Beneficial ex vivo immunomodulatory and clinical effects of clarithromycin in COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Macrolide antibiotics have immunomodulatory properties which may be beneficial in viral infections. However, the precise effects of macrolides on T cell responses to COVID, differences between different macrolides, and synergistic effects with other antibiotics have not been explored. METHODS: We investigated the effect of antibiotics (amoxicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, and combined amoxicillin with clarithromycin) on lymphocyte intracellular cytokine levels and monocyte phagocytosis in healthy volunteer PBMCs stimulated ex vivo with SARS-CoV-2 S1+2 spike protein. A retrospective cohort study was performed on intensive care COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: Co-incubation of clarithromycin with spike protein-stimulated healthy volunteer PBMCs ex vivo resulted in an increase in CD8+ (p = 0.004) and CD4+ (p = 0.007) IL-2, with a decrease in CD8+ (p = 0.032) and CD4+ (p = 0.007) IL-10. The addition of amoxicillin to clarithromycin resulted in an increase in CD8+ IL-6 (p = 0.010), decrease in CD8+ (p = 0.014) and CD4+ (p = 0.022) TNF-alpha, and decrease in CD8+ IFN-alpha (p = 0.038). Amoxicillin alone had no effect on CD4+ or CD8+ cytokines. Co-incubation of azithromycin resulted in increased CD8+ (p = 0.007) and CD4+ (p = 0.011) IL-2. There were no effects on monocyte phagocytosis. 102 COVID-19 ICU patients received antibiotics on hospital admission; 62 (61%) received clarithromycin. Clarithromycin use was associated with reduction in mortality on univariate analysis (p = 0.023), but not following adjustment for confounders (HR = 0.540; p = 0.076). CONCLUSIONS: Clarithromycin has immunomodulatory properties over and above azithromycin. Amoxicillin in addition to clarithromycin is associated with synergistic ex vivo immunomodulatory properties. The potential benefit of clarithromycin in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and other viral pneumonitis merits further exploration.

Corticosteroids in adult respiratory distress syndrome - an inconvenient truth?

OBJECTIVES: Recent studies have demonstrated mortality benefits from corticosteroid use in COVID-19 patients requiring respiratory support. However, clinical practice may warrant the use of corticosteroids outside the context of a clinical trial. Such data are rarely, if ever, reported. We explored the use of corticosteroids for adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) indications in patients with non-COVID ARDS. METHODS: We retrospectively studied patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS, admitted to our intensive care unit (ICU) between January 2018 and March 2020. KEY FINDINGS: Of the 91 patients with ARDS identified, 80% were treated with a corticosteroid during their ICU admission. Of these, 73 (82%) had corticosteroids administered for reasons other than ARDS. CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroid use for non-ARDS indications is commonplace in ARDS patients in our ICU. The use of corticosteroids outside a randomisation process in randomised clinical trials may be more common than appreciated and needs to be routinely reported.

Non-specialist therapeutic strategies in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We undertook a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the mortality benefit of non-specialist therapeutic interventions for ARDS available to general critical care units. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register for RCTs investigating therapeutic interventions in ARDS including corticosteroids, fluid management strategy, high PEEP, low tidal volume ventilation, neuromuscular blockade, prone position ventilation, or recruitment maneuvers. Data was collected on demographic information, treatment strategy, duration and dose of treatment, and primary (28 or 30-day mortality) and secondary (PaO2:FiO2 ratio at 24-48 hours) outcomes. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: No improvement in 28-day mortality could be demonstrated in three RCTs investigating high PEEP (28.0% vs. 30.2% control; risk ratio [confidence interval] 0.93 [0.82-1.06]; eight assessing prone position ventilation (39.3% vs. 44.5%; RR 0.83 [0.68-1.01]; seven investigating neuromuscular blockade (37.8% vs. 42.0%; RR 0.91 [0.81-1.03]); ten investigating recruitment maneuvers (42.4% vs. 42.1%; RR 1.01 [0.91-1.12]); eight investigating steroids (34.8% vs. 41.1%; RR 0.81 [0.59-1.12]); and one investigating conservative fluid strategies (25.4% vs. 28.4%; RR 0.90 [0.73-1.10]). Three studies assessing low tidal volume ventilation (33.1% vs. 41.9%; RR 0.79 (0.68-0.91); P=0.001), and subgroup analyses within studies investigating prone position ventilation greater than 12 hours (33.1% vs. 44.4%; RR 0.75 [0.59-0.95), P=0.02) did reveal outcome benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Among non-specialist therapeutic strategies available to general critical care units, low tidal volumes and prone position ventilation for greater than 12 hours improve mortality in ARDS.

COVID-19 and non-COVID ARDS patients demonstrate a distinct response to low dose steroids- A retrospective observational study.

Patients with COVID-19 ARDS have distinct physiological and immunological phenotypes compared to patients with non-COVID ARDS. Patients with COVID-19 ARDS (n = 32) had a significant improvement in PaO2: FiO2 ratio (p = 0.046) following low-dose steroid treatment, unlike patients with non-COVID ARDS (n = 16) (p = 0.529). Patients with COVID-19 ARDS had a greater fall in CRP compared to patients with non-COVID ARDS, albeit not statistically significant (p = 0.07). Our novel findings highlight differences in the underlying physiological and immunological phenotypes between COVID-19 and non-COVID ARDS, with implications for future ARDS studies.