-
Annals of Medicine Dec 2022Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P; 300 mg/120 mg) is a new direct-acting antiviral (DAA) that exhibits anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) pan-genotype (GT) activity for 8,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P; 300 mg/120 mg) is a new direct-acting antiviral (DAA) that exhibits anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) pan-genotype (GT) activity for 8, 12, or 16 weeks. However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have received reports that using G/P causes moderate to severe liver impairment. In some cases, isolated hyperbilirubinemia and jaundice have been reported without concomitant evidence of increased transaminase levels or other hepatic decompensation events. This study aimed to analyze the incidence of drug-induced liver injury of G/P for chronic hepatitis C virus. We searched databases from the inception of each database until March 2021. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB 2.0) and the OpenMeta [Analyst] software were performed for quality assessment and quantitative studies, respectively. The primary outcome was grade 3 level of drug-induced liver injury (DILI). The nine studies included in the meta-analysis involved a total of 7,650 participants, and the overall sustained virologic response rate was above 95%. The most frequent drug-related laboratory abnormalities in DILI involved total bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and hemoglobin, but these abnormalities were minimal. The cirrhosis-without cirrhosis incidence risk ratio (IRR) was 2.724 (95% confidence interval: 1.182-6.276) in the grade 3 hyperbilirubinemia subgroup analysis. No significant differences were found within the other subgroups, in HCV GTs, and in treatment duration. DILI was found to occur frequently with G/P treatment. Hyperbilirubinemia occurred most frequently, especially, in patients with cirrhosis. However, G/P is still the primary therapy of choice for CKD and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients due to a superior safety rate.
Topics: Aminoisobutyric Acids; Antiviral Agents; Benzimidazoles; Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury; Cyclopropanes; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Lactams, Macrocyclic; Leucine; Proline; Pyrrolidines; Quinoxalines; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 34969349
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2021.2012589 -
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Feb 2022Current WHO recommendations for monitoring treatment response in adult pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) are sputum smear microscopy and/or culture conversion at the end of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Current WHO recommendations for monitoring treatment response in adult pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) are sputum smear microscopy and/or culture conversion at the end of the intensive phase of treatment. These methods either have suboptimal accuracy or a long turnaround time. There is a need to identify alternative biomarkers to monitor TB treatment response. We conducted a systematic review of active pulmonary TB treatment monitoring biomarkers. We screened 9,739 articles published between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2020, of which 77 met the inclusion criteria. When studies quantitatively reported biomarker levels, we meta-analyzed the average fold change in biomarkers from pretreatment to week 8 of treatment. We also performed a meta-analysis pooling the fold change since the previous time point collected. A total of 81 biomarkers were identified from 77 studies. Overall, these studies exhibited extensive heterogeneity with regard to TB treatment monitoring study design and data reporting. Among the biomarkers identified, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interferon gamma-induced protein 10 (IP-10), and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) had sufficient data to analyze fold changes. All four biomarker levels decreased during the first 8 weeks of treatment relative to baseline and relative to previous time points collected. Based on limited data available, CRP, IL-6, IP-10, and TNF-α have been identified as biomarkers that should be further explored in the context of TB treatment monitoring. The extensive heterogeneity in TB treatment monitoring study design and reporting is a major barrier to evaluating the performance of novel biomarkers and tools for this use case. Guidance for designing and reporting treatment monitoring studies is urgently needed.
Topics: Adult; Biomarkers; C-Reactive Protein; Humans; Interferon-gamma; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
PubMed: 34911364
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01859-21 -
International Journal of Molecular... Nov 2021The unprecedented successes of immunotherapies (IOs) including immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) and adoptive T-cell therapy (ACT) in patients with late-stage cancer...
The unprecedented successes of immunotherapies (IOs) including immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) and adoptive T-cell therapy (ACT) in patients with late-stage cancer provide proof-of-principle evidence that harnessing the immune system, in particular T cells, can be an effective approach to eradicate cancer. This instills strong interests in understanding the immunomodulatory effects of radiotherapy (RT), an area that was actually investigated more than a century ago but had been largely ignored for many decades. With the "newly" discovered immunogenic responses from RT, numerous endeavors have been undertaken to combine RT with IOs, in order to bolster anti-tumor immunity. However, the underlying mechanisms are not well defined, which is a subject of much investigation. We therefore conducted a systematic literature search on the molecular underpinnings of RT-induced immunomodulation and IOs, which identified the IFN-JAK-STAT pathway as a major regulator. Our further analysis of relevant studies revealed that the signaling strength and duration of this pathway in response to RT and IOs may determine eventual immunological outcomes. We propose that strategic targeting of this axis can boost the immunostimulatory effects of RT and radiosensitizing effects of IOs, thereby promoting the efficacy of combination therapy of RT and IOs.
Topics: Combined Modality Therapy; Humans; Immunotherapy; Interferons; Janus Kinases; Neoplasms; Radiotherapy; STAT Transcription Factors; Signal Transduction; T-Lymphocytes
PubMed: 34830176
DOI: 10.3390/ijms222212295 -
International Immunopharmacology Dec 2021The novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused great distress worldwide. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is well familiar but when it happens as...
AIMS
The novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused great distress worldwide. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is well familiar but when it happens as part of COVID-19 it has discrete features which are unmanageable. Numerous pharmacological treatments have been evaluated in clinical trials to control the clinical effects of CARDS, but there is no assurance of their effectiveness.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review of the literature of the Medline, Scopus, Bentham, PubMed, and EMBASE (Elsevier) databases was examined to understand the novel therapeutic approaches used in COVID-19-Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and their outcomes.
KEY FINDINGS
Current therapeutic options may not be enough to manage COVID-19-associated ARDS complications in group of patients and therefore, the current review has discussed the pathophysiological mechanism of COVID-19-associated ARDS, potential pharmacological treatment and the emerging molecular drug targets.
SIGNIFICANCE
The rationale of this review is to talk about the pathophysiology of CARDS, potential pharmacological treatment and the emerging molecular drug targets. Currently accessible treatment focuses on modulating immune responses, rendering antiviral effects, anti-thrombosis or anti-coagulant effects. It is expected that considerable number of studies conducting globally may help to discover effective therapies to decrease mortality and morbidity occurring due to CARDS. Attention should be also given on molecular drug targets that possibly will help to develop efficient cure for COVID-19-associated ARDS.
Topics: Animals; COVID-19; Cytokine Release Syndrome; Humans; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 34768236
DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2021.108328 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2021Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients treated with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are still at risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sustained...
Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients treated with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are still at risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sustained virologic response (SVR). This study aimed to investigate the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) as a potential predictive risk factor in developing HCC in HCV-infected patients after DAA treatment. This study was registered on PROSPERO under registration number CRD42021230457. We performed a systematic search in four medical databases from inception through November 3rd, 2020. Studies were eligible if they reported on HCV-infected patients treated with DAAs and compared the frequency of HCC in patients with and without DM. We calculated pooled odds ratios, unadjusted (UHR), and adjusted hazard ratios (AHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in meta-analysis. We included 30 articles in our systematic review and meta-analysis. DM proved to be a significant risk factor of HCC in DAA-treated HCV patients in unadjusted ( = 1.44, CI: 1.15-1.79) and adjusted analyses ( = 1.31, : 1.06-1.62). In the group of patients achieving SVR after DAA therapy, DM increased the risk of HCC in unadjusted ( = 1.3, CI: 1.09-1.51) analysis; however, in adjusted results, the risk was non-significant ( = 1.07, CI: 0.89-1.28). In patients with advanced liver fibrosis, DM was a risk factor for HCC in adjusted ( = 1.36, CI: 1.03-1.8), but not in unadjusted analysis ( = 1.11, CI: 0.8-1.42). DM is an independent risk factor of HCC after DAA treatment in HCV-infected patients. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=230457, identifier: CRD42021230457.
PubMed: 34733865
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.744512 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021The development of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and poor clinical outcomes are associated with hyperinflammation and a complex dysregulation of the immune... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The development of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and poor clinical outcomes are associated with hyperinflammation and a complex dysregulation of the immune response. Colchicine is an anti-inflammatory medicine and is thought to improve disease outcomes in COVID-19 through a wide range of anti-inflammatory mechanisms. Patients and healthcare systems need more and better treatment options for COVID-19 and a thorough understanding of the current body of evidence.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of Colchicine as a treatment option for COVID-19 in comparison to an active comparator, placebo, or standard care alone in any setting, and to maintain the currency of the evidence, using a living systematic review approach.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (comprising CENTRAL, MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and medRxiv), Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded and Emerging Sources Citation Index), and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions to 21 May 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials evaluating colchicine for the treatment of people with COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, age, sex, or ethnicity. We excluded studies investigating the prophylactic effects of colchicine for people without severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection but at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB 2) to assess bias in included studies and GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence for the following prioritised outcome categories considering people with moderate or severe COVID-19: all-cause mortality, worsening and improvement of clinical status, quality of life, adverse events, and serious adverse events and for people with asymptomatic infection or mild disease: all-cause mortality, admission to hospital or death, symptom resolution, duration to symptom resolution, quality of life, adverse events, serious adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three RCTs with 11,525 hospitalised participants (8002 male) and one RCT with 4488 (2067 male) non-hospitalised participants. Mean age of people treated in hospital was about 64 years, and was 55 years in the study with non-hospitalised participants. Further, we identified 17 ongoing studies and 11 studies completed or terminated, but without published results. Colchicine plus standard care versus standard care (plus/minus placebo) Treatment of hospitalised people with moderate to severe COVID-19 All-cause mortality: colchicine plus standard care probably results in little to no difference in all-cause mortality up to 28 days compared to standard care alone (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.08; 2 RCTs, 11,445 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Worsening of clinical status: colchicine plus standard care probably results in little to no difference in worsening of clinical status assessed as new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death compared to standard care alone (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.09; 2 RCTs, 10,916 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Improvement of clinical status: colchicine plus standard care probably results in little to no difference in improvement of clinical status, assessed as number of participants discharged alive up to day 28 without clinical deterioration or death compared to standard care alone (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.01; 1 RCT, 11,340 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Quality of life, including fatigue and neurological status: we identified no studies reporting this outcome. Adverse events: the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of colchicine on adverse events compared to placebo (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.78; 1 RCT, 72 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events: the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of colchicine plus standard care on serious adverse events compared to standard care alone (0 events observed in 1 RCT of 105 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Treatment of non-hospitalised people with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection or mild COVID-19 All-cause mortality: the evidence is uncertain about the effect of colchicine on all-cause mortality at 28 days (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.57, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.62; 1 RCT, 4488 participants; low-certainty evidence). Admission to hospital or death within 28 days: colchicine probably slightly reduces the need for hospitalisation or death within 28 days compared to placebo (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.03; 1 RCT, 4488 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Symptom resolution: we identified no studies reporting this outcome. Quality of life, including fatigue and neurological status: we identified no studies reporting this outcome. Adverse events: the evidence is uncertain about the effect of colchicine on adverse events compared to placebo . Results are from one RCT reporting treatment-related events only in 4412 participants (low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events: colchicine probably slightly reduces serious adverse events (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.00; 1 RCT, 4412 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Colchicine versus another active treatment (e.g. corticosteroids, anti-viral drugs, monoclonal antibodies) No studies evaluated this comparison. Different formulations, doses, or schedules of colchicine No studies assessed this.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the current evidence, in people hospitalised with moderate to severe COVID-19 the use of colchicine probably has little to no influence on mortality or clinical progression in comparison to placebo or standard care alone. We do not know whether colchicine increases the risk of (serious) adverse events. We are uncertain about the evidence of the effect of colchicine on all-cause mortality for people with asymptomatic infection or mild disease. However, colchicine probably results in a slight reduction of hospital admissions or deaths within 28 days, and the rate of serious adverse events compared with placebo. None of the studies reported data on quality of life or compared the benefits and harms of colchicine versus other drugs, or different dosages of colchicine. We identified 17 ongoing and 11 completed but not published RCTs, which we expect to incorporate in future versions of this review as their results become available. Editorial note: due to the living approach of this work, we monitor newly published results of RCTs on colchicine on a weekly basis and will update the review when the evidence or our certainty in the evidence changes.
Topics: COVID-19; Cause of Death; Colchicine; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Quality of Life; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34658014
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015045 -
Cancer Cell International Oct 2021Increasing evidence suggests that hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is associated with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). However, no clear consensus has been reached about... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Increasing evidence suggests that hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is associated with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). However, no clear consensus has been reached about the clinical features and effective treatment of HCV-associated NHL patients. We therefore performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the clinical characteristics and effectiveness of antiviral treatment or rituximab administration among NHL patients with HCV infection.
METHODS
Eight electronic databases, including PubMed, OVID, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials, WANFANG, CNKI, and VIP, were searched for eligible studies up to July 31, 2021. The hazard ratio (HR) or odds ratio (OR) corresponding to the 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated to estimate the outcomes. Publication bias was assessed by Egger's and Begg's tests. Statistical analysis was performed with RevMan 5.4 software and Stata version 15.
RESULTS
There were 27 shortlisted articles out of a total of 13,368 NHL patients included in the current meta-analysis. Our results demonstrated that NHL patients with HCV infection had a significantly shorter overall survival (OS: HR 1.89; 95% CI 1.42-2.51, P < 0.0001) and progression-free survival (PFS: HR 1.58; 95% CI 1.26-1.98, P < 0.0001), a lower overall response rate (ORR: OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.73, P < 0.00001) and a higher incidence of hepatic dysfunction during chemotherapy (OR 5.96; 95% CI 2.61-13.62, P < 0.0001) than NHL patients without HCV infection. HCV-positive NHL patients exhibited an advanced disease stage, an elevated level of LDH, a high-intermediate and high IPI/FLIPI risk as well as a higher incidence of spleen and liver involvement. Moreover, antiviral treatment prolonged survival (OS: HR 0.38; 95% CI 0.24-0.60, P < 0.0001), reduced disease progression [PFS/DFS (disease-free survival): HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.46-0.86, P = 0.003] and reinforced the treatment response (ORR: OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.34-5.11, P = 0.005) among the HCV-infected NHL patients. Finally, rituximab administration was associated with a favourable OS, while liver cirrhosis and low levels of albumin predicted a poor OS for HCV-positive NHL patients.
CONCLUSIONS
The current study provided compelling evidence about an inferior prognosis and distinct clinical characteristics among HCV-associated NHL patients. Antiviral treatment and rituximab-containing regimens were shown to be efficacious in improving the clinical outcomes of NHL patients with HCV infection.
PubMed: 34627251
DOI: 10.1186/s12935-021-02230-1 -
World Journal of Hepatology Aug 2021Liver fibrosis leads to liver-related events in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) infection. Although non-invasive tests (NITs) are critical to early detection of...
BACKGROUND
Liver fibrosis leads to liver-related events in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) infection. Although non-invasive tests (NITs) are critical to early detection of the development of liver fibrosis, the prognostic role of NITs remains unclear due to the limited types of NITs and liver outcomes explored in previous studies.
AIM
To determine the prognostic value of NITs for risk stratification in CHC patients.
METHODS
The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; no. CRD42019128176). The systematic review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases under a timeframe from the inception of the databases through February 25, 2020. We restricted our search to CHC cohort studies reporting an association between liver fibrosis assessed by NITs and the development of hepatocellular carcinoma, decompensation, or mortality. Pooled hazard ratios (HR) and area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) for each NIT were estimated using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed for NITs assessed at pre-treatment or post-treatment with sustained virologic response (SVR), treatment with either pegylated interferon and ribavirin or direct acting antiviral, Eastern or Western countries, and different cutoff points.
RESULTS
The present metaanalysis included 29 cohort studies, enrolling 69339 CHC patients. Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) index, aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio (APRI) score, and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) were found to have hepatocellular carcinoma predictive potential with pooled adjusted HRs of 2.48 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.91-3.23, = 96%], 4.24 (95%CI: 2.15-8.38, = 20%) and 7.90 (95%CI: 3.98-15.68, = 52%) and AUROCs of 0.81 (95%CI: 0.73-0.89, = 77%), 0.81 (95%CI: 0.75-0.87, = 68%), and 0.79 (95%CI: 0.63-0.96, = 90%), respectively. Pooled adjusted HR with a pre-treatment FIB-4 cutoff of 3.25 was 3.22 (95%CI: 2.32-4.47, = 80%). Pooled adjusted HRs for post-treatment with SVR FIB-4, APRI, and LSM were 3.01 (95%CI: 0.32-28.61, = 89%), 9.88 (95%CI: 2.21-44.17, = 24%), and 6.33 (95%CI: 2.57-15.59, = 17%), respectively. Pooled adjusted HRs for LSM in patients with SVR following direct acting antiviral therapy was 5.55 (95%CI: 1.47-21.02, = 36%). Pooled AUROCs for post-treatment with SVR FIB-4 and LSM were 0.75 (95%CI: 0.55-0.95, = 88%) and 0.84 (95%CI: 0.66-1.03, = 88%), respectively. Additionally, FIB-4 and LSM were associated with overall mortality, with pooled adjusted HRs of 2.07 (95%CI: 1.49-2.88, = 27%) and 4.04 (95%CI: 2.40-6.80, = 63%), respectively.
CONCLUSION
FIB-4, APRI, and LSM showed potential for risk stratification in CHC patients. Cutoff levels need further validation.
PubMed: 34552701
DOI: 10.4254/wjh.v13.i8.949 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Sep 2021Previous studies reported worsened lipid profiles in patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) during direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) treatment. This study aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Previous studies reported worsened lipid profiles in patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) during direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) treatment. This study aimed to investigate the effect of sofosbuvir (SOF)-based DAAs on changes in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) in HCV patients.
METHODS
A systematic review of articles published before 31 May 2021 was conducted by searching MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and CINAHL Plus. Eligible studies were those comparing SOF-based DAAs and non-SOF DAAs for HCV patients and providing numerical data for changes in LDL. Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies- of Interventions was used for assessing risk of bias, and meta-analysis was performed for changes in LDL.
RESULTS
Six studies comprising 1248 patients were included, 848 patients treated with SOF-based DAAs and 400 patients with non-SOF DAAs vs. SOF-based DAAs group had significantly greater increases in LDL from baseline to week 4 than non-SOF DAAs group (P = 0.001). However, changes in LDL from baseline to the end of treatment (P = 0.060), to post-treatment week 12 (P = 0.263), and to post-treatment week 24 (P = 0.319) did not significantly differ between the two groups. Further comparison of SOF/ledipasvir with asunaprevir/daclatasvir revealed a similar trend in changes in LDL.
CONCLUSIONS
For HCV patients, SOF-based DAA regimens were associated with rapid and significant increases in LDL during the initial 4 weeks of treatment, and the changes did not sustain after the end of treatment. Potential mechanism might be related to the phosphoramidate side chain of SOF.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Genotype; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C; Hepatitis C, Chronic; Humans; Lipoproteins, LDL; Ribavirin; Sofosbuvir; Sustained Virologic Response; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34548026
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-021-06657-9 -
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis :... Dec 2021Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with macro- and micro-thromboses, which are triggered by endothelial cell activation, coagulopathy, and uncontrolled...
BACKGROUND
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with macro- and micro-thromboses, which are triggered by endothelial cell activation, coagulopathy, and uncontrolled inflammatory response. Conventional antithrombotic agents are under assessment in dozens of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with COVID-19, with preliminary results not demonstrating benefit in several studies.
OBJECTIVES
Given the possibility that more novel agents with antithrombotic effects may have a potential utility for management of patients with COVID-19, we assessed ongoing RCTs including these agents with their potential mechanism of action in this population.
METHODS
We searched clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify RCTs of novel antithrombotic agents in patients with COVID-19.
RESULTS
Based on a systematic literature search, 27 RCTs with 10 novel antithrombotic agents (including nafamostat, dociparstat, rNAPc2, and defibrotide) were identified. The results from these trials have not been disseminated yet. The studied drugs in the ongoing or completed RCTs include agents affecting the coagulation cascade, drugs affecting endothelial activation, and mixed acting agents. Their postulated antithrombotic mechanisms of action and their potential impact on patient management are summarized.
CONCLUSION
Some novel antithrombotic agents have pleiotropic anti-inflammatory and antiviral effects, which may help reduce the viral load or fibrosis, and improve oxygenation. Results from ongoing RCTs will elucidate their actual role in the management of patients with COVID-19.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; COVID-19; Fibrinolytic Agents; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34538017
DOI: 10.1111/jth.15533