Dataset Information

The efficacy and safety of levilimab in severely ill COVID-19 patients not requiring mechanical ventilation: results of a multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase III CORONA clinical study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective and design

The aim of this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III CORONA clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IL-6 receptor inhibitor levilimab (LVL) in subjects with severe COVID-19.

Subjects

The study included 217 patients. The eligible were men and non-pregnant women aged 18 years or older, hospitalized for severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Treatment

206 subjects were randomized (1:1) to receive single subcutaneous administration of LVL 324 mg or placebo, both in combination with standard of care (SOC). 204 patients received allocated therapy. After the LVL/placebo administration in case of deterioration of symptoms, the investigator could perform a single open-label LVL 324 mg administration as the rescue therapy.

Methods

The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with sustained clinical improvement on the 7-category ordinal scale on Day 14. All efficacy data obtained after rescue therapy administration were considered missing. For primary efficacy analysis, all subjects with missing data were considered non-responders.

Results

63.1% and 42.7% of patients in the LVL and in the placebo groups, respectively, achieved sustained clinical improvement on Day 14 (P = .0017). The frequency of adverse drug reactions was comparable between the groups.

Conclusion

In patients with radiologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, requiring or not oxygen therapy (but not ventilation) with no signs of other active infection administration of LVL + SOC results in an increase of sustained clinical improvement rate.

Trail registration

The trial is registered at the US National Institutes of Health (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT04397562).

SUBMITTER: Lomakin NV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8479713 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) is a frequent superinfection in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and is associated with increased mortality rates. The increasing proportion of severely immunocompromised patients with COVID-19 who require mechanical ventilation warrants research into the incidence and impact of CAPA during the vaccination era.MethodsWe performed a retrospective, monocentric, observational study. We collected data from adult patients with severe COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of University Hospitals Leuven, a tertiary referral center, between 1 March 2020 and 14 November 2022. Probable or proven CAPA was diagnosed according to the 2020 European Confederation for Medical Mycology/International Society for Human and Animal Mycology (ECMM/ISHAM) criteria.ResultsWe included 335 patients. Bronchoalveolar lavage sampling was performed in 300 (90%), and CAPA was diagnosed in 112 (33%). The incidence of CAPA was 62% (50 of 81 patients) in European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)/Mycosis Study Group Education and Research Consortium (MSGERC) host factor-positive patients, compared with 24% (62 of 254) in host factor-negative patients. The incidence of CAPA was significantly higher in the vaccination era, increasing from 24% (57 of 241) in patients admitted to the ICU before October 2021 to 59% (55 of 94) in those admitted since then. Both EORTC/MSGERC host factors and ICU admission in the vaccination era were independently associated with CAPA development. CAPA remained an independent risk factor associated with mortality risk during the vaccination era.ConclusionsThe presence of EORTC/MSGERC host factors for invasive mold disease is associated with increased CAPA incidence and worse outcome parameters, and it is the main driver for the significantly higher incidence of CAPA in the vaccination era. Our findings warrant investigation of antifungal prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Project description:Studying interhospital transfer of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia in the spring 2020 surge may help inform future pandemic management.ObjectivesTo compare outcomes for mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 transferred to a tertiary referral center with increased surge capacity with patients admitted from the emergency department.Design setting participantsObservational cohort study of single center urban academic medical center ICUs. All patients admitted and discharged with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia who received invasive ventilation between March 17, 2020, and October 14, 2020.Main outcome and measuresDemographic and clinical variables were obtained from the electronic medical record. Patients were classified as emergency department admits or interhospital transfers. Regression models tested the association between transfer status and survival, adjusting for demographics and presentation severity.ResultsIn total, 298 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia were admitted to the ICU and received mechanical ventilation. Of these, 117 were transferred from another facility and 181 were admitted through the emergency department. Patients were primarily male (64%) and Black (38%) or Hispanic (45%). Transfer patients differed from emergency department admits in having English as a preferred language (71% vs 56%; p = 0.008) and younger age (median 57 vs 61 yr; p < 0.001). There were no differences in race/ethnicity or primary payor. Transfers were more likely to receive extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (12% vs 3%; p = 0.004). Overall, 50 (43%) transferred patients and 78 (43%) emergency department admits died prior to discharge. There was no significant difference in hospital mortality or days from intubation to discharge between the two groups.Conclusions and relevanceIn a single-center retrospective cohort, no significant differences in hospital mortality or length of stay between interhospital transfers and emergency department admits were found. While more study is needed, this suggests that interhospital transfer of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 can be done safely and effectively.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Most prognostic studies in acute stroke patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation are outdated and have limitations such as single-center retrospective designs. We aimed to study the association of ICU admission factors, including the reason for intubation, with 1-year survival of acute stroke patients requiring mechanical ventilation. METHODS:We conducted a secondary data use analysis of a prospective multicenter database (14 ICUs) between 1997 and 2016 on consecutive ICU stroke patients requiring mechanical ventilation at admission. We excluded patients with stroke of traumatic origin, subdural hematoma or cerebral venous thrombosis. The primary outcome was survival 1 year after ICU admission. Factors associated with the primary outcome were identified using a multivariable Cox model stratified on inclusion center. RESULTS:We identified 419 patients (age 68 [58-76] years, males 60%) with a Glasgow coma score (GCS) of 4 [3-8] at admission. Stroke subtypes were acute ischemic stroke (AIS, 46%), intracranial hemorrhage (ICH, 42%) and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH, 12%). At 1 year, 96 (23%) patients were alive. Factors independently associated with decreased 1-year survival were ICH and SAH stroke subtypes, a lower GCS score at admission, a higher non-neurological SOFA score. Conversely, patients receiving acute-phase therapy had improved 1-year survival. Intubation for acute respiratory failure or coma was associated with comparable survival hazard ratios, whereas intubation for seizure was not associated with a worse prognosis than for elective procedure. Survival did not improve over the study period, but patients included in the most recent period had more comorbidities and presented higher severity scores at admission. CONCLUSIONS:In acute stroke patients requiring mechanical ventilation, the reason for intubation and the opportunity to receive acute-phase stroke therapy were independently associated with 1-year survival. These variables could assist in the decision process regarding the initiation of mechanical ventilation in acute stroke patients.

