Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 97
Filter
2.
Pediatr Rheumatol Online J ; 20(1): 69, 2022 Aug 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2002198

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: For children with the multisystem inflammatory syndrome(MIS-C), intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) with or without methylprednisolone are the most effective treatment. In this study, IVIG combined with methylprednisolone was compared to IVIG used alone in children with MIS-C. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was carried out between April 1, 2020, and November 1, 2021. This study covered all children with MIS-C. According to whether they received IVIG alone or IVIG with methylprednisolone as an initial treatment for MIS-C, the patients were split into two groups. The IVIG dosage for the patients in group I was 2 gr/kg, whereas the IVIG dosage for the patients in group II was 2 gr/kg + 2 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone. These two groups were contrasted in terms of the frequency of fever, length of hospital stay, and admission to the pediatric intensive care unit. RESULTS: The study comprised 91 patients who were diagnosed with MIS-C and were under the age of 18. 42 (46.2%) of these patients were in the IVIG alone group (group I), and 49 (53.8%) were in the IVIG + methylprednisolone group (group II). Patients in group II had a severe MIS-C ratio of 36.7%, which was substantially greater than the rate of severe MIS-C patients in group I (9.5%) (p 0.01). When compared to group I (9.5%), the rate of hypotension was considerably higher in group II (30.6%) (p = 0.014). Additionally, patients in group II had considerably higher mean serum levels of C-reactive protein. The incidence of fever recurrence was 26.5% in group II and 33.3% in group I, however the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The choice of treatment for patients with MIS-C should be based on an individual evaluation. In MIS-C children with hypotension and/or with an indication for a pediatric intensive care unit, a combination of IVIG and methylprednisolone may be administered. For the treatment modalities of children with MIS-C, however, randomized double-blind studies are necessary.


Subject(s)
Hypotension , Methylprednisolone , COVID-19/complications , Child , Fever/drug therapy , Fever/etiology , Humans , Immunoglobulins, Intravenous , Infusions, Intravenous , Methylprednisolone/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
3.
Drug Saf ; 45(8): 881-889, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1990814

ABSTRACT

Avoidable harm associated with medication is a persistent problem in health systems and the use of preprogrammed infusion devices ('smart pumps') and data monitoring is seen as a core approach to mitigating and reducing the incidence of these harms. However, smart pumps are costly to procure, configure and maintain (in both human and financial terms) and are often poorly implemented. Variation in the manner in which medicines are prepared and used within complex modern healthcare systems exacerbates these challenges, and a strategic human-centred approach is needed to support their implementation. A symposium of 36 clinical and academic medication safety experts met virtually to discuss the current 'state of the art' and to propose strategic recommendations to support the implementation of medication administration technology to improve medication safety. The recommendations were that health systems (1) standardise infusion concentrations to facilitate the development of ready-to-administer formulations of frequently used medicines, and support 'out of the box' programming of infusion devices; (2) develop and implement drug libraries using human-centred approaches and the aforementioned standard concentrations, with a theoretical understanding of how devices are used in practice; (3) develop standardised metrics and outcomes to support the interpretation of data produced by infusion devices; (4) involve all stakeholders in the development of drug libraries and metrics to ensure broad understanding of the devices, their benefits and limitations; and (5) leverage input into device design, working with manufacturers and users. Using this strategic approach, it is then possible to envisage and plan real-world implementation studies using a uniform approach to quantify improvements in safety, efficiency and cost effectiveness.


Subject(s)
Infusion Pumps , Medication Errors , Delivery of Health Care , Equipment Safety , Humans , Infusion Pumps/adverse effects , Infusions, Intravenous , Medication Errors/prevention & control
4.
Anesth Analg ; 134(2): 303-311, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1928240

