Background Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was proposed as potential treatment for COVID-19. Objective We set-up a multicenter Italian collaboration to investigate the relationship between HCQ therapy and COVID-19 in-hospital mortality. Methods In a retrospective observational study, 3,451 unselected patients hospitalized in 33 clinical centers in Italy, from February 19, 2020 to May 23, 2020, with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, were analyzed. The primary end-point in a time-to event analysis was in-hospital death, comparing patients who received HCQ with patients who did not. We used multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression models with inverse probability for treatment weighting by propensity scores, with the addition of subgroup analyses. Results Out of 3,451 COVID-19 patients, 76.3% received HCQ. Death rates (per 1,000 person-days) for patients receiving or not HCQ were 8.9 and 15.7, respectively. After adjustment for propensity scores, we found 30% lower risk of death in patients receiving HCQ (HR=0.70; 95%CI: 0.59 to 0.84; E-value=1.67). Secondary analyses yielded similar results. The inverse association of HCQ with inpatient mortality was particularly evident in patients having elevated C-reactive protein at entry. Conclusions HCQ use was associated with a 30% lower risk of death in COVID-19 hospitalized patients. Within the limits of an observational study and awaiting results from randomized controlled trials, these data do not discourage the use of HCQ in inpatients with COVID-19.

Introduction: A hypercoagulable condition was described in patients with COVID-19 and proposed as a possible pathogenic mechanism contributing to disease progression and lethality. Aim: We evaluated if in-hospital administration of heparin improved survival in a large cohort of Italian COVID-19 patients. Methods: In a retrospective observational study, 2,574 unselected patients hospitalised in 30 clinical centres in Italy from February 19, 2020 to May 23, 2020 with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, were analysed. The primary end-point in a time-to event analysis was in-hospital death, comparing patients who received heparin (low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH)) with patients who did not. We used multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression models with inverse probability for treatment weighting by propensity scores. Results: Out of 2,574 COVID-19 patients, 70.1% received heparin. LMWH was largely the most used formulation (99.5%). Death rates for patients receiving heparin or not were 7.4 and 14.0 per 1,000 person-days, respectively. After adjustment for propensity scores, we found a 40% lower risk of death in patients receiving heparin (HR=0.60; 95%CI: 0.49 to 0.74; E-value=2.04). This association was particularly evident in patients with a higher severity of disease or strong coagulation activation. Conclusions: In-hospital heparin treatment was associated with lower mortality, particularly in severely ill COVID-19 patients and in those with strong coagulation activation. The results from randomised clinical trials are eagerly awaited to provide clear-cut recommendations.

Background Tocilizumab blocks pro-inflammatory activity of interleukin-6 (IL-6), involved in pathogenesis of pneumonia the most frequent cause of death in COVID-19 patients. Methods A multicenter, single-arm, hypothesis-driven trial was planned, according to a phase 2 design, to study the effect of tocilizumab on lethality rates at 14 and 30 days (co-primary endpoints, a priori expected rates being 20 and 35%, respectively). A further prospective cohort of patients, consecutively enrolled after the first cohort was accomplished, was used as a secondary validation dataset. The two cohorts were evaluated jointly in an exploratory multivariable logistic regression model to assess prognostic variables on survival. Results In the primary intention-to-treat (ITT) phase 2 population, 180/301 (59.8%) subjects received tocilizumab, and 67 deaths were observed overall. Lethality rates were equal to 18.4% (97.5% CI: 13.6–24.0, P = 0.52) and 22.4% (97.5% CI: 17.2–28.3, P < 0.001) at 14 and 30 days, respectively. Lethality rates were lower in the validation dataset, that included 920 patients. No signal of specific drug toxicity was reported. In the exploratory multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio negatively affected survival, while the concurrent use of steroids was associated with greater survival. A statistically significant interaction was found between tocilizumab and respiratory support, suggesting that tocilizumab might be more effective in patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline. Conclusions Tocilizumab reduced lethality rate at 30 days compared with null hypothesis, without significant toxicity. Possibly, this effect could be limited to patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline. Registration EudraCT (2020-001110-38); clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04317092).

In conclusion, patients exposed to lamivudine plus adefovir showed relevant osteorenal damage. The switch to tenofovir provoked a slight reduction in eGFR that stabilized after 6 months. The reduced BMD at baseline did not worsen under tenofovir treatment.

The hypothesis that been set forward that use of Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone System (RAAS) inhibitors is associated with COVID−19 severity. We setup a multicenter Italian collaboration (CORIST Project, ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04318418) to retrospectively investigate the relationship between RAAS inhibitors and COVID−19 in-hospital mortality. We also carried out an updated meta-analysis on the relevant studies. Methods: We analyzed 4069 unselected patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospitalized in 34 clinical centers in Italy from February 19, 2020 to May 23, 2020. The primary end-point in a time-to event analysis was in-hospital death, comparing patients who received angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEeI) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB) with patients who did not. Articles for the meta-analysis were retrieved until July 13th, 2020 by searching in web-based libraries, and data were combined using the general variance-based method. Results: Out of 4069 COVID−19 patients, 13.5% and 13.3% received ACE-I or ARB, respectively. Use of neither ACE-I nor ARB was associated with mortality (multivariable hazard ratio (HR) adjusted also for COVID−19 treatments: 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.77-1.20 and HR = 0.89, 0.67-1.19 for ACE-I and ARB, respectively). Findings were similar restricting the analysis to hypertensive (N = 2057) patients (HR = 1.00, 0.78-1.26 and HR = 0.88, 0.65-1.20) or when ACE-I or ARB were considered as a single group. Results from the meta-analysis (19 studies, 29,057 COVID−19 adult patients, 9700 with hypertension) confirmed the absence of association. Conclusions: In this observational study and meta-analysis of the literature, ACE-I or ARB use was not associated with severity or in-hospital mortality in COVID−19 patients.

No abstract

Background: Protease inhibitors have been considered as possible therapeutic agents for COVID-19 patients.Objectives: To describe the association between lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) or darunavir/cobicistat (DRV/c) use and in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients.Study Design: Multicenter observational study of COVID-19 patients admitted in 33 Italian hospitals. Medications, preexisting conditions, clinical measures, and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Patients were retrospectively divided in three groups, according to use of LPV/r, DRV/c or none of them. Primary outcome in a time-to event analysis was death. We used Cox proportional-hazards models with inverse probability of treatment weighting by multinomial propensity scores.Results: Out of 3,451 patients, 33.3% LPV/r and 13.9% received DRV/c. Patients receiving LPV/r or DRV/c were more likely younger, men, had higher C-reactive protein levels while less likely had hypertension, cardiovascular, pulmonary or kidney disease. After adjustment for propensity scores, LPV/r use was not associated with mortality (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13), whereas treatment with DRV/c was associated with a higher death risk (HR = 1.89, 1.53 to 2.34, E-value = 2.43). This increased risk was more marked in women, in elderly, in patients with higher severity of COVID-19 and in patients receiving other COVID-19 drugs.Conclusions: In a large cohort of Italian patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in a real-life setting, the use of LPV/r treatment did not change death rate, while DRV/c was associated with increased mortality. Within the limits of an observational study, these data do not support the use of LPV/r or DRV/c in COVID-19 patients.

This case confirms that clarithromycin although very rarely, can be a cause of fulminant hepatitis, especially in patients with pre-existing liver damage. Although the presumption that clarithromycin hepatotoxicity is dose related is reasonable, an immune-toxicologic hypothesis cannot be excluded.