Interplay between Inhaled Ibuprofenate, SARS-CoV-2, Vasoplegic Pulmonary Vascular Dysfunction, Pneumonia and CARDS

In this manuscript, we will describe the possible mechanisms of action of inhaled sodium ibuprofenate in hypertonic saline formulation-NaIHS, focusing primarily on vasoplegic pulmonary vascular dysfunction leading to severe pneumonia and Coronavirus Disease 2019-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome. We will address the anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory and antiangiogenic therapeutic effects of NaIHS, which together would exert their action through the negative modulation of local inflammatory mediators, pro-inflammatory cytokines and inflammatory pathways. In such a manner, NaIHS may reverse pulmonary vasoplegia and may thereby restore hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction, correcting the uncoupling of the ventilation-perfusion ratio and vasoplegic intrapulmonary shunting and, above all, it may reverse severe hypoxaemia. We will also describe the potential virucidal effects of NaIHS on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2. Likewise, we will mention the evidence obtained from the potential adjuvant treatment with NaIHS in two observational cohort studies done in Argentina, the most recent of them with 5146 patients, concluding that NaIHS reduces mortality by 48.7%, although randomised clinical trials are still needed to confirm these data

Reversal of SARS-CoV2-Induced Hypoxia by Nebulized Sodium Ibuprofenate in a Compassionate Use Program

Introduction: Sodium ibuprofenate in hypertonic saline (NaIHS) administered directly to the lungs by nebulization and inhalation has antibacterial and anti-inflammatory effects, with the potential to deliver these benefits to hypoxic patients. We describe a compassionate use program that offered this therapy to hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods: NaIHS (50 mg ibuprofen, tid) was provided in addition to standard of care (SOC) to hospitalized COVID-19 patients until oxygen saturation levels of > 94% were achieved on ambient air. Patients wore a containment hood to diminish aerosolization. Outcome data from participating patients treated at multiple hospitals in Argentina between April 4 and October 31, 2020, are summarized. Results were compared with a retrospective contemporaneous control (CC) group of hospitalized COVID-19 patients with SOC alone during the same time frame from a subset of participating hospitals from Córdoba and Buenos Aires. Results: The evolution of 383 patients treated with SOC + NaIHS [56 on mechanical ventilation (MV) at baseline] and 195 CC (21 on MV at baseline) are summarized. At baseline, NaIHS-treated patients had basal oxygen saturation of 90.7 ± 0.2% (74.3% were on supplemental oxygen at baseline) and a basal respiratory rate of 22.7 ± 0.3 breath/min. In the CC group, basal oxygen saturation was 92.6 ± 0.4% (52.1% were on oxygen supplementation at baseline) and respiratory rate was 19.3 ± 0.3 breath/min. Despite greater pulmonary compromise at baseline in the NaIHS-treated group, the length of treatment (LOT) was 9.1 ± 0.2 gs with an average length of stay (ALOS) of 11.5 ± 0.3 days, in comparison with an ALOS of 13.3 ± 0.9 days in the CC group. In patients on MV who received NaIHS, the ALOS was lower than in the CC group. In both NaIHS-treated groups, a rapid reversal of deterioration in oxygenation and NEWS2 scores was observed acutely after initiation of NaIHS therapy. No serious adverse events were considered related to ibuprofen therapy. Mortality was lower in both NaIHS groups compared with CC groups. Conclusions: Treatment of COVID-19 pneumonitis with inhalational nebulized NaIHS was associated with rapid improvement in hypoxia and vital signs, with no serious adverse events attributed to therapy. Nebulized NaIHS s worthy of further study in randomized, placebo-controlled trials (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04382768).Fil: Salva, Oscar. Clínica Independencia; ArgentinaFil: Doreski, Pablo A.. Fundación Respirar; ArgentinaFil: Giler, Celia S.. Clínica Independencia; ArgentinaFil: Quinodoz, Dario C.. Sanatorio de la Cañada; ArgentinaFil: Guzmán, Lucia G.. Sanatorio de la Cañada; ArgentinaFil: Muñoz, Sonia Edith. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Carrillo, Mariana Norma del Valle. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Porta, Daniela Josefina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Ambasch, Germán. Sanatorio Privado Mayo; ArgentinaFil: Coscia, Esteban. Sanatorio Privado Mayo; ArgentinaFil: Tambini Diaz, Jorge L.. Sanatorio Privado Mayo; ArgentinaFil: Bueno, Germán D.. Sanatorio Privado Mayo; ArgentinaFil: Fandi, Jorge O.. Clínica Independencia; ArgentinaFil: Maldonado, Miriam A.. Sanatorio San Roque; ArgentinaFil: Peña Chiappero, Leandro E.. Sanatori San Roque; ArgentinaFil: Fournier, Fernando. Clínica Francesa; ArgentinaFil: Pérez, Hernán A.. Sanatorio Alive; Argentina. University of Maryland; Estados UnidosFil: Quiroga, Mauro A.. Instituto Modelo de Cardiología; ArgentinaFil: Sala Mercado, Javier Agustin. Instituto Modelo de Cardiología; ArgentinaFil: Martínez Picco, Carlos. Clínica del Sol; ArgentinaFil: Beltrán, Marcelo Alejandro. Hospital Dr. Alberto Duhau; ArgentinaFil: Castillo Argañarás, Luis Fernando. Hospital Dr. Alberto Duhau; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Ríos, Nicolás Martínez. Quimica Luar Srl; ArgentinaFil: Kalayan, Galia I.. Provincia de Córdoba. Ministerio de Ciencia y Técnica. Centro de Excelencia en Productos y Procesos de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Beltramo, Dante Miguel. Provincia de Córdoba. Ministerio de Ciencia y Técnica. Centro de Excelencia en Productos y Procesos de Córdoba; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Garcia, Nestor Horacio. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud; Argentina. Provincia de Córdoba. Ministerio de Ciencia y Técnica. Centro de Excelencia en Productos y Procesos de Córdoba; Argentin

Repurposing Inhaled Ibuprofenate, a Non Steroidal Anti‐Inflammatory Drug, as a Potential Adjuvant Treatment for Pneumonia, CARDS and its Aetiological Agent SARS‐CoV‐2

Abstract In this manuscript, we will describe and highlight the most important potential underlying mechanisms of action of the inhaled sodium ibuprofenate in hypertonic saline formulation‐NaIHS aerosolisable, as a probable adjuvant treatment for moderate and severe pneumonia and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19)‐associated acute respiratory distress syndrome in COVID‐19. In both pathological entities, we will refer exclusively to the pulmonary vasoplegic type and we will describe the following therapeutic effects of NaIHS: anti‐inflammatory, immunomodulatory and antiangiogenic. The synergistic action of these therapeutic effects anti‐inflammatory and immunomodulatory together may exert their action at the pulmonary level through the possible reversal of pulmonary vasoplegia and may thereby restore hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction, correcting the uncoupling of the ventilation/perfusion ratio and vasoplegic intrapulmonary shunting and, above all, it may reverse severe hypoxaemia and acute respiratory failure. We will also mention the potential virucidal effects of NaIHS on severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). There are available three retrospective observational studies in moderate and severe COVID‐19 pneumonia, carried out in Argentina, with all three studies concluding that there was a significant reduction in mortality. The most important of these was conducted with the approval of the Institutional Review Board of the National Bureau of Economic Research of Harvard and Columbia Universities, which analysed data from 5146 patients and concluded that NaIHS reduced mortality by 48.7%, although randomized clinical trials are still needed to confirm these emerging data and enable the rise of NaIHS as a new adjuvant treatment. Conclusively, we deem essential to reuse known drugs, such as ibuprofen, in COVID‐19, due to the constant emergence of variants and subvariants of concern secondary to mutations and immune escape mechanisms of (SARS‐CoV‐2), since effective medical treatments are currently scarce and many of them are controversial or not available worldwide

SARS-CoV-2: diagnostic and design conundrums in the context of male factor infertility

The question of whether SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2 [SARS-CoV-2], leading to the COVID-19 infection) can be harboured in the testes and/or semen is currently unanswered. It is essential to understand the limitations of both antibody and real-time PCR tests in interpreting SARS-CoV-2 data in relation to analyses of semen and testicular tissue without appropriate controls. This article critically analyses the evidence so far on this, and the possible implications. The limitations of diagnostic tests in both sampling and testing methodologies, their validation and their relevance in interpreting data are also highlighted

Efficacy and Safety of a Bivalent RSV Prefusion F Vaccine in Older Adults

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection causes considerable illness in older adults. The efficacy and safety of an investigational bivalent RSV prefusion F protein-based (RSVpreF) vaccine in this population are unknown. METHODS: In this ongoing, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, adults (≥60 years of age) to receive a single intramuscular injection of RSVpreF vaccine at a dose of 120 μg (RSV subgroups A and B, 60 μg each) or placebo. The two primary end points were vaccine efficacy against seasonal RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness with at least two or at least three signs or symptoms. The secondary end point was vaccine efficacy against RSV-associated acute respiratory illness. RESULTS: At the interim analysis (data-cutoff date, July 14, 2022), 34,284 participants had received RSVpreF vaccine (17,215 participants) or placebo (17,069 participants). RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness with at least two signs or symptoms occurred in 11 participants in the vaccine group (1.19 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) and 33 participants in the placebo group (3.58 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) (vaccine efficacy, 66.7%; 96.66% confidence interval [CI], 28.8 to 85.8); 2 cases (0.22 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) and 14 cases (1.52 cases per 1000 person-years of observation), respectively, occurred with at least three signs or symptoms (vaccine efficacy, 85.7%; 96.66% CI, 32.0 to 98.7). RSV-associated acute respiratory illness occurred in 22 participants in the vaccine group (2.38 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) and 58 participants in the placebo group (6.30 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) (vaccine efficacy, 62.1%; 95% CI, 37.1 to 77.9). The incidence of local reactions was higher with vaccine (12%) than with placebo (7%); the incidences of systemic events were similar (27% and 26%, respectively). Similar rates of adverse events through 1 month after injection were reported (vaccine, 9.0%; placebo, 8.5%), with 1.4% and 1.0%, respectively, considered by the investigators to be injection-related. Severe or life-threatening adverse events were reported in 0.5% of vaccine recipients and 0.4% of placebo recipients. Serious adverse events were reported in 2.3% of participants in each group through the data-cutoff date. CONCLUSIONS: RSVpreF vaccine prevented RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness and RSV-associated acute respiratory illness in adults (≥60 years of age), without evident safety concerns. (Funded by Pfizer; RENOIR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05035212; EudraCT number, 2021-003693-31.).publishedVersionPeer reviewe

Efficacy and Safety of an mRNA-Based RSV PreF Vaccine in Older Adults.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) can cause substantial morbidity and mortality among older adults. An mRNA-based RSV vaccine, mRNA-1345, encoding the stabilized RSV prefusion F glycoprotein, is under clinical investigation. In this ongoing, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2-3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, adults 60 years of age or older to receive one dose of mRNA-1345 (50 μg) or placebo. The two primary efficacy end points were the prevention of RSV-associated lower respiratory tract disease with at least two signs or symptoms and with at least three signs or symptoms. A key secondary efficacy end point was the prevention of RSV-associated acute respiratory disease. Safety was also assessed. Overall, 35,541 participants were assigned to receive the mRNA-1345 vaccine (17,793 participants) or placebo (17,748). The median follow-up was 112 days (range, 1 to 379). The primary analyses were conducted when at least 50% of the anticipated cases of RSV-associated lower respiratory tract disease had occurred. Vaccine efficacy was 83.7% (95.88% confidence interval [CI], 66.0 to 92.2) against RSV-associated lower respiratory tract disease with at least two signs or symptoms and 82.4% (96.36% CI, 34.8 to 95.3) against the disease with at least three signs or symptoms. Vaccine efficacy was 68.4% (95% CI, 50.9 to 79.7) against RSV-associated acute respiratory disease. Protection was observed against both RSV subtypes (A and B) and was generally consistent across subgroups defined according to age and coexisting conditions. Participants in the mRNA-1345 group had a higher incidence than those in the placebo group of solicited local adverse reactions (58.7% vs. 16.2%) and of systemic adverse reactions (47.7% vs. 32.9%); most reactions were mild to moderate in severity and were transient. Serious adverse events occurred in 2.8% of the participants in each trial group. A single dose of the mRNA-1345 vaccine resulted in no evident safety concerns and led to a lower incidence of RSV-associated lower respiratory tract disease and of RSV-associated acute respiratory disease than placebo among adults 60 years of age or older. (Funded by Moderna; ConquerRSV ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05127434.)

A randomised trial of anti-GM-CSF otilimab in severe COVID-19 pneumonia (OSCAR).

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and dysregulated myeloid cell responses are implicated in the pathophysiology and severity of COVID-19. METHODS: In this randomised, sequential, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, adults aged 18-79 years (Part 1) or ≥70 years (Part 2) with severe COVID-19, respiratory failure and systemic inflammation (elevated C-reactive protein/ferritin) received a single intravenous infusion of otilimab 90 mg (human anti-GM-CSF monoclonal antibody) plus standard care (NCT04376684). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28. RESULTS: In Part 1 (n=806 randomised 1:1 otilimab:placebo), 71% of otilimab-treated patients were alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28 versus 67% who received placebo; the model-adjusted difference of 5.3% was not statistically significant (95% CI -0.8-11.4%, p=0.09). A nominally significant model-adjusted difference of 19.1% (95% CI 5.2-33.1%, p=0.009) was observed in the predefined 70-79 years subgroup, but this was not confirmed in Part 2 (n=350 randomised) where the model-adjusted difference was 0.9% (95% CI -9.3-11.2%, p=0.86). Compared with placebo, otilimab resulted in lower serum concentrations of key inflammatory markers, including the putative pharmacodynamic biomarker CC chemokine ligand 17, indicative of GM-CSF pathway blockade. Adverse events were comparable between groups and consistent with severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28. However, despite the lack of clinical benefit, a reduction in inflammatory markers was observed with otilimab, in addition to an acceptable safety profile

A randomised trial of anti-GM-CSF otilimab in severe COVID-19 pneumonia (OSCAR).

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and dysregulated myeloid cell responses are implicated in the pathophysiology and severity of COVID-19. METHODS: In this randomised, sequential, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, adults aged 18-79 years (Part 1) or ≥70 years (Part 2) with severe COVID-19, respiratory failure and systemic inflammation (elevated C-reactive protein/ferritin) received a single intravenous infusion of otilimab 90 mg (human anti-GM-CSF monoclonal antibody) plus standard care (NCT04376684). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28. RESULTS: In Part 1 (n=806 randomised 1:1 otilimab:placebo), 71% of otilimab-treated patients were alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28 versus 67% who received placebo; the model-adjusted difference of 5.3% was not statistically significant (95% CI -0.8-11.4%, p=0.09). A nominally significant model-adjusted difference of 19.1% (95% CI 5.2-33.1%, p=0.009) was observed in the predefined 70-79 years subgroup, but this was not confirmed in Part 2 (n=350 randomised) where the model-adjusted difference was 0.9% (95% CI -9.3-11.2%, p=0.86). Compared with placebo, otilimab resulted in lower serum concentrations of key inflammatory markers, including the putative pharmacodynamic biomarker CC chemokine ligand 17, indicative of GM-CSF pathway blockade. Adverse events were comparable between groups and consistent with severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28. However, despite the lack of clinical benefit, a reduction in inflammatory markers was observed with otilimab, in addition to an acceptable safety profile