Background Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. Methods We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04327388 ; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. Findings Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference −1·7 [−9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [−6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI −7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 1...

Background: Sex-differences have been demonstrated in the acute phase of COVID-19 infection; females (F) were found to be less prone to develop a severe disease than males (M), but few studies have assessed sex-differences in Long-Covid-19 syndrome. Aim and Results:The aim of this prospective/retrospective study was to characterize the long-term consequences of this infection from a sex-perspective. For this purpose, we enrolled 223 patients (89 F and 134 M) who experienced a SARS -CoV-2 infection.In the acute phase of the illness, females reported more frequently than males: weakness, dysgeusia, anosmia, thoracic pain, palpitations, diarrhea, and myalgia without significant differences in breathlessness, cough, and sleep disturbance. After a mean follow-up time of 5 months after the acute phase, females were significantly more likely than males to report weakness, thoracic pain, palpitations, and sleep disturbance but not myalgia and cough.At the multivariate logistic regression, women were statistically significantly likely to experience persistent symptoms such as dyspnoea, fatigue, chest pain, and palpitations.On the contrary, myalgia, cough and sleep disturbance were not influenced by sex. Conclusion:We demonstrated that females were more symptomatic than males not only in the acute phase but also at follow-up. Sex was found to be an important determinant of Long-COVID syndrome because it is a significant predictor of persistent symptoms in females, such as dyspnoea, fatigue, chest pain, and palpitations.Our results suggest the need for long-term follow-up of these patients from a sexperspective in order to implement early preventive and personalized therapeutic strategies.

COPD is an incurable disorder, characterized by a progressive alveolar tissue destruction and defective mechanisms of repair and defense leading to emphysema. Currently, treatment for COPD is exclusively symptomatic; therefore, stem cell-based therapies represent a promising therapeutic approach to regenerate damaged structures of the respiratory system and restore lung function. The aim of this study was to provide a quantitative synthesis of the efficacy profile of stem cell-based regenerative therapies and derived products in COPD patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA-P. Data from 371 COPD patients were extracted from 11 studies. Active treatments elicited a strong tendency towards significance in FEV1 improvement (+71 mL 95%CI −2–145; p = 0.056) and significantly increased 6MWT (52 m 95%CI 18–87; p < 0.05) vs. baseline or control. Active treatments did not reduce the risk of hospitalization due to acute exacerbations (RR 0.77 CI95% 0.40–1.49; p > 0.05). This study suggests stem cell-based regenerative therapies and derived products may be effective to treat COPD patients, but the current evidence comes from small clinical trials. Large and well-designed randomized clinical trials are needed to really quantify the beneficial impact of stem cell-based regenerative therapy and derived products in COPD.

A clinical interpretation of the Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy (RECOVERY) study was performed to provide a useful tool to understand whether, when, and to whom dexamethasone should be administered during hospitalization for COVID-19. A post hoc analysis of data published in the preliminary report of the RECOVERY study was performed to calculate the person-based number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) of 6 mg dexamethasone once daily for up to 10 days vs. usual care with respect to mortality. At day 28, the NNT of dexamethasone vs. usual care was 36.0 (95%CI 24.9–65.1, p < 0.05) in all patients, 8.3 (95%CI 6.0–13.1, p < 0.05) in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, and 34.6 (95%CI 22.1–79.0, p < 0.05) in patients receiving oxygen only (with or without noninvasive ventilation). Dexamethasone increased mortality compared with usual care in patients not requiring oxygen supplementation, leading to a NNH value of 26.7 (95%CI 18.1–50.9, p < 0.05). NNT of dexamethasone vs. usual care was 17.3 (95%CI 14.9–20.6) in subjects <70 years, 27.0 (95%CI 18.5–49.8) in men, and 16.2 (95%CI 13.2–20.8) in patients in which the onset of symptoms was >7 days. Dexamethasone is effective in male subjects < 70 years that require invasive mechanical ventilation experiencing symptoms from >7 days and those patients receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation; it should be avoided in patients not requiring respiratory support.

Most patients who had COVID-19 are still symptomatic after many months post infection, but the long-term outcomes are not yet well defined. The aim of our prospective/retrospective study was to define the cardiac sequelae of COVID-19 infection. This monocentric cohort study included 160 consecutive patients who had been discharged from the ward or from the outpatient clinic after a diagnosis of COVID-19 and subsequently referred for a follow-up visit. Clinical features’ data about the acute phase along with information about the follow-up visit, including ECG and Echocardiographic parameters, were recorded. At an average follow-up of 5 months, echocardiography showed morpho-functional characteristics of both right (RV) and left (LV) ventricles, such as RV dilation, increased pressure in the pulmonary circulation, and bi-ventricular systolic–diastolic dysfunction. When examined using multivariate analysis, independent of age, sex, and co-morbidities, RV and LV changes were significantly associated with chest High-Resolution computed tomography score and hemodynamic Instability (HI), and with C-reactive protein, respectively. Our results suggest that COVID-19 may impact RV and LV differently. Notably, the extent of the pneumonia and HI may affect RV, whereas the inflammatory status may influence LV. A long-term follow-up is warranted to refine and customize the most appropriate therapeutic strategies.