A comparison of the effectiveness of different doses of tocilizumab and sarilumab in the treatment of severe COVID-19: a natural experiment due to drug shortages

Objectives IL-6 inhibitors are administered to treat hospitalized COVID-19 patients. In 2021, due to shortages, different dosing regimens of tocilizumab, and a switch to sarilumab, were consecutively implemented. Using real world data, we compare the effectiveness of these IL-6 inhibitors. Methods Hospitalized COVID-19 patients, treated with IL-6 inhibitors, were included in this natural-experiment study. Sixty-day survival, hospital- and ICU length of stay and progression to ICU or death were compared between 8 mg/kg tocilizumab, fixed dose tocilizumab, low dose tocilizumab and fixed dose sarilumab treatment groups. Results 5485 patients from 49 hospitals were included. After correction for confounding, increased hazard ratios for 60-day mortality were observed for fixed dose tocilizumab (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.04-1.39), low dose tocilizumab (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.97-1.31) and sarilumab (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.08-1.42), all relative to 8 mg/kg. The 8 mg/kg dosing regimen had lower odds for progression to ICU or death. Both hospital- and ICU length of stay were shorter for low dose tocilizumab than for the 8 mg/kg group. Conclusions We found differences in the probability of 60-day survival and the incidence of the combined outcome of mortality or ICU admission, mostly favoring 8 mg/kg tocilizumab. Because of potential time associated residual confounding, further clinical studies are warranted.

A comparison of the effectiveness of different doses of tocilizumab and sarilumab in the treatment of severe COVID-19: a natural experiment due to drug shortages.

OBJECTIVES: Interleukin (IL)-6 inhibitors are administered to treat patients hospitalized with COVID-19. In 2021, due to shortages, different dosing regimens of tocilizumab, and a switch to sarilumab, were consecutively implemented. Using real-world data, we compare the effectiveness of these IL-6 inhibitors. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19, treated with IL-6 inhibitors, were included in this natural experiment study. Sixty-day survival, hospital- and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and progression to ICU or death were compared between 8 mg/kg tocilizumab, fixed-dose tocilizumab, low-dose tocilizumab, and fixed-dose sarilumab treatment groups. RESULTS: A total of 5485 patients from 49 hospitals were included. After correction for confounding, increased hazard ratios (HRs) for 60-day mortality were observed for fixed-dose tocilizumab (HR 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.39), low-dose tocilizumab (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.97-1.31), and sarilumab (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.08-1.42), all relative to 8 mg/kg. The 8 mg/kg dosing regimen had lower odds of progression to ICU or death. Both hospital- and ICU length of stay were shorter for low-dose tocilizumab than for the 8 mg/kg group. CONCLUSION: We found differences in the probability of 60-day survival and the incidence of the combined outcome of mortality or ICU admission, mostly favoring 8 mg/kg tocilizumab. Because of potential time-associated residual confounding, further clinical studies are warranted.

Real-world Evidence of the Effects of Novel Treatments for COVID-19 on Mortality: A Nationwide Comparative Cohort Study of Hospitalized Patients in the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Waves in the Netherlands.

Background: Large clinical trials on drugs for hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have shown significant effects on mortality. There may be a discrepancy with the observed real-world effect. We describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands during 4 pandemic waves and analyze the association of the newly introduced treatments with mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and discharge alive. Methods: We conducted a nationwide retrospective analysis of hospitalized COVID-19 patients between February 27, 2020, and December 31, 2021. Patients were categorized into waves and into treatment groups (hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, neutralizing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 monoclonal antibodies, corticosteroids, and interleukin [IL]-6 antagonists). Four types of Cox regression analyses were used: unadjusted, adjusted, propensity matched, and propensity weighted. Results: Among 5643 patients from 11 hospitals, we observed a changing epidemiology during 4 pandemic waves, with a decrease in median age (67-64 years; P < .001), in in-hospital mortality on the ward (21%-15%; P < .001), and a trend in the ICU (24%-16%; P = .148). In ward patients, hydroxychloroquine was associated with increased mortality (1.54; 95% CI, 1.22-1.96), and remdesivir was associated with a higher rate of discharge alive within 29 days (1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.31). Corticosteroids were associated with a decrease in mortality (0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.96); the results of IL-6 antagonists were inconclusive. In patients directly admitted to the ICU, hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids, and IL-6 antagonists were not associated with decreased mortality. Conclusions: Both remdesivir and corticosteroids were associated with better outcomes in ward patients with COVID-19. Continuous evaluation of real-world treatment effects is needed.

Development and validation of an early warning model for hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a multi-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Timely identification of deteriorating COVID-19 patients is needed to guide changes in clinical management and admission to intensive care units (ICUs). There is significant concern that widely used Early warning scores (EWSs) underestimate illness severity in COVID-19 patients and therefore, we developed an early warning model specifically for COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We retrospectively collected electronic medical record data to extract predictors and used these to fit a random forest model. To simulate the situation in which the model would have been developed after the first and implemented during the second COVID-19 'wave' in the Netherlands, we performed a temporal validation by splitting all included patients into groups admitted before and after August 1, 2020. Furthermore, we propose a method for dynamic model updating to retain model performance over time. We evaluated model discrimination and calibration, performed a decision curve analysis, and quantified the importance of predictors using SHapley Additive exPlanations values. RESULTS: We included 3514 COVID-19 patient admissions from six Dutch hospitals between February 2020 and May 2021, and included a total of 18 predictors for model fitting. The model showed a higher discriminative performance in terms of partial area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.82 [0.80-0.84]) compared to the National early warning score (0.72 [0.69-0.74]) and the Modified early warning score (0.67 [0.65-0.69]), a greater net benefit over a range of clinically relevant model thresholds, and relatively good calibration (intercept = 0.03 [- 0.09 to 0.14], slope = 0.79 [0.73-0.86]). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows the potential benefit of moving from early warning models for the general inpatient population to models for specific patient groups. Further (independent) validation of the model is needed.

Characteristics and outcomes of older patients hospitalised for COVID-19 in the first and second wave of the pandemic in The Netherlands: the COVID-OLD study.

BACKGROUND: as the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic progressed diagnostics and treatment changed. OBJECTIVE: to investigate differences in characteristics, disease presentation and outcomes of older hospitalised COVID-19 patients between the first and second pandemic wave in The Netherlands. METHODS: this was a multicentre retrospective cohort study in 16 hospitals in The Netherlands including patients aged ≥ 70 years, hospitalised for COVID-19 in Spring 2020 (first wave) and Autumn 2020 (second wave). Data included Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), disease severity and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Main outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: a total of 1,376 patients in the first wave (median age 78 years, 60% male) and 946 patients in the second wave (median age 79 years, 61% male) were included. There was no relevant difference in presence of comorbidity (median CCI 2) or frailty (median CFS 4). Patients in the second wave were admitted earlier in the disease course (median 6 versus 7 symptomatic days; P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was lower in the second wave (38.1% first wave versus 27.0% second wave; P < 0.001). Mortality risk was 40% lower in the second wave compared with the first wave (95% confidence interval: 28-51%) after adjustment for differences in patient characteristics, comorbidity, symptomatic days until admission, disease severity and frailty. CONCLUSIONS: compared with older patients hospitalised in the first COVID-19 wave, patients in the second wave had lower in-hospital mortality, independent of risk factors for mortality.The better prognosis likely reflects earlier diagnosis, the effect of improvement in treatment and is relevant for future guidelines and treatment decisions.

Towards Fixed Dosing of Tocilizumab in ICU-Admitted COVID-19 Patients: Results of an Observational Population Pharmacokinetic and Descriptive Pharmacodynamic Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In the randomized controlled trial REMAP-CAP, it was shown that next to dexamethasone, the interleukin (IL)-6 receptor antagonist tocilizumab improves outcome, including survival in intensive care unit (ICU)-admitted coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID)-19 patients. Therefore tocilizumab has been added to many COVID-19 treatment guidelines. Because obesity is a risk factor for the development of severe COVID-19, concerns have been raised about overtreatment, as well as undertreatment, through weight-based dosing of tocilizumab. The currently applied dose of 8 mg/kg is based on the use of this drug for other indications, however it has not formally been investigated for COVID-19. In this study, the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of tocilizumab were investigated in ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This was an open-label, single-centre, observational population pharmacokinetic and descriptive pharmacodynamic evaluation study. Enrolled patients, with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 were admitted to the ICU for mechanical ventilation or high flow nasal canula oxygen support. All patients were 18 years of age or older and received intravenous tocilizumab 8 mg/kg (maximum 800 mg) within 24 h after admission to the ICU and received dexamethasone 6 mg daily as concomitant therapy. For evaluation of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of tocilizumab, all time points from day 0 to 20 days after dose administration were eligible for collection. A nonlinear mixed-effects model was developed to characterize the population pharmacokinetic parameters of tocilizumab in ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients. Covariate analysis was performed to identify potential covariates for dose individualization. For the development of alternative dosing schedules, Monte Carlo simulations using the final model were performed. RESULTS: Overall, 29 patients were enrolled between 15 December 2020 and 15 March 2021. A total of 139 tocilizumab plasma samples were obtained covering the pharmacokinetic curve of day 0 to day 20 after tocilizumab initiation. A population pharmacokinetic model with parallel linear and nonlinear clearance (CL) was developed and validated. Average CL was estimated to be 0.725 L/day, average volume of distribution (Vd) was 4.34 L, maximum elimination rate (Vmax) was 4.19 µg/day, and concentration at which the elimination pathway is half saturated (Km) was 0.22 µg/mL. Interindividual variability was identified for CL (18.9%) and Vd (21%). Average area under the concentration versus time curve from time zero to infinity of the first dose (AUCinf 1st DOSE) was 938 [±190] µg/mL*days. All patients had tocilizumab exposure above 1 µg/mL for at least 15 days. Bodyweight-based dosing increases variability in exposure compared with fixed dosing. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence to support a fixed dose of tocilizumab 600 mg in COVID-19 patients. Fixed dosing is a safe, logistically attractive, and drug expenses saving alternative compared with the current 8 mg/kg recommendation.

Liver and kidney function in patients with Covid-19 treated with remdesivir.

For the treatment of Covid-19 patients with remdesivir, poor renal and liver function were both exclusion criteria in randomized clinical trials and contraindication for treatment. Also, nephrotoxicity and hepatotoxicity are reported as adverse events. We retrospectively reviewed renal and liver functions of Covid-19 103 patients who received remdesivir in the 15 days after treatment initiation. Approximately 20% of the patient population met randomized clinical trial exclusion criteria. In total, 11% of the patients had a decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate >10 mL/min/1.73m2 . Also, 25 and 35% had increased alanine transaminase and aspartate transaminase levels, respectively. However, serious adverse events were limited. Therefore, based on these preliminary results, contraindications based on kidney and liver function should not be absolute for remdesivir treatment in patients with Covid-19 if these functions are monitored regularly. A larger patient cohort is warranted to confirm our results.

Systematic screening for COVID-19 associated invasive aspergillosis in ICU patients by culture and PCR on tracheal aspirate.

BACKGROUND: A high prevalence of COVID-19 associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) has been reported, though histopathological evidence is frequently lacking. To assess the clinical significance of Aspergillus species in respiratory samples of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, we implemented routine screening for Aspergillus in tracheal aspirate (TA). PATIENTS/METHODS: From all adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), TA samples were collected twice a week for Aspergillus screening by PCR and or culture. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) sampling was performed in patients with a positive screening result if possible. Clinical information was obtained from the electronic patient record and patients were categorised according to the recently published consensus case definition for CAPA. RESULTS: Our study population consisted of 63 predominantly (73%) male patients, with a median age of 62 years and total median ICU stay of 18 days. Aspergillus species were present in TA screening samples from 15 patients (24%), and probable CAPA was diagnosed in 11 (17%) patients. Triazole resistance was detected in one patient (14%). Concordance between TA and BAL was 86%, and all TA culture positives were confirmed in BAL. We were able to withhold treatment in three of fifteen patients with positive screening (20%) but negative BAL results. CONCLUSIONS: Positive culture, molecular detection and or antigen detection of Aspergillus species do not equal infection. Until we understand the clinical relevance of Aspergillus species detected in respiratory samples of COVID-19 patients, minimal-invasive screening by TA is a feasible method to monitor patients. Positive screening results should be an indication to perform a BAL to rule out upper airway colonisation.

Why crowding matters in the time of COVID-19 pandemic? - a lesson from the carnival effect on the 2017/2018 influenza epidemic in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the association between crowding and transmission of viral respiratory infectious diseases, we investigated the change in transmission patterns of influenza and COVID-19 before and after a mass gathering event (i.e., carnival) in the Netherlands. METHODS: Information on individual hospitalizations related to the 2017/2018 influenza epidemic were accessed from Statistics Netherlands. The influenza cases were stratified between non-carnival and carnival regions. Distributions of influenza cases were plotted with time and compared between regions. A similar investigation in the early outbreak of COVID-19 was also conducted using open data from the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics between non-carnival and carnival regions were broadly similar. There were 13,836 influenza-related hospitalizations in the 2017/2018 influenza epidemic, and carnival fell about 1 week before the peak of these hospitalizations. The distributions of new influenza-related hospitalizations per 100,000 inhabitants with time between regions followed the same pattern with a surge of new cases in the carnival region about 1 week after carnival, which did not occur in the non-carnival region. The increase of new cases for COVID-19 in the carnival region exceeded that in the non-carnival region about 1 week after the first case was reported, but these results warrant caution as for COVID-19 there were no cases reported before the carnival and social measures were introduced shortly after carnival. CONCLUSION: In this study, a mass gathering event (carnival) was associated with aggravating the spread of viral respiratory infectious diseases.

Recommendations for antibacterial therapy in adults with COVID-19 - an evidence based guideline.

SCOPE: The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy constituted a multidisciplinary expert committee to provide evidence-based recommendation for the use of antibacterial therapy in hospitalized adults with a respiratory infection and suspected or proven 2019 Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). METHODS: We performed a literature search to answer four key questions. The committee graded the evidence and developed recommendations by using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. QUESTIONS ADDRESSED BY THE GUIDELINE AND RECOMMENDATIONS: We assessed evidence on the risk of bacterial infections in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the associated bacterial pathogens, how to diagnose bacterial infections and how to treat bacterial infections. Bacterial co-infection upon admission was reported in 3.5% of COVID-19 patients, while bacterial secondary infections during hospitalization occurred up to 15%. No or very low quality evidence was found to answer the other key clinical questions. Although the evidence base on bacterial infections in COVID-19 is currently limited, available evidence supports restrictive antibiotic use from an antibiotic stewardship perspective, especially upon admission. To support restrictive antibiotic use, maximum efforts should be undertaken to obtain sputum and blood culture samples as well as pneumococcal urinary antigen testing. We suggest to stop antibiotics in patients who started antibiotic treatment upon admission when representative cultures as well as urinary antigen tests show no signs of involvement of bacterial pathogens after 48 hours. For patients with secondary bacterial respiratory infection we recommend to follow other guideline recommendations on antibacterial treatment for patients with hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia. An antibiotic treatment duration of five days in patients with COVID-19 and suspected bacterial respiratory infection is recommended upon improvement of signs, symptoms and inflammatory markers. Larger, prospective studies about the epidemiology of bacterial infections in COVID-19 are urgently needed to confirm our conclusions and ultimately prevent unnecessary antibiotic use during the COVID-19 pandemic.