32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Immunosuppression for COVID-19: repurposing medicines in a pandemic

      editorial

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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

          It might seem paradoxical to suggest immunosuppression could play a role in managing COVID-19. The seemingly logical therapeutic option for this disease would be an antiviral. Unfortunately, repurposing antiviral therapies has proven disappointing so far, and evidence to support their routine use in COVID-19 is currently lacking.1-4 While the current standard of care for most people with COVID-19 is supportive, a subset of patients become severely unwell with a potentially life-threatening hyperinflammatory state called cytokine release syndrome.5 This clinical state is difficult to predict in advance. When it occurs it is characterised by rapidly worsening multiorgan dysfunction including respiratory failure and a clinically distinctive coagulopathy involving immunothrombosis of the pulmonary vasculature.6 Antigens presented by infected cells activate both the innate and adaptive immune systems. The uncontrolled upregulation of immune cells leads to a surge of proinflammatory cytokines including interleukin-6 and interleukin-1. This in turn increases vascular permeability and inflammatory cell recruitment into lung parenchyma causing acute lung injury and subsequent respiratory failure. As a myriad of proinflammatory molecules and inflammatory markers are involved in both the typical immune response to infection and this hyperinflammatory and hypercoagulable state, the key drivers of inflammation and mortality in severe COVID-19 are contentious. As such, the benefit of treating this hyperinflammatory state has not yet been completely established in COVID-19. In patients with severe COVID-19, there is significant mortality in the second week of disease,7,8 despite many studies describing a progressive fall in viral count.9,10 This may partially explain the lack of success with antivirals. In this situation, immune-driven damage, such as cytokine release syndrome, may be what is driving mortality. Therefore early recognition and prompt initiation of immunosuppression may benefit these patients. Cytokine release syndrome is a known phenomenon, and pathophysiologically similar syndromes exist in autoimmune diseases such as systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis and adult onset Still’s disease. It is also encountered as a complication of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T-cell) therapy used for haematological malignancies. Interleukin-6 and interleukin-1 driven pathways have a central role in cytokine release syndrome associated with COVID-19 and in other previously recognised cytokine release syndromes. Therapies targeting these pathways include tocilizumab (an interleukin-6 receptor antagonist) and anakinra (an interleukin-1 receptor antagonist). These are both registered by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) for cytokine release syndrome-like autoimmune conditions such as systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Anakinra has previously been used in the treatment of macrophage activation syndrome, a cytokine release syndrome associated with autoimmune conditions.11 Tocilizumab is registered for the management of cytokine release syndrome secondary to CAR T-cell therapy. The possibility of adopting these immunosuppressive therapies in COVID-19 is supported by early evidence from observational studies.12 However, these drugs need the same caution as any off-label and experimental prescribing in COVID-19 until they are validated in clinical trials.13-15 Not all immunosuppressive drugs hold the same promise. While systemic corticosteroids are effective immunosuppressants, previous and current outbreaks suggest that their broader physiological effects lead to uncertain benefit and potential harm.16-18 Accordingly, they are avoided in routine care unless for a recognised indication. Colchicine has also generated interest due to its effect on the inflammasome-mediated interleukin-1 beta pathway which is part of the innate immune response. However, its use in COVID-19 remains unproven.19 Baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor used for rheumatoid arthritis, was identified through a machine-learning exercise as potentially reducing viral entry into cells in COVID-19, but currently has no established use in cytokine release syndrome.20 Some important distinctions exist between the rational repurposing of immunosuppression in COVID-19 and other widely discussed experimental therapies.21 Tocilizumab is already part of the evidence-based management of CAR T-cell-induced cytokine release syndrome,6,22 a condition that shares pathological similarities. In contrast, proposed antiviral strategies that include chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and ivermectin are reliant on novel mechanisms of action and low-quality evidence, while raising significant safety concerns.23,24 COVID-19 poses a multifaceted threat requiring a multimodal and stratified treatment approach, possibly transitioning from virus-targeted approaches in the early state of disease to immunomodulation in late-onset immune-mediated disease. The example of interleukin-6 and interleukin-1 inhibition demonstrates that a cohesive and considered approach towards off-label prescribing in COVID-19 is needed. This should be used in consultation with relevant subspecialties and drug and therapeutic committees.21 Decision making should also include patients and their families.25 As it is not yet standard of care, reporting safety and efficacy outcomes as part of clinical trials is highly desirable. With such measures, repurposed medicines can be appropriately recruited into the pandemic fight without defying sensible prescribing.21,25

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • 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

            A Trial of Lopinavir–Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Severe Covid-19

            Abstract Background No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. Methods We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, which causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, and an oxygen saturation (Sao 2) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pao 2) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio 2) of less than 300 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lopinavir–ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, 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. Results A total of 199 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent randomization; 99 were assigned to the lopinavir–ritonavir group, and 100 to the standard-care group. Treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir was not associated with a difference from standard care in the time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio for clinical improvement, 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.72). Mortality at 28 days was similar in the lopinavir–ritonavir group and the standard-care group (19.2% vs. 25.0%; difference, −5.8 percentage points; 95% CI, −17.3 to 5.7). The percentages of patients with detectable viral RNA at various time points were similar. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir–ritonavir led to a median time to clinical improvement that was shorter by 1 day than that observed with standard care (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.91). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, but serious adverse events were more common in the standard-care group. Lopinavir–ritonavir treatment was stopped early in 13 patients (13.8%) because of adverse events. Conclusions In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir–ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308.)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Upper Respiratory Specimens of Infected Patients

              To the Editor: The 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) epidemic, which was first reported in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, and has been declared a public health emergency of international concern by the World Health Organization, may progress to a pandemic associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. SARS-CoV-2 is genetically related to SARS-CoV, which caused a global epidemic with 8096 confirmed cases in more than 25 countries in 2002–2003. 1 The epidemic of SARS-CoV was successfully contained through public health interventions, including case detection and isolation. Transmission of SARS-CoV occurred mainly after days of illness 2 and was associated with modest viral loads in the respiratory tract early in the illness, with viral loads peaking approximately 10 days after symptom onset. 3 We monitored SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in upper respiratory specimens obtained from 18 patients (9 men and 9 women; median age, 59 years; range, 26 to 76) in Zhuhai, Guangdong, China, including 4 patients with secondary infections (1 of whom never had symptoms) within two family clusters (Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org). The patient who never had symptoms was a close contact of a patient with a known case and was therefore monitored. A total of 72 nasal swabs (sampled from the mid-turbinate and nasopharynx) (Figure 1A) and 72 throat swabs (Figure 1B) were analyzed, with 1 to 9 sequential samples obtained from each patient. Polyester flock swabs were used for all the patients. From January 7 through January 26, 2020, a total of 14 patients who had recently returned from Wuhan and had fever (≥37.3°C) received a diagnosis of Covid-19 (the illness caused by SARS-CoV-2) by means of reverse-transcriptase–polymerase-chain-reaction assay with primers and probes targeting the N and Orf1b genes of SARS-CoV-2; the assay was developed by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Samples were tested at the Guangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Thirteen of 14 patients with imported cases had evidence of pneumonia on computed tomography (CT). None of them had visited the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan within 14 days before symptom onset. Patients E, I, and P required admission to intensive care units, whereas the others had mild-to-moderate illness. Secondary infections were detected in close contacts of Patients E, I, and P. Patient E worked in Wuhan and visited his wife (Patient L), mother (Patient D), and a friend (Patient Z) in Zhuhai on January 17. Symptoms developed in Patients L and D on January 20 and January 22, respectively, with viral RNA detected in their nasal and throat swabs soon after symptom onset. Patient Z reported no clinical symptoms, but his nasal swabs (cycle threshold [Ct] values, 22 to 28) and throat swabs (Ct values, 30 to 32) tested positive on days 7, 10, and 11 after contact. A CT scan of Patient Z that was obtained on February 6 was unremarkable. Patients I and P lived in Wuhan and visited their daughter (Patient H) in Zhuhai on January 11 when their symptoms first developed. Fever developed in Patient H on January 17, with viral RNA detected in nasal and throat swabs on day 1 after symptom onset. We analyzed the viral load in nasal and throat swabs obtained from the 17 symptomatic patients in relation to day of onset of any symptoms (Figure 1C). Higher viral loads (inversely related to Ct value) were detected soon after symptom onset, with higher viral loads detected in the nose than in the throat. Our analysis suggests that the viral nucleic acid shedding pattern of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 resembles that of patients with influenza 4 and appears different from that seen in patients infected with SARS-CoV. 3 The viral load that was detected in the asymptomatic patient was similar to that in the symptomatic patients, which suggests the transmission potential of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic patients. These findings are in concordance with reports that transmission may occur early in the course of infection 5 and suggest that case detection and isolation may require strategies different from those required for the control of SARS-CoV. How SARS-CoV-2 viral load correlates with culturable virus needs to be determined. Identification of patients with few or no symptoms and with modest levels of detectable viral RNA in the oropharynx for at least 5 days suggests that we need better data to determine transmission dynamics and inform our screening practices.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Clinical pharmacology registrar, Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics[1]
                Role: Infectious diseases physician, COVID Unit, Department of Infectious Diseases[1], Doctoral candidate, Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology[2], Doctoral candidate[3]
                Role: Infectious diseases physician, Head of COVID Unit, Department of Infectious Diseases[1], Clinical associate professor, Department of Medicine[2], Postdoctoral fellow[3]
                Role: Professor and Head, Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics[1], Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics[2]
                Role: Rheumatologist and Clinical pharmacologist, Department of Rheumatology, and Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics[1], Doctoral candidate, Department of Medicine[2]
                Journal
                Aust Prescr
                Aust Prescr
                AP
                Australian Prescriber
                NPS MedicineWise
                0312-8008
                1839-3942
                17 June 2020
                August 2020
                : 43
                : 4
                : 106-107
                Affiliations
                [[1] ]Austin Health, Melbourne
                [[2] ]University of Melbourne
                [[3] ]National Centre for Infections in Cancer, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre , Melbourne
                Article
                austprescr-43-106
                10.18773/austprescr.2020.037
                7450778
                fe8a3aa8-99d9-4d49-86e7-e866f912ac96
                (c) NPS MedicineWise

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 License.

                History
                Categories
                Editorial

                covid-19,immunosuppression,interleukin-1,interleukin-6,pandemic,tocilizumab

                Comments

                Comment on this article