The time to offer treatments for COVID-19.

Background: COVID-19 has several overlapping phases. Treatments to date have focused on the late stage of disease in hospital. Yet, the pandemic is by propagated by the viral phase in out-patients. The current public health strategy relies solely on vaccines to prevent disease.Methods: We searched the major national registries, pubmed.org, and the preprint servers for all ongoing, completed and published trial results.Results: As of 2/15/2021, we found 111 publications reporting findings on 14 classes of agents, and 9 vaccines. There were 62 randomized controlled studies, the rest retrospective observational analyses. Only 21 publications dealt with outpatient care. Remdesivir and high titer convalescent plasma have emergency use authorization for hospitalized patients in the U.S.A. There is also support for glucocorticoid treatment of the COVID-19 respiratory distress syndrome. Monoclonal antibodies are authorized for outpatients, but supply is inadequate to treat all at time of diagnosis. Favipiravir, ivermectin, and interferons are approved in certain countries.Expert Opinion: Vaccines and antibodies are highly antigen specific, and new SARS-Cov-2 variants are appearing. We call on public health authorities to authorize treatments with known low-risk and possible benefit for outpatients in parallel with universal vaccination.

The Importance of Understanding the Stages of COVID-19 in Treatment and Trials.

COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, continues to be a major health problem since its first description in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. Multiple drugs have been tried to date in the treatment of COVID-19. Critical to treatment of COVID-19 and advancing therapeutics is an appreciation of the multiple stages of this disease and the importance of timing for investigation and use of various agents. We considered articles related to COVID-19 indexed on PubMed published January 1, 2020-November 15, 2020, and considered papers on the medRxiv preprint server. We identified relevant stages of COVID-19 including three periods: pre-exposure, incubation, and detectable viral replication; and five phases: the viral symptom phase, the early inflammatory phase, the secondary infection phase, the multisystem inflammatory phase, and the tail phase. This common terminology should serve as a framework to guide when COVID-19 therapeutics being studied or currently in use is likely to provide benefit rather than harm.

Diagnosis of latent tuberculosis infection with T-SPOT(®).TB in a predominantly immigrant population with rheumatologic disorders.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to compare how likely positive tuberculin skin test (TST) and T-SPOT(®).TB (TSPOT) results predict risk factors for tuberculosis in a predominantly immigrant patient population at risk of latent TB infection (LTBI) and with rheumatologic conditions requiring immunomodulatory therapy (IMT). METHODS: Prospective study conducted at a referral rheumatology clinic. Inclusion criteria included patients on various IMT, including immunosuppressive drugs that could predispose to TB progression. We studied risk factors associated with LTBI, test results, and tests' agreement. RESULTS: We studied 101 patients. Eighty (79.2 %) were from countries where TB is prevalent and Bacille Calmette-Guérin vaccination is placed routinely. Seventy-four (73.3 %) had rheumatoid arthritis and 92 (90.7 %) were on IMT. Among patients with both TST and TSPOT results, 25 (30.9 %) were TST(+) and 20 (24.7 %) had TSPOT(+) results. Fifteen patients (18.5 %) had TST(+)/TSPOT(+) results, and 51 (63.0 %) had TST(-)/TSPOT(-) results (agreement = 81.5 %; kappa = .54 [95 % CI, .34-.74; P < .001]). Each TSPOT(+) and TST(+) results were independently associated with immigrant status and prior residence in a TB prevalent country after adjustment for immunosuppressive therapy: Adjusted OR(TSPOT+)=6.6 (95 % CI, 1.2-123.3; P = .027); and adjusted OR(TST+)=11.2 (95 % CI, 2.0-209.5; P = .003). Seven out of 10 TST(+)/TSPOT(-) cases had a TST ≥15 mm induration, including three cases with history of TST conversion. CONCLUSIONS: TST(+) and TSPOT(+) results predict risk factors associated with LTBI independent of immunosuppressive IMT. Some TST(+)/TSPOT(-) results were unlikely to be false-negatives. The combined use of TST and TSPOT appears to be a reasonable diagnostic strategy to evaluate for LTBI in this population.

Successful rituximab therapy of acquired factor VIII inhibitor in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis.

Acquired factor VIII deficiency due to antibody inhibition can result in life-threatening hemorrhage. Rarely such antibody inhibition of factor VIII can be associated with other autoimmune disorders including rheumatoid arthritis. We present the first case of a patient with active rheumatoid arthritis and refractory bleeding diatheses due to a factor VIII inhibitor who was successfully treated with rituximab. A 61-year-old Caucasian female with rheumatoid arthritis unresponsive to multiple therapies developed an acute hematoma while having a peripheral catheter placed. Her aPTT was prolonged at 61.4 with low factor VIII activity and an inhibitor level for factor VIII of 2.0 Bethesda Units. She received rituximab 375 mg/m in 4 weekly doses. Normalization of the aPTT and resolution of the bleeding occurred in 2 weeks. After 45 days, the levels of factor VIII inhibitor and factor VIII activity were <0.4 BU/mL and 130%, respectively. After 1 year, the aPTT remained normal and there was no further bleeding. An added benefit was the substantial improvement in her rheumatoid arthritis. Treatment of acquired factor VIII inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis should be guided by the levels of the inhibitor. Patients with low levels of the inhibitor may respond to rituximab monotherapy, whereas higher levels may necessitate combination therapies. The dual benefit of RA disease control and resolution of bleeding makes rituximab therapy compelling in the rare patient who presents with these 2 disorders.

Infliximab treatment of Familial Mediterranean fever and its effect on secondary AA amyloidosis.

We describe a patient with a long history of familial Mediterranean fever who developed proteinuria as a result of secondary AA amyloidosis. In this patient, the inflammatory process, including recurrent attacks of arthritis, abdominal pain, nephrotic syndrome secondary to amyloidosis, and high sedimentation rate, was rapidly suppressed by treatment with infliximab and there was remarkable improvement of the proteinuria.Because TNF-alpha is a proinflammatory cytokine that plays a major role in FMF and secondary amyloid, it is an appropriate target for therapy. Our case is the first case of reactive systemic amyloidosis secondary to familial Mediterranean fever, which responded favorably to infliximab.

Local production of B lymphocyte stimulator protein and APRIL in arthritic joints of patients with inflammatory arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether synovial fluid (SF) levels and cell-surface expression of B lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS) protein and SF levels of APRIL are elevated in patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA). METHODS: Same-day blood and SF samples from 89 patients with 103 knee effusions (81 knees with IA and 22 with noninflammatory arthritis [NIA]) were evaluated for BLyS protein and APRIL levels by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Blood and SF mononuclear cells were double-stained for surface BLyS protein and surface CD14 (monocyte marker) and were analyzed by flow cytometry. Complete blood cell counts and SF nucleated cell counts were performed by the clinical hematology laboratory. RESULTS: BLyS protein levels were higher in SF than in corresponding serum samples from both IA and NIA patients. SF BLyS protein levels, but not surface expression of BLyS protein, were disproportionately elevated in IA patients. APRIL levels were higher in SF than in corresponding serum samples from most IA patients but not NIA patients. SF BLyS protein and APRIL levels correlated with each other, and each correlated with SF monocyte, lymphocyte, neutrophil, and total nucleated cell counts. Although SF and serum BLyS protein levels correlated with each other, SF and serum APRIL levels did not, suggesting that SF BLyS protein levels are more dependent upon systemic factors than are SF APRIL levels. Moreover, in 8 patients who underwent sequential arthrocenteses, changes in SF BLyS protein levels did not immutably parallel changes in SF APRIL levels, indicating their differential regulation. CONCLUSION: BLyS protein and APRIL are locally produced in inflamed joints. Their respective SF levels are differentially regulated, suggesting that they serve different functions. Together, their local production may foster survival and/or expansion of B cells that produce pathogenic autoantibodies and/or promote local T cell activation and consequent joint destruction.