Biologics in COVID-19 So Far: Systematic Review
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Arias M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9321859 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The risk of Coronavirus infection continues, and the fear of resurgence indicates the lack of a successful therapeutic strategy. In severe COVID-19 infection, many immune cells and their products are involved, making management difficult. The abundant release of cytokines and chemokines in severe COVID-19 patients leads to profound hyper inflammation and the mobilization of immune cells, triggering the cytokine storm. The complications associated with the cytokine storm include severe respiratory distress, intravascular coagulation, multi-organ failure, and death. The enormous formation of interleukin (IL)-6 and hemopoietic factors such as granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) are implicated in the severity of the infection. Moreover, these inflammatory cytokines and factors signal through the Janus kinase (JAK)-signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) pathway causing the activation of cytokine-related genes. The neutralization of these proteins could be of therapeutic help in COVID-19 patients and could mitigate the risk of mortality. IL-6 antagonist, IL-6 receptor antagonists, GM-CSF receptor inhibitors, and JAK-STAT inhibitors are being investigated to prevent intense lung injury in COVID-19 patients and increase the chances of survival. The review focuses the role of IL-6, GM-CSF, and JAK-STAT inhibitors in regulating the immune response in severely affected COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC8030716 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective:To describe perinatal and neonatal outcomes in newborns exposed to SARS-CoV-2. Methods:A systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed Central, LILACS, and Google Scholar using the keywords 'covid ' AND 'newborn' OR 'child' OR 'infant,' on 18 March 2020, and again on 17 April 2020. One researcher conducted the search and extracted data on demographics, maternal outcomes, diagnostic tests, imaging, and neonatal outcomes. Results:Of 256 publications identified, 20 met inclusion criteria and comprised neonatal outcome data for 222 newborns whose mothers were suspected or confirmed to be SARS-CoV-2 positive perinatally (17 studies) or of newborns referred to hospital with infection/pneumonia (3 studies). Most (12 studies) were case-series reports; all were from China, except three (Australia, Iran, and Spain). Of the 222 newborns, 13 were reported as positive for SARS-CoV-2; most of the studies reported no or mild symptoms and no adverse perinatal outcomes. Two papers among those from newborns who tested positive reported moderate or severe clinical characteristics. Five studies using data on umbilical cord blood, placenta, and/or amniotic fluid reported no positive results. Nine studies reported radiographic imaging, including 5 with images of pneumonia, increased lung marking, thickened texture, or high-density nodular shadow. Minor, non-specific changes in biochemical variables were reported. Studies that tested breast milk reported negative SARS-CoV-2 results. Conclusions:Given the paucity of studies at this time, vertical transmission cannot be confirmed or denied. Current literature does not support abstaining from breastfeeding nor separating mothers and newborns. Further evidence and data collection networks, particularly in the Americas, are needed for establishing definitive guidelines and recommendations.
| S-EPMC7241573 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) presents with progressive dyspnea, which results from acute lung inflammatory edema leading to hypoxia. As with other infectious diseases that affect the respiratory tract, asthma has been cited as a potential risk factor for severe COVID-19. However, conflicting results have been published over the last few months and the putative association between these two diseases is still unproven.MethodsHere, we systematically reviewed all reports on COVID-19 published since its emergence in December 2019 to June 30, 2020, looking into the description of asthma as a premorbid condition, which could indicate its potential involvement in disease progression.ResultsWe found 372 articles describing the underlying diseases of 161,271 patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Asthma was reported as a premorbid condition in only 2623 patients accounting for 1.6% of all patients.ConclusionsAs the global prevalence of asthma is 4.4%, we conclude that either asthma is not a premorbid condition that contributes to the development of COVID-19 or clinicians and researchers are not accurately describing the premorbidities in COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC7787409 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile the landscape of vaccine and treatment candidates against the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been reviewed systematically, prophylactic candidates remain unexplored.ObjectivesTo map pre- and postexposure prophylactic (PrEP and PEP) candidate for COVID-19.Data sourcesPubMed/Medline, Embase, International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform clinical trial registries and medRxiv.Study eligibility criteria and participantsAll studies in humans or animals and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in humans reporting primary data on prophylactic candidates against COVID-19, excluding studies focused on key populations.InterventionsPrEP and PEP candidate for COVID-19.MethodsSystematic review and qualitative synthesis of COVID-19 PrEP and PEP studies and RCTs complemented by search of medRxiv and PubMed and Embase for studies reporting RCT outcomes since systematic review search completion.ResultsWe identified 13 studies (from 2119 database records) and 117 RCTs (from 5565 RCTs listed in the registries) that met the inclusion criteria. Non-RCT studies reported on cross-sectional studies using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in humans (n = 2) or reported on animal studies (n = 7), most of which used antibodies. All five completed RCTs focused on the use of HCQ as either PrEP or PEP, and these and the cross-sectional studies reported no prophylactic effect. The majority of ongoing RCTs evaluated HCQ or other existing candidates including non-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines, anti(retro)virals or use of vitamins and supplements.ConclusionsThe key message from completed studies and RCTs seems to be that HCQ does not work. There is little evidence regarding other compounds, with all RCTs using candidates other than HCQ still ongoing. It remains to be seen if the portfolio of existing molecules being evaluated in RCTs will identify successful prophylaxis against COVID-19 or if there is a need for the development of new candidates.
| S-EPMC7813508 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A systematic review was conducted to explore the immunogenicity of biologic agents across inflammatory diseases and its potential impact on efficacy/safety.Literature searches were conducted through November 2016 to identify controlled and observational studies of biologics/biosimilars administered for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA), psoriasis (Ps), Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis.Of >21,000 screened publications, 443 were included. Anti-drug antibody (ADAb) rates varied widely among biologics across diseases (and are not directly comparable because of immunoassay heterogeneity); the highest overall rates were reported with infliximab (0-83%), adalimumab (0-54%), and infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 (21-52%), and the lowest with secukinumab (0-1%), ustekinumab (1-11%), etanercept (0-13%), and golimumab (0-19%). Most ADAbs were neutralizing, except those to abatacept and etanercept. ADAb+ versus ADAb- patients had lower rates of clinical response to adalimumab (RA, PsA, JIA, AS, Ps), golimumab (RA), infliximab (RA, PsA, AS, Ps), rituximab (RA), ustekinumab (Ps), and CT-P13 (RA, AS). Higher rates of infusion-related reactions were reported in infliximab- and CT-P13-treated ADAb+ patients. Background immunosuppressives/anti-proliferatives reduced biologic immunogenicity across diseases.Based on reviewed reports, biologic/biosimilar immunogenicity differs among agents, with the highest rates observed with infliximab and adalimumab. As ADAb formation in biologic-/biosimilar-treated patients may increase the risk of lost response, the immunogenicity of these agents is an important (albeit not the only) consideration in the treatment decision-making process.
| S-EPMC5548814 | biostudies-other
Project description:Tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors increase susceptibility to tuberculosis, but the effect of biologics on susceptibility to leprosy has not been described. Moreover, biologics may play a role in treating erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL). The objectives of this systematic review were to determine whether the development of clinical leprosy is increased in patients being treated with biologics and to assess the use of biologics in treating leprosy reactions. A systematic literature review was completed of patients with leprosy who received treatment with biologics either before or after a diagnosis of leprosy was confirmed. All studies and case reports were included for qualitative evaluation. The search yielded 10 cases (including one duplicate publication) of leprosy diagnosed after initiation of TNF-α inhibitors and four case reports of refractory ENL successfully treated with infliximab or etanercept. An unpublished case of persistent ENL responsive to infliximab is also presented. These data demonstrate that the use of TNF-α inhibitors may be a risk factor for developing leprosy or reactivating subclinical infections. Leprosy can present with skin lesions and arthritis, so leprosy should be considered in patients presenting with these signs before starting treatment with these agents. Leprosy should be considered in patients who develop worsening eruptions and neurologic symptoms during treatment with TNF-α inhibitors. Finally, TNF-α inhibitors appear effective in some cases of refractory ENL.
| S-EPMC7204592 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST563 | biostudies-other
Project description:Older people have paid a huge toll in terms of mortality during the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Frailty may have contributed to the vulnerability of older people to more severe clinical presentation. We aimed at reviewing available evidence about frailty and COVID-19. We searched PUBMED, Web of Science, and EMBASE from 1 December 2019 to 29 May 2020. Study selection and data extraction were performed by three independent reviewers. Qualitative synthesis was conducted and quantitative data extracted when available. Forty papers were included: 13 editorials, 15 recommendations/guidelines, 3 reviews, 1 clinical trial, 6 observational studies, 2 case reports. Editorials and reviews underlined the potential clinical relevance of assessing frailty among older patients with COVID-19. However, frailty was only investigated in regards to its association with overall mortality, hospital contagion, intensive care unit admission rates, and disease phenotypes in the few observational studies retrieved. Specific interventions in relation to frailty or its impact on COVID-19 treatments have not been evaluated yet. Even with such limited evidence, clinical recommendations on the use of frailty tools have been proposed to support decision making about escalation plan. Ongoing initiatives are expected to improve knowledge of COVID-19 interaction with frailty and to promote patient-centered approaches.
| S-EPMC7408623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Recently, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has affected more than 200 countries and lead to enormous losses. This study systematically reviews the application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques in COVID-19, especially for diagnosis, estimation of epidemic trends, prognosis, and exploration of effective and safe drugs and vaccines; and discusses the potential limitations. Methods: We report this systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library from inception to 19 September 2020 for published studies of AI applications in COVID-19. We used PROBAST (prediction model risk of bias assessment tool) to assess the quality of literature related to the diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19. We registered the protocol (PROSPERO CRD42020211555). Results: We included 78 studies: 46 articles discussed AI-assisted diagnosis for COVID-19 with total accuracy of 70.00 to 99.92%, sensitivity of 73.00 to 100.00%, specificity of 25 to 100.00%, and area under the curve of 0.732 to 1.000. Fourteen articles evaluated prognosis based on clinical characteristics at hospital admission, such as clinical, laboratory and radiological characteristics, reaching accuracy of 74.4 to 95.20%, sensitivity of 72.8 to 98.00%, specificity of 55 to 96.87% and AUC of 0.66 to 0.997 in predicting critical COVID-19. Nine articles used AI models to predict the epidemic of the COVID-19, such as epidemic peak, infection rate, number of infected cases, transmission laws, and development trend. Eight articles used AI to explore potential effective drugs, primarily through drug repurposing and drug development. Finally, 1 article predicted vaccine targets that have the potential to develop COVID-19 vaccines. Conclusions: In this review, we have shown that AI achieved high performance in diagnosis, prognosis evaluation, epidemic prediction and drug discovery for COVID-19. AI has the potential to enhance significantly existing medical and healthcare system efficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC8514781 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeIn March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the SARS-CoV-2 infection-related coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) a pandemic. During the first and second waves of the pandemic spread, there have been several reports of COVID-19-associated neurological manifestations, including acute seizures and status epilepticus (SE). In this systematic review, we summarized the available data on clinical features, diagnosis, and therapy of COVID-19-related SE.MethodsWe performed a systematic search of the literature to identify data on demographics, clinical, neurophysiological, and neuroradiological data of patients with COVID-19-related SE. We used regression models (linear or logistic) with a stepwise forward method to identify features associated with mortality or severity of SE.ResultsThirty-nine articles were included with a total of 47 cases of SE associated with COVID-19. Age, time between the acute respiratory phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and SE onset, and hospitalization correlated with a higher SE severity as assessed by quantitative validated scales.ConclusionsSE can be a neurological manifestation of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although a possible association between SE and COVID-19 has been reported, the exact mechanisms are still not fully understood. Systemic inflammatory syndrome due to cytokine release could play a role in COVID-19-related SE.
| S-EPMC7968345 | biostudies-literature