Project description:Lower oxygen consumption is associated with worse survival in septic shock and in other forms of critical illness. No treatment that increases oxygen extraction, a key determinant of oxygen consumption, has been found. Thiamine is required for aerobic metabolism, and deficiency is common in the critically ill.ObjectivesWe evaluated the effect of thiamine on oxygen consumption in patients requiring mechanical ventilation for an acute illness.DesignPhase II, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial.Setting and participantsICUs in a tertiary care hospital in the United States. Patients admitted to the ICU and requiring mechanical ventilation were screened for enrollment.InterventionsAfter enrollment, baseline measurement of oxygen consumption and baseline laboratories including lactate, central venous oxygen saturation, and pyruvate dehydrogenase, a single dose of 200 mg IV thiamine or placebo was administered. Oxygen consumption was then monitored for 6 additional hours and repeat laboratories were drawn at the end of the protocol.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the change in oxygen consumption. Analysis was done using linear regression with a first-order autoregressive variance-covariance structure to account for repeated measures within subjects. Secondary outcomes included change in lactate, central venous oxygen saturation, and pyruvate dehydrogenase quantity and activity.ResultsSixty-seven patients were enrolled. After excluding 11 patients due to inadequate quantity or quality of oxygen consumption data, 56 patients were included. There was no difference in change in oxygen consumption in the 6 hours after study drug. Results for secondary outcomes were similarly negative. In the prespecified subgroup of 18 thiamine deficient patients, there was a difference in the two oxygen consumption curves (p = 0.006), although no difference in median oxygen consumption or area under the curve.Conclusions and relevanceA single dose of IV thiamine did not alter oxygen consumption in patients requiring mechanical ventilation for acute illness.