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Oxytocin administration during cesarean delivery is the first-line therapy for the prevention of uterine atony. Patients with preeclampsia may receive magnesium sulfate, a drug with known tocolytic effects, for seizure prophylaxis. However, no study has evaluated the minimum effective dose of oxytocin during cesarean delivery in women with preeclampsia. METHODS: This study compared the effective dose in 90% population (ED90) of oxytocin infusion for achieving satisfactory uterine tone during cesarean delivery in nonlaboring patients with preeclampsia who were receiving magnesium sulfate treatment with a control group of normotensives who were not receiving magnesium sulfate. This prospective dual-arm dose-finding study was based on a 9:1 biased sequential allocation design. Oxytocin infusion was initiated at 13 IU/h, on clamping of the umbilical cord, in the first patient of each group. Uterine tone was graded as satisfactory or unsatisfactory by the obstetrician at 4 minutes after initiation of oxytocin infusion. The dose of oxytocin infusion for subsequent patients was decided according to the response exhibited by the previous patient in the group; it was increased by 2 IU/h after unsatisfactory response or decreased by 2 IU/h or maintained at the same level after satisfactory response, in a ratio of 1:9. Oxytocin-associated side effects were also evaluated. Dose-response data for the groups were evaluated using a log-logistic function and ED90 estimates were derived from fitted equations using the delta method. RESULTS: The ED90 of oxytocin was significantly greater for the preeclampsia group (n = 27) than for the normotensive group (n = 40) (24.9 IU/h [95% confidence interval {CI}, 22.4-27.5] and 13.9 IU/h [95% CI, 12.4-15.5], respectively); the difference in dose requirement was 10.9 IU/h (95% CI, 7.9-14.0; P < .001). The number of patients with oxytocin-related hypotension, defined as a decrease in systolic blood pressure >20% from baseline or to <90 mm Hg, was significantly greater in the preeclampsia group (92.6% vs 62.5%; P = .030), while other side effects such as ST-T depression, nausea/vomiting, headache, and flushing, were not significantly different. There was no significant difference in the need for additional uterotonic or uterine massage, estimated blood loss, and need for re-exploration for uncontrolled bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with preeclampsia receiving preoperative magnesium therapy need a greater intraoperative dose of oxytocin to achieve satisfactory contraction of the uterus after fetal delivery, as compared to normotensives.


Subject(s)
Analgesics/administration & dosage , Cesarean Section/methods , Magnesium Sulfate/administration & dosage , Oxytocin/administration & dosage , Pre-Eclampsia/drug therapy , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Adult , Blood Pressure/drug effects , Blood Pressure/physiology , Cesarean Section/adverse effects , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Pre-Eclampsia/diagnosis , Pre-Eclampsia/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
5.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 53(4): 959-964, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1872642

ABSTRACT

To evaluate the hypothesis that patients with a history of intravenous drug misuse (IVDM) initiated on weight-based heparin infusions require higher than expected infusion rates to achieve therapeutic activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT). This study is a multicenter, retrospective chart review of patients with a history of IVDM who were admitted to an acute care site between 10/1/2015 and 9/30/2020 and treated with continuous heparin infusions. Patients were identified using ICD9 and ICD10 codes and included if they had a documented history of IVDM within the past six months. Variables of particular interest included: median heparin infusion rates to maintain therapeutic aPTT, average time to reach therapeutic aPTT, and International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis Criteria for moderate to severe bleeding. Of the 41 patients who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 39 achieved therapeutic aPTT while on a weight-based heparin infusion. All heparin infusions were initiated at a rate of 18 units/kg/hr then titrated per institutional heparin infusion protocols. The mean time to therapeutic aPTT was 38.48 h ± 26.4 h with a mean infusion rate of 27.64 ± 7.14 units/kg/hr. To maintain therapeutic anticoagulation, infusion rates 150% higher than the initial rate were required. Of the 39 patients who achieved therapeutic aPTT, 85% (33) met criteria for heparin resistance, defined as greater than 35,000 units of heparin daily. No statistical significance could be derived from this retrospective chart review as therapeutic heparin rates were evaluated in comparison to initial infusion rate, rather than a control group. The findings in this study demonstrate a possible clinical association of the reduced antithrombin activity previously described in opiate misusers. To efficiently achieve therapeutic anticoagulation, it may be appropriate to consider use of heparin antiXa monitoring in place of aPTT or utilization of increased initial heparin infusion rates.


