Dataset Information

Methylprednisolone Pulses Plus Tacrolimus in Addition to Standard of Care vs. Standard of Care Alone in Patients With Severe COVID-19. A Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: Severe lung injury is triggered by both the SARS-CoV-2 infection and the subsequent host-immune response in some COVID-19 patients. Methods: We conducted a randomized, single-center, open-label, phase II trial with the aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone pulses and tacrolimus plus standard of care (SoC) vs. SoC alone, in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The primary outcome was time to clinical stability within 56 days after randomization. Results: From April 1 to May 2, 2020, 55 patients were prospectively included for subsequent randomization; 27 were assigned to the experimental group and 28 to the control group. The experimental treatment was not associated with a difference in time to clinical stability (hazard ratio 0.73 [95% CI 0.39-1.37]) nor most secondary outcomes. Median methylprednisolone cumulative doses were significantly lower (360 mg [IQR 360-842] vs. 870 mg [IQR 364-1451]; p = 0.007), and administered for a shorter time (median of 4.00 days [3.00-17.5] vs. 18.5 days [3.00-53.2]; p = 0.011) in the experimental group than in the control group. Although not statistically significant, those receiving the experimental therapy showed a numerically lower all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC, especially at day 10 [2 (7.41%) vs. 5 (17.9%); OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.05-2.1); p = 0.282]. The total number of non-serious adverse events was 42 in each the two groups. Those receiving experimental treatment had a numerically higher rate of non-serious infectious adverse events [16 (38%) vs. 10 (24%)] and serious infectious adverse events [7 (35%) vs. 3 (23%)] than those receiving SoC. Conclusions: The combined use of methylprednisolone pulses plus tacrolimus, in addition to the SoC, did not significantly improve the time to clinical stability or other secondary outcomes compared with the SoC alone in severe COVID-19. Although not statistically significant, patients receiving the experimental therapy had numerically lower all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC, supporting recent non-randomized studies with calcineurin inhibitors. It is noteworthy that the present trial had a limited sample size and several other limitations. Therefore, further RCTs should be done to assess the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus to tackle the inflammatory stages of COVID-19. Clinical Trial Registration: Identifier [NCT04341038/EudraCT: 2020-001445-39].

SUBMITTER: Solanich X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8236585 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSeverity of illness in COVID-19 is consistently lower in women. A focus on sex as a biological factor may suggest a potential therapeutic intervention for this disease. We assessed whether adding progesterone to standard of care (SOC) would improve clinical outcomes of hospitalized men with moderate to severe COVID-19.Research questionDoes short-term subcutaneous administration of progesterone safely improve clinical outcome in hypoxemic men hospitalized with COVID-19?Study design and methodsWe conducted a pilot, randomized, open-label, controlled trial of subcutaneous progesterone in men hospitalized with confirmed moderate to severe COVID-19. Patients were randomly assigned to receive SOC plus progesterone (100 mg subcutaneously twice daily for up to 5 days) or SOC alone. In addition to assessment of safety, the primary outcome was change in clinical status on day 7. Length of hospital stay and number of days on supplemental oxygen were key secondary outcomes.ResultsForty-two patients were enrolled from April 2020 to August 2020; 22 were randomized to the control group and 20 to the progesterone group. Two patients from the progesterone group withdrew from the study before receiving progesterone. There was a 1.5-point overall improvement in median clinical status score on a seven-point ordinal scale from baseline to day 7 in patients in the progesterone group as compared with control subjects (95% CI, 0.0-2.0; P = .024). There were no serious adverse events attributable to progesterone. Patients treated with progesterone required three fewer days of supplemental oxygen (median, 4.5 vs 7.5 days) and were hospitalized for 2.5 fewer days (median, 7.0 vs 9.5 days) as compared with control subjects.InterpretationProgesterone at a dose of 100 mg, twice daily by subcutaneous injection in addition to SOC, may represent a safe and effective approach for treatment in hypoxemic men with moderate to severe COVID-19.Trial registryClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04365127; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Project description:ImportanceMultisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) is the most severe pediatric disease associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, potentially life-threatening, but the optimal therapeutic strategy remains unknown.ObjectiveTo compare intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) plus methylprednisolone vs IVIG alone as initial therapy in MIS-C.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study drawn from a national surveillance system with propensity score-matched analysis. All cases with suspected MIS-C were reported to the French National Public Health Agency. Confirmed MIS-C cases fulfilling the World Health Organization definition were included. The study started on April 1, 2020, and follow-up ended on January 6, 2021.ExposuresIVIG and methylprednisolone vs IVIG alone.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was persistence of fever 2 days after the introduction of initial therapy or recrudescence of fever within 7 days, which defined treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included a second-line therapy, hemodynamic support, acute left ventricular dysfunction after first-line therapy, and length of stay in the pediatric intensive care unit. The primary analysis involved propensity score matching with a minimum caliper of 0.1.ResultsAmong 181 children with suspected MIS-C, 111 fulfilled the World Health Organization definition (58 females [52%]; median age, 8.6 years [interquartile range, 4.7 to 12.1]). Five children did not receive either treatment. Overall, 3 of 34 children (9%) in the IVIG and methylprednisolone group and 37 of 72 (51%) in the IVIG alone group did not respond to treatment. Treatment with IVIG and methylprednisolone vs IVIG alone was associated with lower risk of treatment failure (absolute risk difference, -0.28 [95% CI, -0.48 to -0.08]; odds ratio [OR], 0.25 [95% CI, 0.09 to 0.70]; P = .008). IVIG and methylprednisolone therapy vs IVIG alone was also significantly associated with lower risk of use of second-line therapy (absolute risk difference, -0.22 [95% CI, -0.40 to -0.04]; OR, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.06 to 0.61]; P = .004), hemodynamic support (absolute risk difference, -0.17 [95% CI, -0.34 to -0.004]; OR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.06 to 0.76]), acute left ventricular dysfunction occurring after initial therapy (absolute risk difference, -0.18 [95% CI, -0.35 to -0.01]; OR, 0.20 [95% CI, 0.06 to 0.66]), and duration of stay in the pediatric intensive care unit (median, 4 vs 6 days; difference in days, -2.4 [95% CI, -4.0 to -0.7]).Conclusions and relevanceAmong children with MIS-C, treatment with IVIG and methylprednisolone vs IVIG alone was associated with a more favorable fever course. Study interpretation is limited by the observational design.

Project description:ImportanceFrontline health care professionals who work with patients with COVID-19 have an increased incidence of burnout symptoms. Cannabidiol (CBD) has anxiolytic and antidepressant properties and may be capable of reducing emotional exhaustion and burnout symptoms.ObjectiveTo investigate the safety and efficacy of CBD therapy for the reduction of emotional exhaustion and burnout symptoms among frontline health care professionals working with patients with COVID-19.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective open-label single-site randomized clinical trial used a 1:1 block randomization design to examine emotional exhaustion and burnout symptoms among frontline health care professionals (physicians, nurses, and physical therapists) working with patients with COVID-19 at the Ribeirão Preto Medical School University Hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Participants were enrolled between June 12 and November 12, 2020. A total of 214 health care professionals were recruited and assessed for eligibility, and 120 participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio by a researcher who was not directly involved with data collection.InterventionsCannabidiol, 300 mg (150 mg twice per day), plus standard care or standard care alone for 28 days.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was emotional exhaustion and burnout symptoms, which were assessed for 28 days using the emotional exhaustion subscale of the Brazilian version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey for Medical Personnel.ResultsA total of 120 participants were randomized to receive either CBD, 300 mg, plus standard care (treatment arm; n = 61) or standard care alone (control arm; n = 59) for 28 days. Of those, 118 participants (59 participants in each arm; 79 women [66.9%]; mean age, 33.6 years [95% CI, 32.3-34.9 years]) received the intervention and were included in the efficacy analysis. In the treatment arm, scores on the emotional exhaustion subscale of the Maslach Burnout Inventory significantly decreased at day 14 (mean difference, 4.14 points; 95% CI, 1.47-6.80 points; partial eta squared [ηp2] = 0.08), day 21 (mean difference, 4.34 points; 95% CI, 0.94-7.73 points; ηp2 = 0.05), and day 28 (mean difference, 4.01 points; 95% CI, 0.43-7.59 points; ηp2 = 0.04). However, 5 participants, all of whom were in the treatment group, experienced serious adverse events: 4 cases of elevated liver enzymes (1 critical and 3 mild, with the mild elevations reported at the final 28-day assessment) and 1 case of severe pharmacodermia. In 2 of those cases (1 with critical elevation of liver enzymes and 1 with severe pharmacodermia), CBD therapy was discontinued, and the participants had a full recovery.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, CBD therapy reduced symptoms of burnout and emotional exhaustion among health care professionals working with patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it is necessary to balance the benefits of CBD therapy with potential undesired or adverse effects. Future double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials are needed to confirm the present findings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04504877.

Project description:BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of azithromycin in the treatment of COVID-19 remain uncertain. We assessed whether adding azithromycin to standard of care, which included hydroxychloroquine, would improve clinical outcomes of patients admitted to the hospital with severe COVID-19.MethodsWe did an open-label, randomised clinical trial at 57 centres in Brazil. We enrolled patients admitted to hospital with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and at least one additional severity criteria as follows: use of oxygen supplementation of more than 4 L/min flow; use of high-flow nasal cannula; use of non-invasive mechanical ventilation; or use of invasive mechanical ventilation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to azithromycin (500 mg via oral, nasogastric, or intravenous administration once daily for 10 days) plus standard of care or to standard of care without macrolides. All patients received hydroxychloroquine (400 mg twice daily for 10 days) because that was part of standard of care treatment in Brazil for patients with severe COVID-19. The primary outcome, assessed by an independent adjudication committee masked to treatment allocation, was clinical status at day 15 after randomisation, assessed by a six-point ordinal scale, with levels ranging from 1 to 6 and higher scores indicating a worse condition (with odds ratio [OR] greater than 1·00 favouring the control group). The primary outcome was assessed in all patients in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population who had severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection confirmed by molecular or serological testing before randomisation (ie, modified ITT [mITT] population). Safety was assessed in all patients according to which treatment they received, regardless of original group assignment. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04321278.Findings447 patients were enrolled from March 28 to May 19, 2020. COVID-19 was confirmed in 397 patients who constituted the mITT population, of whom 214 were assigned to the azithromycin group and 183 to the control group. In the mITT population, the primary endpoint was not significantly different between the azithromycin and control groups (OR 1·36 [95% CI 0·94-1·97], p=0·11). Rates of adverse events, including clinically relevant ventricular arrhythmias, resuscitated cardiac arrest, acute kidney failure, and corrected QT interval prolongation, were not significantly different between groups.InterpretationIn patients with severe COVID-19, adding azithromycin to standard of care treatment (which included hydroxychloroquine) did not improve clinical outcomes. Our findings do not support the routine use of azithromycin in combination with hydroxychloroquine in patients with severe COVID-19.FundingCOALITION COVID-19 Brazil and EMS.

Project description:BackgroundChronic malnutrition is a condition associated with negative impacts on physical and cognitive development. It is multi-causal and can start very early in life, already in utero, thus it is especially challenging to find appropriate interventions to tackle it. The government of Angola is implementing a standard of care program with potential to prevent it, and the provision of cash transfers and the supplementation with small quantity lipid-based nutrients (SQ-LNS) are also promising interventions. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the standard of care program alone and of the standard of care plus a cash transfer intervention in the lineal growth of children less than 2 years old and compare it to the effectiveness of a nutrition supplementation plus standard of care program in Southern Angola.Methods/designThe three-arm parallel cluster randomised controlled trial is set in four communes of Huila and Cunene provinces. Clusters are villages or neighbourhoods with a population around 1075 people. A total of twelve clusters were selected per arm and forty pregnant women are expected to be recruited in each cluster. Pregnant women receive the standard of care alone, or the standard of care plus unconditional cash transfer or plus nutritional supplementation during the first 1000 days, from pregnancy to the child reaching 24 months. The primary outcome is the prevalence of stunting measured as height-for-age Z-score (HAZ) < -2 in children below 2 years. Impact will be assessed at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months of children's age. Secondary outcomes include mortality, morbidity, caring, hygiene and nutrition behaviours and practices, and women and children's dietary diversity. Quantitative data are also collected on women's empowerment, household food security, expenditure and relevant clinical and social events at baseline, endline and intermediate time points.DiscussionThe results will provide valuable information on the impact of the standard of care intervention alone as well as combined with an unconditional cash transfer intervention compared to a nutrition supplementation plus standard of care intervention, carried out during the first 1000 days, in the children´s growth up to 2 years and related outcomes in Southern Angola.Trial registrationClinical Trials NCT05571280. Registered 7 October 2022.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Type 2 diabetes is a serious clinical problem in both India and the UK. Adoption of a healthy lifestyle through dietary and physical activity modification can help prevent type 2 diabetes. However, implementing lifestyle modification programmes to high risk groups is expensive and alternative cheaper methods are needed. We are using a short messaging service (SMS) programme in our study as a tool to provide healthy lifestyle advice and an aid to motivation. The aim of the study is to assess the efficacy and user acceptability of text messaging employed in this way for people with pre-diabetes (HbA1c 6.0% to ?6.4%; 42-47 mmol/mol) in the UK and India. METHODS/DESIGN:This is a randomised, controlled trial with participants followed up for 2 years. After being screened and receiving a structured education programme for prediabetes, participants are randomised to a control or intervention group. In the intervention group, text messages are delivered 2-3 times weekly and contain educational, motivational and supportive content on diet, physical activity, lifestyle and smoking. The control group undergoes monitoring only. In India, the trial involves 5 visits after screening (0, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months). In the UK there are 4 visits after screening (0, 6, 12 and 24 months). Questionnaires (EQ-5D, RPAQ, Transtheoretical Model of Behavioural Change, and food frequency (UK)/24 h dietary recall (India)) and physical activity monitors (Actigraph GT3X+ accelerometers) are assessed at baseline and all follow-up visits. The SMS acceptability questionnaires are evaluated in all follow-up visits. The primary outcome is progression to type 2 diabetes as defined by an HbA1c of 6.5% or over(India) and by any WHO criterion(UK). Secondary outcomes are the changes in body weight, body mass index, waist circumference, blood pressure, fasting plasma glucose; lipids; proportion of participants achieving HbA1c ?6.0%; HOMA-IR; HOMA-?; acceptability of SMS; dietary parameters; physical activity and quality of life. DISCUSSION:The study is designed to assess the efficacy of tailored text messaging in addition to standard lifestyle advice to reduce the progression from prediabetes to type 2 diabetes in the two different countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov ; NCT01570946 , 4th April 2012 (India); NCT01795833 , 21st February 2013 (UK).

Dataset Information

Methylprednisolone Pulses Plus Tacrolimus in Addition to Standard of Care vs. Standard of Care Alone in Patients With Severe COVID-19. A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets