88
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Trials of anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy for COVID-19 are urgently needed

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          With more than 81 000 deaths worldwide from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by April 8, 2020, 1 it is incumbent on researchers to accelerate clinical trials of any readily available and potentially acceptably safe therapies that could reduce the rising death toll. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) gains access to host cells via angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, which is expressed in the type II surfactant-secreting alveolar cells of the lungs. 2 Severe COVID-19 is associated with a major immune inflammatory response with abundant neutrophils, lymphocytes, macrophages, and immune mediators. Which mediators are most important in driving the immune pathology remains to be elucidated. Deaths from COVID-19 are chiefly due to diffuse alveolar damage with pulmonary oedema, hyaline membrane formation, and interstitial mononuclear inflammatory infiltrate compatible with early-phase adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). 3 Prevention of ARDS and death in patients with COVID-19 is a pressing health emergency. Anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antibodies have been used for more than 20 years in severe cases of autoimmune inflammatory disease such as rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, or ankylosing spondylitis. There are ten (as reported on Sept 29, 2019) US Food and Drug Administration approved and four off-label indications for anti-TNF therapy, 4 indicating that TNF is a valid target in many inflammatory diseases. TNF is present in blood and disease tissues of patients with COVID-19 5 and TNF is important in nearly all acute inflammatory reactions, acting as an amplifier of inflammation. We propose that anti-TNF therapy should be evaluated in patients with COVID-19 on hospital admission to prevent progression to needing intensive care support. There is evidence of an inflammatory excess in patients with COVID-19. Lung pathology in COVID-19 is characterised by capillary leakage of fluid and recruitment of immune-inflammatory lymphocytes, neutrophils, and macrophages, 6 implying a role for adhesion molecules, chemokines, and cytokines targeting vascular endothelium. Cytokine upregulation is documented in COVID-19. In patients with COVID-19, there is upregulation of pro-inflammatory cytokines in the blood, including interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, TNF, and interferon γ,7, 8 and patients in intensive care units have increased concentrations of many cytokines. Preliminary data from Salford Royal Hospital and the University of Manchester in the UK document the presence of proliferating excess monocytes expressing TNF by intracellular staining in patients with COVID-19 in intensive care (Hussell T, Grainger J, Menon M, Mann E, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK, personal communication). Available cytokine data on immunology and inflammation in COVID-19 are summarised in the appendix. Initial reports comprising a trial of 21 severe and critical COVID-19 patients in China (ChiCTR2000029765) and a case study from France 9 of clinical benefit with the anti-IL6 receptor antibody 10 tocilizumab in COVID-19 suggest that cytokines are of importance in the “cytokine storm” and further controlled clinical trials are in progress. Although there are many potential drug candidates for reducing inflammation in COVID-19, only a few drugs such as the anti-TNF antibodies infliximab or adalimumab are potentially effective, widely available, and have a well established safety profile. The potential role of anti-TNF therapy thus warrants consideration. Preclinical studies suggest that the response to severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza in mice is ameliorated by anti-TNF therapy, which reduces weight loss, disease duration, and cell and fluid infiltrate. 11 This research suggests a potential rationale for use of anti-TNF therapy in viral pneumonia, especially given the known mechanism of action of TNF and the reversal of TNF-induced immunopathology by TNF blockade in multiple diseases. It is known TNF is produced in most types of inflammation, especially in the acute phase, and is important in the coordination and development of the inflammatory response. However, too much production of TNF for too long becomes immune suppressive. 12 Blockade of TNF alone is clinically effective in many circumstances and diseases, despite the presence of many other pro-inflammatory cytokines and mediators. There is evidence of a “TNF dependent cytokine cascade” in rheumatoid arthritis tissue and upon bacterial challenge in baboons.13, 14 Thus, if TNF is blocked, there is a rapid (ie, <12 h) decrease of IL-6 and IL-1 concentrations in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis 15 and, importantly, a reduction of adhesion molecules and vascular endothelial growth factor, which is also known as vascular permeability factor, denoting its importance in capillary leak.15, 16, 17, 18, 19 Furthermore, a reduction in leucocyte trafficking occurs in inflamed tissues of joints due to reduction in adhesion molecules and chemokines 20 with reduction in cell content and exudate. Finally, after anti-TNF infusion tissue TNF is reduced as it passes into the blood bound to the anti-TNF antibody. Blood concentrations of immunoreactive, but biologically inactive, TNF increase more than ten times after infusion. 15 For these reasons it is possible that a single infusion of anti-TNF antibody might reduce some of the processes that occur during COVID-19 lung inflammation, reducing TNF and other inflammatory mediators, cellularity, and exudate. © 2020 Marco Mantovani/Getty Images 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. What would be the best time for intervention with anti-TNF therapy in patients with COVID-19? We postulate that the earlier the better after hospital admission might be the answer because patients will already have initiated anti-viral immunity for several days. There is a balance to be struck between stage of intervention and ensuring patients are at sufficient risk of a poor outcome and can be appropriately monitored. We propose that initial assessment of anti-TNF therapy in clinical trials should be in patients with moderate disease admitted to hospital and who require oxygen support but not intensive care. If this treatment approach proved beneficial with a good safety profile, treatment in the community for people identified as being at high risk of progressing to hospital admission might be considered. The range of available formulations and administration routes of anti-TNF products could facilitate this treatment approach. Is there a trade-off between immunity and virus clearance? The use of powerful anti-inflammatory drugs in acute viral diseases has to be approached with caution because of the risk of increasing viral replication or bacterial infections. For lung viral infections, the higher the infectious dose, the greater the tissue damage from viral replication and the ensuing immune response. In animal models that resemble lung viral infection in humans, the immune response to the virus is so great that even a moderate reduction in inflammation is beneficial—eg, mice with severe pneumonia from RSV or influenza benefit from anti-TNF treatment without compromising viral clearance 11 because more of the lung architecture is preserved. However, concerns about safety are important when considering new therapy. Would anti-TNF therapy increase the risk of bacterial or fungal super-infections? After respiratory viral infection, superinfections with other organisms occur at the most severe end of the disease spectrum. Many research groups have elucidated the mechanisms responsible 21 and anecdotal evidence suggests that bacteria might have a role in in COVID-19,5, 22 although this remains to be confirmed. Bacteria gain a foothold faster in a lung that is damaged. Experimental studies suggest that if the duration of inflammation is limited, with its associated collateral lung damage, then bacterial superinfection is reduced. 23 There is concern that anti-TNF therapy might increase the risk of bacterial infection. 24 Yet two randomised studies in critically unwell patients with septic shock25, 26 showed that monoclonal anti-TNF therapy had good safety data with no evidence of increased secondary bacterial infections in the anti-TNF treated group. In an observational trial in rheumatoid arthritis patients with serious infections, the risk of sepsis and death was reduced in patients on TNF inhibitors compared with those on synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDS). 27 46 (11%) of 399 patients on TNF inhibitors developed sepsis after serious infection, of whom 20 (43%) died, compared with 74 (17%) of 444 patients on DMARDS who developed sepsis, of whom 54 (74%) died. 27 Paradoxically, another class of TNF inhibitor, a TNF-R2 Ig-Fc fusion protein, etanercept, was associated with moderately increased mortality in a randomised trial of this treatment for sepsis, 28 possibly due to its faster off-rate for TNF potentially resulting in some redistribution and bioavailability of pathogenic TNF rather than its clearance. There has been interest as to whether the safety of anti-TNF therapy in patients with COVID-19 might be gleaned from analysis of the course of COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or rheumatoid arthritis who are already on anti-TNF treatment. As of April 6, 2020, on SECURE-IBD, a coronavirus and IBD reporting database with a register of outcomes of IBD patients with COVID-19, there were 116 patients on anti-TNF therapy alone, 99 of whom recovered without hospitalisation and one patient died. By contrast, about half of 71 patients on sulfasalazine/mesalamine recovered without hospital admission and six patients died. Thus IBD patients with COVID-19 on anti-TNF therapy do not fare worse than those treated with other drugs, but there are insufficient data to make conclusions about a better outcome. We believe there is sufficient evidence to support clinical trials of anti-TNF therapy in patients with COVID-19. With an average of 2 days between hospital admission and ARDS, 7 we propose anti-TNF therapy should be initiated as early as is practicable. If there is preliminary evidence of benefit and safety of anti-TNF therapy in hospitalised patients, we suggest consideration should be given to out of hospital treatment for patients with COVID-19 at high risk, such as older people and those with pre-existing conditions, and who can be monitored appropriately.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China

          Summary Background A recent cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China, was caused by a novel betacoronavirus, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). We report the epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics and treatment and clinical outcomes of these patients. Methods All patients with suspected 2019-nCoV were admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan. We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing. Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by WHO and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records. Researchers also directly communicated with patients or their families to ascertain epidemiological and symptom data. Outcomes were also compared between patients who had been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and those who had not. Findings By Jan 2, 2020, 41 admitted hospital patients had been identified as having laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection. Most of the infected patients were men (30 [73%] of 41); less than half had underlying diseases (13 [32%]), including diabetes (eight [20%]), hypertension (six [15%]), and cardiovascular disease (six [15%]). Median age was 49·0 years (IQR 41·0–58·0). 27 (66%) of 41 patients had been exposed to Huanan seafood market. One family cluster was found. Common symptoms at onset of illness were fever (40 [98%] of 41 patients), cough (31 [76%]), and myalgia or fatigue (18 [44%]); less common symptoms were sputum production (11 [28%] of 39), headache (three [8%] of 38), haemoptysis (two [5%] of 39), and diarrhoea (one [3%] of 38). Dyspnoea developed in 22 (55%) of 40 patients (median time from illness onset to dyspnoea 8·0 days [IQR 5·0–13·0]). 26 (63%) of 41 patients had lymphopenia. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest CT. Complications included acute respiratory distress syndrome (12 [29%]), RNAaemia (six [15%]), acute cardiac injury (five [12%]) and secondary infection (four [10%]). 13 (32%) patients were admitted to an ICU and six (15%) died. Compared with non-ICU patients, ICU patients had higher plasma levels of IL2, IL7, IL10, GSCF, IP10, MCP1, MIP1A, and TNFα. Interpretation The 2019-nCoV infection caused clusters of severe respiratory illness similar to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and was associated with ICU admission and high mortality. Major gaps in our knowledge of the origin, epidemiology, duration of human transmission, and clinical spectrum of disease need fulfilment by future studies. Funding Ministry of Science and Technology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, National Natural Science Foundation of China, and Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Pathological findings of COVID-19 associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome

            Since late December, 2019, an outbreak of a novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19; previously known as 2019-nCoV)1, 2 was reported in Wuhan, China, 2 which has subsequently affected 26 countries worldwide. In general, COVID-19 is an acute resolved disease but it can also be deadly, with a 2% case fatality rate. Severe disease onset might result in death due to massive alveolar damage and progressive respiratory failure.2, 3 As of Feb 15, about 66 580 cases have been confirmed and over 1524 deaths. However, no pathology has been reported due to barely accessible autopsy or biopsy.2, 3 Here, we investigated the pathological characteristics of a patient who died from severe infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by postmortem biopsies. This study is in accordance with regulations issued by the National Health Commission of China and the Helsinki Declaration. Our findings will facilitate understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and improve clinical strategies against the disease. A 50-year-old man was admitted to a fever clinic on Jan 21, 2020, with symptoms of fever, chills, cough, fatigue and shortness of breath. He reported a travel history to Wuhan Jan 8–12, and that he had initial symptoms of mild chills and dry cough on Jan 14 (day 1 of illness) but did not see a doctor and kept working until Jan 21 (figure 1 ). Chest x-ray showed multiple patchy shadows in both lungs (appendix p 2), and a throat swab sample was taken. On Jan 22 (day 9 of illness), the Beijing Centers for Disease Control (CDC) confirmed by reverse real-time PCR assay that the patient had COVID-19. Figure 1 Timeline of disease course according to days from initial presentation of illness and days from hospital admission, from Jan 8–27, 2020 SARS-CoV-2=severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. He was immediately admitted to the isolation ward and received supplemental oxygen through a face mask. He was given interferon alfa-2b (5 million units twice daily, atomisation inhalation) and lopinavir plus ritonavir (500 mg twice daily, orally) as antiviral therapy, and moxifloxacin (0·4 g once daily, intravenously) to prevent secondary infection. Given the serious shortness of breath and hypoxaemia, methylprednisolone (80 mg twice daily, intravenously) was administered to attenuate lung inflammation. Laboratory tests results are listed in the appendix (p 4). After receiving medication, his body temperature reduced from 39·0 to 36·4 °C. However, his cough, dyspnoea, and fatigue did not improve. On day 12 of illness, after initial presentation, chest x-ray showed progressive infiltrate and diffuse gridding shadow in both lungs. He refused ventilator support in the intensive care unit repeatedly because he suffered from claustrophobia; therefore, he received high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy (60% concentration, flow rate 40 L/min). On day 13 of illness, the patient's symptoms had still not improved, but oxygen saturation remained above 95%. In the afternoon of day 14 of illness, his hypoxaemia and shortness of breath worsened. Despite receiving HFNC oxygen therapy (100% concentration, flow rate 40 L/min), oxygen saturation values decreased to 60%, and the patient had sudden cardiac arrest. He was immediately given invasive ventilation, chest compression, and adrenaline injection. Unfortunately, the rescue was not successful, and he died at 18:31 (Beijing time). Biopsy samples were taken from lung, liver, and heart tissue of the patient. Histological examination showed bilateral diffuse alveolar damage with cellular fibromyxoid exudates (figure 2A, B ). The right lung showed evident desquamation of pneumocytes and hyaline membrane formation, indicating acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS; figure 2A). The left lung tissue displayed pulmonary oedema with hyaline membrane formation, suggestive of early-phase ARDS (figure 2B). Interstitial mononuclear inflammatory infiltrates, dominated by lymphocytes, were seen in both lungs. Multinucleated syncytial cells with atypical enlarged pneumocytes characterised by large nuclei, amphophilic granular cytoplasm, and prominent nucleoli were identified in the intra-alveolar spaces, showing viral cytopathic-like changes. No obvious intranuclear or intracytoplasmic viral inclusions were identified. Figure 2 Pathological manifestations of right (A) and left (B) lung tissue, liver tissue (C), and heart tissue (D) in a patient with severe pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2 SARS-CoV-2=severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The pathological features of COVID-19 greatly resemble those seen in SARS and Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronavirus infection.4, 5 In addition, the liver biopsy specimens of the patient with COVID-19 showed moderate microvesicular steatosis and mild lobular and portal activity (figure 2C), indicating the injury could have been caused by either SARS-CoV-2 infection or drug-induced liver injury. There were a few interstitial mononuclear inflammatory infiltrates, but no other substantial damage in the heart tissue (figure 2D). Peripheral blood was prepared for flow cytometric analysis. We found that the counts of peripheral CD4 and CD8 T cells were substantially reduced, while their status was hyperactivated, as evidenced by the high proportions of HLA-DR (CD4 3·47%) and CD38 (CD8 39·4%) double-positive fractions (appendix p 3). Moreover, there was an increased concentration of highly proinflammatory CCR6+ Th17 in CD4 T cells (appendix p 3). Additionally, CD8 T cells were found to harbour high concentrations of cytotoxic granules, in which 31·6% cells were perforin positive, 64·2% cells were granulysin positive, and 30·5% cells were granulysin and perforin double-positive (appendix p 3). Our results imply that overactivation of T cells, manifested by increase of Th17 and high cytotoxicity of CD8 T cells, accounts for, in part, the severe immune injury in this patient. X-ray images showed rapid progression of pneumonia and some differences between the left and right lung. In addition, the liver tissue showed moderate microvesicular steatosis and mild lobular activity, but there was no conclusive evidence to support SARS-CoV-2 infection or drug-induced liver injury as the cause. There were no obvious histological changes seen in heart tissue, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 infection might not directly impair the heart. Although corticosteroid treatment is not routinely recommended to be used for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, 1 according to our pathological findings of pulmonary oedema and hyaline membrane formation, timely and appropriate use of corticosteroids together with ventilator support should be considered for the severe patients to prevent ARDS development. Lymphopenia is a common feature in the patients with COVID-19 and might be a critical factor associated with disease severity and mortality. 3 Our clinical and pathological findings in this severe case of COVID-19 can not only help to identify a cause of death, but also provide new insights into the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia, which might help physicians to formulate a timely therapeutic strategy for similar severe patients and reduce mortality. This online publication has been corrected. The corrected version first appeared at thelancet.com/respiratory on February 25, 2020
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Functional assessment of cell entry and receptor usage for SARS-CoV-2 and other lineage B betacoronaviruses

              Over the past 20 years, several coronaviruses have crossed the species barrier into humans, causing outbreaks of severe, and often fatal, respiratory illness. Since SARS-CoV was first identified in animal markets, global viromics projects have discovered thousands of coronavirus sequences in diverse animals and geographic regions. Unfortunately, there are few tools available to functionally test these viruses for their ability to infect humans, which has severely hampered efforts to predict the next zoonotic viral outbreak. Here, we developed an approach to rapidly screen lineage B betacoronaviruses, such as SARS-CoV and the recent SARS-CoV-2, for receptor usage and their ability to infect cell types from different species. We show that host protease processing during viral entry is a significant barrier for several lineage B viruses and that bypassing this barrier allows several lineage B viruses to enter human cells through an unknown receptor. We also demonstrate how different lineage B viruses can recombine to gain entry into human cells, and confirm that human ACE2 is the receptor for the recently emerging SARS-CoV-2.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                The Lancet
                The Lancet
                Elsevier BV
                01406736
                May 2020
                May 2020
                : 395
                : 10234
                : 1407-1409
                Article
                10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30858-8
                11db3c7e-8cef-4ad5-9a7a-6d6e588cea6c
                © 2020

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article