A massive COVID-19 vaccination campaign is underway worldwide. Epidemiological data from studies indicate excellent efficacy and safety profile for COVID-19 vaccines. However, there are few data from studies on the effect of decreasing the probability of infection of vaccinated subjects compared to unvaccinated subjects. In this short communication, we describe some evidence on this important and current topic providing useful personal reflections.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS‐CoV)‐2 has spread worldwide, leading the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare a pandemic, on 11 March 2020. Variants of concern have appeared at regular intervals—Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and now Omicron. Omicron variant, first identified in Botswana in November 2021, is rapidly becoming the dominant circulating variant. In this review, we provide an overview regarding the molecular profile of the Omicron variant, epidemiology, transmissibility, the impact on vaccines, as well as vaccine escape, and finally, we report the pharmacological agents able to block the endocellular entry of SARS‐CoV‐2 or to inhibit its viral replication. The Omicron has more than 50 mutations, of which the spike protein has 26–35 amino acids different from the original SARS‐CoV‐2 virus or the Delta, some of which are associated with humoral immune escape potential and greater transmissibility. Omicron has a significant growth advantage over Delta, leading to rapid spread with higher incidence levels. The disease so far has been mild compared to the Delta. The two vaccination doses offer little or no protection against Omicron infection while the booster doses provide significant protection against mild illness and likely offer even greater levels of protection against serious illness. Recently, new oral antiviral agents such as molnupiravir and paxlovid have been approved and represent important therapeutic alternatives to antiviral remdesivir. In addition, monoclonal antibodies such as casirivimab/imdevimab bind different epitopes of the spike protein receptor; is this class of drugs effective against the Omicron variant? However, more research is needed to define whether Omicron is indeed more infectious and whether the vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, and antivirals currently available are effective.

BackgroundTo describe frequency, preventability and seriousness of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in children as cause of emergency department (ED) admission and to evaluate the association between specific factors and the reporting of ADRs.MethodsA retrospective analysis based on reports of suspected ADRs collected between January 1st, 2012 and December 31st, 2016 in the ED of Meyer Children’s Hospital (Italy). Demographics, clinical status, suspected drugs, ADR description, and its degree of seriousness were collected. Logistic regression was used to estimate the reporting odds ratios (RORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of potential predictors of ADR seriousness.ResultsWithin 5 years, we observed 834 ADRs (1100 drug-ADR pairs), of whom 239 were serious; of them, 224 led to hospitalization. Patients were mostly treated with one drug. Among patients treated with more than one drug, 78 ADRs presented a potential interaction. The most frequently reported ADRs involved gastrointestinal system. The most frequently reported medication class was antinfectives. Risk of serious ADR was significantly lower in children and infants compared to adolescents (ROR 0.41 [95% CI: 0.27–0.61] and 0.47 [0.32–0.71], respectively), and it was significantly increased in subjects exposed to more than one drug (ROR 1.87 [1.33–2.62] and 3.01 [2.07–4.37] for subjects exposed to 2 and 3 or more drugs, respectively). Gender, interactions and off-label drug use did not influence the risk of serious ADRs.ConclusionActive surveillance in pharmacovigilance might represent the best strategy to estimate and characterize the clinical burden of ADRs in children.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40360-018-0207-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background The global pandemic COVID-19 caused by the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has already caused about 1.4 million deaths, and to date, there are no effective or direct antiviral vaccines. Some vaccines are in the last stages of testing. Overall mortality rates vary between countries, for example, from a minimum of 0.05% in Singapore to a maximum of 9.75 in Mexico; however, mortality and severity of COVID-19 are higher in the elderly and in those with comorbidities already present such as diabetes, hypertension, and heart disease. Main text Recent evidence has shown that an underlying liver disease can also be a risk factor, and SARS-CoV-2 itself can cause direct or indirect damage to liver tissue through multisystem inflammation generated especially in the more severe stages. In the current pandemic, liver dysfunction has been observed in 14–53% of patients with severe COVID-19. In addition, drugs administered during infection may be an additional factor of liver damage. The mechanism of cellular penetration of the virus that occurs by viral entry is through the receptors of the angiotensin 2 conversion enzyme (ACE-2) host that are abundantly present in type II pneumocytes, heart cells, but also liver cholangiocytes. Conclusion In this manuscript, we describe the clinical management aimed at preserving the liver or reducing the damage caused by COVID-19 and anti-COVID-19 drug treatments.

Aim SARS-CoV-2 infection has been divided by scientific opinion into three phases: the first as asymptomatic or slightly symptomatic and the second and the third with greater severity, characterized by a hyperinflammatory and fibrotic state, responsible for lung lesions, in some cases fatal. The development of antiviral drugs directed against SARS-CoV-2 and effective vaccines is progressing; meanwhile, the best pharmacological objective is related to the management of all the complications caused by this viral infection, mainly controlling the inflammatory and fibrotic state and preventing the infection from moving into the most serious phases. Subject and method Describe the scientific rationale related to the use of an antifibrotic therapy with pirfenidone, as monotherapy and/or in combination with anti-inflammatory drugs to manage and control complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results Based on the scientific literature and epidemiological results and considering the pathophysiological, biological, and molecular characteristics of SARS-CoV-2, an antifibrotic drug such as pirfenidone as monotherapy or in combination with antiinflammatory drugs can be (acting early, at the right doses and at the right time) therapeutically effective to avoid serious complications during viral infection. The same approach can also be effective as postinfection therapy in patients with residual pulmonary fibrotic damage. Management of inflammation and fibrotic status with a combination therapy of pirfenidone and IL-6 or IL-1 inhibitors could represent a pharmacological synergy with added value. Conclusion In this article, we consider the role of antifibrotic therapy with pirfenidone in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection on going or in the stage of postinfection with pulmonary fibrotic consequences. The scientific rationale for its use is also described.