Teclistamab in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Teclistamab is a T-cell-redirecting bispecific antibody that targets both CD3 expressed on the surface of T cells and B-cell maturation antigen expressed on the surface of myeloma cells. In the phase 1 dose-defining portion of the study, teclistamab showed promising efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this phase 1-2 study, we enrolled patients who had relapsed or refractory myeloma after at least three therapy lines, including triple-class exposure to an immunomodulatory drug, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 antibody. Patients received a weekly subcutaneous injection of teclistamab (at a dose of 1.5 mg per kilogram of body weight) after receiving step-up doses of 0.06 mg and 0.3 mg per kilogram. The primary end point was the overall response (partial response or better). RESULTS: Among 165 patients who received teclistamab, 77.6% had triple-class refractory disease (median, five previous therapy lines). With a median follow-up of 14.1 months, the overall response rate was 63.0%, with 65 patients (39.4%) having a complete response or better. A total of 44 patients (26.7%) were found to have no minimal residual disease (MRD); the MRD-negativity rate among the patients with a complete response or better was 46%. The median duration of response was 18.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.9 to not estimable). The median duration of progression-free survival was 11.3 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 17.1). Common adverse events included cytokine release syndrome (in 72.1% of the patients; grade 3, 0.6%; no grade 4), neutropenia (in 70.9%; grade 3 or 4, 64.2%), anemia (in 52.1%; grade 3 or 4, 37.0%), and thrombocytopenia (in 40.0%; grade 3 or 4, 21.2%). Infections were frequent (in 76.4%; grade 3 or 4, 44.8%). Neurotoxic events occurred in 24 patients (14.5%), including immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome in 5 patients (3.0%; all grade 1 or 2). CONCLUSIONS: Teclistamab resulted in a high rate of deep and durable response in patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Cytopenias and infections were common; toxic effects that were consistent with T-cell redirection were mostly grade 1 or 2. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MajesTEC-1 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03145181 and NCT04557098.).

Case report: Variant-specific pre-exposure prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in multiple sclerosis patients lacking vaccination responses.

Sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators and anti-CD20 treatment are widely used disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis. Unfortunately, they may impair the patient's ability to mount sufficient humoral and T-cellular responses to vaccination, which is of special relevance in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We present here a case series of six multiple sclerosis patients on treatment with sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators who failed to develop SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies and T-cells after three doses of vaccination. Due to their ongoing immunotherapy, lacking vaccination response, and additional risk factors, we offered them pre-exposure prophylactic treatment with monoclonal SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies. Initially, treatment was conducted with the antibody cocktail casirivimab/imdevimab. When the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant became predominant, we switched treatment to monoclonal antibody sotrovimab due to its sustained neutralizing ability also against the Omicron strain. Since sotrovimab was approved only for the treatment of COVID-19 infection and not for pre-exposure prophylaxis, we switched treatment to tixagevimab/cilgavimab as soon as it was granted marketing authorization in the European Union. This antibody cocktail has retained, albeit reduced, neutralizing activity against the Omicron variant and is approved for pre-exposure prophylaxis. No severe adverse events were recorded for our patients. One patient had a positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 under treatment with sotrovimab, but was asymptomatic. The other five patients did not develop symptoms of an upper respiratory tract infection or evidence of a SARS-CoV-2 infection during the time of treatment up until the finalization of this report. SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibody treatment should be considered individually for multiple sclerosis patients lacking adequate vaccination responses on account of their immunomodulatory treatment, especially in times of high incidences of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Effect of Sotrovimab on Hospitalization or Death Among High-risk Patients With Mild to Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Older patients and those with comorbidities who are infected with SARS-CoV-2 may be at increased risk of hospitalization and death. Sotrovimab is a neutralizing antibody for the treatment of high-risk patients to prevent COVID-19 progression. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of sotrovimab in preventing progression of mild to moderate COVID-19 to severe disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial including 1057 nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic, mild to moderate COVID-19 and at least 1 risk factor for progression conducted at 57 sites in Brazil, Canada, Peru, Spain, and the US from August 27, 2020, through March 11, 2021; follow-up data were collected through April 8, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1) to an intravenous infusion with 500 mg of sotrovimab (n = 528) or placebo (n = 529). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with COVID-19 progression through day 29 (all-cause hospitalization lasting >24 hours for acute illness management or death); 5 secondary outcomes were tested in hierarchal order, including a composite of all-cause emergency department (ED) visit, hospitalization of any duration for acute illness management, or death through day 29 and progression to severe or critical respiratory COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen or mechanical ventilation. Results: Enrollment was stopped early for efficacy at the prespecified interim analysis. Among 1057 patients randomized (median age, 53 years [IQR, 42-62], 20% were ≥65 years of age, and 65% Latinx), the median duration of follow-up was 103 days for sotrovimab and 102 days for placebo. All-cause hospitalization lasting longer than 24 hours or death was significantly reduced with sotrovimab (6/528 [1%]) vs placebo (30/529 [6%]) (adjusted relative risk [RR], 0.21 [95% CI, 0.09 to 0.50]; absolute difference, -4.53% [95% CI, -6.70% to -2.37%]; P < .001). Four of the 5 secondary outcomes were statistically significant in favor of sotrovimab, including reduced ED visit, hospitalization, or death (13/528 [2%] for sotrovimab vs 39/529 [7%] for placebo; adjusted RR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.19 to 0.63]; absolute difference, -4.91% [95% CI, -7.50% to -2.32%]; P < .001) and progression to severe or critical respiratory COVID-19 (7/528 [1%] for sotrovimab vs 28/529 [5%] for placebo; adjusted RR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.59]; absolute difference, -3.97% [95% CI, -6.11% to -1.82%]; P = .002). Adverse events were infrequent and similar between treatment groups (22% for sotrovimab vs 23% for placebo); the most common events were diarrhea with sotrovimab (n = 8; 2%) and COVID-19 pneumonia with placebo (n = 22; 4%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among nonhospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 and at risk of disease progression, a single intravenous dose of sotrovimab, compared with placebo, significantly reduced the risk of a composite end point of all-cause hospitalization or death through day 29. The findings support sotrovimab as a treatment option for nonhospitalized, high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, although efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 variants that have emerged since the study was completed is unknown. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04545060.

Nirsevimab for Prevention of RSV in Healthy Late-Preterm and Term Infants.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a major cause of lower respiratory tract infection and hospitalization in infants. Nirsevimab is a monoclonal antibody to the RSV fusion protein that has an extended half-life. The efficacy and safety of nirsevimab in healthy late-preterm and term infants are uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, infants who had been born at a gestational age of at least 35 weeks to receive a single intramuscular injection of nirsevimab or placebo before the start of an RSV season. The primary efficacy end point was medically attended RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection through 150 days after the injection. The secondary efficacy end point was hospitalization for RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection through 150 days after the injection. RESULTS: A total of 1490 infants underwent randomization: 994 were assigned to the nirsevimab group and 496 to the placebo group. Medically attended RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection occurred in 12 infants (1.2%) in the nirsevimab group and in 25 infants (5.0%) in the placebo group; these findings correspond to an efficacy of 74.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.6 to 87.1; P<0.001) for nirsevimab. Hospitalization for RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection occurred in 6 infants (0.6%) in the nirsevimab group and in 8 infants (1.6%) in the placebo group (efficacy, 62.1%; 95% CI, -8.6 to 86.8; P = 0.07). Among infants with data available to day 361, antidrug antibodies after baseline were detected in 58 of 951 (6.1%) in the nirsevimab group and in 5 of 473 (1.1%) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events were reported in 67 of 987 infants (6.8%) who received nirsevimab and in 36 of 491 infants (7.3%) who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: A single injection of nirsevimab administered before the RSV season protected healthy late-preterm and term infants from medically attended RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by MedImmune/AstraZeneca and Sanofi; MELODY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03979313.).

Prognostic factors and combined use of tocilizumab and corticosteroids in a Spanish cohort of elderly COVID-19 patients.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection in elderly patients is more aggressive and treatments have shown limited efficacy. Our objective is to describe the clinical course and to analyze the prognostic factors associated with a higher risk of mortality of a cohort of patients older than 80 years. In addition, we assess the efficacy of immunosuppressive treatments in this population. We analyzed the data from 163 patients older than 80 years admitted to our institution for COVID-19, during March and April 2020. A Lasso regression model and subsequent multivariate Cox regression were performed to select variables predictive of death. We evaluated the efficacy of immunomodulatory therapy in three cohorts using adjusted survival analysis. The mortality rate was 43%. The mean age was 85.2 years. The disease was considered severe in 76.1% of the cases. Lasso regression and multivariate Cox regression indicated that factors correlated with hospital mortality were: age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.22), alcohol consumption (HR 3.15, 95% CI: 1.27-7.84), CRP > 10 mg/dL (HR 2.67, 95% CI: 1.36-5.24), and oxygen support with Venturi Mask (HR 6.37, 95% CI: 2.18-18.62) or reservoir (HR 7.87, 95% CI: 3.37-18.38). Previous treatment with antiplatelets was the only protective factor (HR 0.47, 95% CI: 0.23-0.96). In the adjusted treatment efficacy analysis, we found benefit in the combined use of tocilizumab (TCZ) and corticosteroids (CS) (HR 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01-0.74) compared to standard treatment, with no benefit of CS alone (HR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.53-1.71). Hospitalized elderly patients suffer from a severe and often fatal form of COVID-19 disease. In this regard, several parameters might identify high-risk patients upon admission. Combined use of TCZ and CS could improve survival.

Tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of tocilizumab in adult patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with both hypoxia and systemic inflammation. METHODS: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. Those trial participants with hypoxia (oxygen saturation <92% on air or requiring oxygen therapy) and evidence of systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein ≥75 mg/L) were eligible for random assignment in a 1:1 ratio to usual standard of care alone versus usual standard of care plus tocilizumab at a dose of 400 mg-800 mg (depending on weight) given intravenously. A second dose could be given 12-24 h later if the patient's condition had not improved. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04381936). FINDINGS: Between April 23, 2020, and Jan 24, 2021, 4116 adults of 21 550 patients enrolled into the RECOVERY trial were included in the assessment of tocilizumab, including 3385 (82%) patients receiving systemic corticosteroids. Overall, 621 (31%) of the 2022 patients allocated tocilizumab and 729 (35%) of the 2094 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·85; 95% CI 0·76-0·94; p=0·0028). Consistent results were seen in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including those receiving systemic corticosteroids. Patients allocated to tocilizumab were more likely to be discharged from hospital within 28 days (57% vs 50%; rate ratio 1·22; 1·12-1·33; p<0·0001). Among those not receiving invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, patients allocated tocilizumab were less likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (35% vs 42%; risk ratio 0·84; 95% CI 0·77-0·92; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: In hospitalised COVID-19 patients with hypoxia and systemic inflammation, tocilizumab improved survival and other clinical outcomes. These benefits were seen regardless of the amount of respiratory support and were additional to the benefits of systemic corticosteroids. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research.

Eculizumab in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring continuous positive airway pressure ventilator support: Retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Complement activation contributes to lung dysfunction in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We assessed whether C5 blockade with eculizumab could improve disease outcome. METHODS: In this single-centre, academic, unblinded study two 900 mg eculizumab doses were added-on standard therapy in ten COVID-19 patients admitted from February 2020 to April 2020 and receiving Continuous-Positive-Airway-Pressure (CPAP) ventilator support from ≤24 hours. We compared their outcomes with those of 65 contemporary similar controls. Primary outcome was respiratory rate at one week of ventilator support. Secondary outcomes included the combined endpoint of mortality and discharge with chronic complications. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of eculizumab-treated patients and controls were similar. At baseline, sC5b-9 levels, ex vivo C5b-9 and thrombi deposition were increased. Ex vivo tests normalised in eculizumab-treated patients, but not in controls. In eculizumab-treated patients respiratory rate decreased from 26.8±7.3 breaths/min at baseline to 20.3±3.8 and 18.0±4.8 breaths/min at one and two weeks, respectively (p<0.05 for both), but did not change in controls. Between-group changes differed significantly at both time-points (p<0.01). Changes in respiratory rate correlated with concomitant changes in ex vivo C5b-9 deposits at one (rs = 0.706, p = 0.010) and two (rs = 0.751, p = 0.032) weeks. Over a median (IQR) period of 47.0 (14.0-121.0) days, four eculizumab-treated patients died or had chronic complications versus 52 controls [HRCrude (95% CI): 0.26 (0.09-0.72), p = 0.010]. Between-group difference was significant even after adjustment for age, sex and baseline serum creatinine [HRAdjusted (95% CI): 0.30 (0.10-0.84), p = 0.023]. Six patients and 13 controls were discharged without complications [HRCrude (95% CI): 2.88 (1.08-7.70), p = 0.035]. Eculizumab was tolerated well. The main study limitations were the relatively small sample size and the non-randomised design. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe COVID-19, eculizumab safely improved respiratory dysfunction and decreased the combined endpoint of mortality and discharge with chronic complications. Findings need confirmation in randomised controlled trials.

Tocilizumab improves 28-day survival in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19: an open label, prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Data on the safety and efficacy profile of tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19 needs to be enriched. METHODS: In this open label, prospective study, we evaluated clinical outcomes in consecutive patients with COVID-19 and PaO2/FiO2 < 200 receiving tocilizumab plus usual care versus usual care alone. Tocilizumab was administered at the time point that PaO2/FiO2 < 200 was observed. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included time to discharge, change in PaO2/FiO2 at day 5 and change in WHO progression scale at day 10. FINDINGS: Overall, 114 patients were included in the analysis (tocilizumab plus usual care: 56, usual care: 58). Allocation to usual care was associated with significant increase in 28-day mortality compared to tocilizumab plus usual care [Cox proportional-hazards model: HR: 3.34, (95% CI: 1.21-9.30), (p = 0.02)]. There was not a statistically significant difference with regards to hospital discharge over the 28 day period for patients receiving tocilizumab compared to usual care [11.0 days (95% CI: 9.0 to 16.0) vs 14.0 days (95% CI: 10.0-24.0), HR: 1.32 (95% CI: 0.84-2.08), p = 0.21]. ΔPaO2/FiO2 at day 5 was significantly higher in the tocilizumab group compared to the usual care group [42.0 (95% CI: 23.0-84.7) vs 15.8 (95% CI: - 19.4-50.3), p = 0.03]. ΔWHO scale at day 10 was significantly lower in the tocilizumab group compared to the usual care group (-0.5 ± 2.1 vs 0.6 ± 2.6, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Administration of tocilizumab, at the time point that PaO2/FiO2 < 200 was observed, improved survival and other clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 irrespective of systemic inflammatory markers levels.

A retrospective evaluation of COVID-19 patients treated with Tocilizumab: who should be treated?

INTRODUCTION: Tocilizumab, can be used in the treatment of COVID-19 in patients developing cytokine storms. This study retrospectively evaluated patients treated with Tocilizumab. METHODOLOGY: This study included 23 patients (17 men) admitted to the hospital and received Tocilizumab due to cytokine storms. The patients were categorized into three groups: "moderate, severe, and critical". Clinical outcomes after 7 days of hospitalization were classified as "death, disease aggravation, clinical stabilization, and clinical improvement". RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 58±10.1 years. 52.2% of the patients were severely ill, and 47.8% were critically ill. After tocilizumab treatment, the mean lymphocyte count increased in all patients; the C-reactive protein levels dropped rapidly, except for one patient. After the first dose, the patients' fever dropped dramatically, and their oxygen support needs decreased. During the treatment, 82.6% of the patients were in the intensive care unit. At the end of the treatment, 56.5% had clinical improvement, 13% had clinical stabilization, and 4.3% had aggravation. Mortality occurred in 26.1%; 60.9% were discharged within a mean time of 19.14 ± 13.57 days after their treatment, and 18.2% of the critically ill and 91.7% of the severely ill patients recovered. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high rates of recovery and discharge after the tocilizumab treatment in the severely ill patients, more than half of the critically ill patients died. Early tocilizumab treatment resulted in a high survival rate and reduced the rates of progression to more critical states and mortality. Tocilizumab treatment should be given early in patients developing cytokine storms.

Transitioning from Intravenous to Subcutaneous Vedolizumab in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease [TRAVELESS].

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subcutaneous [SC] vedolizumab presents the opportunity for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients to manage their treatment at home. There are currently no data on the process of transitioning patients established on intravenous [IV] to SC vedolizumab as part of routine clinical care. The aim of this programme is to evaluate the clinical and biochemical outcomes of switching a cohort of IBD patients established on IV vedolizumab to SC, at 12 weeks following the transition. METHODS: In all, 178 adult patients were offered the opportunity to transition to SC vedolizumab. Patients who agreed were reviewed prior to switching and at Week 12 [W12] after their first SC dose. Evaluation outcomes included disease activity scores, the IBD-Control Patient-Reported Outcome Measures [PROMs], and faecal calprotectin [FCP]. Reasons for patients declining or accepting transitioning, pharmacokinetics, adverse drug reactions, and risk factors for a poor outcome in SARS-CoV-2 infection were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients agreed to transition, of whom 106 patients had been on IV vedolizumab for at least 4 months. There were no statistically significant differences in disease activity scores or IBD-Control PROMs between baseline and W12. A statistically significant increase in FCP was observed [31 µg/g vs. 47 µg/g; p = 0.008], although this was unlikely to be clinically relevant. The most common adverse drug reaction reported was injection site reactions [15%]. Based on this cohort of patients, an expected reduction of £572,000 per annum is likely to be achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Transitioning patients established on IV vedolizumab to SC appears to be safe and effective, with high patient satisfaction and multiple benefits for the health service.

Early use of canakinumab to prevent mechanical ventilation in select COVID-19 patients: A retrospective, observational analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The fully-human monoclonal anti-interleukin (IL)-1ß antibody canakinumab may inhibit the production of inflammatory mediators in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the hyperinflammatory response potentially leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome. OBJECTIVES: The goal of our retrospective, observational analysis was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous (s.c.) canakinumab in combination with our standard of care (SOC) treatment of selected patients with COVID-19 with respiratory failure and elevated reactive pro-inflammatory markers. METHODS: Eight participants received two doses of s.c. canakinumab 150 mg (or 2 mg/kg for participants weighing ≤40 kg) in addition to SOC. 12 patients received only SOC treatment. RESULTS: Canakinumab treatment reduced the need for mechanical ventilation and reduced proinflammatory markers, resulting in an amelioration of the final outcome, with respect to the control group who received SOC alone. The treatment was safe and well tolerated; no adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: The use of canakinumab (300 mg, s.c.) in the early stage of COVID-19 with mild-to-moderate respiratory failure was superior to SOC at preventing clinical deterioration and may warrant further investigation as a treatment option for patients with COVID-19 who experience a hyperinflammatory response in the early stage of the disease.

Safety and Efficacy of Extended Interval Dosing for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Extended interval (EI) dosing for immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) mono- or consolidation therapy initiated due to the COVID-19 pandemic led to a significant reduction in ICI-related site visits for patients with stage III and IV non-small cell lung cancer. Here we report the safety and efficacy compared to standard dose (SD) schedules. METHOD: In this retrospective analysis, patients who received ICI mono- or consolidation therapy, or adjuvant ICI therapy were assessed. Safety and efficacy of EI dosing with data of SD schedules were compared. RESULTS: One hundred seventeen patients received EI dosing for ICI and 88 patients SD. Patient characteristics were comparable. We observed 237 adverse events in the EI dosing cohort versus 118 in the SD group (P= .02). Overall, there was no difference in the occurrence of grade ≥3 adverse events (EI dosing: 21/237 [8.9%]; SD group: 20/118 [17.0%], P = .42), except for the pembrolizumab EI dosing cohort. Of all patients who received an EI dosing schedule, however, only 8 (6.8%) were reduced to SD because of toxicity. In 5 (4.3%) patients ICI was permanently stopped because of severe toxicity compared to 11 (12.5%) discontinuations in the SD group. Short-term treatment interruption occurred with similar frequencies in both groups. Progression-free survival and overall survival were comparable in patients receiving pembrolizumab and in those receiving adjuvant durvalumab. Progression-free survival and OS were better in the EI dosing cohort of nivolumab. CONCLUSION: EI dosing for ICI did not lead to an increase of clinically relevant toxicities resulting in dose reduction and/or treatment discontinuation. Efficacy of EI dosing of pembrolizumab and durvalumab were comparable to SD. Based on our safety and efficacy data EI dosing for ICI seems a safe and effective strategy.

Sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. METHODS: We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04327388; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. FINDINGS: Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference -1·7 [-9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [-6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI -7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group. INTERPRETATION: This trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

Tocilizumab plus standard care versus standard care in patients in India with moderate to severe COVID-19-associated cytokine release syndrome (COVINTOC): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Global randomised controlled trials of the anti-IL-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 have shown conflicting results but potential decreases in time to discharge and burden on intensive care. Tocilizumab reduced progression to mechanical ventilation and death in a trial population enriched for racial and ethnic minorities. We aimed to investigate whether tocilizumab treatment could prevent COVID-19 progression in the first multicentre randomised controlled trial of tocilizumab done entirely in a lower-middle-income country. METHODS: COVINTOC is an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial done at 12 public and private hospitals across India. Adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with moderate to severe COVID-19 (Indian Ministry of Health grading) confirmed by positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR result were randomly assigned (1:1 block randomisation) to receive tocilizumab 6 mg/kg plus standard care (the tocilizumab group) or standard care alone (the standard care group). The primary endpoint was progression of COVID-19 (from moderate to severe or from severe to death) up to day 14 in the modified intention-to-treat population of all participants who had at least one post-baseline assessment for the primary endpoint. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients. The trial is completed and registered with the Clinical Trials Registry India (CTRI/2020/05/025369). FINDINGS: 180 patients were recruited between May 30, 2020, and Aug 31, 2020, and randomly assigned to the tocilizumab group (n=90) or the standard care group (n=90). One patient randomly assigned to the standard care group inadvertently received tocilizumab at baseline and was included in the tocilizumab group for all analyses. One patient randomly assigned to the standard care group withdrew consent after the baseline visit and did not receive any study medication and was not included in the modified intention-to-treat population but was still included in safety analyses. 75 (82%) of 91 in the tocilizumab group and 68 (76%) of 89 in the standard care group completed 28 days of follow-up. Progression of COVID-19 up to day 14 occurred in eight (9%) of 91 patients in the tocilizumab group and 11 (13%) of 88 in the standard care group (difference -3·71 [95% CI -18·23 to 11·19]; p=0·42). 33 (36%) of 91 patients in the tocilizumab group and 22 (25%) of 89 patients in the standard care group had adverse events; 18 (20%) and 15 (17%) had serious adverse events. The most common adverse event was acute respiratory distress syndrome, reported in seven (8%) patients in each group. Grade 3 adverse events were reported in two (2%) patients in the tocilizumab group and five (6%) patients in the standard care group. There were no grade 4 adverse events. Serious adverse events were reported in 18 (20%) patients in the tocilizumab group and 15 (17%) in the standard care group; 13 (14%) and 15 (17%) patients died during the study. INTERPRETATION: Routine use of tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with moderate to severe COVID-19 is not supported. However, post-hoc evidence from this study suggests tocilizumab might still be effective in patients with severe COVID-19 and so should be investigated further in future studies. FUNDING: Medanta Institute of Education and Research, Roche India, Cipla India, and Action COVID-19 India.

Mechanisms of COVID-19-induced kidney injury and current pharmacotherapies.

The COVID-19 pandemic created a worldwide debilitating health crisis with the entire humanity suffering from the deleterious effects associated with the high infectivity and mortality rates. While significant evidence is currently available online and targets various aspects of the disease, both inflammatory and noninflammatory kidney manifestations secondary to COVID-19 infection are still largely underrepresented. In this review, we summarized current knowledge about COVID-19-related kidney manifestations, their pathologic mechanisms as well as various pharmacotherapies used to treat patients with COVID-19. We also shed light on the effect of these medications on kidney functions that can further enhance renal damage secondary to the illness.

Tocilizumab in critically ill COVID-19 patients: An observational study.

Tocilizumab decreases inflammatory response in the cytokine storm which is one of the mechanisms behind the development of ARDS in COVID-19 patients. The objective of our study was to determine response of tocilizumab in patients suffering from COVID-19 by analyzing clinical parameters and inflammatory markers. A single-arm observational retrospective study was conducted from March 15, 2020 to March 15, 2021. Clinical outcomes in terms of mortality, weaning from mechanical ventilator, improvement in laboratory parameters including inflammatory cytokines, and length of hospital stay were documented. Reduction in values of inflammatory markers, and patients discharged home in stable condition were defined as an improvement after tocilizumab administration. A total of 514 patients received tocilizumab, majority of whom were critically sick 333 (64.8%). Out of the total sample 363 (70.6%) patients were discharged home in stable condition. Overall mean length of stay was 11.50 ± 8.4 days. There was significant difference in length of stay of patients who required invasive mechanical ventilation as compared to those who were kept only on supplemental oxygen (p < 0.05). Patients who were discharged home showed significant improvement in inflammatory markers and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio as compared to those who expired (p < 0.05). A total of 21 (4.1%) patients had positive blood culture while 57 (11.1%) had positive culture of tracheal aspirate. Hence, tocilizumab is found to be a reasonable therapeutic option for worsening COVID-19 pneumonia by decreasing the need for mechanical ventilation. However, it is associated with adverse events including bacterial and fungal infections.