Inhaled aviptadil for the possible treatment of COVID-19 in patients at high risk for ARDS: study protocol for a randomized, placebo-controlled, and multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the fast establishment of new therapeutic agents in the management of COVID-19 and large-scale vaccination campaigns since the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in early 2020, severe disease courses still represent a threat, especially to patients with risk factors. This indicates the need for alternative strategies to prevent respiratory complications like acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) associated with COVID-19. Aviptadil, a synthetic form of human vasoactive intestinal peptide, might be beneficial for COVID-19 patients at high risk of developing ARDS because of its ability to influence the regulation of exaggerated pro-inflammatory proteins and orchestrate the lung homeostasis. Aviptadil has recently been shown to considerably improve the prognosis of ARDS in COVID-19 when applied intravenously. An inhaled application of aviptadil has the advantages of achieving a higher concentration in the lung tissue, fast onset of activity, avoiding the hepatic first-pass metabolism, and the reduction of adverse effects. The overall objective of this project is to assess the efficacy and safety of inhaled aviptadil in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at high risk of developing ARDS. METHODS: This multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, randomized trial with 132 adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and at high risk for ARDS (adapted early acute lung injury score ≥ 2 points) is conducted in five public hospitals in Europe. Key exclusion criteria are mechanical ventilation at baseline, need for intensive care at baseline, and severe hemodynamic instability. Patients are randomly allocated to either inhale 67 µg aviptadil or normal saline (three times a day for 10 days), in addition to standard care, stratified by center. The primary endpoint is time from hospitalization to clinical improvement, defined as either hospital discharge, or improvement of at least two levels on the nine-level scale for clinical status suggested by the World Health Organization. DISCUSSION: Treatment strategies for COVID-19 are still limited. In the context of upcoming new variants of SARS-CoV-2 and possible inefficacy of the available vaccines and antibody therapies, the investigation of alternative therapy options plays a crucial role in decreasing associated mortality and improving prognosis. Due to its unique immunomodulating properties also targeting the SARS-CoV-2 pathways, inhaled aviptadil may have the potential to prevent ARDS in COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04536350 . Registered 02 September 2020.

Comparison of pulmonary function test, diffusion capacity, blood gas analysis and CT scan in patients with and without persistent respiratory symptoms following COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Long-lasting symptoms following SARS-CoV2-infection have been described in several studies. However, there is only limited knowledge about the ongoing pathophysiology and the association with pathological findings in medical examinations. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of a prospective trial, 135 patients following COVID-19 were enrolled and grouped with respect to the presence or absence of respiratory ongoing symptoms following COVID-19. Pulmonary function test (PFT), diffusion capacity measurement (TLCO SB and TLCO/VA), blood gas analysis (BGA), laboratory tests and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) of patients with persistent respiratory symptoms were compared to those of asymptomatic patients. RESULTS: In this analysis, 71% (96/135) of all patients (mean age 49 years; range 20-91 years) reported long-lasting symptoms after a median (IQR) of 85 days (60-116) following COVID-19 whereby 57.8% (78/135) complained about persistent pulmonary symptoms. Pathological findings in blood test, PFT, TLCO, BGA and/or HRCT were found in 71.8% and 64.1% of patients with and without long-lasting respiratory symptoms respectively. Patients with persistent respiratory symptoms were significantly younger and presented a significant lower FVC (%), TLC (L), and TLCO SB compared to asymptomatic patients (p < 0.05). The multiple logistic regression results in a significant effect of age (p = 0.004) and TLCO SB (p = 0.042). CONCLUSION: Following COVID-19, a large proportion of patients experience ongoing symptoms, whereby the respiratory symptoms are the predominant complaints. Compared to asymptomatic patients, patients with ongoing symptoms were younger and presented a significant lower FVC, TLC and TLCO SB. The multiple logistic regression demonstrated only a significant association between the TLCO SB as the only PFT parameter and the perceived symptoms.

COVID-19 in two severe asthmatics receiving benralizumab: busting the eosinophilia myth.

Experience with very mild #COVID19 disease courses in two severe eosinophilic asthmatics with complete eosinophil depletion due to benralizumab treatment counters the recent theories that eosinophilia is protective in COVID-19 infections https://bit.ly/3cnEFvg.

Use of biologicals in allergic and type-2 inflammatory diseases during the current COVID-19 pandemic: Position paper of Ärzteverband Deutscher Allergologen (AeDA)A, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Klinische Immunologie (DGAKI)B, Gesellschaft für Pädiatrische Allergologie und Umweltmedizin (GPA)C, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (ÖGAI)D, Luxemburgische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (LGAI)E, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Pneumologie (ÖGP)F in co-operation with the German, Austrian, and Swiss ARIA groupsG, and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)H.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases has faced major challenges. Recommendations for "social distancing" and the fear of patients becoming infected during a visit to a medical facility have led to a drastic decrease in personal doctor-patient contacts. This affects both acute care and treatment of the chronically ill. The immune response after SARS-CoV-2 infection is so far only insufficiently understood and could be altered in a favorable or unfavorable way by therapy with monoclonal antibodies. There is currently no evidence for an increased risk of a severe COVID-19 course in allergic patients. Many patients are under ongoing therapy with biologicals that inhibit type 2 immune responses via various mechanisms. There is uncertainty about possible immunological interactions and potential risks of these biologicals in the case of an infection with SARS-CoV-2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A selective literature search was carried out in PubMed, Livivo, and the internet to cover the past 10 years (May 2010 - April 2020). Additionally, the current German-language publications were analyzed. Based on these data, the present position paper provides recommendations for the biological treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: In order to maintain in-office consultation services, a safe treatment environment must be created that is adapted to the pandemic situation. To date, there is a lack of reliable study data on the care for patients with complex respiratory, atopic, and allergic diseases in times of an imminent infection risk from SARS-CoV-2. Type-2-dominant immune reactions, as they are frequently seen in allergic patients, could influence various phases of COVID-19, e.g., by slowing down the immune reactions. Theoretically, this could have an unfavorable effect in the early phase of a SARS-Cov-2 infection, but also a positive effect during a cytokine storm in the later phase of severe courses. However, since there is currently no evidence for this, all data from patients treated with a biological directed against type 2 immune reactions who develop COVID-19 should be collected in registries, and their disease courses documented in order to be able to provide experience-based instructions in the future. CONCLUSION: The use of biologicals for the treatment of bronchial asthma, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and spontaneous urticaria should be continued as usual in patients without suspected infection or proven SARS-CoV-2 infection. If available, it is recommended to prefer a formulation for self-application and to offer telemedical monitoring. Treatment should aim at the best possible control of difficult-to-control allergic and atopic diseases using adequate rescue and add-on therapy and should avoid the need for systemic glucocorticosteroids. If SARS-CoV-2 infection is proven or reasonably suspected, the therapy should be determined by weighing the benefits and risks individually for the patient in question, and the patient should be involved in the decision-making. It should be kept in mind that the potential effects of biologicals on the immune response in COVID-19 are currently not known. Telemedical offers are particularly desirable for the acute consultation needs of suitable patients.

Allergen immunotherapy in the current COVID-19 pandemic: A position paper of AeDA, ARIA, EAACI, DGAKI and GPA: Position paper of the German ARIA GroupA in cooperation with the Austrian ARIA GroupB, the Swiss ARIA GroupC, German Society for Applied Allergology (AEDA)D, German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI)E, Society for Pediatric Allergology (GPA)F in cooperation with AG Clinical Immunology, Allergology and Environmental Medicine of the DGHNO-KHCG and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)H.

No abstract available.

COVID-19 in a severe eosinophilic asthmatic receiving benralizumab - a case study.

INTRODUCTION: Only little is known about COVID-19 in patients with asthma. There is no data on COVID-19 in patients with severe asthma or patients with asthma who are treated with monoclonal antibodies. CASE STUDY: Here, we present the case of a severe eosinophilic asthmatic in whom benralizumab treatment, an anti-IL-5R monoclonal antibody, was initiated 2 years ago. Prior to benralizumab treatment, every viral infection had resulted in a prolonged course of oral corticosteroids (OCS). Since initiation of benralizumab, the patient has had good asthma control. Mid-March 2020, the patient developed high fever. RESULTS: A SARS-CoV-2-PCR (nasopharyngeal swab) was positive. The patient's symptoms subsided after few days. No OCS was needed. The asthma control questionnaire 6-item scale worsened moderately in the week of the infection and returned to normal levels thereafter. The asthma control test, measuring longer term asthma control, showed no decline. CONCLUSION: The course of COVID-19 was very mild in this particular patient with severe eosinophilic asthma. So far, there is no evidence that would suggest a more severe course of COVID-19 in patients with asthma. It is worth noting, that prior to the initiation of benralizumab this patient had multiple exacerbations per year triggered by viral infections (4/year), which all required OCS. Whilst only anecdotal, this case study provides the first evidence to support the current recommendation of continuing monoclonal antibodies in patients with severe asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic.