Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Respir Res ; 23(1): 202, 2022 Aug 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2214585

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of complement inhibition in COVID-19 patients is unclear. METHODS: A multicenter randomized controlled, open-label trial. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with signs of systemic inflammation and hypoxemia (PaO2/FiO2 below 350 mmHg) were randomized (2:1 ratio) to receive standard of care with or without the C5 inhibitor zilucoplan daily for 14 days, under antibiotic prophylaxis. The primary outcome was improvement in oxygenation at day 6 and 15. RESULTS: 81 patients were randomly assigned to zilucoplan (n = 55) or the control group (n = 26). 78 patients were included in the safety and primary analysis. Most were men (87%) and the median age was 63 years. The mean improvement in PaO2/FiO2 from baseline to day 6 was 56.4 mmHg in the zilucoplan group and 20.6 mmHg in the control group (mean difference + 35.8; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 9.4 to 80.9; p = 0.12), an effect also observed at day 15. Day 28 mortality was 9% in the zilucoplan and 21% in the control group (odds ratio 0.4; 95% CI 0.1 to 1.5). At long-term follow up, the distance walked in a 6-min test was 539.7 m in zilucoplan and 490.6 m in the control group (p = 0.18). Zilucoplan lowered serum C5b-9 (p < 0.001) and interleukin-8 (p = 0.03) concentration compared with control. No relevant safety differences between the zilucoplan and control group were identified. CONCLUSION: Administration of zilucoplan to COVID-19 patients in this proof-of-concept randomized trial was well tolerated under antibiotic prophylaxis. While not reaching statistical significance, indicators of respiratory function (PaO2/FiO2) and clinical outcome (mortality and 6-min walk test) suggest that C5 inhibition might be beneficial, although this requires further research in larger randomized studies.


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Complement C5 , Complement Inactivating Agents/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Peptides, Cyclic , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
2.
Pulm Med ; 2020: 9012187, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1004221

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is currently not recommended in noncritically ill patients for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Indeed, the diagnosis is based on the RT-PCR test on a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and abnormal findings on the chest CT scan. However, the sensitivity of the NPS and the specificity of the chest CT scan are low. Results of BAL in case of negative NPS testing are underreported, especially in the subgroup of immunocompromised patients. OBJECTIVES: The added value of BAL in the management of unstable, but noncritically ill patients, suspected of having SARS-CoV-2 infection despite one previous negative NPS and the side effects of the procedure for the patients and the health-care providers, were assessed during the epidemic peak of the COVID-19 outbreak in Belgium. METHODS: This multicentric study included all consecutive noncritically ill patients hospitalized with a clinical and radiological suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection but with a negative NPS. BAL was performed according to a predefined decisional algorithm based on their state of immunocompetence, the chest CT scan features, and their respiratory status. RESULTS: Among the 55 patients included in the study, 14 patients were diagnosed with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Interestingly, there was a relationship between the cycle threshold of the RT-PCR and the interval of time between the symptom onset and the BAL procedure (Pearson's correlation coefficient = 0.8, p = 0.0004). Therapeutic management was changed in 33 patients because another infectious agent was identified in 23 patients or because an alternative diagnosis was made in 10 patients. In immunocompromised patients, the impact of BAL was even more marked (change in therapy for 13/17 patients). No significant adverse event was noted for patients or health-care staff. All health-care workers remained negative for SARS-CoV-2 NPS and serology at the end of the study. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-life study, BAL can be performed safely in selected noncritically ill patients suspected of SARS-CoV-2 infection, providing significant clinical benefits that outweigh the risks.


Subject(s)
Bronchoalveolar Lavage , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Algorithms , Belgium , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL