Dataset Information

Effect of high versus low dose of dexamethasone on clinical worsening in patients hospitalised with moderate or severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: an open-label, randomised clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Low dose dexamethasone demonstrated clinical improvement in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) needing oxygen therapy; however, evidence on the efficacy of high dose of dexamethasone is limited.

Methods

We performed a randomised, open-label, controlled trial involving hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia needing oxygen therapy. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive low dose dexamethasone (6 mg once daily for 10 days) or high dose dexamethasone (20 mg once daily for 5 days, followed by 10 mg once daily for additional 5 days). The primary outcome was clinical worsening within 11 days since randomisation. Secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality, time to recovery, and clinical status at day 5, 11, 14 and 28 on an ordinal scale ranging from 1 (discharged) to 7 (death).

Results

A total of 200 patients (mean (sd) age, 64 (14) years; 62% male) were enrolled. Thirty-two patients of 102 (31.4%) enrolled in the low dose group and 16 of 98 (16.3%) in the high dose group showed clinical worsening within 11 days since randomisation (rate ratio, 0.427; 95% CI, 0.216-0.842; p=0.014). The 28-day mortality was 5.9% in the low dose group and 6.1% in the high dose group (p=0.844). There was no significant difference in time to recovery, and in the 7-point ordinal scale at day 5, 11, 14 and 28.

Conclusions

Among hospitalised COVID-19 patients needing oxygen therapy, high dose of dexamethasone reduced clinical worsening within 11 days after randomisation as compared with low dose.

SUBMITTER: Taboada M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8678498 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients with COVID-19 pneumonia can have increased inflammation and elevated cytokines, including interleukin (IL)-6, which might be deleterious. Thus, sarilumab, a high-affinity anti-IL-6 receptor antibody, might improve the outcome of patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia.MethodsWe did a multicentric, open-label, Bayesian randomised, adaptive, phase 2/3 clinical trial, nested within the CORIMUNO-19 cohort, to test a superiority hypothesis. Patients 18 years or older hospitalised with COVID-19 in six French centres, requiring at least 3L/min of oxygen but without ventilation assistance and a WHO Clinical Progression Scale [CPS] score of 5 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a web-based system, according to a randomisation list stratified on centre and with blocks randomly selected among 2 and 4, to receive usual care plus 400 mg of sarilumab intravenously on day 1 and on day 3 if clinically indicated (sarilumab group) or usual care alone (usual care group). Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients with WHO-CPS scores greater than 5 on the 10-point scale on day 4 and survival without invasive or non-invasive ventilation at day 14. This completed trial is closed to new participants and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324073.Findings165 patients were recruited from March 27 to April 6, 2020, and 148 patients were randomised (68 patients to the sarilumab group and 80 to the usual care group) and followed up for 90 days. Median age was 61·7 years [IQR 53·0-71·1] in the sarilumab group and 62·8 years [56·0-71·7] in the usual care group. In the sarilumab group 49 (72%) of 68 were men and in the usual care group 59 (78%) of 76 were men. Four patients in the usual care group withdrew consent and were not analysed. 18 (26%) of 68 patients in the sarilumab group had a WHO-CPS score greater than 5 at day 4 versus 20 (26%) of 76 in the usual care group (median posterior absolute risk difference 0·2%; 90% credible interval [CrI] -11·7 to 12·2), with a posterior probability of absolute risk difference greater than 0 of 48·9%. At day 14, 25 (37%) patients in the sarilumab and 26 (34%) patients in the usual care group needed ventilation or died, (median posterior hazard ratio [HR] 1·10; 90% CrI 0·69-1·74) with a posterior probability HR greater than 1 of 37·4%. Serious adverse events occurred in 27 (40%) patients in the sarilumab group and 28 (37%) patients in the usual care group (p=0·73).InterpretationSarilumab treatment did not improve early outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the effect of sarilumab on long-term survival.FundingAssistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris.

Project description:High-dose dexamethasone is a mainstay of therapy for multiple myeloma. We studied whether low-dose dexamethasone in combination with lenalidomide is non-inferior to and has lower toxicity than high-dose dexamethasone plus lenalidomide.Patients with untreated symptomatic myeloma were randomly assigned in this open-label non-inferiority trial to lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1-21 plus dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20 of a 28-day cycle (high dose), or lenalidomide given on the same schedule with dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of a 28-day cycle (low dose). After four cycles, patients could discontinue therapy to pursue stem-cell transplantation or continue treatment until disease progression. The primary endpoint was response rate after four cycles assessed with European Group for Blood and Bone Marrow Transplant criteria. The non-inferiority margin was an absolute difference of 15% in response rate. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00098475.445 patients were randomly assigned: 223 to high-dose and 222 to low-dose regimens. 169 (79%) of 214 patients receiving high-dose therapy and 142 (68%) of 205 patients on low-dose therapy had complete or partial response within four cycles (odds ratio 1.75, 80% CI 1.30-2.32; p=0.008). However, at the second interim analysis at 1 year, overall survival was 96% (95% CI 94-99) in the low-dose dexamethasone group compared with 87% (82-92) in the high-dose group (p=0.0002). As a result, the trial was stopped and patients on high-dose therapy were crossed over to low-dose therapy. 117 patients (52%) on the high-dose regimen had grade three or worse toxic effects in the first 4 months, compared with 76 (35%) of the 220 on the low-dose regimen for whom toxicity data were available (p=0.0001), 12 of 222 on high dose and one of 220 on low-dose dexamethasone died in the first 4 months (p=0.003). The three most common grade three or higher toxicities were deep-vein thrombosis, 57 (26%) of 223 versus 27 (12%) of 220 (p=0.0003); infections including pneumonia, 35 (16%) of 223 versus 20 (9%) of 220 (p=0.04), and fatigue 33 (15%) of 223 versus 20 (9%) of 220 (p=0.08), respectively.Lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone is associated with better short-term overall survival and with lower toxicity than lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma.National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.

Project description:BackgroundIn moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia, dexamethasone (DEX) and tocilizumab (TCZ) reduce the occurrence of death and ventilatory support. We investigated the efficacy and safety of DEX+TCZ in an open randomized clinical trial.MethodsFrom July 24, 2020, through May 18, 2021, patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring oxygen (>3 L/min) were randomly assigned to receive DEX (10 mg/d 5 days tapering up to 10 days) alone or combined with TCZ (8 mg/kg IV) at day 1, possibly repeated with a fixed dose of 400 mg i.v. at day 3. The primary outcome was time from randomization to mechanical ventilation support or death up to day 14, analysed on an intent-to-treat basis using a Bayesian approach. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04476979.FindingsA total of 453 patients were randomized, 3 withdrew consent, 450 were analysed, of whom 226 and 224 patients were assigned to receive DEX or TCZ+DEX, respectively. At day 14, mechanical ventilation or death occurred in 32/226 (14%) and 27/224 (12%) in the DEX and TCZ+DEX arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0·85, 90% credible interval [CrI] 0·55 to 1·31). At day 14, the World health Organization (WHO) clinical progression scale (CPS) was significantly improved in the TCZ+DEX arm (OR 0·69, 95% CrI, 0·49 to 0.97). At day 28, the cumulative incidence of oxygen supply independency was 82% in the TCZ+DEX arms and 72% in the DEX arm (HR 1·36, 95% CI 1·11 to 1·67). On day 90, 24 deaths (11%) were observed in the DEX arm and 18 (8%) in the TCZ+DEX arm (HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·42-1·41). Serious adverse events were observed in 25% and 21% in DEX and TCZ+DEX arms, respectively.InterpretationMechanical ventilation need and mortality were not improved with TCZ+DEX compared with DEX alone. The safety of both treatments was similar. However, given the wide confidence intervals for the estimate of effect, definitive interpretation cannot be drawn.FundingProgramme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique [PHRC COVID-19-20-0151, PHRC COVID-19-20-0029], Fondation de l'Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (Alliance Tous Unis Contre le Virus) and from Fédération pour la Recherche Médicale" (FRM). Tocilizumab was provided by Roche.

Project description:IntroductionMore than 2 million individuals in the USA have an opioid use disorder (OUD). Methadone maintenance treatment is the gold standard of medication-based treatment for OUD, but high-dose methadone is associated with cardiotoxicity and respiratory complications, among other side effects. These adverse effects make enhancing the effectiveness of lower doses of methadone an attractive therapeutic goal. Long recognised for its capacity to enhance treatment outcomes for a wide range of neuropsychiatric disorders including pain, the placebo effect offers an as-yet untested avenue to such an enhancement. This approach is particularly compelling given that individuals with substance use disorder tend to have higher salience attribution and may thereby be more sensitive to placebo effects. Our study combines two promising clinical methodologies-conditioning/dose-extension and open-label placebo-to investigate whether placebo effects can increase the effective potency of methadone in treatment-seeking OUD patients.Methods and analysisA total of 120 newly enrolled treatment-seeking OUD patients will be randomly assigned to one of two different groups: either methadone plus daily placebo dose-extension (PDE; treatment group) or methadone/treatment as usual (control). Participants will meet with study team members five times over the course of 3 months of treatment with methadone (baseline, 2 weeks, and 1, 2 and 3 months postbaseline). Throughout this study time period, methadone dosages will be adjusted by an addiction clinician blind to patient assignment, per standard clinical methods. The primary outcome is methadone dose at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include self-report of drug use; 3-month urine toxicology screen results; and treatment retention. Exploratory outcomes include several environmental as well as personality factors associated with OUD and with propensity to demonstrate a placebo effect.Ethics and disseminationHuman subjects oversight for this study is provided by the University of Maryland, Baltimore and University of Maryland, College Park Institutional Review Boards. Additionally, the study protocol is reviewed annually by an independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Study results will be disseminated via research conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration numberNCT02941809.

Project description:BackgroundThere is no effective therapy for the severe acute respiratory syndrome by coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) responsible for the Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). To date, dexamethasone has shown a decrease in mortality in patients who require oxygen, especially those with invasive mechanical ventilation. However, it is unknown if another corticosteroid can be used, the optimal dose and its duration, to achieve a better clinical outcome. The objective of the study was to compare the differences in clinical outcome and laboratory results in hospitalized patients with severe SARS-CoV2 Pneumonia treated with dexamethasone at 6 mg doses versus patients treated with high-dose methylprednisolone.Materials and methodsAmbispective cohort study with survival analysis of 216 patients diagnosed with severe Covid-19 pneumonia confirmed by polymerase chain reaction for SARS-CoV2 by Berlin protocol, who were hospitalized in a high-complexity clinic in Medellín, Colombia. The patients should also have supplementary oxygen and radiological confirmation of Pneumonia by chest tomography. Sample size was not calculated since the total population that met the inclusion criteria was evaluated. 111 patients were treated with the institutional protocol with intravenous dexamethasone 6 mg QD for seven to 10 days if they required oxygen. Since September 15, 2020, the hospitalization protocol of the clinic was modified by the Infectious Diseases and Pulmonology service, recommending a high dose of methylprednisolone of 250 to 500 mg every day for three days with a subsequent change to oral prednisone 50 mg every day for 14 days. The protocol was not applied in the intensive care unit, where dexamethasone continued to be administered. The clinical outcome and differences in laboratory results of the patients who received dexamethasone vs. the prospective cohort that received methylprednisolone from September 15 to October 31, 2020, were evaluated. Follow-up was carried out by outpatient consultation one month after discharge or by telephone, inquiring about readmission or living-dead status.Results216 patients had Covid-19 pneumonia documented by ground-glass imaging and alveolar pressure / inspired oxygen fraction (PaFi) less than 300. 111 patients received dexamethasone (DXM) and 105 received methylprednisolone (MTP). Patients in the DXM group evolved to severe ARDS in a higher proportion (26.1% vs 17.1% than the MTP group). Upon completion 4 days of treatment with parenteral corticosteroid, laboratory markers of severity decreased significantly in the group that received MTP, CRP 2.85 (2.3-3.8) vs 7.2 (5.4-9.8), (p-value < 0.0001), D-dimer 691 (612-847) vs 1083 (740-1565) (p-value = 0.04) and DHL 273 (244-289) vs 355 (270.6-422) (p-value = 0.01). After starting the corticosteroid, transfer to the intensive care unit (4.8% vs. 14.4%) and mortality (9,5% vs. 17.1%) was lower in the group that received MTP. Recovery time was shorter in patients treated with MTP, three days (3-4) vs. DXM 6 days (5-8) (p-value < 0.0001). At 30-day follow-up, 88 (92.6%) were alive in MTP vs 58 (63.1%) of those who received dexamethasone.ConclusionsIn this study, the treatment of severe Covid-19 Pneumonia with high-dose methylprednisolone for three days followed by oral prednisone for 14 days, compared with 6 mg dexamethasone for 7 to 10 days, statistically significantly decreased the recovery time, the need for transfer to intensive care and the severity markers C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer and LDH. Randomized controlled studies with methylprednisolone are required to corroborate its effect, and studies in a population hospitalized in intensive care wards.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN:Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING:16 government designated covid-19 treatment centres in China, 11 to 29 February 2020. PARTICIPANTS:150 patients admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed covid-19 were included in the intention to treat analysis (75 patients assigned to hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care, 75 to standard of care alone). INTERVENTIONS:Hydroxychloroquine administrated at a loading dose of 1200 mg daily for three days followed by a maintenance dose of 800 mg daily (total treatment duration: two or three weeks for patients with mild to moderate or severe disease, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:Negative conversion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by 28 days, analysed according to the intention to treat principle. Adverse events were analysed in the safety population in which hydroxychloroquine recipients were participants who received at least one dose of hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine non-recipients were those managed with standard of care alone. RESULTS:Of 150 patients, 148 had mild to moderate disease and two had severe disease. The mean duration from symptom onset to randomisation was 16.6 (SD 10.5; range 3-41) days. A total of 109 (73%) patients (56 standard of care; 53 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) had negative conversion well before 28 days, and the remaining 41 (27%) patients (19 standard of care; 22 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) were censored as they did not reach negative conversion of virus. The probability of negative conversion by 28 days in the standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine group was 85.4% (95% confidence interval 73.8% to 93.8%), similar to that in the standard of care group (81.3%, 71.2% to 89.6%). The difference between groups was 4.1% (95% confidence interval -10.3% to 18.5%). In the safety population, adverse events were recorded in 7/80 (9%) hydroxychloroquine non-recipients and in 21/70 (30%) hydroxychloroquine recipients. The most common adverse event in the hydroxychloroquine recipients was diarrhoea, reported in 7/70 (10%) patients. Two hydroxychloroquine recipients reported serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS:Administration of hydroxychloroquine did not result in a significantly higher probability of negative conversion than standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with mainly persistent mild to moderate covid-19. Adverse events were higher in hydroxychloroquine recipients than in non-recipients. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ChiCTR2000029868.