Dataset Information

Real-world corticosteroid use in severe pneumonia: a propensity-score-matched study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide despite correct antibiotic use. Corticosteroids have long been evaluated as a treatment option, but heterogeneous effects on survival have precluded their widespread implementation. We aimed to evaluate whether corticosteroids might improve clinical outcomes in patients with severe CAP and high inflammatory responses.

Study design and methods

We analyzed two prospective observational cohorts of patients with CAP in Barcelona and Rome who were admitted to intensive care with a high inflammatory response. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to obtain balance among the baseline variables in both groups, and we excluded patients with viral pneumonia or who received hydrocortisone.

Results

Of the 610 patients admitted with severe CAP, 198 (32%) received corticosteroids and 387 had major criteria for severe CAP. All patients had a baseline serum C-reactive protein above 15 mg/dL. Patients who received corticosteroids were more commonly male, had more comorbidities (e.g., cancer or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), and presented with significantly higher sequential organ failure assessment scores. Eighty-nine patients met major severity criteria (invasive mechanical ventilation and/or septic shock) and were matched per group. Twenty-eight-day mortality was lower among patients receiving corticosteroids (16 patients, 18%) than among those not receiving them (28 patients, 31%; p = 0.037). After PS matching, corticosteroid therapy reduced the 28-day mortality risk in patients who met major severity criteria (hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.98) (p = 0.043). In patients who did not meet major severity criteria, no benefits were observed with corticosteroid use (HR 0.88 (95%CI 0.32-2.36).

Conclusions

Corticosteroid treatment may be of benefit for patients with CAP who have septic shock and/or a high inflammatory response and requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation. Corticosteroids appear to have no impact on mortality when these features are not present.

SUBMITTER: Ceccato A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8674860 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFor treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), a broad range of disease-modifying therapies (DMT) is available. However, few comparative effectiveness studies between different drugs have been performed.ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the efficacy and treatment continuation of natalizumab and ocrelizumab in a real-world cohort of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) from two German university hospitals.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of RRMS patients who initiated treatment with natalizumab or ocrelizumab between January 2016 and April 2019 at the German university hospitals of Mainz and Düsseldorf. Bayesian propensity score matching was conducted to correct for differences in baseline characteristics. Our primary outcome was no evidence of disease activity [NEDA-3: no relapses, no confirmed disability progression, and no magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity] and its subcomponents. Secondary outcomes included measurement of neurofilament light chain (NfL) in serum, analysis of premature discontinuation, and evidence of rebound activity in patients switching from natalizumab to ocrelizumab.ResultsWe identified 63 patients starting treatment with natalizumab and 76 patients starting with ocrelizumab. Binary logistic regression showed that treatment with natalizumab or a higher number of relapses in the previous year were independently associated with a higher risk for relapses. Patients receiving natalizumab had a higher probability of premature discontinuation of therapy (p = 0.002). After propensity score matching of the two treatment arms, 55 patients remained per group. NEDA-3 after 30 months of follow-up was reached by 53.1% in the ocrelizumab group and 36.1% in the natalizumab group (p = 0.177). Ocrelizumab was superior to natalizumab concerning the occurrence of relapses in log-rank test (p = 0.019). NfL levels in serum were low under both treatments. Patients who switched from natalizumab to ocrelizumab showed no increased rebound activity.DiscussionThis study provides class IV evidence that treatment of RRMS patients with ocrelizumab and natalizumab show comparable effectiveness in combined endpoints, while ocrelizumab might be more effective in preventing the occurrence of relapses.

Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to spread globally and cause significant morbidity and mortality. Antispike protein monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy has been shown to prevent progression to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The objective of this study was to report the outcomes of high-risk, SARS-CoV-2-positive patients infused with 1 of the 3 mAb therapies available through Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).MethodsA total of 4328 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients who satisfied EUA criteria for eligibility for receiving mAb therapy were infused with bamlanivimab or the combination therapies bamlanivimab-etesevimab or casirivimab-imdevimab from November 22, 2020, to May 31, 2021, at 6 infusion clinics and multiple emergency departments within the 8 Houston Methodist Hospitals in Houston, Texas. The primary outcome of hospital admission within 14 and 28 days postinfusion was assessed relative to a propensity score-matched cohort, matched based on age, race/ethnicity, median income by zip code, body mass index, comorbidities, and positive polymerase chain reaction date. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit admission and mortality.ResultsA total of 2879 infused patients and matched controls were included in the analysis, including 1718 patients infused with bamlanivimab, 346 patients infused with bamlanivimab-etesevimab, and 815 patients infused with casirivimab-imdevimab. Hospital admission and mortality rates were significantly decreased overall in mAb-infused patients relative to matched controls. Among the infused cohort, those who received casirivimab-imdevimab had a significantly decreased rate of admission relative to the other 2 mAb therapy groups (adjusted risk ratio,0.51; P=.001).ConclusionsTreatment with bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab-etesevimab, or casirivimab-imdevimab significantly decreased the number of patients who progressed to severe COVID-19 disease and required hospitalization.