Randomized elimination and prolongation of ACE inhibitors and ARBs in coronavirus 2019 (REPLACE COVID) Trial Protocol.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Cohen JB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7722152 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The discovery of angiotensin converting enzyme-2 (ACE-2) as the receptor for SARS- CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2) has implicated the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and respiratory failure in patients with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). The angiotensin converting enzyme-1-angiotensin II-angiotensin AT1 receptor pathway contributes to the pathophysiology of ARDS, whereas activation of the ACE-2-angiotensin(1-7)-angiotensin AT2 receptor and the ACE-2-angiotensin(1-7)-Mas receptor pathways have been shown to be protective. Here we propose and discuss therapeutic considerations how to increase soluble ACE-2 in plasma in order for ACE-2 to capture and thereby inactivate SARS-CoV-2. This could be achieved by administering recombinant soluble ACE-2. We also discuss why and how ACEIs and ARBs provide cardiovascular, renal and also pulmonary protection in SARS-CoV-2- associated ARDS. Discontinuing these medications in COVID-19 patients may therefore potentially be harmful.
| S-EPMC7198232 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of the ongoing severe acute respiratory disease pandemic COVID-19. Tissue and cellular tropism is one key to understanding the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2. We investigate the expression and subcellular localization of the SARS-CoV-2 receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), within the upper (nasal) and lower (pulmonary) respiratory tracts of human donors using a diverse panel of banked tissues. Here, we report our discovery that the ACE2 receptor protein robustly localizes within the motile cilia of airway epithelial cells, which likely represents the initial or early subcellular site of SARS-CoV-2 viral entry during host respiratory transmission. We further determine whether ciliary ACE2 expression in the upper airway is influenced by patient demographics, clinical characteristics, comorbidities, or medication use, and show the first mechanistic evidence that the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) does not increase susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection through enhancing the expression of ciliary ACE2 receptor. These findings are crucial to our understanding of the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 for prevention and control of this virulent pathogen.
| S-EPMC7595232 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective:During the COVID-19 pandemic the continuation or cessation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) has been contentious. Mechanisms have been proposed for both beneficial and detrimental effects. Recent studies have focused on mortality with no literature having examined length of hospital stay. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of ACEi and ARBs on COVID-19 mortality and length of hospital stay. Methods:COPE (COVID-19 in Older People) is a multicenter observational study including adults of all ages admitted with either laboratory or clinically confirmed COVID-19. Routinely generated hospital data were collected. Primary outcome: mortality; secondary outcomes: Day-7 mortality and length of hospital stay. A mixed-effects multivariable Cox's proportional baseline hazards model and logistic equivalent were used. Results:1371 patients were included from eleven centres between 27th February to 25th April 2020. Median age was 74 years [IQR 61-83]. 28.6% of patients were taking an ACEi or ARB. There was no effect of ACEi or ARB on inpatient mortality (aHR = 0.85, 95%CI 0.65-1.11). For those prescribed an ACEi or ARB, hospital stay was significantly reduced (aHR = 1.25, 95%CI 1.02-1.54, p = 0.03) and in those with hypertension the effect was stronger (aHR = 1.39, 95%CI 1.09-1.77, p = 0.007). Conclusions:Patients and clinicians can be reassured that prescription of an ACEi or ARB at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis is not harmful. The benefit of prescription of an ACEi or ARB in reducing hospital stay is a new finding.
| S-EPMC7561344 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A 2007 systematic review compared angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with hypertension. Direct renin inhibitors (DRIs) have since been introduced, and significant new research has been published. We sought to update and expand the 2007 review.We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (through December 2010) and selected other sources for relevant English-language trials.We included studies that directly compared ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and/or DRIs in at least 20 total adults with essential hypertension; had at least 12 weeks of follow-up; and reported at least one outcome of interest. Ninety-seven (97) studies (36 new since 2007) directly comparing ACE inhibitors versus ARBs and three studies directly comparing DRIs to ACE inhibitor inhibitors or ARBs were included.A standard protocol was used to extract data on study design, interventions, population characteristics, and outcomes; evaluate study quality; and summarize the evidence.In spite of substantial new evidence, none of the conclusions from the 2007 review changed. The level of evidence remains high for equivalence between ACE inhibitors and ARBs for blood pressure lowering and use as single antihypertensive agents, as well as for superiority of ARBs for short-term adverse events (primarily cough). However, the new evidence was insufficient on long-term cardiovascular outcomes, quality of life, progression of renal disease, medication adherence or persistence, rates of angioedema, and differences in key patient subgroups.Included studies were limited by follow-up duration, protocol heterogeneity, and infrequent reporting on patient subgroups.Evidence does not support a meaningful difference between ACE inhibitors and ARBs for any outcome except medication side effects. Few, if any, of the questions that were not answered in the 2007 report have been addressed by the 36 new studies. Future research in this area should consider areas of uncertainty and be prioritized accordingly.
| S-EPMC3358398 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundReducing patient cost-sharing and engaging patients in disease management activities have been shown to increase uptake of evidence-based care.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of employer purchase of a disease-specific plan with reduced cost-sharing and disease management (the Diabetes Health Plan/DHP) on medication adherence among eligible employees and dependents.DesignEmployer-level "intent to treat" cohort study, including data from eligible employees and their dependents with diabetes, regardless of whether they were enrolled in the DHP.SettingEmployers that contracted with a large national health plan administrator in 2009, 2010, and/or 2011.ParticipantsTen employers that purchased the DHP and 191 employers that did not (controls). Inverse probability weighting (IPW) estimation was used to adjust for inter-group differences.InterventionThe DHP includes free or low-cost medications and physician visits. Enrollment strategies and specific benefit designs are determined by the employer and vary in practice. DHP participants are notified up front that they must engage in their own health care (e.g., receiving diabetes-related screening) in order to remain enrolled.Main outcome measureMean employee adherence to metformin, statins, and ACE/ARBs at the employer level at one year post-DHP implementation, as measured by the proportion of days covered (PDC).ResultsBaseline adherence to the three medications was similar across DHP and control employers, ranging from 64 to 69 %. In the first year after DHP implementation, predicted employer-level adherence for metformin (+4.9 percentage points, p = 0.017), statins (+4.8, p = 0.019), and ACE/ARBs (+4.4, p = 0.02) was higher with DHP purchase.LimitationsNon-randomized, observational study.ConclusionsThe Diabetes Health Plan, an innovative health plan that combines reduced cost-sharing and disease management with an up-front requirement of enrollee participation in his or her own health care, is associated with a modest improvement in medication adherence at 12 months.
| S-EPMC4617948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The pandemic outbreak of coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is rapidly spreading across the globe, so the development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents is urgently needed. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2), a human receptor that facilitates entry of SARS-CoV-2, serves as a prominent target for drug discovery. In the present study, we have applied the bioinformatics approach for screening of a series of bioactive chemical compounds from Himalayan stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) as potent inhibitors of ACE-2 receptor (PDB ID: 1R4L). The molecular docking was applied to dock a set of representative compounds within the active site region of target receptor protein using 0.8 version of the PyRx virtual screen tool and analyzed by using discovery studio visualizer. Based on the highest binding affinity, 23 compounds were shortlisted as a lead molecule using molecular docking analysis. Among them, ?-sitosterol was found with the highest binding affinity -?12.2 kcal/mol and stable interactions with the amino acid residues present on the active site of the ACE-2 receptor. Similarly, luteoxanthin and violaxanthin followed by rutin also displayed stronger binding efficiency. We propose these compounds as potential lead candidates for the development of target-specific therapeutic drugs against COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7781418 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since the beginning of 2020, the whole world has been struggling with the pandemic of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by a novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. The SARS-CoV-2 infection depends on ACE2, TMPRSS2, and CD147, which are expressed on host cells. Several studies suggest that some single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of ACE2 might be a risk factor of COVID-19 infection. Genotypes affect ACE2 structure, its serum concentration, and levels of circulating angiotensin (1-7). Moreover, there is evidence that ACE genotype affects the outcomes of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) treatment, the most severe consequence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. COVID-19 morbidity, infection course, and mortality might depend on ACE D allele frequency. The aim of this narrative review was to analyze and identify the mechanisms of ACE-I and ARBs with particular emphasis on angiotensin receptors and their polymorphism in the light of COVID-19 pandemic as these medications are commonly prescribed to elderly patients. There is no direct evidence yet for ACE-I or ARBs in the treatment of COVID-19. However, for those already taking these medications, both the European Society of Cardiology and the American College of Cardiology recommend continuing the treatment, because at present, there is no clear clinical or scientific evidence to justify the discontinuation of ACE-I or ARBs. Individualized treatment decisions should be based on the clinical condition and co-morbidities of each patient.
| S-EPMC7382582 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: To study the potential effect of COVID-19 on the endometrium of affected symptomatic women. Design: Preliminary study of the endometrial transcriptomes in women with COVID-19 through RNA sequencing. Setting: Hospital and university laboratories. Subjects: Women with COVID-19 lacking SARS-CoV-2 infection in endometrial tissue. Intervention/Exposure: Endometrial biopsy collection. Main outcomes measures: Endometrial gene expression and functional analysis of patients with COVID-19 versus uninfected individuals. Results: COVID-19 systemic disease alters endometrial gene expression in 75% of women, with patients exhibiting a preponderance of 163 up-regulated (e.g., UTS2, IFI6, IFIH1, BNIP3) and 72 down-regulated genes (e.g., CPZ, CDH3, IRF4) (FDR<0.05). A total of 161 dysregulated functions (36 up-regulated and 125 down-regulated) were typically enriched in COVID-19 endometria, including upregulation in pathways involved in response to virus and cytokine inflammation, highlighting upregulation of a COVID-19 response pathway. Conclusion: COVID-19 affects endometrial gene expression despite the absence of SARS-CoV-2 particles in endometrial tissues.
2024-04-22 | GSE202553 | GEO
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of IL-6 inhibitors compared to standard of care (SOC) in COVID-19 patients.Data sourcesA systematic review of the MEDLINE and Scopus databases (last search: October 8th, 2021) was performed according to the PRISMA statement.Study selectionRandomized control trials (RCTs) comparing IL-6 inhibitors to SOC in hospitalized COVID-19 patients were deemed eligible.Data extraction and synthesisIndividual patient data were extracted from the Kaplan-Meier curves or were obtained from authors of included studies. Additionally, the reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed study quality of each eligible report.ResultsEleven studies were identified, incorporating 7467 patients (IL-6 inhibitors: 4103, SOC: 3364). IL-6 inhibitors were associated with decreased risk for death compared to SOC at the one-stage meta-analysis (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 0.75, 95% Confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-0.82, p<0.0001) and the two-stage meta-analysis (HR: 0.85, 95%CI: 0.77-0.93, p<0.001, I2 = 0.0%). Meta-regression analysis revealed that the difference in OS between the two groups was not influenced by the mean age of patients. At secondary meta-analyses, IL-6 inhibitors were associated with decreased odds for intubation OR:0.74, 95%CI:0.65-0.85, p<0.001, I2=0.0%). IL-6 inhibitors were associated with increased odds for discharge compared to SOC (OR:1.28, 95% CI:1.15-1.42, p<0.001, I2=0.0%).Conclusions and relevanceThis meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials shows that IL-6 inhibitors significantly reduce the risk of death compared to SOC. IL-6 inhibitors are also associated with better outcomes in terms of intubation and discharge rates compared to SOC.
| S-EPMC8986475 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We analyzed reports on safety and efficacy of JAK-inhibitors in patients with coronavirus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19) published between January 1st and March 6th 2021 using the Newcastle-Ottawa and Jadad scales for quality assessment. We used disease severity as a proxy for time when JAK-inhibitor therapy was started. We identified 6 cohort studies and 5 clinical trials involving 2367 subjects treated with ruxolitinib (N = 3) or baricitinib 45 (N = 8). Use of JAK-inhibitors decreased use of invasive mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.63; [95% Confidence Interval (CI), 0.47, 0.84]; P = 0.002) and had borderline impact on rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (RR = 0.24 [0.06, 1.02]; P = 0.05) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS; RR = 0.50 [0.19, 1.33]; P = 0.16). JAK-inhibitors did not decrease length of hospitalization (mean difference (MD) -0.18 [-4.54, 4.18]; P = 0.94). Relative risks of death for both drugs were 0.42 [0.30, 0.59] (P < 0.001), for ruxolitinib, RR = 0.33 (0.13, 0.88; P = 0.03) and for baricitinib RR = 0.44 (0.31, 0.63; P < 0.001). Timing of JAK-inhibitor treatment during the course of COVID-19 treatment may be important in determining impact on outcome. However, these data are not consistently reported.
| S-EPMC8119232 | biostudies-literature