A Review of the Evidence for Corticosteroids in COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To review available evidence on corticosteroids in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), and other viral pneumonias. DATA SOURCES: A literature search of MEDLINE, PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov was performed to identify studies between 1980 to 2020 using the following search terms: corticosteroids, COVID19, severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and influenza. Pre-printed articles were also reviewed at medRxiv.org. DATA ANALYSIS: Corticosteroids were not recommended early in the COVID-19 pandemic outside of the use for concomitant indications (i.e. ARDS, septic shock) as they have been associated with delayed time to viral clearance in other viral pneumonias. A randomized trial showed a mortality benefit with dexamethasone in COVID-19. Guidelines have been updated to include a strong recommendation for their use in COVID-19 in those hospitalized requiring supplemental oxygen or mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSION: Based on data from available randomized trials, patients that require respiratory support or mechanical ventilation benefit from corticosteroid therapy. Corticosteroids are an inexpensive and readily available therapy that should be standard of care in hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring respiratory support.

Tedizolid vs Linezolid for the Treatment of Nontuberculous Mycobacteria Infections in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) infections are limited by the pathogen's intrinsic resistance profile and toxicities. Tedizolid and linezolid display in vitro activity against NTM species. However, safety data and treatment outcomes are limited in the solid organ transplant (SOT) population. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of adult SOT recipients receiving linezolid or tedizolid for an NTM infection from January 1, 2010, to August 31, 2019. The primary outcome compared the hematologic safety profiles of tedizolid vs linezolid. We also described nonhematological adverse drug events (ADEs) and therapy discontinuation rates. In an exploratory analysis, we assessed symptomatic microbiologic and clinical outcomes in those receiving tedizolid or linezolid for at least 4 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were included (15 tedizolid, 9 linezolid). No differences were identified comparing the effects of tedizolid vs linezolid on platelet counts, absolute neutrophil counts (ANCs), and hemoglobin over 7 weeks using mixed-effects analysis of variance models. ANC was significantly decreased in both groups after 7 weeks of therapy (P = .04). Approximately 20% of patients in each arm discontinued therapy due to an ADE. Seven of 12 (58%) and 2 of 3 (67%) patients were cured or clinically cured with tedizolid- and linezolid-containing regimens, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests no significant safety benefit of tedizolid over linezolid for the treatment of NTM infections in SOT recipients. Tedizolid or linezolid-containing regimens demonstrated a potential benefit in symptomatic and microbiologic improvement. Larger cohorts are needed to further delineate the comparative role of linezolid and tedizolid for the treatment of NTM infections in SOT recipients.