High-Dose Vitamin C Infusion for the Treatment of Covid-19: Beware of Paraben Intoxication.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Yuksel ME
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7929582 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
High-Dose Vitamin C Infusion for the Treatment of Covid-19: Beware of Paraben Intoxication.
Yuksel Mehmet Eren ME Izdes Seval S
The Eurasian journal of medicine 20210119 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundFew specific medications have been proven effective for the treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Here, we tested whether high-dose vitamin C infusion was effective for severe COVID-19.MethodsThis randomized, controlled, clinical trial was performed at 3 hospitals in Hubei, China. Patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the ICU were randomly assigned in as 1:1 ratio to either the high-dose intravenous vitamin C (HDIVC) or the placebo. HDIVC group received 12 g of vitamin C/50 ml every 12 h for 7 days at a rate of 12 ml/hour, and the placebo group received bacteriostatic water for injection in the same way within 48 h of arrival to ICU. The primary outcome was invasive mechanical ventilation-free days in 28 days (IMVFD28). Secondary outcomes were 28-day mortality, organ failure (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score), and inflammation progression (interleukin-6).ResultsOnly 56 critical COVID-19 patients were ultimately recruited due to the early control of the outbreak. There was no difference in IMVFD28 between two groups (26.0 [9.0-28.0] in HDIVC vs 22.0 [8.50-28.0] in control, p = 0.57). HDIVC failed to reduce 28-day mortality (P = 0.27). During the 7-day treatment period, patients in the HDIVC group had a steady rise in the PaO2/FiO2 (day 7: 229 vs. 151 mmHg, 95% CI 33 to 122, P = 0.01), which was not observed in the control group. IL-6 in the HDIVC group was lower than that in the control group (19.42 vs. 158.00; 95% CI -301.72 to -29.79; P = 0.04) on day 7.ConclusionThis pilot trial showed that HDIVC failed to improve IMVFD28, but might show a potential signal of benefit in oxygenation for critically ill patients with COVID-19 improving PaO2/FiO2 even though.
| S-EPMC7794643 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe rapid worldwide spread of COVID-19 has caused a global health crisis. To date, symptomatic supportive care has been the most common treatment. It has been reported that the mechanism of COVID-19 is related to cytokine storms and subsequent immunogenic damage, especially damage to the endothelium and alveolar membrane. Vitamin C (VC), also known as L-ascorbic acid, has been shown to have antimicrobial and immunomodulatory properties. A high dose of intravenous VC (HIVC) was proven to block several key components of cytokine storms, and HIVC showed safety and varying degrees of efficacy in clinical trials conducted on patients with bacterial-induced sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Therefore, we hypothesise that HIVC could be added to the treatment of ARDS and multiorgan dysfunction related to COVID-19.Methods and analysisThe investigators designed a multicentre prospective randomised placebo-controlled trial that is planned to recruit 308 adults diagnosed with COVID-19 and transferred into the intensive care unit. Participants will randomly receive HIVC diluted in sterile water or placebo for 7 days once enrolled. Patients with a history of VC allergy, end-stage pulmonary disease, advanced malignancy or glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency will be excluded. The primary outcome is ventilation-free days within 28 observational days. This is one of the first clinical trials applying HIVC to treat COVID-19, and it will provide credible efficacy and safety data. We predict that HIVC could suppress cytokine storms caused by COVID-19, help improve pulmonary function and reduce the risk of ARDS of COVID-19.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University (identifiers: Clinical Ethical Approval No. 2020001). Findings of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences.Trial registration numberNCT04264533.
| S-EPMC7348463 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7455797 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFusobacterium nucleatum (F. n) is an important opportunistic pathogen causing oral and gastrointestinal disease. Faecalibacterium prausnitzii (F. p) is a next-generation probiotic and could serve as a biomarker of gut eubiosis/dysbiosis to some extent. Alterations in the human oral and gut microbiomes are associated with viral respiratory infection. The aim of this study was to characterise the oral and fecal bacterial biomarker (i.e., F. n and F. p) in COVID-19 patients by qPCR and investigate the pharyngeal microbiome of COVID-19 patients through metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS).ResultsPharyngeal F. n was significantly increased in COVID-19 patients, and it was higher in male than female patients. Increased abundance of pharyngeal F. n was associated with a higher risk of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test (adjusted OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.06 ~ 1.65, P < 0.05). A classifier to distinguish COVID-19 patients from the healthy controls based on the pharyngeal F. n was constructed and achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.843 (95% CI = 0.688 ~ 0.940, P < 0.001). However, the level of fecal F. n and fecal F. p remained unaltered between groups. Besides, mNGS showed that the pharyngeal swabs of COVID-19 patients were dominated by opportunistic pathogens.ConclusionsPharyngeal but not fecal F. n was significantly increased in COVID-19 patients, clinicians should pay careful attention to potential coinfection. Pharyngeal F. n may serve as a promising candidate indicator for COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8504566 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7137406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIt is controversial whether B12 deficiency causes dementia or B12 treatment can prevent dementia.ObjectiveTo assess associations between low plasma (P-)B12 levels, B12 treatment, and risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD; primary outcome) and all-cause or vascular dementia (secondary outcomes).MethodsWe conducted a population-based cohort study using Danish registry data to assess associations between low P-B12 levels, high-dose injection or oral B12 treatment, and risk of dementia (study period 2000-2013). The primary P-B12 cohort included patients with a first-time P-B12 measurement whose subsequent B12 treatment was recorded. The secondary B12 treatment cohort included patients with a first-time B12 prescription and P-B12 measurement within one year before this prescription. For both cohorts, patients with low P-B12 levels (<200 pmol/L) were propensity score-matched 1:1 with patients with normal levels (200-600 pmol/L). We used multivariable Cox regression to compute 0-15-year hazard ratios for dementia.ResultsFor low P-B12 and normal P-B12 level groups, we included 53,089 patients in the primary P-B12 cohort and 13,656 patients in the secondary B12 treatment cohort. In the P-B12 cohort, hazard ratios for AD centered around one, regardless of follow-up period or treatment during follow-up. In the B12 treatment cohort, risk of AD was unaffected by low pre-treatment P-B12 levels, follow-up period and type of B12 treatment. Findings were similar for all-cause and vascular dementia.ConclusionWe found no associatio1n between low P-B12 levels and dementia. Associations were unaffected by B12 treatment. Results do not support routine screening for B12 deficiency in patients with suspected dementia.
| S-EPMC7990402 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8257425 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vitamin D and its role in the coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been controversially discussed, with inconclusive evidence about vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) supplementation in COVID-19 patients. Vitamin D metabolites play an important role in the initiation of the immune response and can be an easily modifiable risk factor in 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25(OH)D3)-deficient patients. This is a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind trial to compare the effect of a single high dose of vitamin D3 followed by treatment as usual (TAU) of daily vitamin D3 daily until discharge versus placebo plus TAU in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and 25(OH)D3-deficiency on length hospital stay. We included 40 patients per group and did not observe a significant difference in the median length of hospital stay (6 days in both groups, p = 0.920). We adjusted the length of stay for COVID-19 risk factors (β = 0.44; 95% CI: -2.17-2.22), and center (β = 0.74; 95% CI: -1.25-2.73). The subgroup analysis in patients with severe 25(OH)D3-deficiency (<25 nmol/L) showed a non-significant reduction in the median length of hospital stay in the intervention group (5.5 vs. 9 days, p = 0.299). The competing risk model with death did not reveal significant differences between the group in the length of stay (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.62-1.48, p = 0.850). Serum 25(OH)D3 level increased significantly in the intervention group (mean change in nmol/L; intervention: +26.35 vs. control: -2.73, p < 0.001). The intervention with 140,000 IU vitamin D3 + TAU did not significantly shorten the length of hospital stay but was effective and safe for the elevation of serum 25(OH)D3 levels.
| S-EPMC10215464 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe inflammatory reaction is the main cause of acute respiratory distress syndrome and multiple organ failure in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019, especially those with severe and critical illness. Several studies suggested that high-dose vitamin C reduced inflammatory reaction associated with sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome. This study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of high-dose vitamin C in Coronavirus disease 2019.MethodsWe included 76 patients with Coronavirus disease 2019, classified into the high-dose vitamin C group (loading dose of 6g intravenous infusion per 12 hr on the first day, and 6g once for the following 4 days, n=46) and the standard therapy group (standard therapy alone, n=30).ResultsThe risk of 28-day mortality was reduced for the high-dose vitamin C versus the standard therapy group (HR=0.14, 95% CI, 0.03-0.72). Oxygen support status was improved more with high-dose vitamin C than standard therapy (63.9% vs 36.1%). No safety events were associated with high-dose vitamin C therapy.ConclusionHigh-dose vitamin C may reduce the mortality and improve oxygen support status in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 without adverse events.
| S-EPMC7993712 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe role of oral vitamin D3 supplementation for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 remains to be determined. The study was aimed to evaluate whether vitamin D3 supplementation could prevent respiratory worsening among hospitalized patients with COVID-19.Methods and findingsWe designed a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, sequential, placebo-controlled clinical trial. The study was conducted in 17 second and third level hospitals, located in four provinces of Argentina, from 14 August 2020 to 22 June 2021. We enrolled 218 adult patients, hospitalized in general wards with SARS-CoV-2 confirmed infection, mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and risk factors for disease progression. Participants were randomized to a single oral dose of 500 000 IU of vitamin D3 or matching placebo. Randomization ratio was 1:1, with permuted blocks and stratified for study site, diabetes and age (≤60 vs >60 years). The primary outcome was the change in the respiratory Sepsis related Organ Failure Assessment score between baseline and the highest value recorded up to day 7. Secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay; intensive care unit admission; and in-hospital mortality. Overall, 115 participants were assigned to vitamin D3 and 105 to placebo (mean [SD] age, 59.1 [10.7] years; 103 [47.2%] women). There were no significant differences in the primary outcome between groups (median [IQR] 0.0 [0.0-1.0] vs 0.0 [0.0-1.0], for vitamin D3 and placebo, respectively; p = 0.925). Median [IQR] length of hospital stay was not significantly different between vitamin D3 group (6.0 [4.0-9.0] days) and placebo group (6.0 [4.0-10.0] days; p = 0.632). There were no significant differences for intensive care unit admissions (7.8% vs 10.7%; RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.70; p = 0.622), or in-hospital mortality (4.3% vs 1.9%; RR 2.24; 95% CI 0.44 to 11.29; p = 0.451). There were no significant differences in serious adverse events (vitamin D3 = 14.8%, placebo = 11.7%).ConclusionsAmong hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and risk factors, a single high oral dose of vitamin D3 as compared with placebo, did not prevent the respiratory worsening.Trial registrationClincicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04411446.
| S-EPMC9140264 | biostudies-literature