Outcomes of patients with respiratory failure declined for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a prospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Descriptive information on referral patterns and short-term outcomes of patients with respiratory failure declined for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is lacking. METHODS: We conducted a prospective single-centre observational cohort study of ECMO referrals to Toronto General Hospital (receiving hospital) for severe respiratory failure (COVID-19 and non-COVID-19), between 1 December 2019 and 30 November 2020. Data related to the referral, the referral decision, and reasons for refusal were collected. Reasons for refusal were grouped into three mutually exclusive categories selected a priori: "too sick now," "too sick before," and "not sick enough." In declined referrals, referring physicians were surveyed to collect patient outcome on day 7 after the referral. The primary study endpoints were referral outcome (accepted/declined) and patient outcome (alive/deceased). RESULTS: A total of 193 referrals were included; 73% were declined for transfer. Referral outcome was influenced by age (odds ratio [OR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 0.96; P < 0.01) and involvement of other members of the ECMO team in the discussion (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 1.28 to 15.2; P < 0.01). Patient outcomes were missing in 46 (24%) referrals (inability to locate the referring physician or the referring physician being unable to recall the outcome). Using available data (95 declined and 52 accepted referrals; n = 147), survival to day 7 was 49% for declined referrals (35% for patients deemed "too sick now," 53% for "too sick before," 100% for "not sick enough," and 50% for reason for refusal not reported) and 98% for transferred patients. Sensitivity analysis setting missing outcomes to directional extreme values retained robustness of survival probabilities. CONCLUSION: Nearly half of the patients declined for ECMO consideration were alive on day 7. More information on patient trajectory and long-term outcomes in declined referrals is needed to refine selection criteria.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: On manque d'informations descriptives sur les schémas de références et les devenirs à court terme des patient·es atteint·es d'insuffisance respiratoire n'ayant pas pu recevoir une oxygénation par membrane extracorporelle (ECMO). MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de cohorte observationnelle prospective monocentrique sur les références vers l'ECMO à l'Hôpital général de Toronto (hôpital d'accueil) pour insuffisance respiratoire grave (COVID-19 et non-COVID-19), entre le 1er décembre 2019 et le 30 novembre 2020. Les données relatives à la référence, à la décision de référence et aux motifs du refus ont été recueillies. Les motifs de refus ont été regroupés en trois catégories mutuellement exclusives sélectionnées a priori : « Trop malade maintenant ¼, « Trop malade avant ¼ et « Pas assez malade ¼. En ce qui concerne les références refusées, un sondage envoyé aux médecins traitant·es avait pour objectif de recueillir les devenirs des patient·es le jour 7 suivant la référence. Les critères d'évaluation principaux de l'étude étaient le résultat de la référence (accepté/refusé) et le devenir des patient·es (vivant·e/décédé·e). RéSULTATS: Au total, 193 références ont été incluses; le transfert a été refusé dans 73 % des cas. L'acceptation ou le refus de la référence était influencé par l'âge (rapport de cotes [RC], 0,97; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 0,95 à 0,96; P < 0,01) et la participation d'autres membres de l'équipe ECMO à la discussion (RC, 4,42; IC 95 %, 1,28 à 15,2; P < 0,01). Les devenirs des patient·es étaient manquants pour 46 (24 %) des personnes référées (incapacité de localiser les médecins traitant·es ou incapacité des médecins de se souvenir du devenir). À l'aide des données disponibles (95 références refusées et 52 références acceptées; n = 147), la survie jusqu'au jour 7 était de 49 % pour les références refusées (35 % pour la patientèle jugée « trop malade maintenant ¼, 53 % pour celle « trop malade avant ¼, 100 % pour celle « pas assez malade ¼ et 50 % pour les cas où la raison du refus n'était pas déclarée) et 98 % pour les patient·es transféré·es. L'analyse de sensibilité établissant les résultats manquants à des valeurs extrêmes directionnelles a conservé la robustesse des probabilités de survie. CONCLUSION: Près de la moitié des patient·es pour lesquel·les un traitement sous ECMO a été refusé étaient en vie au jour 7. Davantage d'informations concernant la trajectoire et les devenirs à long terme des patient·es refusé·es sont nécessaires pour parfaire les critères de sélection.

Association of lung recruitment and change in recruitment-to-inflation ratio from supine to prone position in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Prone positioning is an evidence-based treatment for patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Lung recruitment has been proposed as one of the mechanisms by which prone positioning reduces mortality in this group of patients. Recruitment-to-inflation ratio (R/I) is a method to measure potential for lung recruitment induced by a change in positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on the ventilator. The association between R/I and potential for lung recruitment in supine and prone position has not been studied with computed tomography (CT) scan imaging. In this secondary analysis, we sought to investigate the correlation between R/I measured in supine and prone position with CT and the potential for lung recruitment as measured by CT scan. Among 23 patients, the median R/I did not significantly change from supine (1.9 IQR 1.6-2.6) to prone position (1.7 IQR 1.3-2.8) (paired t test p = 0.051) but the individual changes correlated with the different response to PEEP. In supine and in prone position, R/I significantly correlated with the proportion of lung tissue recruitment induced by the change of PEEP. Lung tissue recruitment induced by a change of PEEP from 5 to 15 cmH2O was 16% (IQR 11-24%) in supine and 14.3% (IQR 8.4-22.6%) in prone position, as measured by CT scan analysis (paired t test p = 0.56). In this analysis, PEEP-induced recruitability as measured by R/I correlated with PEEP-induced lung recruitment as measured by CT scan, and could help to readjust PEEP in prone position.

Therapeutic advances in COVID-19.

Over 2 years have passed since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has claimed millions of lives. Unlike the early days of the pandemic, when management decisions were based on extrapolations from in vitro data, case reports and case series, clinicians are now equipped with an armamentarium of therapies based on high-quality evidence. These treatments are spread across seven main therapeutic categories: anti-inflammatory agents, antivirals, antithrombotics, therapies for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, anti-SARS-CoV-2 (neutralizing) antibody therapies, modulators of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and vitamins. For each of these treatments, the patient population characteristics and clinical settings in which they were studied are important considerations. Although few direct comparisons have been performed, the evidence base and magnitude of benefit for anti-inflammatory and antiviral agents clearly outweigh those of other therapeutic approaches such as vitamins. The emergence of novel variants has further complicated the interpretation of much of the available evidence, particularly for antibody therapies. Importantly, patients with acute and chronic kidney disease were under-represented in many of the COVID-19 clinical trials, and outcomes in this population might differ from those reported in the general population. Here, we examine the clinical evidence for these therapies through a kidney medicine lens.

Thrombopoietin participates in platelet activation in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: The pathogenesis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by enhanced platelet activation and diffuse hemostatic alterations, which may contribute to immunothrombosis/thromboinflammation and subsequent development of target-organ damage. Thrombopoietin (THPO), a growth factor essential to megakariocyte proliferation, is known to prime platelet activation and leukocyte-platelet interaction. In addition, THPO concentrations increase in several critical diseases, such as acute cardiac ischemia and sepsis, thus representing a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker. Furthermore, several data suggest that interleukin (IL)-6 is one of the most important inflammatory mediators involved in these phenomena, which led to explore the potential therapeutic role of IL-6 inhibitors. In this prospective cohort study, we aimed to study THPO and IL-6 concentrations in COVID-19 patients at the time of first clinical evaluation in the Emergency Department (ED), and to investigate their potential use as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. In addition, we sought to explore the role of THPO contained in plasma samples obtained from COVID-19 patients in priming in vitro platelet activation and leukocyte-platelet interaction. METHODS: We enrolled 66 patients presenting to the ED with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, including 47 with confirmed COVID-19 and 19 in whom COVID-19 was excluded (Non-COVID-19 patients). As controls, we also recruited 18 healthy subjects. In vitro, we reproduced the effects of increased circulating THPO on platelet function by adding plasma from COVID-19 patients or controls to platelet-rich plasma or whole blood obtained by healthy donors, and we indirectly studied the effect of THPO on platelet activation by blocking its biological activity. FINDINGS: THPO levels were higher in COVID-19 patients than in both Non-COVID-19 patients and healthy subjects. Studying THPO as diagnostic marker for the diagnosis of COVID-19 by receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) statistics, we found an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.73, with an optimal cut-off value of 42.60 pg/mL. IL-6 was higher in COVID-19 patients than in healthy subjects, but did not differ between COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 patients. THPO concentrations measured at the time of diagnosis in the ED were also higher in COVID-19 patients subsequently developing a severe disease than in those with mild disease. Evaluating THPO as biomarker for severe COVID-19 using ROC analysis, we found an AUC of 0.71, with an optimal cut-off value of 57.11 pg/mL. IL-6 was also higher in severe than in mild COVID-19 patients, with an AUC for severe COVID-19 of 0.83 and an optimal cut-off value of 23 pg/ml. THPO concentrations correlated with those of IL-6 (r=0.2963; p=0.043), and decreased 24 h after the administration of tocilizumab, an IL-6 receptor blocking antibody, showing that the increase of THPO levels depends on IL-6-stimulated hepatic synthesis. In vitro, plasma obtained from COVID-19 patients, but not from healthy subjects, primed platelet aggregation and leukocyte-platelet binding, and these effects were reduced by inhibiting THPO activity. INTERPRETATION: Increased THPO may be proposed as an early biomarker for the diagnosis of COVID-19 and for the identification of patients at risk of developing critical illness. Elevated THPO may contribute to enhance platelet activation and leukocyte-platelet interaction in COVID-19 patients, thus potentially participating in immunothrombosis/thromboinflammation. FUNDING: This work was supported by Ministero dell'Università e della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica (MURST) ex 60% to GM and EL.

Association of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure and Lung Recruitment Selection Strategies with Mortality in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

Rationale: The most beneficial positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) selection strategy in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is unknown, and current practice is variable. Objectives: To compare the relative effects of different PEEP selection strategies on mortality in adults with moderate to severe ARDS. Methods: We conducted a network meta-analysis using a Bayesian framework. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation methodology. Measurements and Main Results: We included 18 randomized trials (4,646 participants). Compared with a lower PEEP strategy, the posterior probability of mortality benefit from a higher PEEP without lung recruitment maneuver (LRM) strategy was 99% (risk ratio [RR], 0.77; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.60-0.96, high certainty), the posterior probability of benefit of the esophageal pressure-guided strategy was 87% (RR, 0.77; 95% CrI, 0.48-1.22, moderate certainty), the posterior probability of benefit of a higher PEEP with brief LRM strategy was 96% (RR, 0.83; 95% CrI, 0.67-1.02, moderate certainty), and the posterior probability of increased mortality from a higher PEEP with prolonged LRM strategy was 77% (RR, 1.06; 95% CrI, 0.89-1.22, low certainty). Compared with a higher PEEP without LRM strategy, the posterior probability of increased mortality from a higher PEEP with prolonged LRM strategy was 99% (RR, 1.37; 95% CrI, 1.04-1.81, moderate certainty). Conclusions: In patients with moderate to severe ARDS, higher PEEP without LRM is associated with a lower risk of death than lower PEEP. A higher PEEP with prolonged LRM strategy is associated with increased risk of death when compared with higher PEEP without LRM.

A biomarker assay to risk-stratify patients with symptoms of respiratory tract infection.

BACKGROUND: Patients who present to an emergency department with respiratory symptoms are often conservatively triaged in favour of hospitalization. We sought to determine if an inflammatory biomarker panel that identifies the host response better predicts hospitalization in order to improve the precision of clinical decision-making in the emergency department. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 2020 to March 2021, plasma samples of 641 patients with symptoms of respiratory illness were collected from emergency departments in an international multicentre study: Canada (n=310), Italy (n=131), and Brazil (n=200). Patients were followed prospectively for 28 days. Subgroup analysis was conducted on confirmed COVID-19 patients (n=245). An inflammatory profile was determined using a rapid, 50-minute, biomarker panel: Rapid Acute Lung Injury Diagnostic (RALI-Dx), which measures IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, sTNFR1, and sTREM1. RESULTS: RALI-Dx biomarkers were significantly elevated in patients who required hospitalization across all three sites. A machine learning algorithm that was applied to predict hospitalization using RALI-Dx biomarkers had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 76±6% (Canada), 84±4% (Italy), and 86±3% (Brazil). Model performance in COVID-19 patients was 82±3% and 87±7% for patients with a confirmed pneumonia diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid diagnostic biomarker panel accurately identified the need for inpatient care in patients presenting with respiratory symptoms, including COVID-19. The RALI-Dx test is broadly and easily applicable across many jurisdictions and represents an important diagnostic adjunct to advance emergency department decision-making protocols.

Lessening Organ Dysfunction With Vitamin C (LOVIT) Trial: Statistical Analysis Plan.

BACKGROUND: The LOVIT (Lessening Organ Dysfunction with Vitamin C) trial is a blinded multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing high-dose intravenous vitamin C to placebo in patients admitted to the intensive care unit with proven or suspected infection as the main diagnosis and receiving a vasopressor. OBJECTIVE: We aim to describe a prespecified statistical analysis plan (SAP) for the LOVIT trial prior to unblinding and locking of the trial database. METHODS: The SAP was designed by the LOVIT principal investigators and statisticians, and approved by the steering committee and coinvestigators. The SAP defines the primary and secondary outcomes, and describes the planned primary, secondary, and subgroup analyses. RESULTS: The SAP includes a draft participant flow diagram, tables, and planned figures. The primary outcome is a composite of mortality and persistent organ dysfunction (receipt of mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, or new renal replacement therapy) at 28 days, where day 1 is the day of randomization. All analyses will use a frequentist statistical framework. The analysis of the primary outcome will estimate the risk ratio and 95% CI in a generalized linear mixed model with binomial distribution and log link, with site as a random effect. We will perform a secondary analysis adjusting for prespecified baseline clinical variables. Subgroup analyses will include age, sex, frailty, severity of illness, Sepsis-3 definition of septic shock, baseline ascorbic acid level, and COVID-19 status. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed an SAP for the LOVIT trial and will adhere to it in the analysis phase. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/36261.

Development of a repeated-measures predictive model and clinical risk score for mortality in ventilated COVID-19 patients.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused intensive care units (ICUs) to reach capacities requiring triage. A tool to predict mortality risk in ventilated patients with COVID-19 could inform decision-making and resource allocation, and allow population-level comparisons across institutions. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all mechanically ventilated adults with COVID-19 admitted to three tertiary care ICUs in Toronto, Ontario, between 1 March 2020 and 15 December 2020. Generalized estimating equations were used to identify variables predictive of mortality. The primary outcome was the probability of death at three-day intervals from the time of ICU admission (day 0), with risk re-calculation every three days to day 15; the final risk calculation estimated the probability of death at day 15 and beyond. A numerical algorithm was developed from the final model coefficients. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven patients were eligible for inclusion. Median ICU length of stay was 26.9 (interquartile range, 15.4-52.0) days. Overall mortality was 42%. From day 0 to 15, the variables age, temperature, lactate level, ventilation tidal volume, and vasopressor use significantly predicted mortality. Our final clinical risk score had an area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve of 0.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 0.9). For every ten-point increase in risk score, the relative increase in the odds of death was approximately 4, with an odds ratio of 4.1 (95% CI, 2.9 to 5.9). CONCLUSION: Our dynamic prediction tool for mortality in ventilated patients with COVID-19 has excellent diagnostic properties. Notwithstanding, external validation is required before widespread implementation.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: En raison de la pandémie de COVID-19, les unités de soins intensifs (USI) ont atteint des taux d'occupation nécessitant un triage. Un outil pour prédire le risque de mortalité chez les patients sous ventilation atteints de COVID-19 pourrait éclairer la prise de décision et l'attribution des ressources tout en permettant des comparaisons populationnelles entre les établissements. MéTHODE: Cette étude de cohorte rétrospective a inclus tous les adultes atteints de COVID-19 sous ventilation mécanique admis dans trois USI de centres de soins tertiaires à Toronto, en Ontario, entre le 1er mars 2020 et le 15 décembre 2020. Des équations d'estimation généralisées ont été utilisées pour identifier les variables prédictives de mortalité. Le critère d'évaluation principal était la probabilité de décès à des intervalles de trois jours à partir du moment de l'admission à l'USI (jour 0), avec un nouveau calcul du risque tous les trois jours jusqu'au jour 15; le calcul final du risque a estimé la probabilité de décès au jour 15 et au-delà. Un algorithme numérique a été mis au point à partir des coefficients du modèle final. RéSULTATS: Cent vingt-sept patients étaient éligibles à l'inclusion. La durée médiane de séjour à l'USI était de 26,9 jours (écart interquartile, 15,4 à 52,0). La mortalité globale était de 42 %. Du jour 0 au jour 15, les variables que sont l'âge, la température, les taux de lactate, le volume courant de ventilation et l'utilisation de vasopresseurs ont constitué des prédicteurs significatifs de mortalité. Notre score de risque clinique final avait une aire sous la courbe ROC de 0,9 (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 0,8 à 0,9). Pour chaque augmentation de dix points du score de risque, l'augmentation relative des risques de décès était d'environ 4, avec un rapport de cotes de 4,1 (IC 95 %, 2,9 à 5,9). CONCLUSION: Notre outil de prédiction dynamique de la mortalité pour les patients ventilés atteints de COVID-19 possède d'excellentes propriétés diagnostiques. Néanmoins, une validation externe est nécessaire avant sa mise en œuvre généralisée.

A novel pre-clinical strategy to deliver antimicrobial doses of inhaled nitric oxide.

Effective treatment of respiratory infections continues to be a major challenge. In high doses (≥160 ppm), inhaled Nitric Oxide (iNO) has been shown to act as a broad-spectrum antimicrobial agent, including its efficacy in vitro for coronavirus family. However, the safety of prolonged in vivo implementation of high-dose iNO therapy has not been studied. Herein we aim to explore the feasibility and safety of delivering continuous high-dose iNO over an extended period of time using an in vivo animal model. Yorkshire pigs were randomized to one of the following two groups: group 1, standard ventilation; and group 2, standard ventilation + continuous iNO 160 ppm + methylene blue (MB) as intravenous bolus, whenever required, to maintain metHb <6%. Both groups were ventilated continuously for 6 hours, then the animals were weaned from sedation, mechanical ventilation and followed for 3 days. During treatment, and on the third post-operative day, physiologic assessments were performed to monitor lung function and other significative markers were assessed for potential pulmonary or systemic injury. No significant change in lung function, or inflammatory markers were observed during the study period. Both gas exchange function, lung tissue cytokine analysis and histology were similar between treated and control animals. During treatment, levels of metHb were maintained <6% by administration of MB, and NO2 remained <5 ppm. Additionally, considering extrapulmonary effects, no significant changes were observed in biochemistry markers. Our findings showed that high-dose iNO delivered continuously over 6 hours with adjuvant MB is clinically feasible and safe. These findings support the development of investigations of continuous high-dose iNO treatment of respiratory tract infections, including SARS-CoV-2.

Propensity-Adjusted Comparison of Mortality of Elderly Versus Very Elderly Ventilated Patients.

BACKGROUND: The growing proportion of elderly intensive care patients constitutes a public health challenge. The benefit of critical care in these patients remains unclear. We compared outcomes in elderly versus very elderly subjects receiving mechanical ventilation. METHODS: In total, 5,557 mechanically ventilated subjects were included in our post hoc retrospective analysis, a subgroup of the VENTILA study. We divided the cohort into 2 subgroups on the basis of age: very elderly subjects (age ≥ 80 y; n = 1,430), and elderly subjects (age 65-79 y; n = 4,127). A propensity score on being very elderly was calculated. Evaluation of associations with 28-d mortality was done with logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Very elderly subjects were clinically sicker as expressed by higher SAPS II scores (53 ± 18 vs 50 ± 18, P < .001), and their rates of plateau pressure < 30 cm H2O were higher, whereas other parameters did not differ. The 28-d mortality was higher in very elderly subjects (42% vs 34%, P < .001) and remained unchanged after propensity score adjustment (adjusted odds ratio 1.31 [95% CI 1.16-1.49], P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Age was an independent and unchangeable risk factor for death in mechanically ventilated subjects. However, survival rates of very elderly subjects were > 50%. Denial of critical care based solely on age is not justified. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT02731898.).

Interleukin-6 receptor blockade in patients with COVID-19: placing clinical trials into context.

The pleiotropic cytokine interleukin-6 (IL-6) has been implicated in the pathogenesis of COVID-19, but uncertainty remains about the potential benefits and harms of targeting IL-6 signalling in patients with the disease. The efficacy and safety of tocilizumab and sarilumab, which block the binding of IL-6 to its receptor, have been tested in adults with COVID-19-related acute respiratory illness in randomised trials, with important differences in trial design, characteristics of included patients, use of co-interventions, and outcome measurement scales. In this Series paper, we review the clinical and methodological heterogeneity of studies of IL-6 receptor antagonists, and consider how this heterogeneity might have influenced reported treatment effects. Timing from clinical presentation to treatment, severity of illness, and concomitant use of corticosteroids are among the factors that might have contributed to apparently inconsistent results. With an understanding of the sources of variability in these trials, available evidence could be applied to guide clinical decision making and to inform the enrichment of future studies.

Tocilizumab in Hospitalized Patients with Severe Covid-19 Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with immune dysregulation and hyperinflammation, including elevated interleukin-6 levels. The use of tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor, has resulted in better outcomes in patients with severe Covid-19 pneumonia in case reports and retrospective observational cohort studies. Data are needed from randomized, placebo-controlled trials. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients who were hospitalized with severe Covid-19 pneumonia in a 2:1 ratio receive a single intravenous infusion of tocilizumab (at a dose of 8 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo. Approximately one quarter of the participants received a second dose of tocilizumab or placebo 8 to 24 hours after the first dose. The primary outcome was clinical status at day 28 on an ordinal scale ranging from 1 (discharged or ready for discharge) to 7 (death) in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all the patients who had received at least one dose of tocilizumab or placebo. RESULTS: Of the 452 patients who underwent randomization, 438 (294 in the tocilizumab group and 144 in the placebo group) were included in the primary and secondary analyses. The median value for clinical status on the ordinal scale at day 28 was 1.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 1.0) in the tocilizumab group and 2.0 (non-ICU hospitalization without supplemental oxygen) (95% CI, 1.0 to 4.0) in the placebo group (between-group difference, -1.0; 95% CI, -2.5 to 0; P = 0.31 by the van Elteren test). In the safety population, serious adverse events occurred in 103 of 295 patients (34.9%) in the tocilizumab group and in 55 of 143 patients (38.5%) in the placebo group. Mortality at day 28 was 19.7% in the tocilizumab group and 19.4% in the placebo group (weighted difference, 0.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.6 to 8.2; nominal P = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial involving hospitalized patients with severe Covid-19 pneumonia, the use of tocilizumab did not result in significantly better clinical status or lower mortality than placebo at 28 days. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and the Department of Health and Human Services; COVACTA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04320615.).