Tocilizumab in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: Clinical outcomes, inflammatory marker kinetics, and safety.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hill JA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7753799 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pneumonia is often associated with hyperinflammation. Despite the disproportionate incidence of Covid-19 among underserved and racial and ethnic minority populations, the safety and efficacy of the anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab in patients from these populations who are hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia are unclear.MethodsWe randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) patients hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia who were not receiving mechanical ventilation to receive standard care plus one or two doses of either tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously) or placebo. Site selection was focused on the inclusion of sites enrolling high-risk and minority populations. The primary outcome was mechanical ventilation or death by day 28.ResultsA total of 389 patients underwent randomization, and the modified intention-to-treat population included 249 patients in the tocilizumab group and 128 patients in the placebo group; 56.0% were Hispanic or Latino, 14.9% were Black, 12.7% were American Indian or Alaska Native, 12.7% were non-Hispanic White, and 3.7% were of other or unknown race or ethnic group. The cumulative percentage of patients who had received mechanical ventilation or who had died by day 28 was 12.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.5 to 16.9) in the tocilizumab group and 19.3% (95% CI, 13.3 to 27.4) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for mechanical ventilation or death, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.97; P?=?0.04 by the log-rank test). Clinical failure as assessed in a time-to-event analysis favored tocilizumab over placebo (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.93). Death from any cause by day 28 occurred in 10.4% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 8.6% of those in the placebo group (weighted difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -?5.2 to 7.8). In the safety population, serious adverse events occurred in 38 of 250 patients (15.2%) in the tocilizumab group and 25 of 127 patients (19.7%) in the placebo group.ConclusionsIn hospitalized patients with Covid-19 pneumonia who were not receiving mechanical ventilation, tocilizumab reduced the likelihood of progression to the composite outcome of mechanical ventilation or death, but it did not improve survival. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by Genentech; EMPACTA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04372186.).
| S-EPMC7781101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInflammatory markers are often elevated in patients with COVID-19. The objective of this study is to assess the prognostic capability of these tests in predicting clinical outcomes.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study including all patients at least 16 years old with COVID-19 who were admitted from one of five Emergency Departments between March 6th and April 4th, 2020. We included 1123 laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19. We analyzed white blood cell count (WBC), absolute lymphocyte count (ALC), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), D-dimer, ferritin, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). We looked at clinical outcomes including death, the need for endotracheal intubation (ETT), the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), and ICU admission. We report Spearman's ρ2 and statistical significance for each correlation with outcomes. We also report positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratios, and negative likelihood ratios.ResultsThe mean age of our patient population was 62 (SD 16). Thirty-seven percent of patients self-reported Spanish/Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, 47% reported their race as Black or African-American, and 10% reported their race as non-Hispanic white. Inter-rater reliability was 96%. There was no laboratory value that had both sensitivity and specificity of at least 0.90, or that had a positive predictive value and negative predictive value of at least 0.90, or that had likelihood ratios that could reliably predict a severe course of disease.ConclusionInflammatory markers drawn within 48 h of arrival, though often correlated with clinical outcomes, are not individually highly predictive of which patients in a predominantly older and minority population will die or require intubation, RRT, or ICU admission.
| S-EPMC7685065 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesPatients with Covid-19 and obesity have worse clinical outcomes which may be driven by increased inflammation. This study aimed to characterize the association between clinical outcomes in patients with obesity and inflammatory markers.MethodsWe analyzed data for patients aged ≥18 years admitted with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. We used multivariate logistic regression to determine the association between BMI and intensive care unit (ICU) transfer and all-cause mortality. Inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein [CRP], lactate dehydrogenase [LDH], ferritin, and D-dimer) were compared between patients with and without obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥30 kg/m2).ResultsOf 791 patients with Covid-19, 361 (45.6%) had obesity. In multivariate analyses, BMI ≥35 was associated with a higher odds of ICU transfer (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.388 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.074-5.310) and hospital mortality (aOR = 4.3, 95% CI: 1.69-10.82). Compared to those with BMI<30, patients with obesity had lower ferritin (444 vs 637 ng/mL; p<0.001) and lower D-dimer (293 vs 350 mcg/mL; p = 0.009), non-significant differences in CRP (72.8 vs 84.1 mg/L, p = 0.099), and higher LDH (375 vs 340, p = 0.009) on the first hospital day.ConclusionsPatients with obesity were more likely to have poor outcomes even without increased inflammation.
| S-EPMC7744045 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor blockade in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) who are not receiving mechanical ventilation is unclear.MethodsWe performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, hyperinflammatory states, and at least two of the following signs: fever (body temperature >38°C), pulmonary infiltrates, or the need for supplemental oxygen in order to maintain an oxygen saturation greater than 92%. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive standard care plus a single dose of either tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo. The primary outcome was intubation or death, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The secondary efficacy outcomes were clinical worsening and discontinuation of supplemental oxygen among patients who had been receiving it at baseline, both assessed in time-to-event analyses.ResultsWe enrolled 243 patients; 141 (58%) were men, and 102 (42%) were women. The median age was 59.8 years (range, 21.7 to 85.4), and 45% of the patients were Hispanic or Latino. The hazard ratio for intubation or death in the tocilizumab group as compared with the placebo group was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 1.81; P?=?0.64), and the hazard ratio for disease worsening was 1.11 (95% CI, 0.59 to 2.10; P?=?0.73). At 14 days, 18.0% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 14.9% of the patients in the placebo group had had worsening of disease. The median time to discontinuation of supplemental oxygen was 5.0 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.6) in the tocilizumab group and 4.9 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.8) in the placebo group (P?=?0.69). At 14 days, 24.6% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 21.2% of the patients in the placebo group were still receiving supplemental oxygen. Patients who received tocilizumab had fewer serious infections than patients who received placebo.ConclusionsTocilizumab was not effective for preventing intubation or death in moderately ill hospitalized patients with Covid-19. Some benefit or harm cannot be ruled out, however, because the confidence intervals for efficacy comparisons were wide. (Funded by Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04356937.).
| S-EPMC7646626 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with immune dysregulation and hyperinflammation, including elevated interleukin-6 levels. The use of tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor, has resulted in better outcomes in patients with severe Covid-19 pneumonia in case reports and retrospective observational cohort studies. Data are needed from randomized, placebo-controlled trials.MethodsIn this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients who were hospitalized with severe Covid-19 pneumonia in a 2:1 ratio receive a single intravenous infusion of tocilizumab (at a dose of 8 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo. Approximately one quarter of the participants received a second dose of tocilizumab or placebo 8 to 24 hours after the first dose. The primary outcome was clinical status at day 28 on an ordinal scale ranging from 1 (discharged or ready for discharge) to 7 (death) in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all the patients who had received at least one dose of tocilizumab or placebo.ResultsOf the 452 patients who underwent randomization, 438 (294 in the tocilizumab group and 144 in the placebo group) were included in the primary and secondary analyses. The median value for clinical status on the ordinal scale at day 28 was 1.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 1.0) in the tocilizumab group and 2.0 (non-ICU hospitalization without supplemental oxygen) (95% CI, 1.0 to 4.0) in the placebo group (between-group difference, -1.0; 95% CI, -2.5 to 0; P = 0.31 by the van Elteren test). In the safety population, serious adverse events occurred in 103 of 295 patients (34.9%) in the tocilizumab group and in 55 of 143 patients (38.5%) in the placebo group. Mortality at day 28 was 19.7% in the tocilizumab group and 19.4% in the placebo group (weighted difference, 0.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.6 to 8.2; nominal P = 0.94).ConclusionsIn this randomized trial involving hospitalized patients with severe Covid-19 pneumonia, the use of tocilizumab did not result in significantly better clinical status or lower mortality than placebo at 28 days. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and the Department of Health and Human Services; COVACTA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04320615.).
| S-EPMC7953459 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8604568 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTrials of tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia have demonstrated mixed results, and the role of tocilizumab in combination with other treatments is uncertain. Here we evaluated whether tocilizumab plus remdesivir provides greater benefit than remdesivir alone in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.MethodsThis randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial included patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring > 6 L/min supplemental oxygen. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive tocilizumab 8 mg/kg or placebo intravenously plus ≤ 10 days of remdesivir. The primary outcome was time from randomization to hospital discharge or "ready for discharge" (defined as category 1, assessed by the investigator on a 7-category ordinal scale of clinical status) to day 28. Patients were followed for 60 days.ResultsAmong 649 enrolled patients, 434 were randomly assigned to tocilizumab plus remdesivir and 215 to placebo plus remdesivir. 566 patients (88.2%) received corticosteroids during the trial to day 28. Median time from randomization to hospital discharge or "ready for discharge" was 14 (95% CI 12-15) days with tocilizumab plus remdesivir and 14 (95% CI 11-16) days with placebo plus remdesivir [log-rank P = 0.74; Cox proportional hazards ratio 0.97 (95% CI 0.78-1.19)]. Serious adverse events occurred in 128 (29.8%) tocilizumab plus remdesivir and 72 (33.8%) placebo plus remdesivir patients; 78 (18.2%) and 42 (19.7%) patients, respectively, died by day 28.ConclusionsTocilizumab plus remdesivir did not shorten time to hospital discharge or "ready for discharge" to day 28 compared with placebo plus remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.
| S-EPMC8490137 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Context: Populations severely affected by COVID-19 are also at risk for vitamin D deficiency. Common risk factors include older age, chronic illness, obesity, and non-Caucasian race. Vitamin D deficiency has been associated with risk for respiratory infections and failure, susceptibility and response to therapy for enveloped virus infection, and immune-mediated inflammatory reaction.Objective: To test the hypothesis that 25-hydroxyvitamin D[25(OH)D] deficiency is a risk factor for severity of COVID-19 respiratory and inflammatory complications.Design: We examined the relationship between prehospitalization 25(OH)D levels (obtained 1-365 days prior to admission) and COVID-19 clinical outcomes in 700 COVID-19 positive hospitalized patients.Primary Outcomes: Discharge status, mortality, length of stay, intubation status, renal replacement.Secondary Outcomes: Inflammatory markers.Results: 25(OH)D levels were available in 93 patients [25(OH)D:25(IQR:17-33)ng/mL]. Compared to those without 25(OH)D levels, those with measurements did not differ in age, BMI or distribution of sex and race, but were more likely to have comorbidities. Those with 25(OH)D < 20 ng/mL (n = 35) did not differ from those with 25(OH)D ≥ 20 ng/mL in terms of age, sex, race, BMI, or comorbidities. Low 25(OH)D tended to be associated with younger age and lower frequency of preexisting pulmonary disease. There were no significant between-group differences in any outcome. Results were similar in those ≥50 years, in male/female-only cohorts, and when differing 25(OH)D thresholds were used (<15 ng/mL and <30 ng/mL). There was no relationship between 25(OH)D as a continuous variable and any outcome, even after controlling for age and pulmonary disease.Conclusions: These preliminary data do not support a relationship between prehospitalization vitamin D status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes.
| S-EPMC7784779 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate in-hospital outcomes among patients with a history of heart failure (HF) hospitalized with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19).BackgroundCardiometabolic comorbidities are common in patients with severe COVID-19. Patients with HF may be particularly susceptible to COVID-19 complications.MethodsThe Premier Healthcare Database was used to identify patients with at least 1 HF hospitalization or 2 HF outpatient visits between January 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020, who were subsequently hospitalized between April and September 2020. Baseline characteristics, health care resource utilization, and mortality rates were compared between those hospitalized with COVID-19 and those hospitalized with other causes. Predictors of in-hospital mortality were identified in HF patients hospitalized with COVID-19 by using multivariate logistic regression.ResultsAmong 1,212,153 patients with history of HF, 132,312 patients were hospitalized from April 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020. A total of 23,843 patients (18.0%) were hospitalized with acute HF, 8,383 patients (6.4%) were hospitalized with COVID-19, and 100,068 patients (75.6%) were hospitalized with alternative reasons. Hospitalization with COVID-19 was associated with greater odds of in-hospital mortality as compared with hospitalization with acute HF; 24.2% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 died in-hospital compared to 2.6% of those hospitalized with acute HF. This association was strongest in April (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 14.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]:12.25 to 17.12) than in subsequent months (adjusted OR: 10.11; 95% CI: 8.95 to 11.42; pinteraction <0.001). Among patients with HF hospitalized with COVID-19, male sex (adjusted OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.40) and morbid obesity (adjusted OR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.46) were associated with greater odds of in-hospital mortality, along with age (adjusted OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.29 to 1.42 per 10 years) and admission earlier in the pandemic.ConclusionsPatients with HF hospitalized with COVID-19 are at high risk for complications, with nearly 1 in 4 dying during hospitalization.
| S-EPMC7833294 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: Multiple risk factors of mortality have been identified in patients with COVID-19. Here, we sought to determine the effect of a history of neurological disorder and development of neurological manifestations on mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods: From March 20 to May 20, 2020, hospitalized patients with laboratory confirmed or highly suspected COVID-19 were identified at four hospitals in Ohio. Previous history of neurological disease was classified by severity (major or minor). Neurological manifestations during disease course were also grouped into major and minor manifestations. Encephalopathy, ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, and seizures were defined as major manifestations, whereas minor neurological manifestations included headache, anosmia, dysgeusia, dizziness or vertigo, and myalgias. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine significant predictors of mortality in patients with COVID-19 infection. Results: 574/626 hospitalized patients were eligible for inclusion. Mean age of the 574 patients included in the analysis was 62.8 (SD 17.6), with 298 (51.9%) women. Of the cohort, 240(41.8%) patients had a prior history of neurological disease (HND), of which 204 (35.5%) had a major history of neurological disease (HND). Mortality rates were higher in patients with a major HND (30.9 vs. 15.4%; p = 0.00002), although this was not a significant predictor of death. Major neurological manifestations were recorded in 203/574 (35.4%) patients during disease course. The mortality rate in patients who had major neurological manifestations was 37.4% compared to 11.9% (p = 2 × 10-12) in those who did not. In multivariate analysis, major neurological manifestation (OR 2.1, CI 1.3-3.4; p = 0.002) was a predictor of death. Conclusions: In this retrospective study, history of pre-existing neurological disease in hospitalized COVID-19 patients did not impact mortality; however, development of major neurological manifestations during disease course was found to be an independent predictor of death. Larger studies are needed to validate our findings.
| S-EPMC7662675 | biostudies-literature