-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF), a hereditary auto-inflammatory disease, mainly affects ethnic groups living in the Mediterranean region. Early studies reported... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF), a hereditary auto-inflammatory disease, mainly affects ethnic groups living in the Mediterranean region. Early studies reported colchicine may potentially prevent FMF attacks. For people who are colchicine-resistant or intolerant, drugs such as anakinra, rilonacept, canakinumab, etanercept, infliximab or adalimumab might be beneficial. This is an update of the review last published in 2018.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of interventions for reducing inflammation in people with FMF.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and four Chinese databases on in August 2021. We searched clinical trials registries and references listed in relevant reports. The last search was 17 August 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of people with FMF, comparing active interventions (including colchicine, anakinra, rilonacept, canakinumab, etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, thalidomide, tocilizumab, interferon-α and ImmunoGuard (herbal dietary supplement)) with placebo or no treatment, or comparing active drugs to each other.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology. We assessed certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 RCTs with 312 participants (aged three to 53 years), including five parallel and five cross-over designed studies. Six studies used oral colchicine, one used oral ImmunoGuard, and the remaining three used rilonacept, anakinra or canakinumab as a subcutaneous injection. The duration of each study arm ranged from one to eight months. There were inadequacies in the design of the four older colchicine studies and the two studies comparing a single to a divided dose of colchicine. However, the four studies of ImmunoGuard, rilonacept, anakinra and canakinumab were generally well-designed. We aimed to report on the number of participants experiencing an attack, the timing of attacks, the prevention of amyloid A amyloidosis, adverse drug reactions and the response of a number of biochemical markers from the acute phase of an attack; but no study reported on the prevention of amyloid A amyloidosis. Colchicine (oral) versus placebo After three months, colchicine 0.6 mg three times daily may reduce the number of people experiencing attacks (risk ratio (RR) 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.95; 1 study, 10 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study (20 participants) of colchicine 0.5 mg twice daily showed there may be no difference in the number of participants experiencing attacks at two months (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.23; low-certainty evidence). There may be no differences in the duration of attacks (narrative summary; very low-certainty evidence), or in the number of days between attacks: (narrative summary; very low-certainty evidence). Regarding adverse drug reactions, one study reported loose stools and frequent bowel movements and a second reported diarrhea (narrative summary; both very low-certainty evidence). There were no data on acute-phase response. Rilonacept versus placebo There is probably no difference in the number of people experiencing attacks at three months (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.26; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be no differences in the duration of attacks (narrative summary; low-certainty evidence) or in the number of days between attacks (narrative summary; low-certainty evidence). Regarding adverse drug reactions, the rilonacept study reported there may be no differences in gastrointestinal symptoms, hypertension, headache, respiratory tract infections, injection site reactions and herpes, compared to placebo (narrative summary; low-certainty evidence). The study narratively reported there may be no differences in acute-phase response indicators after three months (low-certainty evidence). ImmunoGuard versus placebo The ImmunoGuard study observed there are probably no differences in adverse effects (moderate-certainty evidence) or in acute-phase response indicators after one month of treatment (moderate-certainty evidence). No data were reported for the number of people experiencing an attack, duration of attacks or days between attacks. Anakinra versus placebo A study of anakinra given to 25 colchicine-resistant participants found there is probably no difference in the number of participants experiencing an attack at four months (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.07; moderate-certainty evidence). There were no data for duration of attacks or days between attacks. There are probably no differences between anakinra and placebo with regards to injection site reaction, headache, presyncope, dyspnea and itching (narrative summary; moderate-certainty evidence). For acute-phase response, anakinra probably reduced C-reactive protein (CRP) after four months (narrative summary; moderate-certainty evidence). Canakinumab versus placebo Canakinumab probably reduces the number of participants experiencing an attack at 16 weeks (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.65; 1 study, 63 colchicine-resistant participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There were no data for the duration of attacks or days between attacks. The included study reported the number of serious adverse events per 100 patient-years was probably 42.7 with canakinumab versus 97.4 with placebo among people with colchicine-resistant FMF (moderate-certainty evidence). For acute-phase response, canakinumab probably caused a higher proportion of participants to have a CRP level of 10 mg/L or less compared to placebo (68% with canakinumab versus 6% with placebo; 1 study, 63 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Colchicine single dose versus divided dose There is probably no difference in the duration of attacks at three months (MD -0.04 hours, 95% CI -10.91 to 10.83) or six months (MD 2.80 hours, 95% CI -5.39 to 10.99; moderate-certainty evidence). There were no data for the number of participants experiencing an attack or days between attacks. There is probably no difference in adverse events (including anorexia, nausea, diarrhea, abdominal pain, vomiting and elevated liver enzymes) between groups (narrative summary; moderate-certainty evidence). For acute-phase response, there may be no evidence of a difference between groups (narrative summary; low- to moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There were limited RCTs assessing interventions for people with FMF. Based on the evidence, three times daily colchicine may reduce the number of people experiencing attacks, colchicine single dose and divided dose may not be different for children with FMF, canakinumab probably reduces the number of people experiencing attacks, and anakinra or canakinumab probably reduce CRP in colchicine-resistant participants; however, only a few RCTs contributed data for analysis. Further RCTs examining active interventions, not only colchicine, are necessary before a comprehensive conclusion regarding the efficacy and safety of interventions for reducing inflammation in FMF can be drawn.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Amyloidosis; Child; Child, Preschool; Colchicine; Familial Mediterranean Fever; Humans; Inflammation; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Middle Aged; Serum Amyloid A Protein; Young Adult
PubMed: 35349164
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010893.pub4 -
The Lancet. Rheumatology Oct 2021Anakinra might improve the prognosis of patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 (ie, patients requiring oxygen supplementation but not yet receiving organ support). We...
