Rapid rEcognition of COrticosteRoiD resistant or sensitive Sepsis (RECORDS): study protocol for a multicentre, placebo-controlled, biomarker-guided, adaptive Bayesian design basket trial.

INTRODUCTION: Corticosteroids affect variably survival in sepsis trials, suggesting heterogeneity in patients' response to corticosteroids. The RECORDS (Rapid rEcognition of COrticosteRoiD resistant or sensitive Sepsis) trial aimed at defining endotypes associated with adults with sepsis responsiveness to corticosteroids. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: RECORDS, a multicentre, placebo-controlled, biomarker-guided, adaptive Bayesian design basket trial, will randomly assign to a biomarker stratum 1800 adults with community-acquired pneumonia, vasopressor-dependent sepsis, septic shock or acute respiratory distress syndrome. In each stratum, patients will be randomly assigned to receive a 7-day course of hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone or their placebos. Patients with COVID-19 will be treated with a 10-day standard course of dexamethasone and randomised to fludrocortisone or its placebo. Primary outcome will be 90-day death or persistent organ dysfunction. Large simulation study will be performed across a range of plausible scenarios to foresee power to detect a 5%-10% absolute difference with corticosteroids. We will assess subset-by-treatment interaction by estimating in a Bayesian framework two quantities: (1) measure of influence, relying on the value of the estimation of corticosteroids' effect in each subset, and (2) measure of interaction. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes, Dijon, France), on 6 April 2020. Trial results will be disseminated at scientific conferences and results will be published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04280497).

‘Which severe COVID-19 patients could benefit from High dose dexamethasone? A Bayesian reanalysis of a randomized clinical trial (preprint)

Background: The respective benefits of high and low doses of dexamethasone (DXM) in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov2) and acute respiratory failure (ARF) are controversial, with two large triple-blind RCTs reaching opposite conclusions. In the COVIDICUS trial, we argued against any additional benefit of high-dose dexamethasone (DXM20). We aimed to explore whether some specific patient phenotypes could benefit from DXM20 compared to the standard of care dose of DXM (DXMSoC). Methods: We performed a post hoc exploratory Bayesian analysis of 473 patients who received either DXM6 or DXM20 in the COVIDICUS trial. The primary outcome was the 60-day mortality rate of DXM20 over DXMSoC, with the treatment effect measured on the posterior mean of relative risk (RR) estimated using a beta-binomial model with 95% credibility intervals (95% CrI). Bayesian measures of interaction quantified the probability of interaction (Pr Interact) that the RR of 60-day death differed across the subsets by 20%. Results: Overall, the posterior mean RR of Day 60 mortality was 1.06 with a 95% credible confidence interval (0.77 to 1.44) and a posterior probability of benefit and harm of 27.0% and 50.5%, respectively. There was some evidence of treatment by subset interaction according to age, with the benefit increasing in patients aged below 70 years (RR=0.74, 95% CrI 0.41-1.22) compared to those aged above 70 (RR=1.12, 95% CrI 0.77 to 1.60) (Pr Interact, 77%), when the time since symptoms onset was lower than 7 days (RR=0.66, 95% CrI 0. 36 to 1.09) compared to 7 days or more (RR=1.15, 95% CrI 0.76 to 1.67) (Pr Interact, 90%) and in patients receiving remdesivir (RR=0.62, 95% CrI 0.29 to 1.14) compared to those who did not (RR=1.12, 95% CrI 0.78 to 1.58) (Pr Interact, 88%). Conclusions: In this exploratory post hoc Bayesian analysis, compared with standard-of-care DXM, high-dose DXM may benefit patients aged less than 70 years with severe ARF that occurred less than 7 days after symptoms onset. The use of remdesivir may also favour the benefit of DXM20. Further analysis is needed to confirm these findings. Trial registration: NCT04344730, date of registration April 14, 2020 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04344730?term=NCT04344730&draw=2&rank=1); EudraCT: 2020-001457-43 (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=2020-001457-43).

Challenges of using external data in clinical trials- an illustration in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: To improve the efficiency of clinical trials, leveraging external data on control and/or treatment effects, which is almost always available, appears to be a promising approach. METHODS: We used data from the experimental arm of the Covidicus trial evaluating high-dose dexamethasone in severely ill and mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, using published data from the Recovery trial as external data, to estimate the 28-day mortality rate. Primary approaches to deal with external data were applied. RESULTS: Estimates ranged from 0.241 ignoring the external data up to 0.294 using hierarchical Bayesian models. Some evidence of differences in mortality rates between the Covidicus and Recovery trials were observed, with an matched adjusted odds ratio of death in the Covidicus arm of 0.41 compared to the Recovery arm. CONCLUSIONS: These indirect comparisons appear sensitive to the method used. None of those approaches appear robust enough to overcome randomized clinical trial data. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Covidicus Trial: NCT04344730, First Posted: 14/04/2020; Recovery trial: NCT04381936.

Remdesivir for Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 Severe Pneumonia: A National Cohort Study (Remdeco-19).

BACKGROUND: Given the rapidly evolving pandemic of COVID-19 in 2020, authorities focused on the repurposing of available drugs to develop timely and cost-effective therapeutic strategies. Evidence suggested the potential utility of remdesivir in the framework of an early access program. REMDECO-19 is a multicenter national cohort study assessing the ability of remdesivir to improve the outcome of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective real-life study that included all patients from the early access program of remdesivir in France. The primary endpoint was the clinical course evolution of critically ill and hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with remdesivir. Secondary endpoints were the SOFA score evolution within 29 days following the admission and mortality at 29 and 90 days. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were enrolled in 22 sites from January to April 2020. The median WHO and SOFA scores were respectively reduced by two and six points between days 1 and 29. Improvement in the WHO-CPS and the SOFA score were observed in 83.5% and 79.3% of patients, respectively, from day 10. However, there was no effect of remdesivir on the 90-day survival based on the control cohort for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with invasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: SOFA score appeared to be an attractive approach to assess remdesivir efficacy and stratify its utilization or not in critically ill patients with COVID-19. This study brings a new clinical benchmark for therapeutic decision making and supports the use of remdesivir for some hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Infection of lung megakaryocytes and platelets by SARS-CoV-2 anticipate fatal COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2, although not being a circulatory virus, spread from the respiratory tract resulting in multiorgan failures and thrombotic complications, the hallmarks of fatal COVID-19. A convergent contributor could be platelets that beyond hemostatic functions can carry infectious viruses. Here, we profiled 52 patients with severe COVID-19 and demonstrated that circulating platelets of 19 out 20 non-survivor patients contain SARS-CoV-2 in robust correlation with fatal outcome. Platelets containing SARS-CoV-2 might originate from bone marrow and lung megakaryocytes (MKs), the platelet precursors, which were found infected by SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 autopsies. Accordingly, MKs undergoing shortened differentiation and expressing anti-viral IFITM1 and IFITM3 RNA as a sign of viral sensing were enriched in the circulation of deadly COVID-19. Infected MKs reach the lung concomitant with a specific MK-related cytokine storm rich in VEGF, PDGF and inflammatory molecules, anticipating fatal outcome. Lung macrophages capture SARS-CoV-2-containing platelets in vivo. The virus contained by platelets is infectious as capture of platelets carrying SARS-CoV-2 propagates infection to macrophages in vitro, in a process blocked by an anti-GPIIbIIIa drug. Altogether, platelets containing infectious SARS-CoV-2  alter COVID-19 pathogenesis and provide a powerful fatality marker. Clinical targeting of platelets might prevent viral spread, thrombus formation and exacerbated inflammation at once and increase survival in COVID-19.

Comparison of characteristics and laboratory tests of COVID-19 hematological patients from France and Brazil during the pre-vaccination period: identification of prognostic profiles for survival.

Introduction: COVID-19 disease presentation is heterogeneous, from asymptomatic up to severe life-threatening forms. Getting further insights into patients with specific diseases is of particular interest. We aimed to identify profiles of hematology patients hospitalized with COVID-19 that would be associated with survival and to assess the differences between cohorts. Methods: A binational cohort of 263 patients with COVID-19 and hematological disease was studied in Paris, France and São Paulo, Brazil. Patient profiles were based on age, comorbidities, biological measurements, COVID-19 symptoms and hematological disease characteristics. A semi-supervised learning method with a survival endpoint was first used, following which, a classifier was identified to allow the classification of patients using only baseline information. Main results: Two profiles of patients were identified, one being young patients with few comorbidities and low C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimers, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and creatinine levels, and the other, older patients, with several comorbidities and high levels of the 4 biology markers. The profiles were strongly associated with survival (p < 0.0001), even after adjusting for age (p = 0.0002). The 30-day survival rate was 77.1% in the first profiles, versus 46.7% in the second. The Brazilian analysis emphasized the importance of age, while the French focused on the comorbidities. Conclusion: This analysis showed the importance of CRP, LHD and creatinine in the COVID-19 presentation and prognosis, whatever the geographic origin of the patients.

High-Dose Dexamethasone and Oxygen Support Strategies in Intensive Care Unit Patients With Severe COVID-19 Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The COVIDICUS Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The benefit of high-dose dexamethasone and oxygenation strategies vs standard of care for patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) caused by COVID-19 pneumonia is debated. Objectives: To assess the benefit of high-dose dexamethasone compared with standard of care dexamethasone, and to assess the benefit of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNo2) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) compared with oxygen support standard of care (o2SC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 19 intensive care units (ICUs) in France from April 2020 to January 2021. Eligible patients were consecutive ICU-admitted adults with COVID-19 AHRF. Randomization used a 2 × 3 factorial design for dexamethasone and oxygenation strategies; patients not eligible for at least 1 oxygenation strategy and/or already receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) were only randomized for dexamethasone. All patients were followed-up for 60 days. Data were analyzed from May 26 to July 31, 2021. Interventions: Patients received standard dexamethasone (dexamethasone-phosphate 6 mg/d for 10 days [or placebo prior to RECOVERY trial results communication]) or high-dose dexamethasone (dexamethasone-phosphate 20 mg/d on days 1-5 then 10 mg/d on days 6-10). Those not requiring IMV were additionally randomized to o2SC, CPAP, or HFNo2. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were time to all-cause mortality, assessed at day 60, for the dexamethasone interventions, and time to IMV requirement, assessed at day 28, for the oxygenation interventions. Differences between intervention groups were calculated using proportional Cox models and expressed as hazard ratios (HRs). Results: Among 841 screened patients, 546 patients (median [IQR] age, 67.4 [59.3-73.1] years; 414 [75.8%] men) were randomized between standard dexamethasone (276 patients, including 37 patients who received placebo) or high-dose dexamethasone (270 patients). Of these, 333 patients were randomized among o2SC (109 patients, including 56 receiving standard dexamethasone), CPAP (109 patients, including 57 receiving standard dexamethasone), and HFNo2 (115 patients, including 56 receiving standard dexamethasone). There was no difference in 60-day mortality between standard and high-dose dexamethasone groups (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.69-1.33]; P = .79). There was no significant difference for the cumulative incidence of IMV criteria at day 28 among o2 support groups (o2SC vs CPAP: HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.71-1.63]; o2SC vs HFNo2: HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.69-1.55]) or 60-day mortality (o2SC vs CPAP: HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.58-1.61; o2SC vs HFNo2: HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.53-1.47]). Interactions between interventions were not significant. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial among ICU patients with COVID-19-related AHRF, high-dose dexamethasone did not significantly improve 60-day survival. The oxygenation strategies in patients who were not initially receiving IMV did not significantly modify 28-day risk of IMV requirement. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04344730; EudraCT: 2020-001457-43.

Impact of Fast SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Point-Of-Care Testing on Patients' Length of Stay in an Emergency Department.

