Search

A variety of treatment modalities have been investigated since the beginning of the Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. The use of antimalarials (hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine) for COVID-19 treatment and prevention has proven to be a cautionary tale for widespread, off-label use of a medication during a crisis. The investigation of antimalarials for COVID-19 has also been a driver for a deluge of scientific output in a short amount of time. In this narrative review, we detail the evidence for and against antimalarial use in COVID-19, starting with the early small observational studies that influenced strategies worldwide. We then contrast these findings to later published larger observational studies and randomized controlled trials. We detail the emerging possible cardiovascular risks associated with antimalarial use in COVID-19 and whether COVID-19-related outcomes and cardiovascular risks may differ for antimalarials used in rheumatic diseases., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest BE has nothing to disclose. JWL has received research support from Pfizer unrelated to this work. JAS is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers K23 AR069688, R03 AR075886, L30 AR066953, P30 AR070253, and P30 AR072577), the Rheumatology Research Foundation (R Bridge Award), the Brigham Research Institute, and the R. Bruce and Joan M. Mickey Research Scholar Fund. Dr. Sparks has received research support from Amgen and Bristol-Myers Squibb and performed consultancy for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova Diagnostics, Janssen, Optum, and Pfizer unrelated to this work. AHK is supported by grants from NIH/NIAMS, Rheumatology Research Foundation, and GlaxoSmithKline as well as by personal fees from Exagen Diagnostics, Inc. Annexon Biosciences, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, and GlaxoSmithKline outside of the submitted work., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: COVID-19 is an acute respiratory viral infection that threatens people worldwide, including people with rheumatic disease, although it remains unclear to what extent various antirheumatic disease therapies increase susceptibility to complications of viral respiratory infections., Objective: The present study undertakes a scoping review of available evidence regarding the frequency and severity of acute respiratory viral adverse events related to antirheumatic disease therapies., Methods: Online databases were used to identify, since database inception, studies reporting primary data on acute respiratory viral infections in patients utilizing antirheumatic disease therapies. Independent reviewer pairs charted data from eligible studies using a standardized data abstraction tool., Results: A total of 180 studies were eligible for qualitative analysis. While acknowledging that the extant literature has a lack of specificity in reporting of acute viral infections or complications thereof, the data suggest that use of glucocorticoids, JAK inhibitors (especially high-dose), TNF inhibitors, and anti-IL-17 agents may be associated with an increased frequency of respiratory viral events. Available data suggest no increased frequency or risk of respiratory viral events with NSAIDs, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclophosphamide, or apremilast. One large cohort study demonstrated an association with leflunomide use and increased risk of acute viral respiratory events compared to non-use., Conclusion: This scoping review identified that some medication classes may confer increased risk of acute respiratory viral infections. However, definitive data are lacking and future studies should address this knowledge gap., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Several months into the COVID-19 pandemic, safe and effective treatments against this global health disaster have yet to be identified. Clinical research trials around the world are underway testing a wide array of possible medications. In particular, the off-label use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 prophylaxis and treatment has created many unprecedented challenges for the scientific community and the public., Areas Covered: We critically assessed major events from February - May 2020 that contributed to widespread use of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment and prophylaxis of COVID-19. We aimed to explore how opinions toward hydroxychloroquine may shift from early enthusiasm (based on in vitro and preliminary clinical data) to the hope for a miracle cure (through communication and promotion of questionable results) and, finally, to a rise of skepticism as more in-depth analyses are emerging., Expert Opinion: Mindful and rigorous acquisition of data, as well as its interpretation, are essential to an effective pandemic response. The rapid and premature promotion of results has had major implications for global crisis management, even creating distrust among the public. It is crucial for the medical and scientific community to incorporate the lessons learned from this situation.

Objectives: COVID-19 outcomes in people with rheumatic diseases remain poorly understood. The aim was to examine demographic and clinical factors associated with COVID-19 hospitalisation status in people with rheumatic disease., Methods: Case series of individuals with rheumatic disease and COVID-19 from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry: 24 March 2020 to 20 April 2020. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate ORs and 95% CIs of hospitalisation. Age, sex, smoking status, rheumatic disease diagnosis, comorbidities and rheumatic disease medications taken immediately prior to infection were analysed., Results: A total of 600 cases from 40 countries were included. Nearly half of the cases were hospitalised (277, 46%) and 55 (9%) died. In multivariable-adjusted models, prednisone dose ≥10 mg/day was associated with higher odds of hospitalisation (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.96). Use of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) alone or in combination with biologics/Janus Kinase inhibitors was not associated with hospitalisation (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.17 and OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.46, respectively). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use was not associated with hospitalisation status (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.06). Tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (anti-TNF) use was associated with a reduced odds of hospitalisation (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.81), while no association with antimalarial use (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.57) was observed., Conclusions: We found that glucocorticoid exposure of ≥10 mg/day is associated with a higher odds of hospitalisation and anti-TNF with a decreased odds of hospitalisation in patients with rheumatic disease. Neither exposure to DMARDs nor NSAIDs were associated with increased odds of hospitalisation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MG reports grants from National Institutes of Health, NIAMS, outside the submitted work. KLH reports she has received speaker’s fees from AbbVie and grant income from BMS, UCB and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript. KLH is also supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. SA-A has nothing to disclose. LC has not received fees or personal grants from any laboratory, but her institute works by contract for laboratories among other institutions, such as AbbVie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, S.A., Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal GmbH and UCB Pharma. MD reports no competing interests related to this work. She is supported by grants from the National Institute of Health, Pfizer Independent Grants for Learning and Change, Genentech, Horizon Pharma. She has performed consultant work for Amgen, Novartis, Regeneron/Sanofi unrelated to this work. LG reports personal consultant fees from AbbVie, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB and grants from Eli Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript. EM reports that LPCDR received support for specific activities: grants from AbbVie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Eli Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal S.A., MSD, Celgene, Medac, Pharmakern, GAfPA; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer; non-financial support from Grünenthal GmbH, outside the submitted work. GS reports no competing interests related to this work. Her work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. She leads the Data Analytic Center for the American College of Rheumatology, which is unrelated to this work. AS reports grants from a consortium of 13 companies (among them AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Eli Lilly, Mylan, Hexal, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis and UCB) supporting the German RABBIT register and personal fees from lectures for AbbVie, MSD, Roche, BMS, Pfizer, outside the submitted work. SB reports no competing interests related to this work. He reports non-branded marketing campaigns for Novartis (