249
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Vasculitis is one of the complications of COVID-19. We conducted a systematic review analysing the association of COVID-19 with vasculitis. We searched Google Scholar and PubMed from December 1, 2019, to October 11, 2021. The review included 8 studies (7 case reports and 1 case series) reporting 9 cases of vasculitis secondary to COVID-19. The mean age was 29.17 ± 28.2 years, ranging from 6 months to 83 years. The male to female ratio was 4:5. Maculopapular, violaceous, papular and erythematous rash were common. Heparin(n = 2), corticosteroids (n = 6) (methylprednisolone) and intravenous immunoglobulin (n = 4) were prescribed in these patients. Significant clinical improvement was observed in 8 out of 9 patients. One person died during treatment. Our study discusses vasculitis as one of the complications of COVID-19. Furthermore, the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and management of COVID-19 associated vasculitis is discussed.
