Search

Background: No comprehensive analysis of the pulmonary sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Japan based on respiratory function tests and chest computed tomography (CT) has been reported. We evaluated post-COVID-19 conditions, especially focusing on pulmonary sequelae assessed by pulmonary function tests and chest CT., Methods: For this prospective cohort study, we enrolled 1069 patients who presented pneumonia at the time of admission in 55 hospitals from February 2020 to September 2021. Disease severity was classified as moderateⅠ, moderate II, and severe, defined primarily according to the degree of respiratory failure. The data on post-COVID-19 conditions over 12 months, pulmonary function, and chest CT findings at 3 months were evaluated in this study. Additionally, the impact of COVID-19 severity on pulmonary sequelae, such as impaired diffusion capacity, restrictive pattern, and CT abnormalities, was also evaluated., Results: The most frequently reported post-COVID-19 conditions at 3 months after COVID-19 were muscle weakness, dyspnea, and fatigue (48.4%, 29.0%, and 24.7%, respectively). The frequency of symptoms gradually decreased over subsequent months. In pulmonary function tests at 3 months, the incidence of impaired diffusion capacity and restrictive pattern increased depending on disease severity. There also were differences in the presence of chest CT abnormalities at the 3 months, which was markedly correlated with the severity., Conclusion: We reported a comprehensive analysis of post-COVID-19 condition, pulmonary function, and chest CT abnormalities in Japanese patients with COVID-19. The findings of this study will serve as valuable reference data for future post-COVID-19 condition research in Japan., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: This phase 2b/3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial explored the efficacy and evaluated the safety of ensitrelvir. This trial involved individuals with asymptomatic infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and patients with mild symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)., Methods: The trial was conducted at 57 medical institutions in Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam (study period: January 6-August 14, 2022). Eligible participants were randomized (1:1:1) to the ensitrelvir 125-mg, ensitrelvir 250-mg, or placebo group, received the allocated intervention orally, and were followed up until Day 28. Participants self-rated the severity of 14 typical COVID-19 symptoms and recorded the data in an electronic diary., Results: In total, 572 participants (194, 189, and 189 in the ensitrelvir 125-mg, ensitrelvir 250-mg, and placebo groups, respectively) were included in the intention-to-treat population. Ensitrelvir 125-mg group observed a 77% reduction in the risk of developing any of the 14 COVID-19 symptoms or fever and a 29% reduction in the risk of worsening of such symptoms or fever versus placebo (statistically nonsignificant). The viral RNA, viral titer, and time to infectious viral clearance observed a statistically significant decrease versus placebo. Most treatment-related adverse events (TEAEs) were mild to moderate in severity, and the most common TEAE observed across groups was a decrease in high-density lipoprotein., Conclusions: Our exploratory results suggest a potential reduction in the risk of development or worsening of COVID-19 symptoms with ensitrelvir. Ensitrelvir showed antiviral efficacy and was well tolerated., Trial Registration: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials identifier: jRCT2031210350., (© 2024 The Author(s). Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

This retrospective observational study aimed to assess the clinical characteristics of platypnea-orthodeoxia syndrome in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated using mechanical ventilation or high-flow nasal canula. We analyzed 42 consecutive patients with COVID-19 from January 2020 to March 2022. The primary outcomes were the incidence of platypnea-orthodeoxia syndrome, the time with required long-term oxygen therapy, and short-term prognosis. Additionally, we examined the relationships between platypnea-orthodeoxia syndrome and COVID-19 severity, the time with long-term oxygen therapy, and short-term prognosis. Of the 42 included patients, 15 (35.7 %) had platypnea-orthodeoxia syndrome. Although mortality was not significantly different between both groups, the oxygen withdrawal rate in the platypnea-orthodeoxia syndrome group was significantly lower than that in the group without this syndrome. Clinical staff should be aware of the possibility of platypnea-orthodeoxia syndrome during positional changes in patients with COVID-19. Recognizing POS can improve early detection, countermeasures, and safety during physiotherapy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Tetsuya Hara reports lecture fees from Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., and grants from Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Edwards Lifesciences Co., Ltd., and Asahi Kasei Pharma Co., Ltd., outside of the submitted work. Masatoshi Hanada, Yuji Ishimatsu, Noriho Sakamoto, Nobuyuki Ashizawa, Hirotomo Yamanashi, Motohiro Sekino, Koichi Izumikawa, Hiroshi Mukae, Koya Ariyoshi, Takahiro Maeda, Shuntaro Sato, and Ryo Kozu have no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Japanese Respiratory Society. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Treatment options for COVID-19 are warranted irrespective of the presence of risk factors for severe disease., Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of ensitrelvir in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19., Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 3 part of a phase 2/3, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted from February 10 to July 10, 2022, with a 28-day follow-up period, at 92 institutions in Japan, Vietnam, and South Korea. Patients (aged 12 to <70 years) with mild to moderate COVID-19 within 120 hours of positive viral test results were studied., Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive 125 mg of once-daily ensitrelvir (375 mg on day 1), 250 mg of once-daily ensitrelvir (750 mg on day 1), or placebo for 5 days., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the time to resolution of the composite of 5 characteristic symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection, assessed using a Peto-Prentice generalized Wilcoxon test stratified by vaccination history. Virologic efficacy and safety were also assessed., Results: A total of 1821 patients were randomized, of whom 1030 (347 in the 125-mg ensitrelvir group, 340 in the 250-mg ensitrelvir group, and 343 in the placebo group) were randomized in less than 72 hours of disease onset (primary analysis population). The mean (SD) age in this population was 35.2 (12.3) years, and 552 (53.6%) were men. A significant difference was observed between the 125-mg ensitrelvir group and the placebo group (P = .04 with a Peto-Prentice generalized Wilcoxon test). The difference in median time was approximately 1 day between the 125-mg ensitrelvir group and the placebo group (167.9 vs 192.2 hours; difference, -24.3 hours; 95% CI, -78.7 to 11.7 hours). Adverse events were observed in 267 of 604 patients (44.2%) in the 125-mg ensitrelvir group, 321 of 599 patients (53.6%) in the 250-mg ensitrelvir group, and 150 of 605 patients (24.8%) in the placebo group, which included a decrease in high-density lipoprotein level (188 [31.1%] in the 125-mg ensitrelvir group, 231 [38.6%] in the 250-mg ensitrelvir group, and 23 [3.8%] in the placebo group). No treatment-related serious adverse events were reported., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, 125-mg ensitrelvir treatment reduced the time to resolution of the 5 typical COVID-19 symptoms compared with placebo in patients treated in less than 72 hours of disease onset; the absolute difference in median time to resolution was approximately 1 day. Ensitrelvir demonstrated clinical and antiviral efficacy without new safety concerns. Generalizability to populations outside Asia should be confirmed., Trial Registration: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials Identifier: jRCT2031210350.

Saliva is a key component of mucosal immunity, which protects the oral cavity from viral infections. However, salivary immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in terms of immunoglobulin dynamics and recognition, have not been investigated sufficiently. In this study, saliva samples were collected from individuals that received SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, and immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgM, and IgA against whole spike protein and S1 protein were measured. IgA against whole spike protein increased significantly following vaccination, while IgA against S1 protein did not. Of note, the IgA response was evident two weeks after the first vaccine dose and continued to rise thereafter. On the contrary, IgG antibodies against S1 increased significantly at four weeks after vaccination. These results reveal the dynamics and recognition antigens of immunoglobulins in saliva, indicating the function of IgA in the mucosal immune system. These findings may pave the way for further studies on mucosal immune response induced by vaccination., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Infection and mortality rates caused by the coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic were high. However, the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the clinical burden in medical facilities remains to be clarified in Japan., Materials and Methods: This study used a questionnaire-based web survey to clarify how the COVID-19 pandemic affected infectious disease practice and infection control. The questionnaire was sent to healthcare professionals at nationwide medical facilities between January 13, 2023, and February 15, 2023., Results: Responses were obtained from 1784 healthcare professionals throughout Japan. Hospital management of COVID-19 patients was the responsibility of 96.5% of respondents. Furthermore, 75.1% had experienced nosocomial spread of COVID-19. Manuals and infection control measures for COVID-19 have been arranged in most facilities. In many facilities, the timing of an infected employee's return to work was determined in accordance with the isolation period for coronavirus-positive patients with symptoms established by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare in Japan. Approximately 30% of respondents reported that caring for COVID-19 patients, including the use of personal protective equipment, was their most stressful job. Approximately 50% of the respondents reported an increase in overtime hours. Approximately 90% of facilities are now capable of performing COVID-19 testing onsite., Conclusion: Infection control for COVID-19 has been improved, and testing equipment for SARS-CoV-2 has been prepared. Patient care-related burdens and burdens caused by having to compensate for vacancies due to infected staff members have increased. In the future, a reduction in workload and role sharing should be considered., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy, Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases, and Japanese Society for Infection Prevention and Control. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: A test-based strategy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is one of the measures to assess the need for isolation and prevention of infection. However, testing with high sensitivity methods, such as quantitative RT-PCR, leads to unnecessary isolation, whereas the lateral flow antigen test shows low sensitivity and false negative results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Ag test (Lumira Ag), a rapid microfluidic immunofluorescence method, in assessing infectivity., Methods: This study was performed from March 2022 to July 2022. A pair of nasopharyngeal swab samples were obtained from each patient with mild COVID-19. One swab was used for Lumira Ag testing, and the other for quantitative RT-PCR testing and virus culture., Results: A total of 84 patients were included in the study. Among them, PCR, Lumira Ag test, and virus culture indicated positivity for 82, 66, and 24 patients, respectively. When comparing the Lumira Ag test to virus culture, its sensitivity was 100.0% (24/24), specificity, 30.0% (18/60); positive predictive value, 36.3% (24/66); and negative predictive value (NPV), 100.0% (18/18). The positive sample for virus culture was observed until the ninth day from the onset of symptoms, while the Lumira Ag test was observed until day 11., Conclusions: The Lumira Ag test showed high sensitivity and NPV (100% each) compared to virus culture. A test-based strategy using the Lumira Ag test can effectively exclude COVID-19 infectiousness., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA), a natural amino acid that is marketed alongside sodium ferrous citrate (SFC) as a functional food, blocks severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) proliferation in vitro and exerts anti-inflammatory effects. In this phase II open-label, prospective, parallel-group, randomized trial, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 5-ALA in patients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019., Methods: This trial was conducted in patients receiving 5-ALA/SFC (250/145 mg) orally thrice daily for 7 days, followed by 5-ALA/SFC (150/87 mg) orally thrice daily for 7 days. The primary endpoints were changes in SARS-CoV-2 viral load, clinical symptom scores, and 5-ALA/SFC safety (adverse events [AE] and changes in laboratory values and vital signs)., Results: A total of 50 patients were enrolled from 8 institutions in Japan. The change in SARS-CoV-2 viral load from baseline was not significantly different between the 5-ALA/SFC (n = 24) and control (n = 26) groups. The duration to improvement was shorter in the 5-ALA/SFC group than in the control group, although the difference was not significant. The 5-ALA/SFC group exhibited faster improvement rates in "taste abnormality," "cough," "lethargy," and "no appetite" than the control group. Eight AEs were observed in the 5-ALA/SFC group, with 22.7% of patients experiencing gastrointestinal symptoms (decreased appetite, constipation, and vomiting). AEs occurred with 750/435 mg/day in 25.0% of patients in the first phase and with 450/261 mg/day of 5-ALA/SFC in 6.3% of patients in the second phase., Conclusion: 5-ALA/SFC improved some symptoms but did not influence the SARS-CoV-2 viral load or clinical symptom scores over 14 days. The safety of 5-ALA/SFC in this study was acceptable. Further evaluation using a larger sample size or modified method is warranted., (Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Introduction: During the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, preferences for factors associated with vaccines have been evaluated. Three oral antiviral drugs have been approved in Japan for patients with mild-to-moderate I COVID-19 symptoms. Although preferences for the drugs may also depend on various factors, these have not been fully evaluated., Methods: A conjoint analysis was performed based on an online survey in August 2022 to estimate the intangible costs of factors associated with oral antiviral drugs for COVID-19. Respondents were individuals aged 20-69 across Japan. The attributes included the company (Japanese/foreign) that developed the drug, formulation and size of the drug, frequency of administration per day, number of tablets/capsules per dose, number of days until no longer infectious to others, and out-of-pocket expenses. A logistic regression model was applied to estimate the utility of each level for each attribute. The intangible costs were calculated by comparing the utility to the out-of-pocket attribute., Results: Responses were collected from 11,303 participants. The difference between levels was the largest for companies that developed a drug; the intangible costs were JPY 5390 higher for the foreign company than for the Japanese company. The next largest difference was in the number of days until one is no longer infectious. For the same formulation, the intangible cost was lower for small sizes than large sizes. For similar-sized tablets and capsules, the intangible cost was lower for tablets than capsules. These tendencies were similar regardless of COVID-19 infection history and the presence of risk factors for severe COVID-19 in the respondents., Conclusion: Intangible costs for factors associated with oral antiviral drugs among the Japanese population were estimated. The results may change as the number of people with a history of COVID-19 infection increases and significant progress is made regarding treatments., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Nelfinavir, an orally administered inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus protease, inhibits the replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro . We conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of nelfinavir in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We included unvaccinated asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic adult patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection within 3 days before enrollment. The patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral nelfinavir (750 mg; thrice daily for 14 days) combined with standard-of-care or standard-of-care alone. The primary endpoint was the time to viral clearance, confirmed using quantitative reverse-transcription PCR by assessors blinded to the assigned treatment. A total of 123 patients (63 in the nelfinavir group and 60 in the control group) were included. The median time to viral clearance was 8.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.0 to 12.0) days in the nelfinavir group and 8.0 (95% CI, 7.0 to 10.0) days in the control group, with no significant difference between the treatment groups (hazard ratio, 0.815; 95% CI, 0.563 to 1.182; P  = 0.1870). Adverse events were reported in 47 (74.6%) and 20 (33.3%) patients in the nelfinavir and control groups, respectively. The most common adverse event in the nelfinavir group was diarrhea (49.2%). Nelfinavir did not reduce the time to viral clearance in this setting. Our findings indicate that nelfinavir should not be recommended in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. The study is registered with the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT2071200023). IMPORTANCE The anti-HIV drug nelfinavir suppresses the replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro . However, its efficacy in patients with COVID-19 has not been studied. We conducted a multicenter, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of orally administered nelfinavir in patients with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic COVID-19. Compared to standard-of-care alone, nelfinavir (750 mg, thrice daily) did not reduce the time to viral clearance, viral load, or the time to resolution of symptoms. More patients had adverse events in the nelfinavir group than in the control group (74.6% [47/63 patients] versus 33.3% [20/60 patients]). Our clinical study provides evidence that nelfinavir, despite its antiviral effects on SARS-CoV-2 in vitro , should not be recommended for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 having no or mild symptoms., Competing Interests: The authors declare a conflict of interest. All authors have completed the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. T. Miyazaki, K.I., K. Yanagihara, H.M., H. Kakeya, T. Matsumoto, and H. Yotsuyanagi have received lecture honoraria from Pfizer and MSD outside this work. N.T. has received lecture honoraria from MSD outside this work. T. Miyazaki, K.I., H.M., and H. Yotsuyanagi have received lecture honoraria from Gilead Sciences outside this work. T. Miyazaki has received a consultation fee from Pfizer and research grants from Pfizer and MSD outside this work. H.M. has received payments for expert testimony from Pfizer, MSD, and Gilead Sciences outside this work. H. Yotsuyanagi serves on the advisory board for Pfizer, MSD, and Gilead Sciences. The other authors have no competing interests. The sponsors and pharmaceutical companies had no role in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and writing of the manuscript.

Background: This phase 2b part of a randomized phase 2/3 study assessed the efficacy and safety of ensitrelvir for mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the Omicron epidemic., Methods: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to orally receive ensitrelvir fumaric acid 125 mg (375 mg on day 1) or 250 mg (750 mg on day 1) or placebo once daily for 5 days. The co-primary endpoints were the change from baseline in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) titer on day 4 and time-weighted average change from baseline up to 120 hours in the total score of predefined 12 COVID-19 symptoms. Safety was assessed through adverse events., Results: A total of 341 patients (ensitrelvir 125-mg group: 114; ensitrelvir 250-mg group: 116; and placebo group: 111; male: 53.5-64.9%; mean age: 35.3-37.3 years) were included in the efficacy analyses. The change from baseline in SARS-CoV-2 titer on day 4 was significantly greater with both ensitrelvir doses than with placebo (differences from placebo: -0.41 log10 50% tissue-culture infectious dose/mL; P < .0001 for both). The total score of the 12 COVID-19 symptoms did not show a significant difference between the ensitrelvir groups and placebo group. The time-weighted average change from baseline up to 120 hours was significantly greater with ensitrelvir versus placebo in several subtotal scores, including acute symptoms and respiratory symptoms. Most adverse events were mild in severity., Conclusions: Ensitrelvir treatment demonstrated a favorable antiviral efficacy and potential clinical benefit with an acceptable safety profile., Clinical Trials Registration: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials: jRCT2031210350 (https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCT2031210350)., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. H. M. has received grants from Taisho Pharma; lecture fees from Pfizer, MSD, Shionogi, and Taisho Pharma; and advisory fees for expert testimony from Pfizer, MSD, and Shionogi, outside the submitted work. H. Y. has received consulting fees regarding ensitrelvir from Shionogi, lecture fees and chairs in sponsored symposiums from Shionogi (regarding ensitrelvir) and ViiV Healthcare, and travel support regarding ensitrelvir from Shionogi, outside the submitted work. He serves as an advisory board member of Shionogi and the President of the Japanese Society of Infectious Diseases. Y. D. has received grants from Shionogi and Entasis; consulting fees from Shionogi, Meiji Seika Pharma, Gilead Sciences, GSK, MSD, Chugai, FujiFilm, and bioMerieux; and lecture fees from MSD, AstraZeneca, Shionogi, and Teijin Healthcare, outside the submitted work; and has participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for FujiFilm. H. S., T. Sonoyama, G. I., T. Sanaki, K. B., Y. T., and T. U. are full-time employees of Shionogi & Co, Ltd, and may have stocks or stock options. N. O. serves as an advisory board member of Shionogi without compensation. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Background: Limited treatment options exist for patients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), irrespective of vaccination history or risk status. Ensitrelvir is a novel oral severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) 3C-like (3CL) protease inhibitor. While phase 2 studies of ensitrelvir have demonstrated promising results in treating mild-to-moderate COVID-19, evaluation of its clinical efficacy due to shifting vaccination status and emergence of the Omicron variant represents significant challenges. Here, we describe the protocol for a phase 3 study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ensitrelvir in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, regardless of risk status or vaccination history., Methods: This is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study. Patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 within 120 hours from onset will be randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio into 3 treatment arms-ensitrelvir 125 mg (375 mg loading dose on Day 1), ensitrelvir 250 mg (750 mg loading dose on Day 1), and placebo. The study interventions will be administered orally, once-daily, for 5 days. The primary endpoint will be the time to resolution of 5 symptoms of COVID-19 (stuffy or runny nose, sore throat, cough, feeling hot or feverish, and low energy or tiredness), and the key secondary endpoints will include the change from baseline on Day 4 in the amount of SARS-CoV-2 viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) and the time to first negative SARS-CoV-2 viral titer. The primary population for the primary and key secondary endpoints will be patients with <72 hours from COVID-19 onset to randomization and, subsequently, patients in entire patient population (<120 hours) in the ensitrelvir 125 mg group. Closed testing procedure will be used for the primary and key secondary endpoints in both the primary and entire patient populations. All safety assessments and adverse events (AE) will be reported., Discussion: In a post hoc analysis of the phase 2b study, compared with placebo, ensitrelvir demonstrated a reduced time to resolution of 5 symptoms in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Through this study, we intend to validate and establish the efficacy and safety of ensitrelvir in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19., Competing Interests: HY reports consulting fees from Shionogi, lecture fees from Shionogi and ViiV Healthcare, and travel support from Shionogi outside the submitted work. He serves as an advisory board member for Shionogi and President of the Japanese Society of Infectious Diseases. NO declares no conflict of interest. YD reports grants from Shionogi and Entasis; consulting fees from Shionogi, Meiji Seika Pharma, Gilead Sciences, GSK, MSD, Chugai, and bioMerieux; and lecture fees from MSD, AstraZeneca, Shionogi, and Teijin Healthcare outside the submitted work and serves as an advisory board member for FujiFilm. TI, T Sonoyama, GI, T Sanaki, YT, and TU are full-time employees of Shionogi & Co., Ltd., and may own stocks or stock options. HM has received funding relevant to the submitted work from Shionogi and grants from Taisho Pharma; lecture fees from Pfizer, MSD, Shionogi, and Taisho Pharma; and advisory fees from Pfizer, MSD, and Shionogi outside the submitted work., (Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Introduction: We investigated the performance of the cobas® 6800 system and cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B, a fully automated molecular testing system for influenza viruses and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This enabled an assay in a batch of 96 samples in approximately 3 h., Methods: An assay was performed using the cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B on the cobas 6800 system for samples collected in four facilities between November 2019 and March 2020 in our previous study. The results were compared with those obtained using the reference methods., Results: Of the 127 samples analyzed, the cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B detected influenza A virus in 75 samples, of which 73 were positive using the reference methods. No false negative results were observed. The overall positive and negative percent agreement for influenza A virus detection were 100.0% and 96.3%, respectively. There were no positive results for the influenza B virus or SARS-CoV-2., Conclusion: The cobas 6800 system and cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B showed high accuracy for influenza A virus detection and can be useful for clinical laboratories, especially those that routinely assay many samples., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has been a major concern worldwide; however, easily accessible treatment options for patients with mild COVID-19 remain limited. Since the oral intake of Lactococcus lactis strain plasma (LC-Plasma) enhances both the innate and acquired immune systems through the activation of plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs), we hypothesised that the oral intake of LC-Plasma could aid the relief or prevention of symptoms in patients with asymptomatic or mild COVID-19., Methods and Analysis: This is an exploratory, multicentre, double-blinded, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. This study was initiated in December 2021 and concludes in April 2023. The planned number of enrolled subjects is 100 (50 subjects×2 groups); subject enrolment will be conducted until October 2022. Patients with asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 will be enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to group A (oral intake of LC-Plasma-containing capsule, 200 mg/day, for 14 days) or group B (oral intake of placebo capsule, for 14 days). The primary endpoint is the change in subjective symptoms measured by the severity score. Secondary endpoints include SARS-CoV-2 viral loads, biomarkers for pDC activation, serum SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, serum cytokines, interferon and interferon-inducible antiviral effectors and the proportion of subjects with emergency room visits to medical institutions or who are hospitalised., Ethics and Dissemination: The study protocol was approved by the Clinical Research Review Board of Nagasaki University, in accordance with the Clinical Trials Act of Japan. The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, the Clinical Trials Act, and other current legal regulations in Japan. Written informed consent will be obtained from all the participants. The results of this study will be reported in journal publications., Trial Registration Number: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (registration number: jRCTs071210097)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Kazuko Yamamoto received a research fund from Kirin Holdings Co., for this study and another research grant from Fisher & Paykel Healthcare. Tsuyoshi Inoue received research funds from Kirin Holdings Co., for this study, and he belonged to a donated course from Kyowa Kirin Co. Kenta Jounai, Ryohei Tsuji, and Daisuke Fujiwara are employees of Kirin Holdings Co. Koichi Izumikawa received a research grant from Kirin Holdings Co., for this study. Hiroshi Mukae received a research grant from Taisho Pharmaceutical Co. All funding agencies, except Kirin Holdings Co., played no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

An internet questionnaire survey for investigating empirical antibiotic usage and bacterial superinfections in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in Japan was conducted among the chief physicians of respiratory disease departments of 715 Japanese Respiratory Society-certified hospitals using Google Forms between January 28, 2021 and February 28, 2021. Responses to the questionnaire survey were obtained from 198 of 715 hospitals (27.6%). The survey revealed that the complication incidences of community-acquired pneumonia; hospital-acquired pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia; and sepsis were 2.86, 5.59, and 0.99%, respectively, among patients with moderate/severe and critical COVID-19. Bacterial co-infection and secondary infection rarely affected patients with COVID-19 in Japan, and the isolated pathogens were not specific to these patients. Moreover, the anti-inflammatory effects of macrolides for COVID-19 were not observed in several studies. These results might be useful in clinical practice for COVID-19., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest H·K received honoraria from MSD Co., Ltd., Astellas Pharma Inc., Pfizer Inc., Asahi Kasei Pharma Corporation, Shionogi Co., Ltd., and Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Co., Ltd. The other authors have no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Japanese Respiratory Society. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is necessary for confirming a diagnosis of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Here we present a COVID-19 case of an elderly woman whose SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests showed false negative repeatedly by evaluating with different sampling sites and procedures. Nasopharyngeal swabs, suctioned sputum, and tongue swabs were collected for SARS-CoV-2-PCR. As for tongue swabs, we compared between two different sample conditions; one obtained with dry condition and the other obtained with moistened condition inside the oral cavity. SARS-CoV-2-PCR showed positive for an extended period with suctioned sputum samples compared with nasopharyngeal swabs and tongue swabs. No SARS-CoV-2 from a nasopharyngeal swab sample obtained on day 46 after symptoms onset was isolated despite high viral load (183740.5 copies/5μL). An adequate production of neutralizing antibody in a serum sample on day 46 was also confirmed. The number of RNA copies of the tongue swab samples was higher with moistened condition than with dry condition. The present case suggests that the difference of sampling site or sample condition can affect PCR results. High loads viral RNA detection does not always correlate with infectivity., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objectives: A few studies on antibody testing have focused on asymptomatic or mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with low initial anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody responses. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody-testing performance was evaluated using blood samples from asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 patients., Methods: Blood samples were collected from 143 COVID-19 patients during an outbreak on a cruise ship 3 weeks after diagnosis. Simultaneously, a follow-up SARS-CoV-2 genetic test was performed. Samples stored before the COVID-19 pandemic were also used to evaluate the lateral flow immunochromatographic assay (LFA) and electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA). Titers of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies against the nucleocapsid and spike proteins were measured using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to confirm which antibodies were influenced on LFA- and ECLIA- false-negative result in crew-member samples., Results: Sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive, and negative-predictive values of LFA-detected IgM antibodies were 0.231, 1.000, 1.000, and 0.613, respectively; those of LFA-detected IgG antibodies were 0.483, 0.989, 0.972, and 0.601, respectively; and those of ECLIA-detected total antibodies were 0.783, 1.000, 1.000, and 0.848, respectively. All antibody titers measured using ELISA were significantly lower in blood samples with negative results than in those with positive results in both LFA and ECLIA. In the patients with negative results from the follow-up genetic testing, IgM-, IgG-, and total-antibody positivity rates were 22.9%, 47.6%, and 72.4%, respectively., Conclusions: These findings suggest that anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing has lower performance in asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 patients than required in the guidelines., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: We used marketed products of Cellspect Co., Ltd for ELISA in this study; Hironori Sakai is an employee of Cellspect Co., Ltd., and performed ELISA in this study; Norihito Kaku and Kosuke Kosai received research funding from Roche Diagnostics K. K.; Katsunori Yanagihara received research funding from Cellspect Co., Ltd., Roche Diagnostics K. K. and, Abbott Japan LLC. These do not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has emerged worldwide. Although several medications have been approved for treating moderate-to-severe COVID-19, very few treatment strategy has been established for patients with mild COVID-19 who do not require oxygen administration. Clarithromycin is a macrolide antimicrobial agent that has been widely used for bacterial respiratory infectious diseases. Clarithromycin also acts an immunomodulating drug and suppresses cytokine storms in viral respiratory diseases, including influenza. In this study, we aim to evaluate the efficacy of clarithromycin in patients with mild COVID-19., Methods and Analysis: This is an exploratory, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. This study was initiated in May 2021 and will end in July 2022. Patients with mild COVID-19 pneumonia who do not require oxygen administration will be enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to group A (administration of clarithromycin 800 mg/day), group B (administration of clarithromycin 400 mg/day) or group C (standard treatment without clarithromycin). The planned number of enrolled patients is 60 (20 patients × three groups). The primary endpoint is the number of days required to improve the clinical symptoms as measured by the severity score. Secondary endpoints include days for recovery of the body temperature, proportion of patients with oxygen administration, inflammatory cytokines, viral load, serum immunoglobulins, peripheral blood lymphocytes, blood biomarkers and pneumonia infiltrations., Ethics and Dissemination: The study protocol was approved by the Clinical Research Review Board of Nagasaki University in accordance with the Clinical Trials Act in Japan. The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, the Clinical Trials Act and other current legal regulations in Japan. Written informed consent will be obtained from all the participants. The results of this study will be reported as journal publications., Trial Registration Number: jRCTs071210011., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KYat has received grants from Bayer Yakuhin and has received honoraria for scientific lecture presentations, speaker bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from AstraZeneca K.K., Kyorin Pharmaceutical, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline K.K. and Novartis Pharma K.K. HM has received grants from Taisho Pharmaceutical, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Shionogi and Kyorin Pharmaceutical, has received honoraria for scientific lecture presentations, speaker bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Taisho Pharmaceutical, AstraZeneca K.K., Astellas Pharma, Shionogi, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer Japan, MSD K.K., Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals and Kyorin Pharmaceutical and has received donation from FUJIFILM Toyama Chemical, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Meiji Seika Pharma, Kyorin Pharmaceutical and Shionogi. All funding agencies play no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

A 79-year-old Japanese man with polymyalgia rheumatica was admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). On admission, he was treated with ciclesonide inhalation, ivermectin, and meropenem. He was intubated 6 days after admission, and methylprednisolone therapy was initiated (1000 mg/day). Hypoxemia and chest radiographic findings temporarily improved. However, chest computed tomography showed bilateral ground-glass attenuations, multiple nodules, and consolidation. Aspergillus fumigatus was cultured from the tracheal aspirate and he was diagnosed with COVID-19-associated invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) and treated with liposomal amphotericin B. However, he died 28 days after admission., (Copyright © 2021 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy and The Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Numerous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serological tests exists commercially; however, their performance using clinical samples is limited. Although insufficient to detect SARS-CoV-2 in the early phase of infection, antibody assays can be of great use for surveillance studies or for some coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients presenting late to the hospital., Methods: This study evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of four commercial SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow antibody tests using 213 serum specimens from 90 PCR-positive confirmed COVID-19 patients. Of 59 negative control sera, 50 were obtained from patients with other respiratory infectious diseases before COVID-19 pandemic began while nine were from patients infected with other respiratory viruses, including two seasonal coronaviruses., Results: The varied sensitivities for the four commercial kits were 70.9%, 65.3%, 45.1%, and 65.7% for BioMedomics, Autobio Diagnostics, Genbody, and KURABO, respectively, between sick days 1 and 155 in COVID-19 patients. The sensitivities of the four tests gradually increased over time after infection before sick day 5 (15.0%, 12.5%, 15.0%, and 20.0%); from sick day 11-15 (95.7%, 87.2%, 53.2%, and 89.4%); and after sick day 20 (100%, 100%, 68.6%, and 96.1%), respectively. For severe illness, the sensitivities were quite high in the late phase after sick day 15. The specificities were over 96% for all four tests. No cross-reaction due to other pathogens, including seasonal coronaviruses, was observed., Conclusions: Our results demonstrated the large differences in the antibody test performances. This ought to be considered when performing surveillance analysis., (Copyright © 2021 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy and The Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The accurate detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is essential for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We compared the quantitative RT-PCR results between nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva specimens., Methods: A COVID-19 outbreak occurred on a cruise ship at Nagasaki port, Japan. We obtained 123 nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva each from asymptomatic or mild patients in the late phase of infection., Results: The intervals from the diagnosis to the sampling were 25.5 days for nasopharyngeal swabs and 28.9 days for saliva. The positive rate was 19.5% (24/123) for nasopharyngeal swabs and 38.2% (47/123) for saliva (P = 0.48). The quantified viral copies (mean ± SEM copies/5 μl) were 9.3±2.6 in nasopharyngeal swabs and 920±850 in saliva (P = 0.0006)., Conclusions: The advantages of saliva specimens include positive rate improvement and accurate viral load detection. Saliva may be used as a reliable sample for SARS-CoV-2 detection., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

This retrospective study evaluated stored nasopharyngeal swab samples from Japanese patients with influenza-like illness during the 2019/2020 season. We aimed to determine whether COVID-19 had spread in the community before the first confirmed case. The period of influenza season during 2019/2020 in Nagasaki was shorter than in previous influenza seasons. When the first COVID-19 case was reported in Nagasaki prefecture, the number of influenza cases were very low. No positive results for SARS-CoV-2 were detected in 182 samples that were obtained from adult outpatients. Our results revealed no large-scale spread of COVID-19 in the community before the first confirmed case., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflict of interest directly relevant to the content of this article., (Copyright © 2021 Institut Pasteur. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

The potential antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory effectiveness of azithromycin against severe influenza is yet unclear. We retrospectively investigated the effect of intravenous azithromycin administration within 7 days of hospitalization in patients with influenza virus pneumonia and respiratory failure. Using Japan's national administrative database, we enrolled and classified 5066 patients with influenza virus pneumonia into severe, moderate, and mild groups based on their respiratory status within 7 days of hospitalization. The primary endpoints were total, 30-day, and 90-day mortality rates. The secondary endpoints were the duration of intensive-care unit management, invasive mechanical ventilation, and hospital stay. The inverse probability of the treatment weighting method with estimated propensity scores was used to minimize data collection bias. Use of intravenous azithromycin was proportional to the severity of respiratory failure (mild: 1.0%, moderate: 3.1%, severe: 14.8%). In the severe group, the 30-day mortality rate was significantly lower with azithromycin (26.49% vs. 36.65%, p = 0.038). In the moderate group, the mean duration of invasive mechanical ventilation after day 8 was shorter with azithromycin; there were no significant differences in other endpoints between the severe and moderate groups. These results suggest that intravenous azithromycin has favorable effects in patients with influenza virus pneumonia using mechanical ventilation or oxygen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The administration of systemic corticosteroids is a key strategy for improving COVID-19 outcomes. However, evidence is lacking on combination therapies of antiviral agents and systemic corticosteroids. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of the combination therapy of favipiravir and methylprednisolone in preventing respiratory failure progression in patients with COVID-19 and non-critical respiratory failure. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, single-arm phase II study. The patients received favipiravir 3600 mg on the first day, followed by 1600 mg for a total of 10–14 days. Methylprednisolone was administered intravenously at 1 mg/ideal body weight (IBW)/day from days 1 to 5, followed by 0.5 mg/IBW/day from days 6 to 10 if clinically indicated. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) (including noninvasive positive pressure ventilation) or those who met the criteria for tracheal intubation within 14 days of the study treatment initiation (MVCTI-14). Results: Sixty-nine patients were enrolled and underwent the study treatment. Of them, the MVCTI-14 proportion was 29.2% (90% confidence interval 20.1–39.9, p = 0.200). The proportion of patients who required MV or who died within 30 days was 26.2%, and 30-day mortality was 4.9%. The most significant risk factor for MVCTI-14 was a smoking history (odds ratio 4.1, 95% confidence interval 1.2–14.2). The most common grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse event was hyperglycemia, which was observed in 21.7%. Conclusion: The MVCTI-14 proportion did not reach a favorable level in the clinical trial setting with the threshold of 35%. However, the proportion of MV or death within 30 days was 26.6%, which might be close to the findings (28.1%) of the RECOVERY trial, which showed the efficacy of dexamethasone for patients with COVID-19 and non-critical respiratory failure. Further evaluation of this combination therapy is needed. Clinical Trial Registration: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT) identifier jRCTs041200025. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We evaluated a novel transcription-reverse transcription concerted reaction (TRC) assay that can detect influenza A and B within 15 min using nasopharyngeal swab and gargle samples obtained from patients with influenza-like illness, between January and March 2018 and between January and March 2019. Based on the combined RT-PCR and sequencing results, in the nasal swabs, the sensitivity and specificity of TRC for detecting influenza were calculated as 1.000 and 1.000, respectively. In the gargle samples, the sensitivity and specificity of TRC were 0.946 and 1.000, respectively. The TRC assay showed comparable performance to RT-PCR in the detection of influenza viruses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of this trial is to evaluate the antiviral efficacy, clinical efficacy, and safety of nelfinavir in patients with asymptomatic and mild COVID-19.Trial Design: The study is designed as a multicenter, open-label, blinded outcome assessment, parallel group, investigator-initiated, exploratory, randomized (1:1 ratio) controlled clinical trial.Participants: Asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients will be enrolled in 10 university and teaching hospitals in Japan. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are as follows: Inclusion criteria: (1) Japanese male or female patients aged ≥ 20 years (2) SARS-CoV-2 detected from a respiratory tract specimen (e.g., nasopharyngeal swab or saliva) using PCR, LAMP, or an antigen test within 3 days before obtaining the informed consent (3) Provide informed consent Exclusion criteria: (1) Symptoms developed ≥ 8 days prior to enrolment (2) SpO2 < 96 % (room air) (3) Any of the following screening criteria: a) ALT or AST ≥ 5 × upper limit of the reference range b) Child-Pugh class B or C c) Serum creatinine ≥ 2 × upper limit of the reference range and creatinine clearance < 30 mL/min (4) Poorly controlled diabetes (random blood glucose ≥ 200 mg/dL or HbA1c ≥ 7.0%, despite treatment) (5) Unsuitable serious complications based on the assessment of either the principal investigator or the sub-investigator (6) Hemophiliac or patients with a marked hemorrhagic tendency (7) Severe diarrhea (8) Hypersensitivity to the investigational drug (9) Breastfeeding or pregnancy (10) With childbearing potential and rejecting contraceptive methods during the study period from the initial administration of the investigational drug (11) Receiving rifampicin within the previous 2 weeks (12) Participated in other clinical trials and received drugs within the previous 12 weeks (13) Undergoing treatment for HIV infection (14) History of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination or wishes to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 (15) Deemed inappropriate (for miscellaneous reasons) based on the assessment of either the principal investigator or the sub-investigator INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Patients who meet the inclusion criteria and do not meet any of the exclusion criteria will be randomized to either the nelfinavir group or the symptomatic treatment group. The nelfinavir group will be administered 750 mg of nelfinavir orally, three times daily for 14 days (treatment period). However, if a participant tests negative on two consecutive PCR tests of saliva samples, administration of the investigational drug for that participant can be discontinued at the discretion of the investigators. The symptomatic treatment group will not be administered the investigational drug, but all other study procedures and conditions will be the same for both groups for the duration of the treatment period. After the treatment period of 14 days, each group will be followed up for 14 days (observational period).Main Outcomes: The primary endpoint is the time to negative conversion of SARS-CoV-2. During the study period from Day 1 to Day 28, two consecutive negative PCR results of saliva samples will be considered as the negative conversion of the virus. The secondary efficacy endpoints are as follows: For patients with both asymptomatic and mild disease: area under the curve of viral load, half decay period of viral load, body temperature at each time point, all-cause mortality, incidence rate of pneumonia, percentage of patients with newly developed pneumonia, rate of oxygen administration, and the percentage of patients who require oxygen administration. For asymptomatic patients: incidence of symptomatic COVID-19, incidence of fever (≥ 37.0 °C for two consecutive days), incidence of cough For patients with mild disease: incidence of defervescence (< 37.0 °C), incidence of recovery from clinical symptoms, incidence of improvement of each symptom The secondary safety endpoints are adverse events and clinical examinations.Randomization: Patients will be randomized to either the nelfinavir group or the symptomatic treatment group using the electric data capture system (1:1 ratio, dynamic allocation based on severity [asymptomatic], and age [< 60 years]).Blinding (masking): Only the assessors of the primary outcome will be blinded (blinded outcome assessment).Numbers To Be Randomized (sample Size): The sample size was determined based on our power analysis to reject the null hypothesis, S (t | z =1) = S (t | z = 0) where S is a survival function, t is time to negative conversion, and z denotes randomization group, by the log-rank test with a two-sided p value of 0.05. We estimated viral dynamic parameters by fitting a nonlinear mixed-effects model to reported viral load data, and simulated our primary endpoint from viral-load time-courses that were realized from sets of viral dynamics parameters sampled from the estimated probability distribution of the parameters (sample size: 2000; 1000 each for randomization group). From this estimation of the hazard ratio between the randomization groups for the event of negative conversion using this simulation dataset, the required number of events for rejecting our null hypothesis with a power of 0.80 felled 97.345 by plugging the estimated hazard ratio, 1.79, in Freedman's equation. Therefore, we decided the required number of randomizations to be 120 after consideration of the frequency of censoring and the anticipated rate of withdrawal caused by factors such as withdrawal of consent.Trial Status: Protocol version 6.0 of February 12, 2021. Recruitment started on July 22, 2020 and is anticipated to be completed by March 31, 2022.Trial Registration: This trial was registered in Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT) ( jRCT2071200023 ) on 21 July 21, 2020.Full Protocol: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Influenza pneumonia, which causes acute respiratory distress syndrome and multiple organ failure, has no established management protocol. Recently, corticosteroid therapy was used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 with respiratory failure; however, its effectiveness as a treatment for influenza pneumonia remains controversial. To investigate the impact of corticosteroid therapy for the early phase of severe influenza pneumonia, we compared influenza pneumonia patients with respiratory failure treated with or without corticosteroids within 7 days after hospital admission using a Japanese nationwide administrative database. The primary endpoint was the mortality rate. The secondary endpoints were duration of intensive-care unit management, invasive mechanical ventilation, and hospital stay. The inverse probability weighting method with estimated propensity scores was used to minimize the data collection bias. We included 3519 patients with influenza pneumonia with respiratory failure. Of these, 875 were treated with corticosteroids. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding 30-day and 90-day mortality, duration of intensive-care unit management, invasive mechanical ventilation, and hospital stay. However, the in-hospital mortality rate was higher in the corticosteroid group. The use of systematic corticosteroid therapy in patients with influenza pneumonia was associated with a higher in-hospital mortality rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The World Health Organization (WHO) has published guidance recommending systemic corticosteroids for the treatment of patients with severe or critical COVID-19 and no corticosteroids for those with nonsevere COVID-19. Although their recommendations for critical cases were based on the results from seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs), those for noncritical cases were based on the results from only one RCT, the Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy (RECOVERY) trial. In search of additional evidence of corticosteroids' effect on COVID-19, we systematically reviewed controlled observational studies, besides RCTs, that assessed the impact of corticosteroid treatment on any type of mortality and/or other outcomes in noncritical patients. Of the 4037 titles and abstracts screened, we ultimately included the RECOVERY trial and five controlled observational studies using propensity score matching, (accessed on September 8, 2020). Two of the controlled observational studies assessed the association between corticosteroid treatment and in-hospital mortality, without finding statistical significance. Four of the controlled observational studies assessed corticosteroids' effect on other outcomes, demonstrating that they were associated with reduced risk of intubation in patients requiring oxygen and with longer hospitalization and viral shedding in mild or moderate cases. These results support the WHO recommendations not to use corticosteroids for nonsevere COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This exploratory analysis of the double-blind, phase 3, SCORPIO-SR trial assessed the effect of ensitrelvir in preventing post coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) condition (PCC). Patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 were randomized (1:1:1) within 120 h of symptom onset; received 5-day oral ensitrelvir 125 mg (375 mg on day 1), 250 mg (750 mg on day 1), or a matching placebo once daily; and were assessed for the severity of typical PCC symptoms using a self-administered questionnaire. In total, 341, 317, and 333 patients were assessed in the ensitrelvir 125-mg, ensitrelvir 250-mg, and placebo groups, respectively (mean age, 35.6–36.5 years; men, 53.3%–58.3%). On days 85, 169, and 337, ensitrelvir 125-mg treatment showed 32.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -30.6, 66.1), 21.5% (95% CI: -37.3, 55.6), and 24.6% (95% CI: -43.7, 60.9) reductions versus placebo, respectively, in the risk of any of the 14 acute-phase COVID-19 symptoms (at least one mild, moderate, or severe symptom with general health not returning to the usual level). Ensitrelvir 250-mg treatment showed 10.9% (95% CI: -67.0, 52.8), 9.5% (95% CI: -56.6, 48.0), and 30.6% (95% CI: -36.2, 65.5) risk reductions versus placebo on days 85, 169, and 337, respectively. Risk reductions were observed in any of the 4 neurological symptoms and were more pronounced among patients with high acute-phase symptom scores at baseline and among those with a baseline body mass index ≥25 kg/m2. Ensitrelvir treatment in the acute phase of COVID-19 may reduce the risk of various symptoms associated with PCC. jRCT2031210350. • Our results suggested that ensitrelvir may reduce the risk of persistent and/or late-onset COVID-19 symptoms. • The potential benefit of ensitrelvir was indicated irrespective of risk factors or vaccination status of patients. • The potential benefit was more pronounced among patients with high COVID-19 symptom scores at baseline or BMI of ≥25 kg/m2. • Further research is granted for the effect of ensitrelvir in preventing post COVID-19 condition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]