The ID NOW COVID-19 system (IDNOW) is a point-of-care test (POCT) providing results within 15 min. We evaluated the impact of IDNOW use on patient length of stay (LOS) in an emergency department (ED). In the ED of Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France, adult patients requiring a rapid diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 were tested with Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 or FilmArray respiratory panel RP2 in the virology laboratory between 18 October and 3 November 2020 (period 1) and with IDNOW between 4 November and 30 November 2020 (period 2). A total of 676 patients participated in the study, 337 during period 1 and 339 during period 2. The median LOS in ED was significantly higher in period 1 than in period 2 (276 versus 208 min, P < 0.0001). More patients spent less than 4 h in the ED in period 2 (61.3%) than in period 1 (38.3%) (P < 0.0001). By univariate analysis, factors associated with ED LOS were hypertension, anosmia/ageusia, number of patients per day, and ID NOW implementation in period 2. By multivariate analysis, the period of testing remained significantly associated with ED LOS. Rapid molecular SARS-CoV-2 POCT was associated with a reduced LOS for patients admitted to an ED. IMPORTANCE During COVID-19 pandemic upsurges, emergency departments had to deal with a massive flow of incoming patients. The need for COVID-19 infection status determination before medical ward admission worsened ED overcrowding. The development of molecular point-of-care testing gave new opportunities for getting faster results of SARS-CoV-2 genome detection 24 h a day. In our study, we show, with a multivariate analysis, that the use of the POCT COVID-19 IDNOW reduced the ED length of stay by 1 h. The rate of patients who waited less than 4 h in the ED increased significantly. Our study highlights the benefit of COVID-19 molecular POCT for preventing ED overcrowding and facilitating bed allocation and SARS-CoV-2-infected patient isolation.

Treatment of severe COVID-19 patients with either low- or high-volume of convalescent plasma versus standard of care: A multicenter Bayesian randomized open-label clinical trial (COOP-COVID-19-MCTI).

Background: Administration of convalescent plasma may serve as an adjunct to supportive treatment to prevent COVID-19 progression and death. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 volumes of intravenous convalescent plasma (CP) with high antibody titers for the treatment of severe cases of COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a Bayesian, randomized, open-label, multicenter, controlled clinical trial in 7 Brazilian hospitals. Adults admitted to hospital with positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV2, within 10 days of the symptom onset, were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive standard of care (SoC) alone, or in combination with 200 mL (150-300 mL) of CP (Low-volume), or 400 mL (300-600 mL) of CP (High-volume); infusion had to be performed within 24 h of randomization. Randomization was centralized, stratified by center. The primary outcome was the time until clinical improvement up to day 28, measured by the WHO ten-point scale, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Interim and terminal analyses were performed in a Bayesian framework. Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04415086. Findings: Between June 2, 2020, and November 18, 2020, 129 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to SoC (n = 42), Low-volume (n = 43) or High-volume (n = 44) CP. Donors presented a median titer of neutralizing antibodies of 1:320 (interquartile range, 1:160 to 1:1088). No evidence of any benefit of convalescent plasma was observed, with Bayesian estimate of 28-day clinical improvement of 72.7% (95%CI, 58.8 to 84.7) in the SoC versus 64.1% (95%ci, 53.8 to 73.7) in the pooled experimental groups (mean difference of -8.7%, 95%CI, -24.6 to 8.2). There was one case of cutaneous mild allergic reaction related to plasma transfusion and one case of suspected transfusion-related acute lung injury but deemed not to be related to convalescent plasma infusion. Interpretation: In this prospective, randomized trial of adult hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19, convalescent plasma was not associated with clinical benefits. Funding: Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo.

Remdesivir in combination with dexamethasone for patients hospitalized with COVID-19: A retrospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone is standard of care for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen. The objective is to assess the clinical benefit of adding remdesivir to dexamethasone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requesting low-flow oxygen who received dexamethasone. Patients admitted to infectious diseases wards also received remdesivir. Primary outcome was duration of hospitalization after oxygen initiation. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital death, and death and/or transfer to the intensive care unit. To handle potential confounding by indication bias, outcome comparison was performed on propensity score-matched populations. Propensity score was estimated by a multivariable logistic model including prognostic covariates; then 1:1 matching was performed without replacement, using the nearest neighbor algorithm with a caliper of 0.10 fold the standard deviation of the propensity score as the maximal distance. Balance after matching was checked on standardized mean differences. RESULTS: From August 15th 2020, to February 28th, 2021, 325 patients were included, 101 of whom received remdesivir. At admission median time from symptoms onset was 7 days, median age: 68 years, male sex; 61%, >1 comorbidity: 58.5%. Overall 180 patients matched on propensity score were analyzed, 90 each received remdesivir plus dexamethasone or dexamethasone alone. Median duration of hospitalization was 9 (IQR: 7-13) and 9 (IQR: 5-18) days with and without remdesivir, respectively (p = 0.37). In-hospital death rates and rates of transfer to the intensive care unit or death were 8.9 and 17.8% (HR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.21-1.02, p = 0.06) and 20.0 and 35.6% with and without remdesivir, respectively (HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.23-0.89, p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia receiving low-flow oxygen and dexamethasone, the addition of remdesivir was not associated with shorter hospitalization or lower in-hospital mortality but may have reduced the combined outcome of death and transfer to the intensive care unit.

Profiles and outcomes in patients with COVID-19 admitted to wards of a French oncohematological hospital: A clustering approach.

OBJECTIVES: Although some prognostic factors for COVID-19 were consistently identified across the studies, differences were found for other factors that could be due to the characteristics of the study populations and the variables incorporated into the statistical model. We aimed to a priori identify specific patient profiles and then assess their association with the outcomes in COVID-19 patients with respiratory symptoms admitted specifically to hospital wards. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-center study from February 2020 to April 2020. A non-supervised cluster analysis was first used to detect patient profiles based on characteristics at admission of 220 consecutive patients admitted to our institution. Then, we assessed the prognostic value using Cox regression analyses to predict survival. RESULTS: Three clusters were identified, with 47 patients in cluster 1, 87 in cluster 2, and 86 in cluster 3; the presentation of the patients differed among the clusters. Cluster 1 mostly included sexagenarian patients with active malignancies who were admitted early after the onset of COVID-19. Cluster 2 included the oldest patients, who were generally overweight and had hypertension and renal insufficiency, while cluster 3 included the youngest patients, who had gastrointestinal symptoms and delayed admission. Sixty-day survival rates were 74.3%, 50.6% and 96.5% in clusters 1, 2, and 3, respectively. This was confirmed by the multivariable Cox analyses that showed the prognostic value of these patterns. CONCLUSION: The cluster approach seems appropriate and pragmatic for the early identification of patient profiles that could help physicians segregate patients according to their prognosis.

Randomized Controlled Study Evaluating Efficiency of Low Intensity Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) for Dyspnea Relief in Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients in ICU: The tDCS-DYSP-COVID Protocol.

The severe respiratory distress syndrome linked to the new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) includes unbearable dyspneic suffering which contributes to the deterioration of the prognosis of patients in intensive care unit (ICU). Patients are put on mechanical ventilation to reduce respiratory suffering and preserve life. Despite this mechanical ventilation, most patients continue to suffer from dyspnea. Dyspnea is a major source of suffering in intensive care and one of the main factors that affect the prognosis of patients. The development of innovative methods for its management, especially non-drug management is more than necessary. In recent years, numerous studies have shown that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could modulate the perception of acute or chronic pain. In the other hand, it has been shown that the brain zones activated during pain and dyspnea are close and/or superimposed, suggesting that brain structures involved in the integration of aversive emotional component are shared by these two complex sensory experiences. Therefore, it can be hypothesized that stimulation by tDCS with regard to the areas which, in the case of pain have activated one or more of these brain structures, may also have an effect on dyspnea. In addition, our team recently demonstrated that the application of tDCS on the primary cortical motor area can modulate the excitability of the respiratory neurological pathways. Indeed, tDCS in anodal or cathodal modality reduced the excitability of the diaphragmatic cortico-spinal pathways in healthy subjects. We therefore hypothesized that tDCS could relieve dyspnea in COVID-19 patients under mechanical ventilation in ICU. This study was designed to evaluate effects of two modalities of tDCS (anodal and cathodal) vs. placebo, on the relief of dyspnea in COVID-19 patients requiring mechanical ventilation in ICU. Trial Registration: This protocol is derived from the tDCS-DYSP-REA project registered on ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03640455. It will however be registered under its own NCT number.