Subject(s)
Drug Misuse , Heparin , Anticoagulants , Heparin/adverse effects , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Partial Thromboplastin Time , Retrospective Studies
6.
Am J Health Syst Pharm ; 79(Suppl 3): S86-S93, 2022 08 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1860805

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a pharmacist-managed protocol for transitioning critically ill patients from intravenous (IV) to subcutaneous insulin. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective, observational study included patients admitted to the medical or surgical/trauma intensive care unit who received a continuous infusion of IV insulin from January 2019 to April 2021. Patients were excluded if they were less than 18 years old, pregnant, or incarcerated or received IV insulin for the diagnosis of diabetic ketoacidosis, hyperglycemic hyperosmolar state, calcium channel blocker or ß-blocker overdose, or hypertriglyceridemia. The primary outcome was to evaluate the percentage of blood glucose (BG) concentrations within the target range of 70 to 150 mg/dL within 48 hours of the transition to subcutaneous insulin. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of BG concentrations within the goal range following transition at 0 to 12 hours and 12 to 24 hours, the incidence of hypo- and hyperglycemia, and the percentage of patients requiring dose adjustments after the initial transition. RESULTS: Pharmacists were able to achieve BG concentrations in the target range for 53% of transitions at 12 hours, 40% of transitions at 24 hours, and 47% of transitions at 48 hours. With respect to safety endpoints, the pharmacist-managed group had a low rate of hypoglycemia (1.0%) and no severe hypoglycemia. Hyperglycemia was reported for 28% of BG concentrations while severe hyperglycemia was reported for 27%. Pharmacists transitioned patients to an average of 63% of the 24-hour total daily dose of insulin as basal insulin. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists can effectively and safely transition critically ill patients from IV to subcutaneous insulin utilizing a standardized protocol.


Subject(s)
Hyperglycemia , Hypoglycemia , Adolescent , Adult , Blood Glucose , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Hyperglycemia/diagnosis , Hyperglycemia/drug therapy , Hypoglycemia/chemically induced , Hypoglycemia/drug therapy , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Infusions, Intravenous , Insulin/adverse effects , Observational Studies as Topic , Pharmacists , Retrospective Studies
7.
JAMA ; 327(13): 1236-1246, 2022 04 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1801955

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Acute Disease , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , Disease Progression , Hospitalization , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial , Treatment Outcome
8.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(4): e226920, 2022 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1782544

ABSTRACT

Importance: Monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment decreases hospitalization and death in high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19; however, only intravenous administration has been evaluated in randomized clinical trials of treatment. Subcutaneous administration may expand outpatient treatment capacity and qualified staff available to administer treatment, but the association with patient outcomes is understudied. Objectives: To evaluate whether subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab treatment is associated with reduced 28-day hospitalization and death compared with nontreatment among mAb-eligible patients and whether subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab treatment is clinically and statistically similar to intravenous casirivimab and imdevimab treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study evaluated high-risk outpatients in a learning health system in the US with mild to moderate COVID-19 symptoms from July 14 to October 26, 2021, who were eligible for mAb treatment under emergency use authorization. A nontreated control group of eligible patients was also studied. Exposures: Subcutaneous injection or intravenous administration of the combined single dose of 600 mg of casirivimab and 600 mg of imdevimab. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the 28-day adjusted risk ratio or adjusted risk difference for hospitalization or death. Secondary outcomes included 28-day adjusted risk ratios and differences in hospitalization, death, a composite end point of emergency department admission and hospitalization, and rates of adverse events. Among 1959 matched adults with mild to moderate COVID-19, 969 patients (mean [SD] age, 53.8 [16.7] years; 547 women [56.4%]) who received casirivimab and imdevimab subcutaneously had a 28-day rate of hospitalization or death of 3.4% (22 of 653 patients) compared with 7.0% (92 of 1306 patients) in nontreated controls (risk ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.30-0.80; P = .002). Among 2185 patients treated with subcutaneous (n = 969) or intravenous (n = 1216; mean [SD] age, 54.3 [16.6] years; 672 women [54.4%]) casirivimab and imdevimab, the 28-day rate of hospitalization or death was 2.8% vs 1.7%, which resulted in an adjusted risk difference of 1.5% (95% CI, -0.6% to 3.5%; P = .16). Among all infusion patients, there was no difference in intensive care unit admission (adjusted risk difference, 0.7%; 95% CI, -3.5% to 5.0%) or need for mechanical ventilation (adjusted risk difference, 0.2%; 95% CI, -5.8% to 5.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 symptoms, subcutaneously administered casirivimab and imdevimab was associated with reduced hospitalization and death when compared with no treatment. These results provide preliminary evidence of potential expanded use of subcutaneous mAb treatment, particularly in areas that are facing treatment capacity and/or staffing shortages.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological , COVID-19 , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , COVID-19/drug therapy , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Stem Cell Res Ther ; 13(1): 134, 2022 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1770571

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Due to their immunomodulatory properties, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been proposed to have therapeutic potential to improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19. However, the safety and efficacy profile of MSC infusion therapy in patients with non-severe COVID-19 infection has not been completely established; there is, in particular, a substantial void in the literature on dose-dependent studies of MSC infusion in patients with low clinical risk COVID-19 infection. METHODS: This phase 1 double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial examines the safety, feasibility, and tolerability of 2 doses (high and low) of DW-MSC in patients with low clinical risk COVID-19. A total of 9 patients were enrolled in this study and randomized into low-dose (TL), high-dose (TH), and placebo (C) groups. Subjects in the TL and TH groups received single intravenous infusions of 5.0 × 107 cells and 1.0 × 108 cells, respectively. The main outcome was the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) during the 28-day study period. Vital signs and various inflammatory markers were also monitored weekly during the observation period. RESULTS: There were no apparent differences in clinical characteristics between study groups (TL, TH, and C) at baseline. All patients did not show the progression of severity during the study period. During the course of the study, 6 episodes of TEAE were observed in 5 subjects; however, none of the TEAEs were severe. During the follow-up period, 8 subjects recovered and were discharged from the hospital without complications. A subject exhibited abnormal liver function biomarkers at the end of the study period. Changes in inflammatory markers throughout the clinical course were not vastly different across study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our clinical trial has provided reliable results regarding the safety of MSCs in low clinical risk COVID-19 subjects treated with MSCs. However, further confirmation of the therapeutic efficacy aspects of MSC will require large-scale randomized controlled trials in subjects with varying severity profiles for COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04535856. Registered 2 September 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04535856.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation , Mesenchymal Stem Cells , COVID-19/therapy , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects , Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation/methods
11.
Lancet ; 399(10325): 665-676, 2022 Feb 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1683780

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Casirivimab and imdevimab are non-competing monoclonal antibodies that bind to two different sites on the receptor binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein, blocking viral entry into host cells. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of casirivimab and imdevimab administered in combination in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. METHODS: RECOVERY is a randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial comparing several possible treatments with usual care in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. 127 UK hospitals took part in the evaluation of casirivimab and imdevimab. Eligible participants were any patients aged at least 12 years admitted to hospital with clinically suspected or laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual care plus casirivimab 4 g and imdevimab 4 g administered together in a single intravenous infusion. Investigators and data assessors were masked to analyses of the outcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality assessed by intention to treat, first only in patients without detectable antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 infection at randomisation (ie, those who were seronegative) and then in the overall population. Safety was assessed in all participants who received casirivimab and imdevimab. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04381936). FINDINGS: Between Sept 18, 2020, and May 22, 2021, 9785 patients enrolled in RECOVERY were eligible for casirivimab and imdevimab, of which 4839 were randomly assigned to casirivimab and imdevimab plus usual care and 4946 to usual care alone. 3153 (32%) of 9785 patients were seronegative, 5272 (54%) were seropositive, and 1360 (14%) had unknown baseline antibody status. 812 (8%) patients were known to have received at least one dose of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. In the primary efficacy population of seronegative patients, 396 (24%) of 1633 patients allocated to casirivimab and imdevimab versus 452 (30%) of 1520 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio [RR] 0·79, 95% CI 0·69-0·91; p=0·0009). In an analysis of all randomly assigned patients (regardless of baseline antibody status), 943 (19%) of 4839 patients allocated to casirivimab and imdevimab versus 1029 (21%) of 4946 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (RR 0·94, 95% CI 0·86-1·02; p=0·14). The proportional effect of casirivimab and imdevimab on mortality differed significantly between seropositive and seronegative patients (p value for heterogeneity=0·002). There were no deaths attributed to the treatment, or meaningful between-group differences in the pre-specified safety outcomes of cause-specific mortality, cardiac arrhythmia, thrombosis, or major bleeding events. Serious adverse reactions reported in seven (<1%) participants were believed by the local investigator to be related to treatment with casirivimab and imdevimab. INTERPRETATION: In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, the monoclonal antibody combination of casirivimab and imdevimab reduced 28-day mortality in patients who were seronegative (and therefore had not mounted their own humoral immune response) at baseline but not in those who were seropositive at baseline. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/virology , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Male , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Treatment Outcome
12.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 205(3): 324-329, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1673593

