Objective This study investigated the frequency and risk factors of acute liver injury (ALI) and the association between ALI and treatment in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods This was a single-center retrospective study of 631 hospitalized patients ≥18 years old who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and received treatment between July 1, 2020, and January 31, 2024. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical records. ALI was defined according to the consensus guidelines of the Asia Pacific Association of the Study of Liver. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence of ALI to assess the risk factors for the occurrence of ALI. Results Seventy-six patients (12.0%) developed ALI. Seven patients discontinued remdesivir owing to hepatic impairment, and only 1 patient (0.2%) had an increase in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ≥10 times the upper limit of normal. ALI was associated with men (odds ratio [OR]=3.052, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.456-6.398), a higher WHO ordinal scale score at admission (OR=1.408, 95% CI=1.036-1.912), higher ALT level at admission (OR=1.017, 95% CI=1.009-1.024), tocilizumab administration (OR=2.788, 95% CI=1.372-5.666), the absence of diabetes (OR=0.456, 95% CI=0.226-0.922) and the absence of dyslipidemia (OR=0.244, 95% CI=0.083-0.723). In the comparison of the propensity score-matched groups, neither remdesivir nor tocilizumab administration was associated with ALI. Conclusion Men, severe COVID-19, and elevated ALT levels at admission were significantly associated with an increased risk of ALI in patients treated for COVID-19. ALI may have been associated with tocilizumab administration but not with remdesivir administration.

Exploring the risk factors for mortality of hemodialysis patients undergoing COVID-19 and the changes in mortality before and after the opening of the epidemic in northern Hunan province, China.

We analyzed 230 hemodialysis patients with COVID-19 in the Yiyang Central Hospital from November 01, 2022 to February 28, 2023. Demographic data, laboratory data and public diseases were collected. Cox regression analysis was used to identify risk factors and independent predictors of mortality. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the diagnostic value of risk factors in hemodialysis COVID-19 patients.

The average duration of the disease was 12.53 days. The mortality rate in our cohort was 28.70%. Independent predictors of mortality in our cohort were: age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.14; P < 0.001), elevated procalcitonin (PCT) levels (HR 1.02; 95%CI, 1.01-1.03; P < 0.001), and higher white blood cell-neutrophil ratio (NWR) (HR 1.04; 95%CI, 1.04-1.07; P = 0.004). Areas under the ROC curve (AUC) for age, NWR, PCT, age*NWR were 0.70 (95%CI: 0.62-0.77), 0.82 (95%CI: 0.75-0.90), 0.64 (95%CI: 0.55-0.73), and 0.89 (0.85,0.94).

We discovered that old age, high levels of NWR and PCT might be predictors of mortality, reported the causes and prognostic predictors of mortality in hemodialysis populations with COVID-19 from northern Hunan, China.

To compare clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD)s secondary to SARS-CoV-2 versus other respiratory viruses amongst a highly vaccinated population in the Omicron era.

Retrospective cohort study; analysis of hospital medical records and linked pathology and radiology reports.

Tertiary health network in Victoria, Australia; January 2022-August 2022.

Key clinical information including comorbidities, vaccination status, treatments administered and outcomes such as hospital length of stay, ICU admission, non-invasive ventilation usage and inpatient mortality.

One hundred ninety-nine viral AECOPDs - 125 SARS-CoV-2 and 74 other viruses were identified. Of the SARS-CoV-2 group. 13.6% were unvaccinated, 17.6% partially and 68.0% fully vaccinated. The SARS-CoV-2 group were older (77.2 vs 68.9, p < 0.00001) with more comorbidities (1[1-2] vs 1[0-2], p = 0.008) and lower candidacy for full resuscitation (25.6% vs 56.8%, p < 0.0001). Mortality tended to be higher among SARS-CoV2 admission (9.6% v 2.7%, p = 0.066) but rates of ICU admission (10.4% v 13.5%, p = 0.507), length of hospitalisation (5[3-8] vs 5[3-9], p = 0.9) and readmission within 30 days (25% vs 33.3%, p = 0.184) were similar.

In a highly vaccinated population in the Omicron era, COPD patients requiring hospitalisation with SARS-CoV-2 are older with more comorbidities than those admitted with other respiratory viruses. Length of hospitalisation and ICU utilisation was similar. Inpatient mortality may be higher.

The COVID-19 pandemic is prompting extensive investigation into potential treatments, including the use of corticosteroids to manage inflammation and mitigate severe disease outcomes. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of oral/intravenous corticosteroids in the management of COVID-19. A comprehensive search was conducted across major scientific databases such as MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane for relevant studies published from 2019-2024. The inclusion criteria included studies investigating the use of oral/intravenous corticosteroids in COVID-19 patients >18 years with a randomized placebo-controlled trial method. Non-placebo-controlled studies, studies using combined treatments with other drugs, as well as protocol articles, conference proceedings, review articles, and non-English studies were excluded. A narrative synthesis approach was adopted given the significant methodological diversity. The results showed that a total of 12 studies met the inclusion criteria covering the use of three drugs, including dexamethasone (three), hydrocortisone (two), and methylprednisolone (seven). The outcome parameters used for each study were different. Among the total 12 studies, five showed insignificant results for hydrocortisone (two) and methylprednisolone (three), while others reported significant results. This systematic review suggested that oral/intravenous corticosteroids might confer clinical benefits in the management of COVID-19, particularly in reducing mortality and severe disease outcomes. However, further investigation was needed to establish standardized protocols regarding dosage, duration, and safety considerations to optimize efficacy and minimize potential adverse effects.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors (ACE2R) are requisite to enter the host cells for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). ACE2R is constitutive and functions as a type I transmembrane metallo-carboxypeptidase in the renin-angiotensin system (RAS). On thyroid follicular cells, ACE2R allows SARS-CoV-2 to invade the thyroid gland, impose cytopathic effects and produce endocrine abnormalities, including stiff back, neck pain, muscle ache, lethargy, and enlarged, inflamed thyroid gland in COVID-19 patients. Further damage is perpetuated by the sudden bursts of pro-inflammatory cytokines, which is suggestive of a life-threatening syndrome known as a "cytokine storm". IL-1β, IL-6, IFN-γ, and TNF-α are identified as the key orchestrators of the cytokine storm. These inflammatory mediators upregulate transcriptional turnover of nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB), Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK/STAT), and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK), paving the pathway for cytokine storm-induced thyroid dysfunctions including euthyroid sick syndrome, autoimmune thyroid diseases, and thyrotoxicosis in COVID-19 patients. Targeted therapies with corticosteroids (dexamethasone), JAK inhibitor (baricitinib), nucleotide analogue (remdesivir) and N-acetyl-cysteine have demonstrated effectiveness in terms of attenuating the severity and frequency of cytokine storm-induced thyroid dysfunctions, morbidity and mortality in severe COVID-19 patients. Here, we review the pathogenesis of cytokine storms and the mechanisms and pathways that establish the connection between thyroid disorder and COVID-19. Moreover, cross-talk interactions of signalling pathways and therapeutic strategies to address COVID-19-associated thyroid diseases are also discussed herein.

Many studies have attempted to determine the disease severity and patterns of COVID-19. However, at the beginning of the pandemic, the complex patients' trajectories were only descriptively reported, and many analyses were worryingly prone to time-dependent-, selection-, and competing risk biases. Multi-state models avoid these biases by jointly analysing multiple clinical outcomes while taking into account their time dependency, including current cases, and modelling competing events. This paper uses a publicly available data set from the first wave in Israel as an example to demonstrate the benefits of analysing hospital data via multi-state methodology.

We compared the outcome of the data analysis using multi-state models with the outcome obtained when various forms of bias are ignored. Furthermore, we used Cox regression to model the transitions among the states in a multi-state model. This allowed for the comparison of the covariates' influence on transition rates between the two states. Lastly, we calculated expected lengths of stay and state probabilities based on the multi-state model and visualised it using stacked probability plots.

Compared to standard methods, multi-state models avoid many biases in the analysis of real-time disease developments. The utility of multi-state models is further highlighted through the use of stacked probability plots, which visualise the results. In addition, by stratification of disease patterns by subgroups and visualisation of the distribution of possible outcomes, these models bring the data into an interpretable form.

To accurately guide the provision of medical resources, this paper recommends the real-time collection of hospital data and its analysis using multi-state models, as this method eliminates many potential biases. By applying multi-state models to real-time data, the gained knowledge allows rapid detection of altered disease courses when new variants arise, which is essential when informing medical and political decision-makers as well as the general population.

Critical illness, such as severe COVID-19, is heterogenous in presentation and treatment response. However, it remains possible that clinical course may be influenced by dynamic and/or random events such that similar patients subject to similar injuries may yet follow different trajectories. We deployed a mechanistic mathematical model of COVID-19 to determine the range of possible clinical courses after SARS-CoV-2 infection, which may follow from specific changes in viral properties, immune properties, treatment modality and random external factors such as initial viral load. We find that treatment efficacy and baseline patient or viral features are not the sole determinant of outcome. We found patients with enhanced innate or adaptive immune responses can experience poor viral control, resolution of infection or non-infectious inflammatory injury depending on treatment efficacy and initial viral load. Hypoxemia may result from poor viral control or ongoing inflammation despite effective viral control. Adaptive immune responses may be inhibited by very early effective therapy, resulting in viral load rebound after cessation of therapy. Our model suggests individual disease course may be influenced by the interaction between external and patient-intrinsic factors. These data have implications for the reproducibility of clinical trial cohorts and timing of optimal treatment.

A 69-year-old woman suffering with multiple myeloma developed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Shortly after administration of remdesivir, she presented with symptoms of facial flushing, wheezing, and hypoxemia. Subsequently, thrombocytopenia and hypofibrinogenemia rapidly manifested, leading to a diagnosis of enhanced fibrinolytic-type disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (DIC). This clinical presentation was considered an immediate hypersensitivity reaction with associated coagulation abnormalities induced by remdesivir. Although remdesivir is generally considered safe and efficacious in the treatment of COVID-19, physicians should remain vigilant regarding the potential for severe adverse events associated with this medication.

Studies showed that the respiratory is not the only system affected by coronavirus 2, while cardiovascular, digestive, and nervous systems, as well as essential organs such as the kidneys, can be affected by this virus. In this review, we have studied the epidemiology, clinical, and laboratory findings on COVID-19 infection renal involvement, mortality, physiopathology, remaining renal sequels after recovery, underlying renal disease, and renal injury due to its treatment. Also, protective measures for kidney injury are explained in three levels. Evidence of viral particles and genome in the urine and renal tubular cells and signs of damage such as microangiopathy, hypercoagulopathy, and fibrosis are found in COVID-19 patients. The result of this study showed, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, that the rate of acute kidney injury (AKI) was up to 46%, with a mortality ranging from 11 to 96%. A considerable proportion of patients with AKI would remain on renal replacement therapy. Proteinuria and hematuria are observed in 87 and 75% patients, and increased Cr and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 are observed in 29.6 and 35.3% of the patients, respectively. Remedsivir is considered to have adverse effects on GFR. COVID-19 patients need special attention to prevent AKI. Those with underlying chronic kidney disease or AKI need proper and explicit evaluation and treatment to improve their prognosis and decrease mortality, which should not be limited to the hospitalization period.

COVID-19 is generally milder in children than in adults, however severe infection has been described in some patients. Few data are available on use of Remdesivir (RDV) in children, as most clinical trials focused on adult patients. We report a multicenter study conducted in 10 Italian Hospitals to investigate the safety of RDV in children affected by COVID-19.

We collected the clinical data of children with COVID-19 treated with RDV between March 2020 and February 2022 in 10 Italian hospitals. Clinical data were compared according to a duration of RDV therapy more or less than 5 days. Linear regression model was used to determine the association of significant variables from the bivariate analysis to the duration of RDV therapy.

A total of 50 patients were included, with a median age of 12.8 years. Many patients had at least one comorbidity (78%), mostly obesity. Symptoms were fever (88%), cough (74%) and dyspnea (68%). Most patients were diagnosed with pneumonia of either viral and/or bacterial etiology. Blood test showed leukopenia in 66% and increased C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in 63% of cases. Thirty-six patients received RDV for 5 days, nine patients up to 10 days. Most children who received RDV longer were admitted to the PICU (67%). Treatment with RDV was well tolerated with rare side effects: bradycardia was recorded in 6% of cases, solved in less than 24 h after discontinuation. A mild elevation of transaminases was observed in 26% of cases, however for the 8%, it was still detected before the RDV administration. Therefore, in these cases, we could not establish if it was caused by COVID-19, RDV o both. Patients who received RDV for more than 5 days waited longer for its administration after pneumonia diagnosis. The presence of comorbidities and the duration of O2 administration significantly correlated with the duration of RDV therapy at the linear regression analysis.

Our experience indicates that RDV against SARS-CoV-2 is safe and well-tolerated in pediatric populations at high risk of developing severe COVID-19. Our data suggest that delaying RDV therapy after diagnosis of pneumonia may be associated with a longer duration of antiviral therapy, especially in patients with comorbidities.

As the search for effective treatments for COVID-19 continues, the high mortality rate among critically ill patients in Intensive Care Units (ICU) presents a profound challenge. This study explores the potential benefits of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) as a supplementary treatment for severe COVID-19. A total of 110 critically ill COVID-19 patients at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Vulcan Hill Hospital between Feb., 2020, and April, 2020 (Wuhan, China) participated in this observational study. All patients received standard supportive care protocols, with a subset of 81 also receiving TCM as an adjunct treatment. Clinical characteristics during the treatment period and the clinical outcome of each patient were closely monitored and analysed. Our findings indicated that the TCM group exhibited a significantly lower mortality rate compared with the non-TCM group (16 of 81 vs 24 of 29; 0.3 vs 2.3 person/month). In the adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, TCM treatment was associated with improved survival odds (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the analysis also revealed that TCM treatment could partially mitigate inflammatory responses, as evidenced by the reduced levels of proinflammatory cytokines, and contribute to the recovery of multiple organic functions, thereby potentially increasing the survival rate of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Antivirals with broad coronavirus activity are important for treating high-risk individuals exposed to the constantly evolving SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) as well as emerging drug-resistant variants. We developed and characterized a novel class of active-site-directed 3-chymotrypsin-like protease (3CLpro) inhibitors (C2-C5a). Our lead direct-acting antiviral (DAA), C5a, is a non-covalent, non-peptide with a dissociation constant of 170 nM against recombinant SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro. The compounds C2-C5a exhibit broad-spectrum activity against Omicron subvariants (BA.5, BQ.1.1, and XBB.1.5) and seasonal human coronavirus-229E infection in human cells. Notably, C5a has median effective concentrations of 30-50 nM against BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5 in two different human cell lines. X-ray crystallography has confirmed the unique binding modes of C2-C5a to the 3CLpro, which can limit virus cross-resistance to emerging Paxlovid-resistant variants. We tested the effect of C5a with two of our newly discovered host-directed antivirals (HDAs): N-0385, a TMPRSS2 inhibitor, and bafilomycin D (BafD), a human vacuolar H+-ATPase [V-ATPase] inhibitor. We demonstrated a synergistic action of C5a in combination with N-0385 and BafD against Omicron BA.5 infection in human Calu-3 lung cells. Our findings underscore that a SARS-CoV-2 multi-targeted treatment for circulating Omicron subvariants based on DAAs (C5a) and HDAs (N-0385 or BafD) can lead to therapeutic benefits by enhancing treatment efficacy. Furthermore, the high-resolution structures of SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro in complex with C2-C5a will facilitate future rational optimization of our novel broad-spectrum active-site-directed 3C-like protease inhibitors.

Objective Dexamethasone, remdesivir (REM), and baricitinib (BAR) are commonly used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). High-dose steroids have also been reported to be well tolerated, even when used in combination with multiple drugs. In this retrospective study, we assessed the safety and therapeutic efficacy of a three-drug combination of high-dose steroids, REM, and BAR in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods We retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of three-drug combination therapy. Patients We evaluated 107 patients hospitalized with moderate or severe COVID-19 who underwent 3-drug combination therapy with high-dose steroids (80 mg of methylprednisolone or more, REM, and BAR) in our institution from December 2020 to June 2021. The mean age was 62.1±13.7 years old, and 71.2% were men. The severity of the study patients was as follows: 18 (16.8%) with an 8-category ordinal score of 4, 84 (78.5%) with a score of 5, and 5 (4.7%) with a score of 6. Results The frequency of high-grade adverse events was low, except for hyperglycemia (n=59, 45.8%). The median duration from symptom onset to the start of three-drug combination therapy was eight days. All but one of the patients treated with the combination therapy improved. The median time to improvement by 1 category of the eight-category ordinal score was 6 days, and the 28-day mortality was 0.9%. Conclusion This study showed the safety profile of three-drug combination therapy of high-dose steroids, REM, and BAR in moderate to severe COVID-19 patients. The three-drug combination therapy is well tolerated and has the potential to prevent exacerbation of severity.

Objective Understanding the clinical factors associated with the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is very important for the effective use of limited medical resources, including the appropriate evaluation of the need for hospitalization and discharge. Methods Patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19 from March 2021 to October 2022 were included in the study. Patients admitted to our facility were classified into four waves: 4th (April to June 2021), 5th (July to October 2021), 6th (January to June 2022), and 7th waves (July to October 2022). We analyzed the severity, patients' background characteristics, presence of pneumonia on chest computed tomography (CT), and blood test results in each wave. Patients were further classified into respiratory failure and nonrespiratory failure groups and statistically compared. Results Of the 565 patients diagnosed with COVID-19, 546 were included in this study. The percentage of patients classified as mild was approximately 10% in the 4th and 5th waves, but the rate increased after the 6th wave, with rates of 55.7% and 54.8% in each wave. Although more than 80% of patients in the 4th and 5th waves showed pneumonia on chest CT, the percentage decreased to approximately 40% after the 6th wave. Further comparisons between the respiratory failure group (n=75) and the nonrespiratory failure group (n=471) revealed significant differences in the age, sex, vaccination history, and biomarker values between the two groups. Conclusion In this study, elderly men were found to be more likely to develop severe disease than others, and biomarkers of COVID-19, such as C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase, were useful for predicting severity. This study also suggested that vaccination may have contributed to a reduced disease severity.

Cationic chitosan derivatives have been widely studied as potential antimicrobial agents. However, very little is known about their antiviral activity and mode of action against enveloped viruses. We investigated the ability of hydroxypropanoic acid-grafted chitosan (HPA-CS) and N-(2-hydroxypropyl)-3-trimethylammonium chitosan chloride (HTCC) to inactivate enveloped viruses like the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The membrane-disrupting potential of the chitosan derivatives was initially investigated in a hemolysis assay. At 1.0 mg/mL, about 80% hemolysis was observed for the cationic chitosan derivatives, which was significant when compared to almost no membrane-disrupting activity by the unmodified chitosan. Virus inhibition was evaluated using the luciferase-based antiviral assay against the HIV-1 NL4.3 virus (400 TCID). The IC50 of HPA-CS was 4.109 mg/mL, while the HTCC showed a higher antiviral activity at an IC50 = 0.225 mg/mL. For practical application, the antiviral efficacies of the HTCC-coated and uncoated nonmedical masks were evaluated for SARS- CoV-2 virus capture. The coated masks demonstrated an almost excellent performance with nearly 100% viral inhibition compared to less than 60% inhibition by the uncoated masks. Molecular docking predictions suggest that the HTCC polymers interact with the viral spike protein, blocking the coronavirus interaction with the target host cell's angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 cellular receptors.

Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) has become a main target for antiviral therapeutics due to its essential role in viral replication and transcription. Thus, nucleoside analogs structurally resemble the natural RdRp substrate and hold great potential as inhibitors. Until now, extensive experimental investigations have been performed to explore nucleoside analogs to inhibit the RdRp, and concerted efforts have been made to elucidate the underlying molecular mechanisms further. This review begins by discussing the nucleoside analogs that have demonstrated inhibition in the experiments. Second, we examine the current understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying the action of nucleoside analogs on the SARS-CoV-2 RdRp. Recent findings in structural biology and computational research are presented through the classification of inhibitory mechanisms. This review summarizes previous experimental findings and mechanistic investigations of nucleoside analogs inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 RdRp. It would guide the rational design of antiviral medications and research into viral transcriptional mechanisms.

COVID-19 is a global health problem caused by SARS-CoV-2, which has led to over 600 million infections and 6 million deaths. Developing novel antiviral drugs is of pivotal importance to slow down the epidemic swiftly. In this study, we identified five azo compounds as effective antiviral drugs to SARS-CoV-2, and mechanism study revealed their targets for impeding viral particles' ability to bind to host receptors. Direct Blue 53, which displayed the strongest inhibitory impact, inhibited five mutant strains at micromole. In vitro, mechanism study demonstrated Direct Blue 53 inhibited viral infection through interaction with the spike of SARS-CoV-2. And 25 mg/kg/d compound treatment showed 50% or 60% survival protection against lethal Delta or Omicron BA.2 infection in vivo. Taken together, our results demonstrate that azo compounds with dimethyl-biphenyl-diyl-bis(azo)bis structure may be promising anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug candidates, which provide practicable therapies with the aid of structural optimizations and further research.

Objective We evaluated the clinical differences in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients between the sixth wave with the Omicron BA.1/BA.2 dominant variant (from January to April 2022) and seventh wave with the Omicron BA.5 dominant variant (from July to August 2022). Methods This retrospective, single-center, observational study included COVID-19 patients admitted to our institution in the sixth wave (sixth-wave group) and the seventh wave (seventh-wave group). Inter-group comparisons of clinical presentations, the prognosis, and proportion of nosocomial infections were performed. Results A total of 190 patients were included (93 and 97 patients in the sixth- and seventh-wave groups, respectively). While there were no significant differences in severity, significantly more patients developed pneumonia caused by COVID-19 in the sixth-wave group than in the seventh-wave group. Although there was no marked difference in in-hospital deaths, more patients died from COVID-19 in the sixth-wave group than in the seventh-wave group. There were significantly more COVID-19 inpatients with nosocomial infections in the seventh-wave group than in the sixth-wave group. Pneumonia from COVID-19 was significantly more severe in the sixth-wave group than in the seventh-wave group. Conclusion COVID-19 patients in the seventh wave are at a lower risk of pneumonia than those in the sixth wave. However, even in the seventh wave, patients with underlying diseases have a risk of death because of the exacerbation of underlying diseases triggered by COVID-19.

COVID-19 has adversely affected global healthcare infrastructure since 2019. Currently, there are no large-scale published reports on the efficacy of combination therapy of dexamethasone, remdesivir, and tocilizumab on COVID-19 patients.

Is the combination therapy of dexamethasone, remdesivir, and tocilizumab superior to other treatments on hospitalized COVID-19 patients?

This is a retrospective, comparative effectiveness study.

Single-center study PARTICIPANTS/INTERVENTIONS: We analyzed different inpatient COVID-19 treatment options available in the United States and their impact on hospital length of stay (LOS) and mortality. Hospitalized COVID-19 were categorized as "mild," "moderate" and "severe'' based on the highest level of oxygen required; room air, nasal cannula, or high flow/PAP/intubation, respectively. Patients were treated in accordance with the availability of medications and the latest treatment guidelines.

The endpoints of the study are hospital discharges and death during hospitalization.

1233 COVID-19 patients were admitted from 2020 to 2021. No treatment combinations showed a statistically significant decrease in hospital LOS in mild COVID-19 patients (p = 0.186). In moderate patients, the combination of remdesivir and dexamethasone slightly decreased LOS by 1 day (p = 0.007). In severe patients, the three-drug combination of remdesivir, dexamethasone, and tocilizumab decreased LOS by 8 days (p = 0.0034) when compared to nonviable treatments, such as hydroxychloroquine and convalescent plasma transfusion. However, it did not show any statistically significant benefit when compared to two-drug regimens (dexamethasone plus remdesivir) in severe COVID-19 (p = 0.116). No treatment arm appeared to show a statistically significant decrease in mortality for severe COVID-19 patients.

Our findings suggest that three-drug combination may decrease LOS in severe COVID-19 patients when compared to two-drug therapy. However, the trend was not supported by statistical analysis. Remdesivir may not be clinically beneficial for mild hospitalized COVID-19 patients; considering its cost, one could reserve it for moderate and severe patients. Triple drug therapies, while potentially reducing LOS for severe patients, do not affect overall mortality. Additional patient data may increase statistical power and solidify these findings.

A review of 38 studies involving 1437 COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) was conducted to investigate whether mortality has improved since the pandemic's onset. The study found that the median ICU mortality was 56.8%, ranging from 30% to 91.8%. These rates were higher for patients admitted during 2020-2021 (61.4%) compared to 2020 (52.3%), and prospective studies found higher ICU mortality (64.7%) than retrospective ones (56.4%). The studies were conducted in various countries and used different criteria to define CAPA. The percentage of patients who received antifungal therapy varied across studies. These results indicate that the mortality rate among CAPA patients is a growing concern, mainly since there has been an overall reduction in mortality among COVID-19 patients. Urgent action is needed to improve prevention and management strategies for CAPA, and additional research is needed to identify optimal treatment strategies to reduce mortality rates among these patients. This study serves as a call to action for healthcare professionals and policymakers to prioritize CAPA, a serious and potentially life-threatening complication of COVID-19.

Lung transplant (LT) is a life-saving treatment for patients with end-stage lung disease. In the setting of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), LT emerged as a therapeutic option for select cases. It is challenging to determine the extent of the knowledge and interest the United States (US) general population has on LT as salvage therapy during and following the COVID-19 pandemic. It is the authors' opinion that patient therapeutic education (PTE) can directly influence established practices by creating an open channel of communication based on needs and expectations for healthcare services. This perspective is a cursory reflection of the nuances between healthcare providers, their services, the interests and expectations of the general population, specifically on LT following COVID-19. The main endpoint of this study is to analyze the US general population's interest in LT as COVID-19 salvage therapy via the Google Trends (GT) web-kit tool.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the world for over 3 years. Treatment options have improved substantially during this period, including antiviral drugs, antibody drugs, immune-based agents, and vaccination. While these improvements have reduced mortality rates in patients with COVID-19, some patients still develop severe illness. In this review, we aimed to provide an overview of treatments for patients with severe COVID-19 from study reports and clinical experience. We discussed the treatments from two perspectives: respiratory care and drug treatments. In the respiratory care section, we discussed the usefulness of high-flow nasal cannula therapy and non-invasive ventilation as an alternative to invasive ventilation. In the drug treatments section, we focused on three classes for severe COVID-19 treatment: antiviral drugs, immune-based agents, and anticoagulation therapy. We did not discuss antibody drugs and vaccination, as they are not used for severe COVID-19 treatment.

The National Center for Global Health and Medicine plays a central role in the treatment and research of infectious diseases in Japan. It has conducted various research and development activities on drugs to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with clinical questions as starting points. Clinical trials are essential in developing new treatment modalities, but we have noticed some characteristic difficulties in clinical trials on emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases. For example, since there is no standard of care when an emerging infectious disease starts to spread, establishing an appropriate control group is complicated, and many things are hurried at the start of trials. This means there is little time to arrange a placebo, and conducting blinded, randomized, controlled trials has been difficult. Another issue characteristic of infectious disease has been that progress in enrolling subjects is affected by the spread of the disease. It was also a struggle to select institutions that provide medical care on the front lines of infectious disease and conduct clinical trials regularly. To start multicenter clinical trials expeditiously, a regulated and structured network is thus considered necessary. From the perspective of implementation, it is preferable to conduct decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) that do not depend on people coming to the medical institution, while from the perspective of preventing infections during the spread of COVID-19, wide adoption of eConsent is desirable. Based on the experience of COVID-19, new measures must be taken to prepare for emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases in the future.

Coronavirus disease 2019 is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We have used bioinformatics to investigate seventeen mutations in the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, as this mediates infection of human cells and is the target of most vaccine strategies and antibody-based therapies. Two mutations, H146Y and S221W, were identified as being most pathogenic. Mutations at positions D614G, A829T, and P1263L might also have deleterious effects on protein function. We hypothesized that candidate small molecules may be repurposed to combat viral infection. We investigated changes in binding energies of the ligands and the mutant proteins by assessing molecular docking. For an understanding of cellular function and organization, protein-protein interactions are also critical. Protein-protein docking for naïve and mutated structures of SARS-CoV-2 S protein was evaluated for their binding energy with the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). These interactions might limit the binding of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to the ACE2 receptor or may have a deleterious effect on protein function that may limit infection. These results may have important implications for the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, its pathogenesis, and the potential for drug repurposing and immune therapies.

Comments in PubMed are usually short papers for supporting or refuting claims, or discussing methods and findings in original articles. This study aims to explore whether they can be used as a quick and reliable evidence appraisal instrument for promoting research findings into practice, especially in emergency situations such as COVID-19 in which only missing, incomplete or uncertain evidence is available.

Evidence-comment networks (ECNs) were constructed by linking COVID-19-related articles to the commentaries (letters, editorials or brief correspondence) they received. PubTator Central was used to extract entities with a high volume of comments from the titles and abstracts of the articles. Among them, six drugs were selected, and their evidence assertions were analysed by exploring the structural information in the ECNs as well as the sentiment of the comments (positive, negative, neutral). Recommendations in WHO guidelines were used as the gold standard control to validate the consistency, coverage and efficiency of comments in reshaping clinical knowledge claims.

The overall positive/negative sentiments of comments were aligned with recommendations for/against the corresponding treatments in the WHO guidelines. Comment topics covered all significant points of evidence appraisal and beyond. Furthermore, comments may indicate the uncertainty regarding drug use for clinical practice. Half of the critical comments emerged 4.25 months earlier on average than the guideline release.

Comments have the potential as a support tool for rapid evidence appraisal as they have a selection effect by appraising the benefits, limitations and other clinical practice issues of concern in existing evidence. We suggest as a future direction an appraisal framework based on the comment topics and sentiment orientations to leverage the potential of scientific commentaries supporting evidence appraisal and decision-making.

This study was conducted to assess the clinical efficacy of probiotics in the treatment of patients with COVID19.

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies from their inception to 8 February 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical efficacy of probiotics with usual care or standard care for patients with COVID19 were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Random-effects model using MantelHaenszel and inverse variance methods were performed to analyze the data.

Eight RCTs with 900 patients were included. The study group receiving probiotics had a non-significantly lower rate of mortality than the control group had, but this difference was not significant (risk ratio [RR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.22 to 1.16). However, the study group had significantly lower rates of dyspnea (RR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.60), fever (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.85) and headache (RR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.65). Higher complete remission of COVID-19-associated symptoms was observed in the study group than the control group (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.40-2.55).

Although probiotics use did not improve clinical outcomes or reduce inflammatory markers, it may relieve COVID-19-associated symptoms.

The FDA approved the anti-BAFF monoclonal antibody, belimumab, in 2011 for adult systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), in 2019 for pediatric SLE, in 2020 for adult lupus nephritis (LN), and in 2022 for pediatric LN.

We performed a PUBMED database search through November 2022, using 'belimumab and lupus nephritis,' 'belimumab and childhood systemic lupus erythematosus,' 'belimumab and pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus,' and 'belimumab and juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus' as the search phrases. We also vetted pertinent references cited in the papers gleaned from the above search, and we drew from our personal literature collections.

Based on clinical-trials and real-world experience, belimumab is useful and safe in adult SLE and LN. In contrast and despite FDA approval, evidence of effectiveness in pediatric SLE and pediatric LN is very limited. Whereas there was a trend favoring belimumab in the only randomized, controlled trial to date in pediatric SLE, the difference between the belimumab and placebo groups failed to achieve statistical significance. Moreover, there have been no randomized, controlled trials for belimumab in pediatric LN. Based largely on information gleaned from experience in adults, the clinician can cautiously prescribe belimumab to his/her pediatric LN patient and hope for benefit.

The size and complexity of virtual screening libraries in drug discovery have skyrocketed in recent years, reaching up to multiple billions of accessible compounds. However, virtual screening of such ultra-large libraries poses several challenges associated with preparing the libraries, sampling, and pre-selection of suitable compounds. The utilization of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted screening approaches, such as deep learning, poses a promising countermeasure to deal with this rapidly expanding chemical space. For example, various AI-driven methods were recently successfully used to identify novel small molecule inhibitors of the SARS-CoV-2 main protease (M^pro).

This review focuses on presenting various kinds of virtual screening methods suitable for dealing with ultra-large libraries. Challenges associated with these computational methodologies are discussed, and recent advances are highlighted in the example of the discovery of novel M^pro inhibitors targeting the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

With the rapid expansion of the virtual chemical space, the methodologies for docking and screening such quantities of molecules need to keep pace. Employment of AI-driven screening compounds has already been shown to be effective in a range from a few thousand to multiple billion compounds, furthered by de novo generation of drug-like molecules without human interference.

Although several antiviral agents have become available for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment, oral drugs are still limited. Camostat mesylate, an orally bioavailable serine protease inhibitor, has been used to treat chronic pancreatitis in South Korea, and it has an in vitro inhibitory potential against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase 2 clinical trial in mild to moderate COVID-19 patients. We randomly assigned patients to receive either camostat mesylate (DWJ1248) or placebo orally for 14 days. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of subject symptoms within 14 days, measured using a subjective 4-point Likert scale. Three hundred forty-two patients were randomized. The primary endpoint was nonsignificant, where the median times to clinical improvement were 7 and 8 days in the camostat mesylate group and the placebo group, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.43; P = 0.50). A post hoc analysis showed that the difference was greatest at day 7, without reaching significance. In the high-risk group, the proportions of patients with clinical improvement up to 7 days were 45.8% (50/109) in the camostat group and 38.4% (40/104) in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR] = 1.33; 95% CI, 0.77 to 2.31; P = 0.31); the ordinal scale score at day 7 improved in 20.0% (18/90) of the camostat group and 13.3% (12/90) of the placebo group (OR = 1.68; 95% CI, 0.75 to 3.78; P = 0.21). Adverse events were similar in the two groups. Camostat mesylate was safe in the treatment of COVID-19. Although this study did not show clinical benefit in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, further clinical studies for high-risk patients are needed. (This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT04521296).

Objective Patients in whom coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was suspected or confirmed between January 1, 2020, and October 31, 2021, were enrolled from Japanese hospitals in this multicenter, retrospective, observational study. Methods Data on the treatment administered (including conventional and Kampo medicine) and changes in common cold-like symptoms (such as fever, cough, sputum, dyspnea, fatigue, and diarrhea) were collected from their medical records. The primary outcome was the number of days without a fever (with a body temperature <37°C). The secondary outcomes were symptomatic relief and the worsening of illness, defined as the presence of a condition requiring oxygen inhalation. The outcomes of patients treated with and without Kampo medicine were compared. Patients We enrolled 962 patients, among whom 528 received conventional and Kampo treatment (Kampo group) and 434 received conventional treatment (non-Kampo group). Results Overall, after adjusting for the staging of COVID-19 and risk factors, there were no significant between-group differences in the symptoms or number of days being afebrile. After performing propensity score matching and restricting the included cases to those with confirmed COVID-19 who did not receive steroid administration and initiated treatment within 4 days from the onset, the risk of illness worsening was significantly lower in the Kampo group than in the non-Kampo group (odds ratio=0.113, 95% confidence interval: 0.014-0.928, p=0.0424). Conclusion Early Kampo treatment may suppress illness worsening risk in COVID-19 cases without steroid use. Further randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm the clinical benefit of Kampo medicine for COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 NSP12, the viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), is required for viral replication and is a therapeutic target to treat COVID-19. To facilitate research on SARS-CoV-2 NSP12 protein, we developed a rat monoclonal antibody (CM12.1) against the NSP12 N-terminus that can facilitate functional studies. Immunoblotting and immunofluorescence assay (IFA) confirmed the specific detection of NSP12 protein by this antibody for cells overexpressing the protein. Although NSP12 is generated from the ORF1ab polyprotein, IFA of human autopsy COVID-19 lung samples revealed NSP12 expression in only a small fraction of lung cells including goblet, club-like, vascular endothelial cells, and a range of immune cells, despite wide-spread tissue expression of spike protein antigen. Similar studies using in vitro infection also generated scant protein detection in cells with established virus replication. These results suggest that NSP12 may have diminished steady-state expression or extensive posttranslation modifications that limit antibody reactivity during SARS-CoV-2 replication.

Recipients of bone marrow transplant with COVID-19 are at high risk of mortality and morbidity from their underlying immunocompromised state. Graft-versus-host disease and other comorbidities lead to poor COVID-19 outcomes in these patients. Understanding the outcomes and clinical characteristics of bone marrow transplant recipients with COVID-19 is needed to devise potential life-saving therapies for patients with hematologic malignancies. Reviewing large data sets from different ethnic groups and regions can lead to better understanding. We conducted a systematic review ofreal-world data from prospective and retrospective observational cohort studies that reported the clinical outcomes of COVID- 19 in bone marrow transplant patients.

We used electronic databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar), with a cut off date of May 31, 2022, to conduct our search. After screening 349 articles, we selected 33 original reports for screening. After screening these articles for eligibility criteria, we selected 12 studies for final data extraction. We extracted data per the preferred reporting items followed for systematic reviews. Quality evaluation was done with a Cochrane risk-of bias tool for nonrandomized studies (ROBINS-1).

Bone marrow transplant recipients with COVID-19 experienced poor disease outcomes and high mortality rates. Patient age, immunosuppressant intensity, and presence of graft-versus-host disease or other underlying comorbidities directly affected mortality rates of bone marrow transplant recipients with COVID-19. Other factors, like type of malignancy, type of transplant, and time between transplant and COVID-19 diagnosis, did not affect mortality or poor outcomes of COVID-19.

Bone marrow transplant recipients have a higher risk of mortality and poor disease outcomes from COVID-19. Because curative therapies for COVID- 19 are not available, the only option available is its prevention. Transplant centers worldwide, as pertheir capacities, should develop and adhere to strict standard operating procedures based on international or national guidelines related to transplant recipients with COVID-19.

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of treatment with dexamethasone, remdesivir or both on neurological complications in acute coronavirus diease 2019 (COVID-19).

We used observational data from the International Severe Acute and emerging Respiratory Infection Consortium World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Characterization Protocol, United Kingdom. Hospital inpatients aged ≥18 years with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection admitted between January 31, 2020, and June 29, 2021, were included. Treatment allocation was non-blinded and performed by reporting clinicians. A propensity scoring methodology was used to minimize confounding. Treatment with remdesivir, dexamethasone, or both was assessed against the standard of care. The primary outcome was a neurological complication occurring at the point of death, discharge, or resolution of the COVID-19 clinical episode.

Out of 89,297 hospital inpatients, 64,088 had severe COVID-19 and 25,209 had non-hypoxic COVID-19. Neurological complications developed in 4.8% and 4.5%, respectively. In both groups, neurological complications were associated with increased mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, worse self-care on discharge, and time to recovery. In patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with dexamethasone (n = 21,129), remdesivir (n = 1,428), and both combined (n = 10,846) were associated with a lower frequency of neurological complications: OR = 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.69-0.83), OR = 0.69 (95% CI = 0.51-0.90), and OR = 0.54 (95% CI = 0.47-0.61), respectively. In patients with non-hypoxic COVID-19, dexamethasone (n = 2,580) was associated with less neurological complications (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.62-0.97), whereas the dexamethasone/remdesivir combination (n = 460) showed a similar trend (OR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.31-1.15).

Treatment with dexamethasone, remdesivir, or both in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 was associated with a lower frequency of neurological complications in an additive manner, such that the greatest benefit was observed in patients who received both drugs together. ANN NEUROL 2023;93:88-102.

The global community has been affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which emerged in December 2019. Since then, many studies have been conducted on cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and COVID-19. The aim of this study was to perform a bibliometric and visual analysis of the published relationship between CVDs and COVID-19.

1,890 publications were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database on January 5, 2022. Microsoft Office Excel and CiteSpace were then used to carry out scientometric analysis on the relevant literature according to seven aspects: document type, countries/regions, institutions, authors, journals, references, and keywords.

The research on CVDs and COVID-19 is currently in a period of rapid development, with China, USA, England, and Italy leading the field. There is active cooperation between most countries and institutions. Harvard Medical School stands out among the many institutions not only for the largest number of publications, but also for their high quality. Banerjee A, Solomon SD and Narula J are three representative authors in this field. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine was the journal with the highest number of published studies, and The Lancet was the most cited journal. Two documents with a high degree of significance in this field were identified. Popular research topics in this field are specific diseases, such as acute coronary syndrome and heart failure; pathogenesis related to ACE2, insulin resistance and pericyte; the specific therapeutic drug chloroquine; and clinical characteristics, physical activity, and mental health. ACE2 and NF-κB will be the focus of future research.

This study provides useful information for the research of CVDs and COVID-19, including potential collaborators, popular research topics, and a reference for more extensive and in-depth research in the future.

To describe COVID-19 in children and the differences between the two waves.

The electronic medical records of children younger than 16 y of age with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection between June 1st 2020 and May 31st 2021 at Christian Medical College, Vellore were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected on a predesigned case record form and analyzed.

A total of 988 children were diagnosed with confirmed COVID-19 during the study period. Of these, there were 585 children diagnosed during the 1st wave (June 2020-Feb 2021) and 403 children during the 2nd wave (March 2021-May 2021). It was found that loose stools and rash were significantly more frequent during the 1st wave and fever, cough, coryza, heart rate and temperature were significantly more during the 2nd wave. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of requirement of oxygen therapy, need for ICU admission, duration of ICU stay or hospital stay, or severity of illness. Mortality was significantly higher during the 2nd wave (0.3% vs. 2%).

The COVID-19 pandemic among children during the 1st and 2nd waves were similar in severity, though there was a higher mortality during the 2nd wave.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major threat to global health requiring continuous development of new antimicrobial agents. Antimicrobial research and development (R&D) should be promoted in the pharmaceutical industry and academia to ensure sustainable patient access to new treatment options and reduce the global AMR burden.

This review describes the historical challenges in novel antimicrobial drug development in Japan, current national efforts to promote the development, and proposals to effectively manage future AMR pandemics. Literature searches were performed in the PubMed database (from inception to January 2022).

R&D activities in the antimicrobial space in Japan have been insufficient due to multiple factors, including unfavorable cost-profit balance and differences in regulatory requirements between Japan and Western countries. However, the situation is improving with the implementation of the Japanese AMR action plan, drug R&D programs led by the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development, and efforts of regulatory agencies in the United States, Europe, and Japan in aligning and expediting the clinical development process. Further actions during the interpandemic period will strengthen antimicrobial R&D, including international and interdisciplinary collaboration, continued funding and investment with the national government's leadership, and fostering of new-generation academic research leaders.PLAINLANGUAGE SUMMARYEvery year, many people suffer and die of antimicrobial-resistant infections worldwide. New treatment options are required to tackle antimicrobial-resistant infections; however, pharmaceutical companies have not been very active in developing antimicrobial agents in the last two decades. This was mainly due to the difficulty in discovering new and effective compounds and insufficient funds being spent on drug discovery. In addition, differences in drug development requirements between the United States (US), Europe, and Japan have made it difficult for Japanese pharmaceutical companies to develop antimicrobial agents that can be used in all regions in a timely manner. In the last decade, several measures have been taken to re-activate antimicrobial research and development in the pharmaceutical industry, as well as in academia, in Japan. These measures include a national action plan to combat antimicrobial-resistant infections and research support programs led by the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development. Regulatory authorities in the US, Europe, and Japan have initiated efforts to expedite the development of drugs to treat infections. Moreover, pathways for accelerated regulatory review have been established to reduce the time taken for new drugs to be approved, and this has already been applied to several new anti-infective drugs. To combat the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the development of novel vaccines and antiviral drugs has been accelerated with unprecedented speed. Additional actions, such as international research collaboration programs and investment in new antimicrobial development, may help promote antimicrobial research and development activities in Japan.