Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 12(6): e060664, 2022 06 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1879135

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic brought an urgent need to discover novel effective therapeutics for patients hospitalised with severe COVID-19. The Investigation of Serial studies to Predict Your Therapeutic Response with Imaging And moLecular Analysis (ISPY COVID-19 trial) was designed and implemented in early 2020 to evaluate investigational agents rapidly and simultaneously on a phase 2 adaptive platform. This manuscript outlines the design, rationale, implementation and challenges of the ISPY COVID-19 trial during the first phase of trial activity from April 2020 until December 2021. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The ISPY COVID-19 Trial is a multicentre open-label phase 2 platform trial in the USA designed to evaluate therapeutics that may have a large effect on improving outcomes from severe COVID-19. The ISPY COVID-19 Trial network includes academic and community hospitals with significant geographical diversity across the country. Enrolled patients are randomised to receive one of up to four investigational agents or a control and are evaluated for a family of two primary outcomes-time to recovery and mortality. The statistical design uses a Bayesian model with 'stopping' and 'graduation' criteria designed to efficiently discard ineffective therapies and graduate promising agents for definitive efficacy trials. Each investigational agent arm enrols to a maximum of 125 patients per arm and is compared with concurrent controls. As of December 2021, 11 investigational agent arms had been activated, and 8 arms were complete. Enrolment and adaptation of the trial design are ongoing. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: ISPY COVID-19 operates under a central institutional review board via Wake Forest School of Medicine IRB00066805. Data generated from this trial will be reported in peer-reviewed medical journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04488081.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Respiratory Insufficiency , Bayes Theorem , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
2.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 2022 May 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1846615

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: Uncertainty regarding the natural history of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) led to difficulty in efficacy endpoint selection for therapeutic trials. Capturing outcomes that occur after hospital discharge may improve assessment of clinical recovery among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate 90-day clinical course of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 comparing three distinct definitions of recovery. METHODS: We used pooled data from three clinical trials of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies to compare: 1) the hospital discharge approach 2) the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 (TICO) trials "sustained recovery" approach, and 3) a comprehensive approach. At the time of enrollment, all patients were hospitalized in a non-intensive care unit setting without organ failure or major extrapulmonary manifestations of COVID-19. We defined discordance as a difference between time to recovery. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Discordance between the hospital discharge and comprehensive approaches occurred in 170 (20%) of 850 enrolled participants, including 126 hospital readmissions and 24 deaths after initial hospital discharge. Discordant participants were older (median age 68 vs. 59 years; p<0.001) and more had a comorbidity (84% vs. 70%; p<0.001). Of 170 discordant participants, 106 (62%) had post-discharge events captured by the TICO approach. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 20% had clinically significant post-discharge events within 90 days after randomization, in patients that would be considered "recovered" using the hospital discharge approach. Employing the TICO approach balances length of follow-up with practical limitations. However, clinical trials of COVID-19 therapeutics should employ follow-up times up to 90 days to assess clinical recovery more accurately.

3.
Lancet Respir Med ; 10(1): 107-120, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1591647

ABSTRACT

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome. Understanding of the complex pathways involved in lung injury pathogenesis, resolution, and repair has grown considerably in recent decades. Nevertheless, to date, only therapies targeting ventilation-induced lung injury have consistently proven beneficial, and despite these gains, ARDS morbidity and mortality remain high. Many candidate therapies with promise in preclinical studies have been ineffective in human trials, probably at least in part due to clinical and biological heterogeneity that modifies treatment responsiveness in human ARDS. A precision medicine approach to ARDS seeks to better account for this heterogeneity by matching therapies to subgroups of patients that are anticipated to be most likely to benefit, which initially might be identified in part by assessing for heterogeneity of treatment effect in clinical trials. In October 2019, the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a workshop of multidisciplinary experts to explore research opportunities and challenges for accelerating precision medicine in ARDS. Topics of discussion included the rationale and challenges for a precision medicine approach in ARDS, the roles of preclinical ARDS models in precision medicine, essential features of cohort studies to advance precision medicine, and novel approaches to clinical trials to support development and validation of a precision medicine strategy. In this Position Paper, we summarise workshop discussions, recommendations, and unresolved questions for advancing precision medicine in ARDS. Although the workshop took place before the COVID-19 pandemic began, the pandemic has highlighted the urgent need for precision therapies for ARDS as the global scientific community grapples with many of the key concepts, innovations, and challenges discussed at this workshop.


Subject(s)
Precision Medicine , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , COVID-19 , Humans , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy
4.
Crit Care Med ; 49(11): 1963-1973, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1467431

ABSTRACT

Given the urgent need for coronavirus disease 2019 therapeutics, early in the pandemic the Accelerating Coronavirus Disease 2019 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) public-private partnership rapidly designed a unique therapeutic agent intake and assessment process for candidate treatments of coronavirus disease 2019. These treatments included antivirals, immune modulators, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 neutralizing antibodies, and organ-supportive treatments at both the preclinical and clinical stages of development. The ACTIV Therapeutics-Clinical Working Group Agent Prioritization subgroup established a uniform data collection process required to perform an assessment of any agent type using review criteria that were identified and differentially weighted for each agent class. The ACTIV Therapeutics-Clinical Working Group evaluated over 750 therapeutic agents with potential application for coronavirus disease 2019 and prioritized promising candidates for testing within the master protocols conducted by ACTIV. In addition, promising agents among preclinical candidates were selected by ACTIV to be matched with laboratories that could assist in executing rigorous preclinical studies. Between April 14, 2020, and May 31, 2021, the Agent Prioritization subgroup advanced 20 agents into the Accelerating Coronavirus Disease 2019 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines master protocols and matched 25 agents with laboratories to assist with preclinical testing.


Subject(s)
Antibodies/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/drug therapy , Drug Development/organization & administration , Drug Discovery/organization & administration , Humans , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Pandemics , Public-Private Sector Partnerships , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
5.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 17(9): 1144-1153, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-781684

ABSTRACT

The ORCHID (Outcomes Related to COVID-19 treated with Hydroxychloroquine among In-patients with symptomatic Disease) trial is a multicenter, blinded, randomized trial of hydroxychloroquine versus placebo for the treatment of adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This document provides the rationale and background for the trial and highlights key design features. We discuss five novel challenges to the design and conduct of a large, multicenter, randomized trial during a pandemic, including 1) widespread, off-label use of the study drug before the availability of safety and efficacy data; 2) the need to adapt traditional procedures for documentation of informed consent during an infectious pandemic; 3) developing a flexible and robust Bayesian analysis incorporating significant uncertainty about the disease, outcomes, and treatment; 4) obtaining indistinguishable drug and placebo without delaying enrollment; and 5) rapidly obtaining administrative and regulatory approvals. Our goals in describing how the ORCHID trial progressed from study conception to enrollment of the first patient in 15 days are to inform the development of other high-quality, multicenter trials targeting COVID-19. We describe lessons learned to improve the efficiency of future clinical trials, particularly in the setting of pandemics. The ORCHID trial will provide high-quality, clinically relevant data on the safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 among hospitalized adults.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04332991).


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/administration & dosage , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adult , Antimalarials/administration & dosage , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Hospitalization/trends , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Single-Blind Method , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL