Role of Innate and Adaptive Cytokines in the Survival of COVID-19 Patients.

SARS-CoV-2 is a new coronavirus characterized by a high infection and transmission capacity. A significant number of patients develop inadequate immune responses that produce massive releases of cytokines that compromise their survival. Soluble factors are clinically and pathologically relevant in COVID-19 survival but remain only partially characterized. The objective of this work was to simultaneously study 62 circulating soluble factors, including innate and adaptive cytokines and their soluble receptors, chemokines and growth and wound-healing/repair factors, in severe COVID-19 patients who survived compared to those with fatal outcomes. Serum samples were obtained from 286 COVID-19 patients and 40 healthy controls. The 62 circulating soluble factors were quantified using a Luminex Milliplex assay. Results. The patients who survived had decreased levels of the following 30 soluble factors of the 62 studied compared to those with fatal outcomes, therefore, these decreases were observed for cytokines and receptors predominantly produced by the innate immune system-IL-1α, IL-1α, IL-18, IL-15, IL-12p40, IL-6, IL-27, IL-1Ra, IL-1RI, IL-1RII, TNFα, TGFα, IL-10, sRAGE, sTNF-RI and sTNF-RII-for the chemokines IL-8, IP-10, MCP-1, MCP-3, MIG and fractalkine; for the growth factors M-CSF and the soluble receptor sIL2Ra; for the cytokines involved in the adaptive immune system IFNγ, IL-17 and sIL-4R; and for the wound-repair factor FGF2. On the other hand, the patients who survived had elevated levels of the soluble factors TNFß, sCD40L, MDC, RANTES, G-CSF, GM-CSF, EGF, PDGFAA and PDGFABBB compared to those who died. Conclusions. Increases in the circulating levels of the sCD40L cytokine; MDC and RANTES chemokines; the G-CSF and GM-CSF growth factors, EGF, PDGFAA and PDGFABBB; and tissue-repair factors are strongly associated with survival. By contrast, large increases in IL-15, IL-6, IL-18, IL-27 and IL-10; the sIL-1RI, sIL1RII and sTNF-RII receptors; the MCP3, IL-8, MIG and IP-10 chemokines; the M-CSF and sIL-2Ra growth factors; and the wound-healing factor FGF2 favor fatal outcomes of the disease.

Impact of the Innate Inflammatory Response on ICU Admission and Death in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the capacity of a broad spectrum of cytokines and growth factors to predict ICU admission and/or death in patients with severe COVID-19. DESIGN: An observational, analytical, retrospective cohort study with longitudinal follow-up. SETTING: Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias (HUPA). PARTICIPANTS: 287 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 admitted to our hospital from 24 March to 8 May 2020, followed until 31 August 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Profiles of immune response (IR) mediators were determined using the Luminex Multiplex technique in hospitalized patients within six days of admission by examining serum levels of 62 soluble molecules classified into the three groups: adaptive IR-related cytokines (n = 19), innate inflammatory IR-related cytokines (n = 27), and growth factors (n = 16). RESULTS: A statistically robust link with ICU admission and/or death was detected for increased serum levels of interleukin (IL)-6, IL-15, soluble (s) RAGE, IP10, MCP3, sIL1RII, IL-8, GCSF and MCSF and IL-10. The greatest prognostic value was observed for the marker combination IL-10, IL-6 and GCSF. CONCLUSIONS: When severe COVID-19 progresses to ICU admission and/or death there is a marked increase in serum levels of several cytokines and chemokines, mainly related to the patient's inflammatory IR. Serum levels of IL-10, IL-6 and GCSF were most prognostic of the outcome measure.

A Predictive Model and Risk Factors for Case Fatality of COVID-19.

This study aimed to create an individualized analysis model of the risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients as a tool for the rapid clinical management of hospitalized patients in order to achieve a resilience of medical resources. This is an observational, analytical, retrospective cohort study with longitudinal follow-up. Data were collected from the medical records of 3489 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 using RT-qPCR in the period of highest community transmission recorded in Europe to date: February-June 2020. The study was carried out in in two health areas of hospital care in the Madrid region: the central area of the Madrid capital (Hospitales de Madrid del Grupo HM Hospitales (CH-HM), n = 1931) and the metropolitan area of Madrid (Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias (MH-HUPA) n = 1558). By using a regression model, we observed how the different patient variables had unequal importance. Among all the analyzed variables, basal oxygen saturation was found to have the highest relative importance with a value of 20.3%, followed by age (17.7%), lymphocyte/leukocyte ratio (14.4%), CRP value (12.5%), comorbidities (12.5%), and leukocyte count (8.9%). Three levels of risk of ICU/death were established: low-risk level (<5%), medium-risk level (5-20%), and high-risk level (>20%). At the high-risk level, 13% needed ICU admission, 29% died, and 37% had an ICU-death outcome. This predictive model allowed us to individualize the risk for worse outcome for hospitalized patients affected by COVID-19.

Efecto antipseudomónico de los macrólidos. Experiencia en un caso de neumonía nosocomial por Pseudomonas aeruginosa multirresistente sin respuesta a antibioterapia / Antipseudomonic effect of macrolides. Experience in a case of nosocomial pneumonia caused by multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa without response to antibiotic therapy

No disponible

Wood species affect the degradation of crude oil in beach sand.

The addition of wood chips as a co-substrate can promote the degradation of oil in soil. Therefore, in the present study, the tree species-specific impact of wood chips of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), Norway spruce (Picea abies L.) and Western balsam poplar (Populus trichocarpa L.) on the degradation of crude oil was tested in beach sand in a 4-week incubation experiment. The CO2-C release increased in the order of control without wood chips < +spruce < +pine < +poplar. Initial and final hydrocarbon concentrations (C10 to C40), as indicators for the oil degradation, were determined with gas chromatography-flame ionization detection (GC-FID). The degradation increased for the light fraction (C10 to C22), the heavy fraction (C23 to C40) as well as the whole range (C10 to C40) in the order of control without wood chips (f(degrad.) = 23% vs. 0% vs. 12%) < +poplar (f(degrad.) = 49% vs. 19% vs. 36%) < +spruce (f(degrad.) = 55% vs. 34% vs. 46%) < +pine (f(degrad.) = 60% vs. 44% vs. 53%), whereas the heavy fraction was less degraded in comparison to the light fraction. It can be concluded, that the tree species-specific wood quality is a significant control of the impact on the degradation of hydrocarbons, and pine wood chips might be promising, possibly caused by their lower decomposability and lower substrate replacement than the other wood species.

[Reasons for antiretroviral treatment change in HIV+ patients in Spain in 2010-2011. SWITCH AUDIT Study]. / Causas que justifican el cambio del tratamiento antirretroviral en personas con infección por el VIH en España (años 2010-2011). Estudio SWITCH AUDIT.

Survey in 349 HIV infected subjects in 19 Spanish Hospitals in 2010-2011, to assess the reasons for antiretroviral treatment change. Simplification was the most frequent reason for change (37%), followed by toxicity (30%) and treatment failure (21%). There were statistically significant differences according to treatment line and transmission category. In conclusion, in many patients treatment is changed in order to obtain the benefits of a regimen easier to follow.

Causas que justifican el cambio del tratamiento antirretroviral en personas con infección por el VIH en España (años 2010-2011). Estudio SWITCH AUDIT / Reasons for antiretroviral treatment change in HIV+ patients in Spain in 2010-2011. SWITCH AUDIT Study

Encuesta transversal en 349 pacientes con VIH en 19 hospitales españoles, para caracterizar los motivos de cambio del tratamiento antirretroviral en 2010-2011. La causa más frecuente del cambio fue la simplificación (37%), seguida de la toxicidad (30%) y el fracaso terapéutico (21%). Se encontraron diferencias significativas en los motivos de cambio según la línea de tratamiento y la categoría de transmisión. En conclusión, en muchos pacientes se busca la optimización del tratamiento antirretroviral mediante la simplificación a pautas más fáciles de seguir (AU)

Survey in 349 HIV infected subjects in 19 Spanish Hospitals in 2010-2011, to assess the reasons for antiretroviral treatment change. Simplification was the most frequent reason for change (37%), followed by toxicity (30%) and treatment failure (21%). There were statistically significant differences according to treatment line and transmission category. In conclusion, in many patients treatment is changed in order to obtain the benefits of a regimen easier to follow (AU)

Risk factors for loss of virological suppression in patients receiving lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy for maintenance of HIV suppression.

BACKGROUND: Risk factors for loss of virological response in patients receiving lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) monotherapy as maintenance treatment have not been determined. METHODS: In 121 patients enrolled in the OK and OK04 clinical trials assigned to receive monotherapy with LPV/r, we attempted to identify factors associated with loss of virological suppression at 48 weeks, defined as confirmed serum HIV type-1 RNA>50 copies/ml, with missing data or changes caused by toxicity censored. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios for the risk of loss of virological suppression. RESULTS: At week 48, 15 patients experienced loss of virological suppression. Probability of loss of virological suppression was 12.7%. Less than 9 months of maintenance of virological suppression prior to monotherapy, a lower baseline haemoglobin and low adherence measured by self-reported total missed doses in the week prior to study visit were associated with loss of virological suppression in the univariate analyses. Independent factors associated with loss of virological suppression by multivariate analyses were > or =2 visits with self-reported missed doses in the week prior to the study visit, a lower baseline haemoglobin and a nadir CD4(+) T-cell count <100 cells/microl. CONCLUSIONS: Suboptimal adherence, lower baseline haemoglobin and a nadir CD4(+) T-cell count <100 cells/microl were the main risk factors for losing virological suppression in patients randomized to monotherapy with LPV/r.

Lopinavir-ritonavir monotherapy versus lopinavir-ritonavir and 2 nucleosides for maintenance therapy of HIV: 96-week analysis.

BACKGROUND: The OK04 trial has shown that 48 weeks of lopinavir-ritonavir monotherapy with reintroduction of nucleosides as needed was noninferior to continuation of triple therapy with 2 nucleosides and lopinavir-ritonavir in patients with prior stable suppression. However, it is still uncertain if this experimental strategy can maintain suppression in the long term. METHODS: Patients entered this noninferiority trial (upper limit 95% confidence interval: +12%) with no history of virological failure while receiving a protease inhibitor and receiving 2 nucleosides plus lopinavir/ritonavir, with HIV RNA <50 copies per milliliter for more than 6 months. Primary end point was percent of patients without therapeutic failure, defined as confirmed HIV RNA >500 copies per milliliter with exclusion of monotherapy patients who resuppressed to <50 copies per milliliter after resuming baseline nucleosides, or loss to follow-up, or change of randomized therapy other than reinduction. RESULTS: Through 96 weeks, percentage of patient without therapeutic failure was 87% (monotherapy, n = 100) vs. 78% (triple therapy, n = 98; 95% confidence interval: -20% to +1.2%). Percentage with HIV RNA <50 copies per milliliter (intention to treat, missing = failure, reinduction = failure): 77% (monotherapy) vs. 78% (triple therapy). Low-level viral rebound was more frequent in the monotherapy group. Twelve patients in the monotherapy group (12%) needed reinduction with nucleosides. Discontinuations due to adverse events were significantly more frequent in the triple therapy group (8%) than in the monotherapy group (0%); P = 0.003. CONCLUSIONS: At 96-week lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy with reintroduction of nucleosides as needed was noninferior to continuation of triple therapy. Incidence of adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation was significantly lower with monotherapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00114933).

Long-term (4 years) efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy for maintenance of HIV suppression.

OBJECTIVES: Data are scarce on the long-term efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy for the maintenance of HIV suppression. Four years of results of patients randomized to monotherapy in the Only Kaletra (OK) pilot clinical trial are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-one HIV-infected patients with suppressed HIV replication (<50 copies/mL) for at least 6 months and without previous failure while receiving a protease inhibitor-based regimen started lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy. Follow-up was performed within the OK pilot clinical trial during the first 2 years and according to routine clinical practice during the 3rd and 4th years. RESULTS: Fourteen patients (67%) remain on monotherapy and with RNA <50 copies/mL (intention-to-treat analysis, with missing patients scored as failures). Five patients (24%) had virological rebound and all of them were successfully re-suppressed by adding two nucleosides. No major protease inhibitor mutations were found. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the long-term efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy for the maintenance of HIV suppression, a finding that must be confirmed in larger studies.

Lopinavir-ritonavir monotherapy versus lopinavir-ritonavir and two nucleosides for maintenance therapy of HIV.

BACKGROUND: Prior attempts to reduce the number of drugs needed to maintain viral suppression in patients with suppressed HIV replication while receiving three antiretroviral drugs have been unsuccessful. METHODS: In 205 patients with suppressed HIV replication on lopinavir-ritonavir and two nucleosides, this randomized, open-label, non-inferiority clinical trial compared the strategies of continuation of triple therapy versus lopinavir-ritonavir monotherapy followed by reinduction with two nucleosides if virological rebound occurred without genotypic resistance to lopinavir-ritonavir. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients without therapeutic failure, defined as confirmed HIV RNA higher than 500 copies/mL (with exclusion of patients receiving monotherapy who resuppressed to < 50 copies/mL after resuming baseline nucleosides), or loss to follow-up, or change of randomized therapy other than reinduction. RESULTS: At week 48, the percentage of patients without therapeutic failure was 94% in the monotherapy group versus 90% in the triple therapy group (difference,-4%; upper limit of 95% confidence interval for difference, 3.4%). The percentage of patients with HIV RNA 50 copies/mL at 48 weeks by intention-to-treat, missing data or reinductions considered as failures, were 85% in the monotherapy group versus 90% in the triple therapy group (P = 0.31; 95% upper limit of 95% confidence interval for difference, 14%). CONCLUSION: In this trial, 48 weeks of lopinavir-ritonavir monotherapy with reintroduction of nucleosides as needed was non-inferior to continuation of two nucleosides and lopinavir-ritonavir in patients with prior stable suppression. However, episodes of low level viremia were more common in patients receiving monotherapy.

Lopinavir/ritonavir as single-drug therapy for maintenance of HIV-1 viral suppression: 48-week results of a randomized, controlled, open-label, proof-of-concept pilot clinical trial (OK Study).

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated maintenance with lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy vs. continuing lopinavir/ritonavir and 2 nucleosides in HIV-infected patients with suppressed HIV replication. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter, pilot clinical trial. METHODS: Adult patients were eligible if they had no history of virologic failure while receiving a protease inhibitor, were receiving 2 nucleosides + lopinavir/ritonavir (400/100 mg b.i.d.) for >1 month and had maintained serum HIV RNA <50 copies/mL for >6 months prior to enrollment. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to continue or stop the nucleosides. At baseline there were no significant differences between groups in median CD4 cells/muL (baseline or nadir), pre-HAART (highly active antiretroviral therapy) HIV log10 viremia, or time with HIV RNA <50 copies/mL prior to enrollment. After 48 weeks of follow-up, percentage of patients remaining at <50 HIV RNA copies/mL (intention to treat, M = F) was 81% for the monotherapy group (95% CI: 64% to 98%) vs. 95% for the triple-therapy group (95% CI: 86% to 100%); P = 0.34. Patients in whom monotherapy failed had significantly worse adherence than patients who remained virally suppressed on monotherapy. Monotherapy failures did not show primary resistance mutations in the protease gene and were successfully reinduced with prerandomization nucleosides. Mean change in CD4 cells/microL: +70 (monotherapy) and +8 (triple) (P = 0.27). Mean serum fasting lipids remained stable in both groups. No serious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: Most of the patients maintained with lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy remain with undetectable viral load after 48 weeks. Failures of lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy were not associated with the development of primary resistance mutations in the protease gene and could be successfully reinduced adding back prior nucleosides.

Long-term efficacy and safety of protease inhibitor switching to nevirapine in HIV-infected patients with undetectable virus load.

BACKGROUND: Simplified highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimens are becoming widely used, particularly as a result of the side effects of and difficult compliance with protease inhibitor (PI) therapy. However, the long-term efficacy of HAART has not been properly assessed. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 110 patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) with undetectable virus load who discontinued PI therapy and initiated therapy with nevirapine without changing nucleoside analogues. Reasons for switching were treatment simplification (45%), lipodystrophy (24%), renal problems (23%), and dyslipidemia (8%). HIV-1 load, CD4 cell count, and fasting biochemistry profiles were performed at the time of switching (baseline) and every 3-4 months thereafter. The aim of the study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of this combination. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients (61.8%) had a duration of follow-up of 3 years. The mean increase in the CD4 cell count after 3 years was 90 cells/microL (13.8% from baseline). Virus loads remained undetectable in all patients but 9 (8.2%). Triglyceride levels dramatically improved at 12 months (a 75% decrease; P<.02) and remained statistically significant over time (P<.04). The same occurred with serum cholesterol levels: there was an initial reduction of 25% (P<.02) and at the end of the follow-up period (P<.015). However, at the long-term evaluation, complete normalization of mean serum cholesterol and triglyceride levels could not be achieved. Sixteen patients (14.5%) had to stop therapy as a result of nevirapine-associated side effects. CONCLUSIONS: The switching of a PI to nevirapine is a safe and well-tolerated option for maintaining long-term virological suppression and immunological control. Three years after starting nevirapine therapy, rates of hypercholesterolemia and hypertriglyceridemia improved, although normal cholesterol and triglyceride values were not achieved.

Failure of cetirizine to prevent nevirapine-associated rash: a double-blind placebo-controlled trial for the GESIDA 26/01 Study.

OBJECTIVES: Rash is the most frequent adverse event associated with nevirapine. The use of antihistamines remains unclear in this setting. A double-blind placebo-controlled study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of cetirizine in the prevention of nevirapine rash. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial with cetirizine (10 mg/d x 30 days) was conducted. Inclusion criteria were HIV-1 infection and nevirapine therapy started with any CD4 cell count or plasma viral load and without simultaneous use of abacavir, cotrimoxazole, or rifampin. Clinical follow-up was performed at 15, 30, and 90 days. RESULTS: Two hundred seventeen evaluable patients were enrolled (107 patients receiving cetirizine and 110 patients receiving placebo), 32.3% of whom were women. The median baseline CD4 cell count and plasma viral load were 341 cells/mm and 11,000 copies/mL, respectively. Overall, 29 rashes (13.4%) were detected: 16 (15.0%) in the cetirizine group and 13 (11.8%) in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR] = 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-2.88; P = 0.50). The incidence of moderate to severe rashes leading to nevirapine withdrawal was 10.3% (11 of 107 patients) in the cetirizine group and 7.3% (8 of 110 patients) in the placebo group (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 0.52-4.18; P = 0.43). Adverse events leading to withdrawal of therapy appeared in 14 patients (13.1%) from the cetirizine group and 10 (9.1%) from the placebo group (P = 0.34). CONCLUSION: Cetirizine does not prevent the incidence or affect the severity of nevirapine-associated rash.