PDE3-inhibitor enoximone prevented mechanical ventilation in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Standard care in severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia complicated by severe dyspnea and respiratory failure, consists of symptom reduction, ultimately supported by mechanical ventilation. Patients with severe SARS-CoV-2, a prominent feature of COVID-19, show several similar symptoms to Critical Asthma Syndrome (CAS) patients, such as pulmonary edema, mucus plugging of distal airways, decreased tissue oxygenation, (emergent) exhaustion due to severe dyspnea and respiratory failure. Prior application of elective phosphodiesterase (PDE)3-inhibitors milrinone and enoximone in patients with CAS yielded rapid symptomatic relief and reverted the need for mechanical ventilation, due to their bronchodilator and anti-inflammatory properties. Based on these observations, we hypothesized that enoximone may be beneficial in the treatment of patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and prominent CAS-features. METHODS: In this case report enoximone was administered to four consecutive patients (1 M; 3 F; 46-70 y) with emergent respiratory failure due to SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Clinical outcome was compared with three controls who received standard care only. RESULTS: After an intravenous bolus of enoximone 20 mg followed by 10 mg/h via perfusor, a rapid symptomatic relief was observed: two out of four patients recovered within a few hours, the other two (with comorbid COPD GOLD II/III) responded within 24-36 h. Compared to the controls, in the enoximone-treated patients respiratory failure and further COVID-19-related deterioration was reverted and mechanical ventilation was prevented, leading to reduced hospital/ICU time. DISCUSSION: Our preliminary observations suggest that early intervention with the selective PDE3-inhibitor enoximone may help to revert respiratory failure as well as avert mechanical ventilation, and reduces ICU/hospital time in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Our findings warrant further research on the therapeutic potential of PDE3-inhibition, alone or in combination with other anti-COVID-19 strategies.

Anti-infliximab antibodies are already detectable in most patients with rheumatoid arthritis halfway through an infusion cycle: an open-label pharmacokinetic cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with infliximab describes prospectively the course of (anti)infliximab levels within an infusion cycle to assess at what moment patients develop low/no infliximab trough levels and/or detectable anti-infliximab levels. METHODS: Infliximab treated RA patients were included in this descriptive open-label cohort study. During one infusion cycle (anti-)infliximab levels were assessed just before and one hour after infusion, and subsequently at 50%, 75% and at the end of the infusion cycle (pre-infusion). RESULTS: 27 patients were included. The median infliximab levels decreased from 77.0 mg/l (p25-p75: 65-89) one hour after the infusion to pre-infusion levels of 0.0 mg/l (p25-p75: 0.0-3.1). In 7 (26%) patients pre-infusion anti-infliximab antibodies were detected; these antibodies were already present halfway through the infusion cycle in 5 of the 7 individuals. Patients with detectable pre-infusion anti-infliximab antibodies have significantly more often low/no infliximab levels (< 1 mg/l) halfway trough the infusion cycle (in 5/7 patients) compared to patients without detectable pre-infusion anti-infliximab antibodies (0/20 patients, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Most anti-infliximab forming patients have detectable anti-infliximab antibodies halfway through an infusion cycle, which implies that these patients are exposed to nontherapeutical infliximab levels during more than half of their infusion cycle. As none of the patients without anti-infliximab antibodies had no/low-infliximab levels halfway through the infusion cycle, the presence of pre-infusion anti-infliximab antibodies seems a sensitive and specific predictor for no/low infliximab-levels.

Adherence rates and associations with nonadherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis using disease modifying antirheumatic drugs.

OBJECTIVE: Nonadherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) may result in unnecessarily high levels of disease activity and function loss. The aim of this descriptive study was to assess adherence rates with self-report measures in a large random population, and to identify potential risk factors for nonadherence. METHODS: A randomly selected sample of 228 patients with RA using DMARD was invited for a standardised interview. For each medicine, the patients were asked about adherence, consumption and perceived (side) effects. After the interview, the patients received self-report questionnaires to assess adherence [Compliance Questionnaire on Rheumatology (CQR) and the Medication Adherence Scale (MARS)], coping, beliefs about medicines, satisfaction about medicine information, and physical functioning. Subsequently, associations between adherence and demographics, clinical characteristics, and patient attitudes were examined. RESULTS: Depending on the instrument used, 68% (CQR) and 60% (MARS) of the patients were adherent to DMARD. Nonadherence was not associated with demographic and clinical characteristics, satisfaction about information, medication concerns, and coping styles. The disease duration, the number of perceived side-effects, and beliefs about the necessity of the medicine were weakly associated with adherence. CONCLUSION: In this large study with a random RA population, 32%-40% of the patients did not adhere to their DMARD prescription. As none of the possible risk factors was strongly related to adherence, no general risk factor seems to be powerful enough as a possible screening tool or target for adherence-improving interventions. This implies that nonadherence barriers should be assessed on an individual basis.