ABSTRACT

Rationale: The mortality in patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) who require mechanical ventilation remains high, and endotheliopathy has been implicated. Objectives: To determine the effect of prostacyclin infusion in mechanically ventilated patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 with severe endotheliopathy. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized clinical trial in adults infected with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) who required mechanical ventilation and had a plasma level of thrombomodulin >4 ng/ml; patients were randomized to 72-hour infusion of prostacyclin 1 ng/kg/min or placebo. Measurements and Main Results: The main outcome was the number of days alive and without mechanical ventilation within 28 days. Key secondary outcomes were 28-day mortality and serious adverse events within 7 days. Eighty patients were randomized (41 prostacyclin and 39 placebo). The median number of days alive without mechanical ventilation at 28 days was 16.0 days (SD, 12) versus 5.0 days (SD, 10) (difference of the medians, 10.96 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5 to 21; P = 0.07) in the prostacyclin and the placebo groups, respectively. The 28-day mortality was 21.9% versus 43.6% in the prostacyclin and the placebo groups, respectively (risk ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.96; P = 0.06). The incidence of serious adverse events within 7 days was 2.4% versus 12.8% (risk ratio, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.001 to 1.11; P = 0.10) in the prostacyclin and the placebo groups, respectively. Conclusions: Prostacyclin was not associated with a significant reduction in the number of days alive and without mechanical ventilation within 28 days. The point estimates, however, favored the prostacyclin group in all analyses, including 28-day mortality, warranting further investigation in larger trials. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04420741); EudraCT Identifier: 2020-001296-33.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/therapy , Endothelium, Vascular/pathology , Epoprostenol/administration & dosage , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Respiration, Artificial , Aged , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , Denmark , Female , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Intubation, Intratracheal , Male , Middle Aged , Survival Rate , Thrombomodulin/blood , Treatment Outcome
13.
N Engl J Med ; 385(21): 1941-1950, 2021 11 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493318

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) disproportionately results in hospitalization or death in older patients and those with underlying conditions. Sotrovimab is a pan-sarbecovirus monoclonal antibody that was designed to prevent progression of Covid-19 in high-risk patients early in the course of disease. METHODS: In this ongoing, multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic Covid-19 (≤5 days after the onset of symptoms) and at least one risk factor for disease progression to receive a single infusion of sotrovimab at a dose of 500 mg or placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was hospitalization (for >24 hours) for any cause or death within 29 days after randomization. RESULTS: In this prespecified interim analysis, which included an intention-to-treat population of 583 patients (291 in the sotrovimab group and 292 in the placebo group), 3 patients (1%) in the sotrovimab group, as compared with 21 patients (7%) in the placebo group, had disease progression leading to hospitalization or death (relative risk reduction, 85%; 97.24% confidence interval, 44 to 96; P = 0.002). In the placebo group, 5 patients were admitted to the intensive care unit, including 1 who died by day 29. Safety was assessed in 868 patients (430 in the sotrovimab group and 438 in the placebo group). Adverse events were reported by 17% of the patients in the sotrovimab group and 19% of those in the placebo group; serious adverse events were less common with sotrovimab than with placebo (in 2% and 6% of the patients, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk patients with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, sotrovimab reduced the risk of disease progression. No safety signals were identified. (Funded by Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline; COMET-ICE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04545060.).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Disease Progression , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Aged , Ambulatory Care , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Neutralizing/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Infusions, Intravenous , Intention to Treat Analysis , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged
14.
Biomolecules ; 11(11)2021 10 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1488477

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has escalated the occurrence of hypoxia including thrombotic stroke worldwide, for which nitric oxide (NO) therapy seems very promising and translatable. Therefore, various modes/routes of NO-delivery are now being tested in different clinical trials for safer, faster, and more effective interventions against ischemic insults. Intravenous (IV) infusion of S-Nitrosoglutathione (GSNO), the major endogenous molecular pool of NO, has been reported to protect against mechanical cerebral ischemia-reperfusion (IR); however, it has been never tested in any kind of "clinically" relevant thromboembolic stroke models with or without comorbidities and in combination with the thrombolytic reperfusion therapy. Moreover, "IV-effects" of higher dose of GSNO following IR-injury have been contradicted to augment stroke injury. Herein, we tested the hypothesis that nebulization of low-dose GSNO will not alter blood pressure (BP) and will mitigate stroke injury in diabetic mice via enhanced cerebral blood flow (CBF) and brain tissue oxygenation (PbtO2). GSNO-nebulization (200 µg/kgbwt) did not alter BP, but augmented the restoration of CBF, improved behavioral outcomes and reduced stroke injury. Moreover, GSNO-nebulization increased early reoxygenation of brain tissue/PbtO2 as measured at 6.5 h post-stroke following thrombolytic reperfusion, and enervated unwanted effects of late thrombolysis in diabetic stroke. We conclude that the GSNO-nebulization is safe and effective for enhancing collateral microvascular perfusion in the early hours following stroke. Hence, nebulized-GSNO therapy has the potential to be developed and translated into an affordable field therapy against ischemic events including strokes, particularly in developing countries with limited healthcare infrastructure.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Complications/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Hemorrhage/prevention & control , S-Nitrosoglutathione/administration & dosage , Stroke/complications , Thrombolytic Therapy/adverse effects , Animals , Behavior, Animal , Blood Pressure , Blood-Brain Barrier , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hemorrhage/complications , Hypoxia , Infusions, Intravenous , Laser-Doppler Flowmetry , Male , Mice , Mice, Inbred C57BL , Microcirculation , Nebulizers and Vaporizers , Neuroprotective Agents/pharmacology , Perfusion , Reperfusion Injury/drug therapy , Risk , Stress, Mechanical
15.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 6055, 2021 10 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1475294

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has become a global pandemic. 3CL protease is a virally encoded protein that is essential across a broad spectrum of coronaviruses with no close human analogs. PF-00835231, a 3CL protease inhibitor, has exhibited potent in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 as a single agent. Here we report, the design and characterization of a phosphate prodrug PF-07304814 to enable the delivery and projected sustained systemic exposure in human of PF-00835231 to inhibit coronavirus family 3CL protease activity with selectivity over human host protease targets. Furthermore, we show that PF-00835231 has additive/synergistic activity in combination with remdesivir. We present the ADME, safety, in vitro, and in vivo antiviral activity data that supports the clinical evaluation of PF-07304814 as a potential COVID-19 treatment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Coronavirus 3C Proteases/antagonists & inhibitors , Coronavirus Protease Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Indoles/administration & dosage , Leucine/administration & dosage , Pyrrolidinones/administration & dosage , Adenosine Monophosphate/administration & dosage , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/pharmacokinetics , Alanine/administration & dosage , Alanine/adverse effects , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/pharmacokinetics , Animals , COVID-19/virology , Chlorocebus aethiops , Coronavirus 229E, Human/drug effects , Coronavirus 229E, Human/enzymology , Coronavirus Protease Inhibitors/adverse effects , Coronavirus Protease Inhibitors/pharmacokinetics , Disease Models, Animal , Drug Design , Drug Synergism , Drug Therapy, Combination , HeLa Cells , Humans , Indoles/adverse effects , Indoles/pharmacokinetics , Infusions, Intravenous , Leucine/adverse effects , Leucine/pharmacokinetics , Mice , Pyrrolidinones/adverse effects , Pyrrolidinones/pharmacokinetics , SARS Virus/drug effects , SARS Virus/enzymology , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/enzymology , Vero Cells
17.
BMJ Qual Saf ; 30(1): 17-26, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1430192

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: User-testing and subsequent modification of clinical guidelines increases health professionals' information retrieval and comprehension. No study has investigated whether this results in safer care. OBJECTIVE: To compare the frequency of medication errors when administering an intravenous medicine using the current National Health Service Injectable Medicines Guide (IMG) versus an IMG version revised with user-testing. METHOD: Single-blind, randomised parallel group in situ simulation. Participants were on-duty nurses/midwives who regularly prepared intravenous medicines. Using a training manikin in their clinical area, participants administered a voriconazole infusion, a high-risk medicine requiring several steps to prepare. They were randomised to use current IMG guidelines or IMG guidelines revised with user-testing. Direct observation was used to time the simulation and identify errors. Participant confidence was measured using a validated instrument. The primary outcome was the percentage of simulations with at least one moderate-severe IMG-related error, with error severity classified by an expert panel. RESULTS: In total, 133 participants were randomised to current guidelines and 140 to user-tested guidelines. Fewer moderate-severe IMG-related errors occurred with the user-tested guidelines (n=68, 49%) compared with current guidelines (n=79, 59%), but this difference was not statistically significant (risk ratio: 0.82; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.02). Significantly more simulations were completed without any IMG-related errors with the user-tested guidelines (n=67, 48%) compared with current guidelines (n=26, 20%) (risk ratio: 2.46; 95% CI 1.68 to 3.60). Median simulation completion time was 1.6 min (95% CI 0.2 to 3.0) less with the user-tested guidelines. Participants who used user-tested guidelines reported greater confidence. CONCLUSION: User-testing injectable medicines guidelines reduces the number of errors and the time taken to prepare and administer intravenous medicines, while increasing staff confidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: researchregistry5275.


Subject(s)
State Medicine , Adult , COVID-19 , Female , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Single-Blind Method
18.
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis ; 30(12): 106121, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1415617

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is little information regarding the safety of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV-tPA) in patients with stroke and COVID-19. METHODS: This multicenter study included consecutive stroke patients with and without COVID-19 treated with IV-tPA between February 18, 2019, to December 31, 2020, at 9 centers participating in the CASCADE initiative. Clinical outcomes included modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at hospital discharge, in-hospital mortality, the rate of hemorrhagic transformation. Using Bayesian multiple regression and after adjusting for variables with significant value in univariable analysis, we reported the posterior adjusted odds ratio (OR, with 95% Credible Intervals [CrI]) of the main outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 545 stroke patients, including 101 patients with COVID-19 were evaluated. Patients with COVID-19 had a more severe stroke at admission. In the study cohort, 85 (15.9%) patients had a hemorrhagic transformation, and 72 (13.1%) died in the hospital. After adjustment for confounding variables, discharge mRS score ≥2 (OR: 0.73, 95% CrI: 0.16, 3.05), in-hospital mortality (OR: 2.06, 95% CrI: 0.76, 5.53), and hemorrhagic transformation (OR: 1.514, 95% CrI: 0.66, 3.31) were similar in COVID-19 and non COVID-19 patients. High-sensitivity C reactive protein level was a predictor of hemorrhagic transformation in all cases (OR:1.01, 95%CI: 1.0026, 1.018), including those with COVID-19 (OR:1.024, 95%CI:1.002, 1.054). CONCLUSION: IV-tPA treatment in patients with acute ischemic stroke and COVID-19 was not associated with an increased risk of disability, mortality, and hemorrhagic transformation compared to those without COVID-19. IV-tPA should continue to be considered as the standard of care in patients with hyper acute stroke and COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Fibrinolytic Agents/administration & dosage , Ischemic Stroke/drug therapy , Thrombolytic Therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Disability Evaluation , Europe , Female , Fibrinolytic Agents/adverse effects , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Intracranial Hemorrhages/chemically induced , Iran , Ischemic Stroke/complications , Ischemic Stroke/diagnosis , Ischemic Stroke/mortality , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Thrombolytic Therapy/adverse effects , Thrombolytic Therapy/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
19.
J Crohns Colitis ; 15(11): 1846-1851, 2021 Nov 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1387846

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The development programm UNIFI has shown promising results of ustekinumab in ulcerative colitis [UC] treatment which should be confirmed in clinical practice. We aimed to evaluate the durability, effectiveness, and safety of ustekinumab in UC in real life. METHODS: Patients included in the prospectively maintained ENEIDA registry, who received at least one intravenous dose of ustekinumab due to active UC [Partial Mayo Score [PMS]>2], were included. Clinical activity and effectiveness were defined based on PMS. Short-term response was assessed at Week 16. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients were included. At Week 16, 53% of patients had response [including 35% of patients in remission]. In the multivariate analysis, elevated serum C-reactive protein was the only variable significantly associated with lower likelihood of achieving remission. Remission was achieved in 39% and 33% of patients at Weeks 24 and 52, respectively; 36% of patients discontinued the treatment with ustekinumab during a median follow-up of 31 weeks. The probability of maintaining ustekinumab treatment was 87% at Week 16, 63% at Week 56, and 59% at Week 72; primary failure was the main reason for ustekinumab discontinuation. No variable was associated with risk of discontinuation. Three patients reported adverse events; one of them had a fatal severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Ustekinumab is effective in both the short and the long term in real life, even in a highly refractory cohort. Higher inflammatory burden at baseline correlated with lower probability of achieving remission. Safety was consistent with the known profile of ustekinumab.


Subject(s)
Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , Ustekinumab/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Registries , Remission Induction , Ustekinumab/administration & dosage
20.
N Engl J Med ; 385(9): 803-814, 2021 08 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1373469

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Additional interventions are needed to reduce the morbidity and mortality caused by malaria. METHODS: We conducted a two-part, phase 1 clinical trial to assess the safety and pharmacokinetics of CIS43LS, an antimalarial monoclonal antibody with an extended half-life, and its efficacy against infection with Plasmodium falciparum. Part A of the trial assessed the safety, initial side-effect profile, and pharmacokinetics of CIS43LS in healthy adults who had never had malaria. Participants received CIS43LS subcutaneously or intravenously at one of three escalating dose levels. A subgroup of participants from Part A continued to Part B, and some received a second CIS43LS infusion. Additional participants were enrolled in Part B and received CIS43LS intravenously. To assess the protective efficacy of CIS43LS, some participants underwent controlled human malaria infection in which they were exposed to mosquitoes carrying P. falciparum sporozoites 4 to 36 weeks after administration of CIS43LS. RESULTS: A total of 25 participants received CIS43LS at a dose of 5 mg per kilogram of body weight, 20 mg per kilogram, or 40 mg per kilogram, and 4 of the 25 participants received a second dose (20 mg per kilogram regardless of initial dose). No safety concerns were identified. We observed dose-dependent increases in CIS43LS serum concentrations, with a half-life of 56 days. None of the 9 participants who received CIS43LS, as compared with 5 of 6 control participants who did not receive CIS43LS, had parasitemia according to polymerase-chain-reaction testing through 21 days after controlled human malaria infection. Two participants who received 40 mg per kilogram of CIS43LS and underwent controlled human malaria infection approximately 36 weeks later had no parasitemia, with serum concentrations of CIS43LS of 46 and 57 µg per milliliter at the time of controlled human malaria infection. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults who had never had malaria infection or vaccination, administration of the long-acting monoclonal antibody CIS43LS prevented malaria after controlled infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; VRC 612 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04206332.).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antimalarials/therapeutic use , Malaria, Falciparum/prevention & control , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal/pharmacokinetics , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/pharmacokinetics , Antibodies, Protozoan/blood , Antimalarials/administration & dosage , Antimalarials/adverse effects , Antimalarials/pharmacokinetics , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Healthy Volunteers , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous/adverse effects , Injections, Subcutaneous/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Plasmodium falciparum/immunology , Plasmodium falciparum/isolation & purification
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL