Skip to main content
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2020 May 14;38(6):775–780. doi: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2020.05.003

Evidence-based best practice advice for patients treated with systemic immunosuppressants in relation to COVID-19

Fabrizio Galimberti 1, Jeffrey McBride 1, Megan Cronin 1, Yumeng Li 1, Joshua Fox 1, Michael Abrouk 1, Alexander Herbst 1, Robert S Kirsner 1,
PMCID: PMC7224642  PMID: 32419721

Abstract

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to significant uncertainty among physicians and patients about the safety of immunosuppressive medications used for the management of dermatologic conditions. We review available data on commonly used immunosuppressants and their effect on viral infections beyond COVID-19. Notably, the effect of some immunosuppressants on viruses related to SARS-CoV2, including SARS and MERS, has been previously investigated. In the absence of data on the effect of immunosuppressants on COVID-19, these data could be used to make clinical decisions on initiation and continuation of immunosuppressive medications during this pandemic. In summary, we recommend considering the discontinuation of oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and prednisone; considering the delay of rituximab infusion; and suggesting the careful continuation of cyclosporine, mycophenolate, azathioprine, methotrexate, and biologics in patients currently benefitting from such treatments.

Introduction

Infectious diseases continue to pose significant challenges to public health. The first cases of respiratory infections of unknown origin emerged in Hubei province (Wuhan, China) in December 2019. The WHO officially announced on February 11, 2020, that the outbreak is caused by the novel enveloped RNA betacoronavirus that has been named “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2” (SARS-CoV-2), and its associated disease has been named “coronavirus disease 2019” (COVID-19).1 SARS-CoV-2 shares phylogenetic similarities with other coronaviruses, including the one responsible for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV).2 COVID-19 has quickly turned into a global pandemic, unprecedented in the modern world. As immunosuppressive drugs are prescribed to a greater number of patients, concern exists for increased morbidity and mortality in patients infected with COVID-19 treated with these medications. We review evidence evaluating commonly used immunosuppressants medication in dermatology with regard to viral infections.

Cyclosporine

Cyclosporine A (CsA) is a small molecule that binds to members of the cyclophilin family. Cyclophillins are involved in protein folding, and their inhibition results in inhibition of calcineurin and the nuclear factor of activated T cells.3 CsA has been linked to significant risk of serious infection in psoriasis patients (Relative risk (RR) = 3.12), greater compared with other immunosuppressants, particularly biologics.4 Similarly, psoriasis patients on CsA are known to have a higher incidence of herpes zoster.5 In addition, CsA has been shown to decrease immune response to influenza vaccination at high doses.6 The duration of CsA effects on the immune system is currently unknown; however, in vivo animal models found full recovery within 4 days of the last dose.7

CsA is known to interfere with replication of diverse viruses, including the human immunodeficiency virus,8 flaviviruses,9 and hepatitis C.10 Intriguingly, CsA has also been shown to inhibit replication of coronaviruses: CsA inhibits replication of MERS,11 SARS,12 shuman CoV-229E, CoV-NL-63, feline CoV, and avian infectious bronchitis virus.13 , 14 Similar results were seen with nonimmunosuppressive CsA derivatives, such as alispovir,15 and medications targeting FK506.16 (p50) More data are needed to evaluate the magnitude of increased risk for viral infections, specifically COVID-19, in patients taking CsA. Similarly, additional data are needed to evaluate whether a possible therapeutic role exists for CsA in patients with COVID-19. Based on limited data, for patients who are not infected with COVID-19 and who have stable control of their dermatologic disease, we suggest not to preemptively discontinue or decrease CsA. Patients on CsA should immediately report any flu or coldlike clinical manifestations to their physicians. For patients with a high degree of suspicion or diagnosed with active COVID-19 infection, we recommend temporary cessation of CsA. In addition, we recommend care when initiating CsA at this time unless there are no other alternatives, taking into account the risk, benefits, and temporary delay of initiation with patients in nonepidemic and epidemic COVID-19 areas.

Mycophenolate mofetil

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is an FDA-approved immunosuppressant for renal allograft rejection.3 MMF is a noncompetitive, selective, and reversible inhibitor of inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase,17 resulting in the inhibition of lymphocyte proliferation and antibody production.3 , 18 MMF decreases the immune response to influenza vaccine.19 Little is known about the time to immune recovery from the last dose of MMF. Given that MMF suppresses the adaptive immune response, important in fighting viral infections, MMF could potentially increase the risk of viral infections; however, MMF inhibits viral genome replication and gene transcription of influenza A and B.20 Similarly, MMF used in synergy with 6-mercaptopurine and 6-thioguanine can inhibit MERS-CoV PL(pro), the papain-like protease [PL(pro)] of MERS-CoV.21 More data are needed to evaluate the magnitude of an increased risk for viral infections, specifically COVID-19, in patients taking MMF. Based on limited data, for patients who are not infected with COVID-19 and who have stable control of their dermatologic disease, we suggest not to preemptively discontinue or decrease MMF. Patients on MMF should immediately report any fever-, flu-, or cold-like clinical manifestations to their physicians, and for patients with a high degree of suspicion or diagnosed with active COVID-19 infections, we recommend temporary cessation of MMF. In addition, we recommend against the initiation of MMF in COVID-19 epidemic and nonepidemic areas.

Prednisone

Glucocorticoids result in decreased production of proinflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin-1, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor, prostaglandins, and leukotrienes, but increasing anti-inflammatory cytokines22 , 23 and decreasing inflammatory cytokines.24 Infections are a well-characterized complication of steroids. A meta-analysis evaluating 71 controlled trials found significantly increased infection rate in patients receiving corticosteroids.25 In addition, although a dose less than 20 mg daily is not considered sufficiently immunosuppressive to preclude live vaccinations, treatment discontinuation of 1 to 3 months is recommended before live vaccinations for patients on higher daily doses.26 Although there is no clear evidence of the effects of prednisone on SARS-CoV-2, prednisone has been linked to unfavorable clinical outcomes in other viral infections; for example, prednisone was found to result in significantly higher incidence of severe acute respiratory infections in patients with pH1N1 as well as an increased risk of subsequent critical illness or death. Patients who were given corticosteroids after the onset of severe acute respiratory infections did not have worse outcomes.27 Prednisone is known to be beneficial in the management of some viral infections: for example, prednisone used with acyclovir decreases pain in herpes zoster.28 Use of steroids in herpes zoster patients has been shown to lead to decreased level of interleukin-6,29 an inflammatory cytokine known to be significantly upregulated and a possible therapeutic target in COVID-19.30 , 31 Recent presentations have examined the use of glucocorticoids in COVID-19. Although observational studies failed to provide sufficient evidence for use of steroids in treatment of COVID-19–associated lung injury, there are reports of positive clinical experience with SARS and COVID-19.32 , 33 Based on available data, for patients who are not infected with COVID-19 and who have stable control of their dermatologic disease, we suggest that the preemptive discontinuation of prednisone be considered. Patients on prednisone should immediately report any fever-, flu-, or cold-like clinical manifestations to their physicians, and for patients with a high degree of suspicion or diagnosed with active COVID-19 infections, we recommend immediate cessation of their prednisone. Given the limited data available at this point, we recommend limiting oral prednisone only to the most severe clinical scenarios where its use is well established and cannot be substituted with other medications.

Azathioprine

Azathioprine (AZA) is a moderately potent immunosuppressive agent. AZA and its active metabolite 6-thioguanine, a purine analog, suppresses T-cell function and B-cell antibody production.18 AZA has been uncommonly associated with opportunistic infections.3 Although the duration of AZA effects on the immune system is unclear, hematopoietic recovery was observed after at least 40 days from last dose in CD-1 mice.34 Use of AZA at dosage ≤3 mg/kg is not sufficiently immunosuppressive to preclude live vaccines,26 and AZA does not interfere with mounting antibody response to influenza vaccine.35 Data are limited about coronavirus susceptibility in patients treated with AZA; however, patients with systemic lupus erythematosus treated with AZA have higher rates of herpes zoster.36 Although an increased rate of infection in transplant patients on AZA compared with MMF has been reported,37 no increased risk of major infections has been found with AZA in systemic lupus erythematosus and HIV.38 , 39 Based on limited data, for patients who are not infected with COVID-19 and who have stable control of their dermatologic disease, we suggest not to discontinue or decrease AZA preemptively. Patients on AZA should immediately report any fever-, flu-, or cold-like clinical manifestations to their physicians, and for patients with a high degree of suspicion or who are diagnosed with active COVID-19 infections, we recommend temporary cessation of their AZA or the initiation of AZA inhibitors in COVID-19 epidemic and nonepidemic areas.

Rituximab

Rituximab is an immunoglobulin-G1 monoclonal antibody that targets CD20 antigen, a protein expressed on the surface of most B lymphocytes, causing depletion of B lymphocytes. Rituximab can cause B-cell depletion via (1) Fc receptor gamma-mediated antibody-dependent cytotoxicity and phagocytosis, (2) complement-mediated cell lysis, (3) growth arrest, and (4) B-cell apoptosis.40 In addition, rituximab may also result indirectly in substantial but reversible depletion of CD4+ T cells.41 Rituximab is avoided in patients with chronic hepatitis B, hepatitis C, or HIV. Based on international guidelines, and experience with increasing risks of other types of infections, use of rituximab is being cautioned in the setting of this pandemic, as it may increase the risk of worsening consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection; for example, according to the Multiple Sclerosis International Federation, patients currently receiving treatment with rituximab should take all measures possible to isolate to reduce their risk of infection (msif.org, last accessed March 18, 2020). Currently, given the novelty of COVID-19, there is no study specifically examining the effect of rituximab on the risk of developing infection with COVID-19 in any cohort of patients. In addition, there is no study to our knowledge looking at the risk of acquiring other types of coronavirus that have emerged previously (SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, etc.). Based on limited data, for patients who are not infected with COVID-19 and who have stable control of their dermatologic disease, we suggest not to preemptively discontinue or decrease rituximab. Given that rituximab can decrease the number of B cells for over 6 months,42 physicians and patients should discuss the possibility of delaying rituximab injections based on individual cases. Patients on rituximab should immediately report any fever-, flu-, or cold-like clinical manifestations to their physicians, and for patients with a high degree of suspicion or diagnosed with active COVID-19 infections, we recommend temporary cessation of their rituximab. In addition, we recommend against the initiation of rituximab in COVID-19 epidemic and nonepidemic areas.

Methotrexate

Methotrexate (MTX) is a dihydrofolate reductase inhibitor that inhibits DNA synthesis, resulting in antiproliferative and anti-inflammatory effects.3 Serious side effects of MTX have mostly been reported in the rheumatology literature: bone marrow suppression, liver fibrosis, pulmonary fibrosis, and increased risk of infections. The lower dermatologic dose of MTX (5-15 mg/week) is also thought to carry an increased risk and severity of infection, especially compared with biologics.43 Although duration of MTX immunosuppression after its last dose is unclear, RA patients showed improved immunogenicity of influenza vaccination 2 weeks after MTX cessation.44 Regarding viral infections, MTX is known to increase the incidence of herpes zoster in RA patients.45 In addition, reactivation of hepatitis B upon withdrawal of low-dose MTX in RA patients has also been reported, leading to the screening practice for viral hepatitis before initiation of MTX.46 Despite evidence of increased infection risk, there is no evidence about the impact of continuing or withholding MTX during an infection on outcomes. Intriguingly, in vivo studies demonstrated that MTX inhibits replication of RNA viruses, such as dengue virus and Zika via inhibition of purines and pyrimidines synthesis.47 , 48 There are no data on possible effects of MTX on COVID-19. Based on limited data, for patients who are not infected with COVID-19 and who have stable control of their dermatologic disease, we suggest not to preemptively discontinue or decrease MTX. Patients on MTX should immediately report any fever-, flu-, or cold-like clinical manifestations to their physicians, and for patients with a high degree of suspicion or diagnosed with active COVID-19 infections, we recommend temporary cessation of their MTX. In addition, we recommend against the initiation of MTX in COVID-19 epidemic and nonepidemic areas.

JAK inhibitors

Interferons (IFN) play a crucial role in the immune response to viruses. Binding of type I IFN to its receptor leads to activation of JAK kinases, which then activate the STAT transcription factors to upregulate antiviral immunity.49 Selective JAK inhibitors (JAKi), including ruxolitinib and tofacitinib, are now being used in dermatology. A protective role for IFN-1 against coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV, has been previously elucidated in vitro 50 and ex vivo.51 Of particular concern, STAT-1–deficient mice are more susceptible and develop more severe and disseminated infection when exposed to SARS-CoV compared with wild-type mice.52 , 53 A possible role of IFN in the treatment of SARS has been previously suggested.54 The potent immunosuppressive effects of tofacitinib were also shown by the almost double rate of herpes zoster among RA patients treated with tofacitinib compared with those treated with biologics.55 In addition, tofacitinib has been shown to decrease response to pneumococcal vaccination.56 Interruption of tofacitinib for 2 weeks improves response to vaccination.56 There are no data on effects of JAKi on COVID-19. Based on available data, for patients who are not infected with COVID-19 and who have stable control of their dermatologic disease, we suggest discontinuing oral JAKi. Patients on oral JAKi should immediately report any fever-, flu-, or cold-like clinical manifestations to their physicians, and for patients with a high degree of suspicion or diagnosed with active COVID-19 infections, we recommend immediate cessation of their oral JAKi. In addition, we recommend against the initiation of oral JAKi in COVID-19 epidemic and nonepidemic areas.

Biologics

Biologics revolutionized the management of numerous dermatologic conditions. With the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients and providers are understandably concerned about the immunomodulatory effects associated with injectable biologics.57 In Table 1 , we compare the overall upper respiratory tract infection on published data from pivotal trials in FDA package inserts. Although it is challenging to infer clinical decision making from these data in regard to COVID-19, it may be used to decide whether or not to continue injectable biologics during this pandemic. As shown in Table 1, biologic injectables seem to carry minimal increased risk of infection. In addition, it is important to consider that discontinuation of some biologics may result in loss of efficacy and formation of autoantibodies[58], [59], [60]; thus for patients who are not infected with COVID-19 and who have stable control of their dermatologic disease, we suggest not to preemptively discontinue or decrease biologic injectables. Patients on biologics should immediately report any fever-, flu-, or cold-like clinical manifestations to their physicians, and for patients with a high degree of suspicion or diagnosed with active COVID-19 infection, we recommend temporary cessation of their biologic injectables. In addition, we recommend careful initiation of biologic injectables at this time unless there are no other alternatives taking into account and after careful discussion of risk, benefits, and temporary delay of initiation with patients in nonepidemic COVID-19 areas.

Table 1.

Infection rates of biologic injections per FDA package inserts

Biologic Upper respiratory tract infection for placebo, % (n) Upper respiratory tract infection for drug, % (n) Raw difference, %
TNF-α Infliximab (Remicade) 14*x (41) 15*x (135) +1
Etanercept (Enbrel) 13* (25) 13* (51) 0
Adalimumab (Humira) 4 (14) 7 (59) +3
Certolizumab (Cimzia) 5*x (5) 7*x (24) +2
IL-12/23 Ustekinumab (Stelara) 5*x (30) 5*x (64) 0
IL-17 Secukinumab (Cosentyx) 1*x (3) 3*x (36) +2
Ixekizumab (Taltz) 3*x (12) 3*x (51) 0
Brodalumab (Siliq) 6 (40) 5 (112) −1
IL-23 Tildrakizumab (Ilumya) 3*x (9) 2*x (25) −1
Guselkumab (Tremfya) 5* (19) 5* (41) 0
Risankizumab (Skyrizi) 2 (4) 5 (28) +3

IL, interleukin; TNF, tumor necrosis factor.

* Data collected from pivotal phase III trials reported as mean. *x Combined doses reported as mean.

Conclusions

COVID-19 presents an unprecedented challenge to our modern society. A common concern is the continuation of immunosuppressants for dermatologic conditions. We reviewed the mechanism of action and evidence of increased infection associated with commonly prescribed immunosuppressants. Without specific data in the context of COVID-19, we have recommended considering discontinuation of oral JAKi and prednisone and careful continuation of other medications in patients currently benefitting from such treatments (Table 2 ). Available evidence of potential worsening of viral diseases with oral JAKi and prednisone exists, although no clear data are available for CVOID-19. We also recommend careful consideration of delaying rituximab infusion on a case-to-case basis, given that rituximab can lead to prolonged decreased number of circulating B cells. In general, reinstitution of any immunosuppressant should be considered only after a negative COVID-19 test and complete resolution of all COVID-19–related clinical signs and clinical manifestations. It is unclear at this time whether anti–COVID-19 immunoglobulin-G could be used to safely reinstate or initiate immunosuppressants in COVID-19 epidemic and nonepidemic areas.

Table 2.

Recommendations on initiation and continuation of immunosuppressants

Medication Infection status
Not infected
Infected/high suspicion
Initiation Continuation Initiation Continuation
Cyclosporine Consider delay Yes No No
Mycophenolate mofetil No Yes No No
Prednisone No Consider cessation No No
Azathioprine No Yes No No
Rituximab No Consider delay No No
Methotrexate No Yes No No
Janus kinase inhibitors (JAK) No Consider cessation No No
Biologics Consider delay Yes No No

References

  • 1.Guan W., Ni Z., Hu Y. Clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in China. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:1708–1720. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2002032. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Zhu N., Zhang D., Wang W. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:727–733. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Bolognia J.L., editor. Dermatology: ExpertConsult. 3rd ed. Elsevier; New York: 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Dávila-Seijo P., Dauden E., Descalzo M.A. Infections in moderate to severe psoriasis patients treated with biological drugs compared to classic systemic drugs: findings from the BIOBADADERM registry. J Invest Dermatol. 2017;137:313–321. doi: 10.1016/j.jid.2016.08.034. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Dreiher J., Kresch F.S., Comaneshter D. Risk of Herpes zoster in patients with psoriasis treated with biologic drugs. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2012;26:1127–1132. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2011.04230.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Versluis D.J., Beyer W.E., Masurel N. Impairment of the immune response to influenza vaccination in renal transplant recipients by cyclosporine, but not azathioprine. Transplantation. 1986;42:376–379. doi: 10.1097/00007890-198610000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Narayanan L, Mulligan C, Durso L, et al: Recovery of T-cell function in healthy dogs following cessation of oral cyclosporine administration [e-pub ahead of print] (PMID: 31914237). Vet Med Sci, 10.1002/vms3.230. accessed XXX. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 8.Briggs C.J., Ott D.E., Coren L.V. Comparison of the effect of FK506 and cyclosporin A on virus production in H9 cells chronically and newly infected by HIV-1. Arch Virol. 1999;144:2151–2160. doi: 10.1007/s007050050629. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kambara H., Tani H., Mori Y. Involvement of cyclophilin B in the replication of Japanese encephalitis virus. Virology. 2011;412:211–219. doi: 10.1016/j.virol.2011.01.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Henry S.D., Metselaar H.J., Lonsdale R.C.B. Mycophenolic acid inhibits hepatitis C virus replication and acts in synergy with cyclosporin A and interferon-alpha. Gastroenterology. 2006;131:1452–1462. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2006.08.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Li H.S., Kuok D.I.T., Cheung M.C. Effect of interferon alpha and cyclosporine treatment separately and in combination on Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) replication in a human in-vitro and ex-vivo culture model. Antivir Res. 2018;155:89–96. doi: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2018.05.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.de Wilde A.H., Raj V.S., Oudshoorn D. MERS-coronavirus replication induces severe in vitro cytopathology and is strongly inhibited by cyclosporin A or interferon-α treatment. J Gen Virol. 2013;94(Pt 8):1749–1760. doi: 10.1099/vir.0.052910-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Pfefferle S., Schöpf J., Kögl M. The SARS-coronavirus-host interactome: identification of cyclophilins as target for pan-coronavirus inhibitors. PLoS Pathog. 2011;7 doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1002331. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Tanaka Y., Sato Y., Sasaki T. Suppression of coronavirus replication by cyclophilin inhibitors. Viruses. 2013;5:1250–1260. doi: 10.3390/v5051250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Carbajo-Lozoya J., Ma-Lauer Y., Malešević M. Human coronavirus NL63 replication is cyclophilin A-dependent and inhibited by non-immunosuppressive cyclosporine A-derivatives including Alisporivir. Virus Res. 2014;184:44–53. doi: 10.1016/j.virusres.2014.02.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Carbajo-Lozoya J., Müller M.A., Kallies S. Replication of human coronaviruses SARS-CoV, HCoV-NL63 and HCoV-229E is inhibited by the drug FK506. Virus Res. 2012;165:112–117. doi: 10.1016/j.virusres.2012.02.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Fulton B., Markham A. Mycophenolate mofetil: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and clinical efficacy in renal transplantation. Drugs. 1996;51:278–298. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199651020-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Kazlow Stern D., Tripp J.M., Ho V.C. The use of systemic immune moderators in dermatology: an update. Dermatol Clin. 2005;23:259–300. doi: 10.1016/j.det.2004.09.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Cordero E., Manuel O. Influenza vaccination in solid-organ transplant recipients. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2012;17:601–608. doi: 10.1097/MOT.0b013e3283592622. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Park J.-G., Ávila-Pérez G., Nogales A. Identification and characterization of novel compounds with broad-spectrum antiviral activity against influenza A and B viruses. J Virol. 2020;94 doi: 10.1128/JVI.02149-19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Cheng K.-W., Cheng S.-C., Chen W.-Y. Thiopurine analogs and mycophenolic acid synergistically inhibit the papain-like protease of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Antivir Res. 2015;115:9–16. doi: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2014.12.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Youssef J., Novosad S.A., Winthrop K.L. Infection risk and safety of corticosteroid use. Rheum Dis Clin N Am. 2016;42:157–176. doi: 10.1016/j.rdc.2015.08.004. ix-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Almawi W.Y., Beyhum H.N., Rahme A.A. Regulation of cytokine and cytokine receptor expression by glucocorticoids. J Leukoc Biol. 1996;60:563–572. doi: 10.1002/jlb.60.5.563. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Tobler A., Meier R., Seitz M. Glucocorticoids downregulate gene expression of GM-CSF, NAP-1/IL-8, and IL-6, but not of M-CSF in human fibroblasts. Blood. 1992;79:45–51. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Stuck A.E., Minder C.E., Frey F.J. Risk of infectious complications in patients taking glucocorticosteroids. Rev Infect Dis. 1989;11:954–963. doi: 10.1093/clinids/11.6.954. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Papp K.A., Haraoui B., Kumar D. Vaccination guidelines for patients with immune-mediated disorders on immunosuppressive therapies. J Cutan Med Surg. 2019;23:50–74. doi: 10.1177/1203475418811335. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Xing X., Hu S., Chen M. Severe acute respiratory infection risk following glucocorticosteroid treatment in uncomplicated influenza-like illness resulting from pH1N1 influenza infection: a case control study. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19 doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-4669-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Stankus S.J., Dlugopolski M., Packer D. Management of Herpes zoster (shingles) and postherpetic neuralgia. Am Fam Physician. 2000;61:2437. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Peng L., Du B., Sun L. Short-term efficacy and safety of prednisone in herpes zoster and the effects on IL-6 and IL-10. Exp Ther Med. 2019;18:2893–2900. doi: 10.3892/etm.2019.7898. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Mehta P., McAuley D.F., Brown M. COVID-19: consider cytokine storm syndromes and immunosuppression. Lancet. 2020;395:1033–1034. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30628-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Conti P., Ronconi G., Caraffa A. Induction of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1 and IL-6) and lung inflammation by Coronavirus-19 (COVI-19 or SARS-CoV-2): anti-inflammatory strategies. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2020;34:1. doi: 10.23812/CONTI-E. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Russell C.D., Millar J.E., Baillie J.K. Clinical evidence does not support corticosteroid treatment for 2019-nCoV lung injury. Lancet Lond Engl. 2020;395:473–475. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30317-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Shang L., Zhao J., Hu Y. On the use of corticosteroids for 2019-nCoV pneumonia. Lancet Lond Engl. 2020;395:683–684. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30361-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Molyneux G., Gibson F.M., Chen C.M. The haemotoxicity of azathioprine in repeat dose studies in the female CD-1 mouse. Int J Exp Pathol. 2008;89:138–158. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2613.2008.00575.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Salles M.J.C., Sens Y.A.S., Boas L.S.V. Influenza virus vaccination in kidney transplant recipients: serum antibody response to different immunosuppressive drugs. Clin Transpl. 2010;24:E17–E23. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2009.01095.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Danza A., Ruiz-Irastorza G. Infection risk in systemic lupus erythematosus patients: susceptibility factors and preventive strategies. Lupus. 2013;22:1286–1294. doi: 10.1177/0961203313493032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Cristelli M.P., Tedesco-Silva H., Medina-Pestana J.O. Safety profile comparing azathioprine and mycophenolate in kidney transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus and corticosteroids. Transpl Infect Dis. 2013;15:369–378. doi: 10.1111/tid.12095. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Chamberlain F.E., Dinani N., Jagjit Singh G.K. Azathioprine can be safely used in HIV-infected individuals. AIDS. 2014;28:447–448. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000000121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Ruiz-Irastorza G., Olivares N., Ruiz-Arruza I. Predictors of major infections in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Res Ther. 2009;11:R109. doi: 10.1186/ar2764. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Cragg M.S., Walshe C.A., Ivanov A.O. The biology of CD20 and its potential as a target for mAb therapy. Curr Dir Autoimmun. 2005;8:140–174. doi: 10.1159/000082102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Mélet J., Mulleman D., Goupille P. Rituximab-induced T cell depletion in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: association with clinical response. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65:2783–2790. doi: 10.1002/art.38107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Colucci M., Carsetti R., Cascioli S. B cell reconstitution after rituximab treatment in idiopathic nephrotic syndrome. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016;27:1811–1822. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2015050523. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Dommasch E.D., Kim S.C., Lee M.P. Risk of serious infection in patients receiving systemic medications for the treatment of psoriasis. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155:1142–1152. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.1121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Park J.K., Lee Y.J., Shin K. Impact of temporary methotrexate discontinuation for 2 weeks on immunogenicity of seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised clinical trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77:898–904. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-213222. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Liao T.-L., Chen Y.-M., Liu H.-J. Risk and severity of herpes zoster in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving different immunosuppressive medications: a case–control study in Asia. BMJ Open. 2017;7 doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014032. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Hagiyama H., Kubota T., Komano Y. Fulminant hepatitis in an asymptomatic chronic carrier of hepatitis B virus mutant after withdrawal of low-dose methotrexate therapy for rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2004;22:375–376. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Beck S., Zhu Z., Oliveira M.F. Mechanism of action of methotrexate against zika virus. Viruses. 2019;11:338. doi: 10.3390/v11040338. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Fischer M.A., Smith J.L., Shum D. Flaviviruses are sensitive to inhibition of thymidine synthesis pathways. J Virol. 2013;87:9411–9419. doi: 10.1128/JVI.00101-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Damsky W., King B.A. JAK inhibitors in dermatology: the promise of a new drug class. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:736–744. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2016.12.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Zheng B., He M.-L., Wong K.-L. Potent inhibition of SARS-associated coronavirus (SCOV) infection and replication by type I interferons (IFN-alpha/beta) but not by type II interferon (IFN-gamma) J Interferon Cytokine Res. 2004;24:388–390. doi: 10.1089/1079990041535610. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Haagmans B.L., Kuiken T., Martina B.E. Pegylated interferon-alpha protects type 1 pneumocytes against SARS coronavirus infection in macaques. Nat Med. 2004;10:290–293. doi: 10.1038/nm1001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Frieman M.B., Chen J., Morrison T.E. SARS-CoV pathogenesis is regulated by a STAT1 dependent but a type I, II and III interferon receptor independent mechanism. PLoS Pathog. 2010;6 doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1000849. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Sheahan T., Morrison T.E., Funkhouser W. MyD88 is required for protection from lethal infection with a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV. PLoS Pathog. 2008;4 doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1000240. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Cinatl J., Morgenstern B., Bauer G. Treatment of SARS with human interferons. Lancet Lond Engl. 2003;362:293–294. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13973-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Curtis J.R., Xie F., Yun H. Real-world comparative risks of herpes virus infections in tofacitinib and biologic-treated rheumatoid arthritis patients. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75:1843–1847. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Winthrop K.L., Silverfield J., Racewicz A. The effect of tofacitinib on pneumococcal and influenza vaccine responses in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75:687–695. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-207191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Lebwohl M., Rivera-Oyola R., Murrell D.F. Should biologics for psoriasis be interrupted in the era of COVID-19? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1217–1218. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.03.031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Blauvelt A., Papp K.A., Sofen H. Continuous dosing versus interrupted therapy with ixekizumab: an integrated analysis of two phase 3 trials in psoriasis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017;31:1004–1013. doi: 10.1111/jdv.14163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Ortonne J.-P., Taïeb A., Ormerod A.D. Patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis recapture clinical response during re-treatment with etanercept. Br J Dermatol. 2009;161:1190–1195. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09238.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Reich K., Ortonne J.-P., Gottlieb A.B.. Successful treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis with the PEGylated Fab’ certolizumab pegol: results of a phase II randomized, placebo-controlled trial with a re-treatment extension. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167:180–190. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2012.10941.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Clinics in Dermatology are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES