Co-infections: testing macrolides for added benefit in patients with COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sterenczak KA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7836259 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Co-infections: testing macrolides for added benefit in patients with COVID-19.
Sterenczak Katharina Anna KA Barrantes Israel I Stahnke Thomas T Stachs Oliver O Fuellen Georg G Undre Nasrullah N
The Lancet. Microbe 20201102 8
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9006782 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The emergence of the new COVID-19 virus is proving to be a challenge in seeking effective therapies. Since the most severe clinical manifestation of COVID-19 appears to be a severe acute respiratory syndrome, azithromycin has been proposed as a potential treatment. Azithromycin is known to have immunomodulating and antiviral properties. In vitro studies have demonstrated the capacity of azithromycin in reducing production of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-8, IL-6, TNF alpha, reduce oxidative stress, and modulate T-helper functions. At the same time there are multiple clinical evidences of the role of azithromycin in acute respiratory distress syndrome and against Middle East Respiratory syndrome (MERS). Some preliminary evidence has demonstrated controversial results regarding efficacy of azithromycin in combination with hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19. First, a French trial demonstrated 100% virological negativizing of six patients treated with azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine vs. 57.1% of patients treated with only hydroxychloroquine and 12.5% of the control group (P < 0.05). On the other hand, another case series revealed no efficacy at all on 11 patients treated with the same combination and doses. Furthermore, there are some concerns regarding the association of azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine because of potential QT prolongation. In fact, both drugs have this as a potential side effect and evidence regarding the safe use of this combination is controversial. Despite the necessity to quickly find solutions for COVID-19, extreme caution must be used in evaluating the risk-benefit balance. However, based on preclinical and clinical evidence and some preliminary results in COVID-19, azithromycin could have potential in the fight against this new disease.
| S-EPMC7286256 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Severe COVID-19 disease is associated with an increase in pro-inflammatory markers, such as IL-1, IL-6, and tumor necrosis alpha, less CD4 interferon-gamma expression, and fewer CD4 and CD8 cells, which increase the susceptibility to bacterial and fungal infections. One such opportunistic fungal infection is mucormycosis. Initially, it was debated whether a person taking immunosuppressants, such as corticosteroids, and monoclonal antibodies will be at higher risk for COVID-19 or whether the immunosuppresive state would cause a more severe COVID-19 disease. However, immunosuppressants are currently continued unless the patients are at greater risk of severe COVID-19 infection or are on high-dose corticosteroids therapy. As understood so far, COVID-19 infection may induce significant and persistent lymphopenia, which in turn increases the risk of opportunistic infections. It is also noted that 85% of the COVID-19 patients' laboratory findings showed lymphopenia. This means that patients with severe COVID-19 have markedly lower absolute number of T lymphocytes, CD4+T and CD8+ T cells and, since the lymphocytes play a major role in maintaining the immune homeostasis, the patients with COVID-19 are highly susceptible to fungal co-infections. This report is intended to raise awareness of the importance of early detection and treatment of mucormycosis and other fungal diseases, such as candidiasis, SARS-CoV-2-associated pulmonary aspergillosis, pneumocystis pneumonia and cryptococcal disease, in COVID-19 patients, to reduce the risk of mortality.
| S-EPMC8137279 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study systematically reviewed fungal-bacterial co-infections and super-infections among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. A PRISMA systematic search was conducted. On September 2022, Medline, PubMed, Google Scholar, PsychINFO, Wiley Online Library, NATURE, and CINAHL databases were searched for all relevant articles published in English. All articles that exclusively reported the presence of fungal-bacterial co-infections and super-infections among hospitalized COVID-19 patients were included. Seven databases produced 6937 articles as a result of the literature search. Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. The total number of samples across the studies was 10,834, with a total of 1243 (11.5%) patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Of these patients, 535 underwent mechanical ventilation (4.9%), 2386 (22.0%) were male, and 597 (5.5%) died. Furthermore, hospitalized COVID-19 patients have a somewhat high rate (23.5%) of fungal-bacterial co-infections and super-infections. Moreover, for SARS-CoV-2 patients who have a chest X-ray that suggests a bacterial infection, who require immediate ICU admission, or who have a seriously immunocompromised condition, empiric antibiotic therapy should be taken into consideration. Additionally, the prevalence of co-infections and super-infections among hospitalized COVID-19 patients may have an impact on diagnosis and treatment. It is crucial to check for fungal and bacterial co-infections and super-infections in COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC10299597 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundViral reactivations and co-infections have been reported among COVID-19 patients. However, studies on the clinical outcomes of different viral reactivations and co-infections are currently in limit. Thus, the primary purpose of this review is to perform an overarching investigation on the cases of latent virus reactivation and co-infection in COVID-19 patients to build collective evidence contributing to improving patient health. The aim of the study was to conduct a literature review to compare the patient characteristics and outcomes of reactivations and co-infections of different viruses.MethodsOur population of interest included confirmed COVID-19 patients who were diagnosed with a viral infection either concurrently or following their COVID-19 diagnosis. We extracted the relevant literature through a systematic search using the key terms in the online databases including the EMBASE, MEDLINE, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), from inception onwards up to June 2022. The authors independently extracted data from eligible studies and assessed the risk of bias using the Consensus-based Clinical Case Reporting (CARE) guidelines and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Main patient characteristics, frequency of each manifestation, and diagnostic criteria used in studies were summarized in tables.ResultsIn total, 53 articles were included in this review. We identified 40 reactivation studies, 8 coinfection studies, and 5 studies where concomitant infection in COVID-19 patients was not distinguished as either reactivation or coinfection. Data were extracted for 12 viruses including IAV, IBV, EBV, CMV, VZV, HHV-1, HHV-2, HHV-6, HHV-7, HHV-8, HBV, and Parvovirus B19. EBV, HHV-1, and CMV were most frequently observed within the reactivation cohort, whereas IAV and EBV within the coinfection cohort. In both reactivation and coinfection groups, patients reported cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and immunosuppression as comorbidities, acute kidney injury as complication, and lymphopenia and elevated D-dimer and CRP levels from blood tests. Common pharmaceutical interventions in two groups included steroids and antivirals.ConclusionOverall, these findings expand our knowledge on the characteristics of COVID-19 patients with viral reactivations and co-infections. Our experience with current review indicates a need for further investigations on virus reactivation and coinfection among COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC10131452 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Evidence on the efficacy of adding macrolides (azithromycin or clarithromycin) to the treatment regimen for COVID-19 is limited. We testify whether adding azithromycin or clarithromycin to a standard of care regimen was superior to standard of supportive care alone in patients with mild COVID-19.This randomized trial included three groups of patients with COVID-19. The azithromycin group included, 107 patients who received azithromycin 500 mg/24 h for 7 days, the clarithromycin group included 99 patients who received clarithromycin 500 /12 h for 7 days, and the control group included 99 patients who received standard care only. All three groups received only symptomatic treatment for control of fever and cough .Clinical and biochemical evaluations of the study participants including assessment of the symptoms duration, real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR), C-reactive protein (CRP), serum ferritin, D-dimer, complete blood count (CBC), in addition to non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT), were performed. The overall results revealed significant early improvement of symptoms (fever, dyspnea and cough) in patients treated with either azithromycin or clarithromycin compared to control group, also there was significant early conversion of SARS-CoV-2 PCR to negative in patients treated with either azithromycin or clarithromycin compared to control group (p < 0.05 for all).There was no significant difference in time to improvement of fever, cough, dyspnea, anosmia, gastrointestinal tract "GIT" symptoms and time to PCR negative conversion between patients treated with azithromycin compared to patients treated with clarithromycin (p > 0.05 for all). Follow up chest CT done after 2 weeks of start of treatment showed significant improvement in patients treated with either azithromycin or clarithromycin compared to control group (p < 0.05 for all).Adding Clarithromycin or azithromycin to the therapeutic protocols for COVID-19 could be beneficial for early control of fever and early PCR negative conversion in Mild COVID-19.Trial registration: (NCT04622891) www.ClinicalTrials.gov retrospectively registered (November 10, 2020).
| S-EPMC8357809 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The international community has been put in an unprecedented situation by the COVID-19 pandemic. Creating models to describe and quantify alternative mitigation strategies becomes increasingly urgent. In this study, we propose an agent-based model of disease transmission in a society divided into closely connected families, workplaces, and social groups. This allows us to discuss mitigation strategies, including targeted quarantine measures. We find that workplace and more diffuse social contacts are roughly equally important to disease spread, and that an effective lockdown must target both. We examine the cost-benefit of replacing a lockdown with tracing and quarantining contacts of the infected. Quarantine can contribute substantially to mitigation, even if it has short duration and is done within households. When reopening society, testing and quarantining is a strategy that is much cheaper in terms of lost workdays than a long lockdown. A targeted quarantine strategy is quite efficient with only 5 days of quarantine, and its effect increases when testing is more widespread.
| S-EPMC7596701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe mortality risk of co-infections/secondary infections (CoI/ScI) is under-reported in patients with non-critical COVID-19, leading to the under-management of CoI/ScI and publication bias in the medical literature. We aimed to investigate the association between CoI/ScI and mortality in patients hospitalised with mild-to-severe COVID-19.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study at a COVID-19 treatment hospital in Vietnam and collected all eligible medical records, with CoI/ScI status as the exposure (non-CoI/ScI and CoI/ScI, with the latter including nature of pathogen [bacterial, fungal, or bacterial + fungal] and multidrug-resistance pathogen [no MDRp or ≥ 1 MDRp]). The outcome was all-cause mortality, defined as in-hospital death by all causes or being discharged under critical illness. We used time-dependent analysis to report rates of mortality with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI, Poisson regression) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% CI (Cox proportional hazards regression with Holm's method for multiplicity control).ResultsWe followed 1466 patients (median age 61, 56.4% being female) for a median of 9 days. We recorded 387 (26.4%) deaths (95/144 [66.0%] in the CoI/ScI group and 292/1322 [22.1%] in the non-CoI/ScI group). Adjusted mortality rates (per 100 person-days) of the CoI/ScI (6.4, 95% CI 5.3 to 7.8), including bacterial (8.0, 95% CI 7.2 to 8.9), no MDRp (5.9, 95% CI 4.8 to 7.4), and ≥ 1 MDRp (9.0, 95% CI 8.2 to 10.0) groups were higher than that of the non-CoI/ScI group (2.0, 95% CI 1.8 to 2.2). These corresponded to higher risks of mortality in the overall CoI/ScI (HR 3.27, 95% CI 2.58 to 4.13, adjusted p < 0.001), bacterial CoI/ScI (HR 3.79, 95% CI 2.97 to 4.83, adjusted p < 0.001), no MDRp CoI/ScI (HR 3.13, 95% CI 2.42 to 4.05, adjusted p < 0.001), and ≥ 1 MDRp CoI/ScI group (HR 3.89, 95% CI 2.44 to 6.21, adjusted p < 0.001). We could not attain reliable estimates for fungal and bacterial + fungal CoI/ScI.ConclusionCompared with the non-CoI/ScI group, patients with CoI/ScI had a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality, regardless of resistance status. More evidence is needed to confirm the mortality risks in patients with fungal or bacterial + fungal CoI/ScI.
| S-EPMC11385502 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMixed infections can worsen disease symptoms. This study investigated the impact of mixed infections with viral and bacterial pathogens in patients positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).MethodsUsing the in-house multiplex PCR method, we tested 337 SARS-CoV-2 positive samples for co-infections with three bacterial and 14 other viral pathogens.ResultsBetween August 2021 and May 2022, 8% of 337 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients had bacterial co-infections, 5.6% had viral co-infections, and 1.4% had triple mixed infections. The most common causes of mixed infections were Haemophilus influenzae (5.93%) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) (1.18%). Children < 5 years old had more frequent co-infections than adults < 65 years old (20.8% vs. 16.4%), while adults showed a more severe clinical picture with a higher C-reactive protein (CRP) level (78.1 vs.16.2 mg/L; p = 0.033), a lower oxygen saturation (SpO2) (89.5 vs. 93.2%), and a longer hospital stay (8.1 vs. 3.1 days; p = 0.025) (mean levels). The risk of a fatal outcome was 41% in unvaccinated patients (p = 0.713), which increased by 2.66% with co-infection with two pathogens (p = 0.342) and by 26% with three pathogens (p = 0.005). Additionally, 50% of intensive care unit (ICU) patients had a triple infection, compared with only 1.3% in the inpatient unit (p = 0.0029). The risk of death and/or ICU admission was 12 times higher (p = 0.042) with an additional pathogen and increased by 95% (p = 0.003) with a third concomitant pathogen.ConclusionsRegular multiplex testing is important for prompt treatment and targeted antibiotic use.
| S-EPMC11505336 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe aimed to describe the epidemiology, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of co-infections and superinfections in onco-hematological patients with COVID-19.MethodsInternational, multicentre cohort study of cancer patients with COVID-19. All patients were included in the analysis of co-infections at diagnosis, while only patients admitted at least 48 h were included in the analysis of superinfections.Results684 patients were included (384 with solid tumors and 300 with hematological malignancies). Co-infections and superinfections were documented in 7.8% (54/684) and 19.1% (113/590) of patients, respectively. Lower respiratory tract infections were the most frequent infectious complications, most often caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Only seven patients developed opportunistic infections. Compared to patients without infectious complications, those with infections had worse outcomes, with high rates of acute respiratory distress syndrome, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and case-fatality rates. Neutropenia, ICU admission and high levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) were independent risk factors for infections.ConclusionsInfectious complications in cancer patients with COVID-19 were lower than expected, affecting mainly neutropenic patients with high levels of CRP and/or ICU admission. The rate of opportunistic infections was unexpectedly low. The use of empiric antimicrobials in cancer patients with COVID-19 needs to be optimized.
| S-EPMC8295054 | biostudies-literature