BACKGROUND
Anakinra might improve the prognosis of patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 (ie, patients requiring oxygen supplementation but not yet receiving organ support). We aimed to assess the effect of anakinra treatment on mortality in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.
METHODS
For this systematic review and individual patient-level meta-analysis, a systematic literature search was done on Dec 28, 2020, in Medline (PubMed), Cochrane, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases for randomised trials, comparative studies, and observational studies of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, comparing administration of anakinra with standard of care, or placebo, or both. The search was repeated on Jan 22, 2021. Individual patient-level data were requested from investigators and corresponding authors of eligible studies; if individual patient-level data were not available, published data were extracted from the original reports. The primary endpoint was mortality after 28 days and the secondary endpoint was safety (eg, the risk of secondary infections). This study is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020221491).
FINDINGS
209 articles were identified, of which 178 full-text articles fulfilled screening criteria and were assessed. Aggregate data on 1185 patients from nine studies were analysed, and individual patient-level data on 895 patients were provided from six of these studies. Eight studies were observational and one was a randomised controlled trial. Most studies used historical controls. In the individual patient-level meta-analysis, after adjusting for age, comorbidities, baseline ratio of the arterial partial oxygen pressure divided by the fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO/FiO), C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations, and lymphopenia, mortality was significantly lower in patients treated with anakinra (38 [11%] of 342) than in those receiving standard of care with or without placebo (137 [25%] of 553; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·32 [95% CI 0·20-0·51]). The mortality benefit was similar across subgroups regardless of comorbidities (ie, diabetes), ferritin concentrations, or the baseline PaO/FiO. In a subgroup analysis, anakinra was more effective in lowering mortality in patients with CRP concentrations higher than 100 mg/L (OR 0·28 [95% CI 0·17-0·47]). Anakinra showed a significant survival benefit when given without dexamethasone (OR 0·23 [95% CI 0·12-0·43]), but not with dexamethasone co-administration (0·72 [95% CI 0·37-1·41]). Anakinra was not associated with a significantly increased risk of secondary infections when compared with standard of care (OR 1·35 [95% CI 0·59-3·10]).
INTERPRETATION
Anakinra could be a safe, anti-inflammatory treatment option to reduce the mortality risk in patients admitted to hospital with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia, especially in the presence of signs of hyperinflammation such as CRP concentrations higher than 100 mg/L.
FUNDING
Sobi.
PubMed: 34396156
DOI: 10.1016/S2665-9913(21)00216-2 -
Journal of Family Medicine and Primary... Sep 2021Exact information about the efficacy of various medications proposed by regulatory bodies in children with COVID-19 is limited due to the lack of controlled trials in...
BACKGROUND
Exact information about the efficacy of various medications proposed by regulatory bodies in children with COVID-19 is limited due to the lack of controlled trials in the existing literature.
METHODS
Different electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, COCHRANE CENTRAL, LitCovid, medRxiv, and bioRxiv) were searched for articles describing the management of COVID-19 cases in children with 18 shortlisted medications. Prospective/retrospective studies/case series (with at least 20 cases) reporting COVID-19 in patients aged ≤14 years were searched to collect information regarding clinical details and severity of participants, medications used, and outcome. The pooled estimate of these parameters across studies was performed using a random-effect or fixed-effect meta-analysis depending on the degree of heterogeneity.
RESULTS
From a total of 5794 records, 97 studies/case series (8243 patients) fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in this systematic review. A total of 21% children received at least one medication specifically used for COVID-19. While antivirals were used in 15.3% of children, remedesivir was the most commonly used antiviral drug in 6.2% of included children without many reports of serious adverse effects. There was a more prevalent use of anti-inflammatory medications including corticosteroids (27.8%, = 0.01). Total 91% of severe cases described in literature in children received some anti-inflammatory medications. Among them, corticosteroids (17%) and Intravenous immune globulin (IVIG) (17.5%) were the most predominant followed by interferon (4.2%), tocilizumab (1.5%), and anakinra (0.8%). The most predominant therapy among multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) cases were IVIG (81%), followed by aspirin (67%), corticosteroids (64%), inotropes (62%), and anticoagulation (56%, mostly low molecular weight heparin, LMWH). Overall mortality was only 1.3%, but when we analyzed separately including only cases with moderate and severe disease, the mortality rate was 4.6%.
CONCLUSION
Among pharmacological modalities, anti-inflammatory agents like corticosteroids and antivirals like remdesivir have the most promising evidence for severe cases of pediatric COVID-19. Intravenous immunoglobulin and other anti-inflammatory/immunomodulatory agents like anakinra, aspirin, and anticoagulants have important therapeutic role in cases with MIS-C. Most of the mild cases recover with conservative treatment only.
PubMed: 34760747
DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_2583_20 -
Scientific Reports Dec 2020Plant-based diets like vegetarian or vegan diets might influence circulating levels of inflammatory biomarkers, thereby reducing the risk of chronic diseases. This... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Plant-based diets like vegetarian or vegan diets might influence circulating levels of inflammatory biomarkers, thereby reducing the risk of chronic diseases. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the associations of veganism and vegetarianism with circulating inflammatory biomarkers in comparison to omnivores. Literature search was conducted in Pubmed and EMBASE until April 2020 and mean differences of biomarkers were assessed for: C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-18 (IL-18), interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1 RA), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-ɑ), E-selectin, intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), adiponectin, omentin-1 and resistin. Of initially identified 1073 publications, 21 cross-sectional studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Vegan diet was associated with lower levels of CRP compared to omnivores [mean difference - 0.54 mg/l, 95%-CI: - 0.79 to - 0.28, p < 0.0001]. This association was less pronounced in vegetarians [mean difference - 0.25 mg/l, 95%-CI: - 0.49 to 0.00, p = 0.05]. In patients with impaired kidney function, the association between vegetarian nutrition and CRP was much stronger with - 3.91 mg/l (95%-CI: - 5.23 to - 2.60; p < 0.0001). No substantial effects were observed for all other inflammatory biomarkers. Despite strong associations between CRP and a vegan or vegetarian diet were seen, further research is needed, as most inflammatory biomarkers were investigated only in single studies so far.
Topics: Biomarkers; C-Reactive Protein; Chronic Disease; Diet, Vegan; Diet, Vegetarian; Inflammation; Inflammation Mediators; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Interleukin-18; Interleukin-6
PubMed: 33303765
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-78426-8 -
BMC Medicine Oct 2022Hormonal changes during the menstrual cycle play a key role in shaping immunity in the cervicovaginal tract. Cervicovaginal fluid contains cytokines, chemokines,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Hormonal changes during the menstrual cycle play a key role in shaping immunity in the cervicovaginal tract. Cervicovaginal fluid contains cytokines, chemokines, immunoglobulins, and other immune mediators. Many studies have shown that the concentrations of these immune mediators change throughout the menstrual cycle, but the studies have often shown inconsistent results. Our understanding of immunological correlates of the menstrual cycle remains limited and could be improved by meta-analysis of the available evidence.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of cervicovaginal immune mediator concentrations throughout the menstrual cycle using individual participant data. Study eligibility included strict definitions of the cycle phase (by progesterone or days since the last menstrual period) and no use of hormonal contraception or intrauterine devices. We performed random-effects meta-analyses using inverse-variance pooling to estimate concentration differences between the follicular and luteal phases. In addition, we performed a new laboratory study, measuring select immune mediators in cervicovaginal lavage samples.
RESULTS
We screened 1570 abstracts and identified 71 eligible studies. We analyzed data from 31 studies, encompassing 39,589 concentration measurements of 77 immune mediators made on 2112 samples from 871 participants. Meta-analyses were performed on 53 immune mediators. Antibodies, CC-type chemokines, MMPs, IL-6, IL-16, IL-1RA, G-CSF, GNLY, and ICAM1 were lower in the luteal phase than the follicular phase. Only IL-1α, HBD-2, and HBD-3 were elevated in the luteal phase. There was minimal change between the phases for CXCL8, 9, and 10, interferons, TNF, SLPI, elafin, lysozyme, lactoferrin, and interleukins 1β, 2, 10, 12, 13, and 17A. The GRADE strength of evidence was moderate to high for all immune mediators listed here.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the variability of cervicovaginal immune mediator measurements, our meta-analyses show clear and consistent changes during the menstrual cycle. Many immune mediators were lower in the luteal phase, including chemokines, antibodies, matrix metalloproteinases, and several interleukins. Only interleukin-1α and beta-defensins were higher in the luteal phase. These cyclical differences may have consequences for immunity, susceptibility to infection, and fertility. Our study emphasizes the need to control for the effect of the menstrual cycle on immune mediators in future studies.
Topics: Elafin; Female; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor; Humans; Immunoglobulins; Immunologic Factors; Interferons; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Interleukin-16; Interleukin-1alpha; Interleukin-6; Interleukins; Lactoferrin; Menstrual Cycle; Muramidase; Progesterone; beta-Defensins
PubMed: 36195867
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-022-02532-9 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Sep 2021The role of immunomodulatory agents in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been of increasing interest. Anakinra, an interleukin-1 inhibitor, has... (Review)
Review
The role of immunomodulatory agents in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been of increasing interest. Anakinra, an interleukin-1 inhibitor, has been shown to offer significant clinical benefits in patients with COVID-19 and hyperinflammation. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the impact of anakinra on the outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was conducted. Studies, randomized or non-randomized with adjustment for confounders, reporting on the adjusted risk of death in patients treated with anakinra versus those not treated with anakinra were deemed eligible. A search was performed in PubMed/EMBASE databases, as well as in relevant websites, until 1 August 2021. The meta-analysis of six studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria ( = 1553 patients with moderate to severe pneumonia, weighted age 64 years, men 66%, treated with anakinra 50%, intubated 3%) showed a pooled hazard ratio for death in patients treated with anakinra at 0.47 (95% confidence intervals 0.34, 0.65). A meta-regression analysis did not reveal any significant associations between the mean age, percentage of males, mean baseline C-reactive protein levels, mean time of administration since symptoms onset among the included studies and the hazard ratios for death. All studies were considered as low risk of bias. The current evidence, although derived mainly from observational studies, supports a beneficial role of anakinra in the treatment of selected patients with COVID-19.
PubMed: 34640480
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10194462 -
Medicine May 2024The goal of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy and safety of different biological agents (infliximab, canakinumab, baricitinib, anakinra, adalimumab,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
The goal of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy and safety of different biological agents (infliximab, canakinumab, baricitinib, anakinra, adalimumab, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, and rilonacept) compared with placebo for systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients, through a network meta-analysis.
METHODS
Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to July 2023 for randomized controlled trials comparing different biological agents (infliximab, canakinumab, baricitinib, anakinra, adalimumab, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, and rilonacept) or placebo directly or indirectly in JIA. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted. Data was extracted and analyzed by R with gemtc package. The treatment options were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value.
RESULTS
We identified 10 randomized controlled trials and analyzed 898 participants. Canakinumab (odds ratio 55.0, 95% credible intervals 2.4-67.0) was more effective than the placebo, and the difference was statistically significant. However, there was no statistical significance between other drugs versus placebo in terms of the modified ACRpedi30 (P > .05). The SUCRA shows that canakinumab ranked first (SUCRA, 86.9%), anakinra ranked second (SUCRA, 77.7%), adalimumab ranked third (SUCRA, 61.9%), and placebo ranked the last (SUCRA, 6.3%). Nevertheless, there were no notable discrepancies in the occurrence of adverse events, hepatic-related adverse events, infectious adverse event, serious adverse events, and serious infection following treatment with canakinumab, anakinra, tocilizumab, rilonacept, or the placebo. Based on the clustergram of modified ACRpedi30 and adverse events, canakinumab is suggested for JIA according to the surface under SUCRAs considering the symptom and adverse events simultaneously.
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with JIA, canakinumab exhibited the highest likelihood of being the optimal treatment for achieving the modified ACRpedi30 response rate, and neither of the tested biological agents carried a significant risk of serious adverse events.
Topics: Arthritis, Juvenile; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Antirheumatic Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Adalimumab; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Bayes Theorem
PubMed: 38701278
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038002 -
Daru : Journal of Faculty of Pharmacy,... Dec 2020A recent survey has shown that the COVID-19 pandemic has culminated in dramatical and critical treatment particularly in acute infected patients. In fact, this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
A recent survey has shown that the COVID-19 pandemic has culminated in dramatical and critical treatment particularly in acute infected patients. In fact, this systematic review-meta-analysis was directly pertained to estimation at the efficient value of some clinical managements to confront the COVID-19 infection.
METHODS
Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Scholar databases were searched from inception to July 1, 2020, to identify studies reporting the current treatment process and medications (e.g. hydroxychloroquine, antiviral therapy, convalescent plasma, and immunomodulatory agents) for COVID-19. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed to calculate the relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The outcomes of this study were the frequency of negative conversion cases, clinical improvements, mechanical ventilation demand, intensive care unit (ICU) entry, and mortality. The standard treatment refers to the published guidelines and specialist experience which varies in different articles, and the proposed treatment refers to the kind of interest suggested in the included studies.
RESULTS
A number of 45 articles met the eligibility criteria (out of 6793 articles). Among them, 26 articles involving 3263 patients were included in quantitative analysis. Anti-COVID-19 interventions could significantly increase clinical improvement (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.08-1.27; I = 49.8%) and reduce the mortality rate (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.35-0.95; I = 74.8%). Although in terms of negative conversion, ICU entry, and mechanical ventilation demand, clinical intervention had no beneficial effect. The clinical effect of immunomodulatory agents (especially tocilizumab and anakinra) was noticeable compared to other medications with RR of 0.22 (95% CI 0.09-0.53; I = 40.9%) for mortality and 1.25 (95% CI 1.07-1.46; I = 45.4%) for clinical improvement. Moreover, Antivirals (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.26; I = 47.0%) and convalescent plasma therapy (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.01-1.98; I = 66.6%) had significant beneficial effects on clinical improvement.
CONCLUSION
Based on our findings, all the included interventions significantly declined the mortality and enhanced clinical improvements with no effect on negative conversion and mechanical ventilation demand. Especially, immunomodulators and plasma therapy showed favorable outcomes. An evaluation on the efficacy of proposed treatment against COVID-19.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; COVID-19; Humans; Immunization, Passive; Immunologic Factors; Intensive Care Units; Respiration, Artificial; COVID-19 Serotherapy
PubMed: 32812187
DOI: 10.1007/s40199-020-00367-4 -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2023This study evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of interleukin-1 (IL-1) blockade for patients with COVID-19. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This study evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of interleukin-1 (IL-1) blockade for patients with COVID-19.
METHODS
The PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles from their inception to 25 September 2022. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that assessed the clinical efficacy and safety of IL-1 blockade in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 were included.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included seven RCTs. No significant difference in the all-cause mortality rate of patients with COVID-19 was observed between the IL-1 blockade and control groups (7.7 vs. 10.5%, odds ratio [OR] = 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-1.22; = 18%). However, the study group was at significantly lower risk of requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) compared with the control group (OR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.32-0.86; = 24%). Finally, the risk of adverse events was similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
IL-1 blockade does not provide increased survival benefits in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, but it may reduce the need for MV. Furthermore, it is a safe agent for use in the treatment of COVID-19.>.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Interleukin-1; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 37199379
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2208872 -
Rheumatology International Dec 2020Children with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are being reported to have manifestations of hyperinflammatory states and/or Kawasaki-like disease. In this study, we...
Children with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are being reported to have manifestations of hyperinflammatory states and/or Kawasaki-like disease. In this study, we investigated children with typical and atypical Kawasaki disease (KD) likely to be associated with COVID-19. We have reported four children with Kawasaki-like disease probably associated with COVID-19. The clinical features were consistent with incomplete KD in three patients. SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was positive in one and the serology was positive in one patient with negative RT-PCR. Corticosteroids, anakinra, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and acetylsalicylic acid were used in the treatment. Three patients recovered after the treatment while one patient died. The literature review revealed 36 articles describing 320 children with Kawasaki-like disease associated with COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was negative in 120 (65.5%) of 183 patients while the serology was positive in 130 (83.8%) of 155 patients. The therapeutic options have included IVIG, acetylsalicylic acid, tocilizumab, anakinra, enoxaparin, and methylprednisolone. Pediatric COVID-19 cases may present with atypical/incomplete Kawasaki-like disease. Thus, pediatricians need to be aware of such atypical presentations resembling KD for early diagnosis of COVID-19.
Topics: Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Child; Child, Preschool; Coronavirus Infections; Fatal Outcome; Female; Humans; Infant; Male; Mucocutaneous Lymph Node Syndrome; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 32936318
DOI: 10.1007/s00296-020-04701-6