One-year follow-up of the CAPSID randomized trial for high-dose convalescent plasma in severe COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Results of many randomized trials on COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) have been reported but information on long-term outcome after CCP treatment is limited. The objectives of this extended observation of the randomized CAPSID trial are to assess long-term outcome and disease burden in patients initially treated with or without CCP. METHODS: Of 105 randomized patients, 50 participated in the extended observation. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed by questionnaires and a structured interview. CCP-donors (n=113) with asymptomatic to moderate COVID-19 were included as a reference group. RESULTS: The median follow-up of patients was 396 days, the estimated 1-year survival was 78.7% in the CCP and 60.2% in the control group (p=0.08). The subgroup treated with a higher cumulative amount of neutralizing antibodies showed a better 1-year survival compared to the control group (91.5% versus 60.2%; p=0.01). Medical events and QoL assessments showed a consistent trend for better results in the CCP group without reaching statistical significance. There was no difference in the increase of neutralizing antibodies after vaccination between CCP and the control group. CONCLUSION: The trial demonstrated a trend towards better outcome in the CCP group without reaching statistical significance. A pre-defined subgroup analysis showed a significant better outcome (long-term survival; time to discharge from ICU and time to hospital discharge) among those who received a higher amount of neutralizing antibodies compared to the control group. A substantial long-term disease burden remains after severe COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number 2020-001310-38FUNDING. Bundesministerium für Gesundheit (German Federal Ministry of Health): ZMVI1-2520COR802/ZMI1-2521COR802.

Cytokine levels associated with favorable clinical outcome in the CAPSID randomized trial of convalescent plasma in patients with severe COVID-19.

Objectives: To determine the profile of cytokines in patients with severe COVID-19 who were enrolled in a trial of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP). Methods: Patients were randomized to receive standard treatment and 3 CCP units or standard treatment alone (CAPSID trial, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04433910). The primary outcome was a dichotomous composite outcome (survival and no longer severe COVID-19 on day 21). Time to clinical improvement was a key secondary endpoint. The concentrations of 27 cytokines were measured (baseline, day 7). We analyzed the change and the correlation between serum cytokine levels over time in different subgroups and the prediction of outcome in receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses and in multivariate models. Results: The majority of cytokines showed significant changes from baseline to day 7. Some were strongly correlated amongst each other (at baseline the cluster IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, G-CSF, MIP-1α, the cluster PDGF-BB, RANTES or the cluster IL-4, IL-17, Eotaxin, bFGF, TNF-α). The correlation matrix substantially changed from baseline to day 7. The heatmaps of the absolute values of the correlation matrix indicated an association of CCP treatment and clinical outcome with the cytokine pattern. Low levels of IP-10, IFN-γ, MCP-1 and IL-1ß on day 0 were predictive of treatment success in a ROC analysis. In multivariate models, low levels of IL-1ß, IFN-γ and MCP-1 on day 0 were significantly associated with both treatment success and shorter time to clinical improvement. Low levels of IP-10, IL-1RA, IL-6, MCP-1 and IFN-γ on day 7 and high levels of IL-9, PDGF and RANTES on day 7 were predictive of treatment success in ROC analyses. Low levels of IP-10, MCP-1 and high levels of RANTES, on day 7 were associated with both treatment success and shorter time to clinical improvement in multivariate models. Conclusion: This analysis demonstrates a considerable dynamic of cytokines over time, which is influenced by both treatment and clinical course of COVID-19. Levels of IL-1ß and MCP-1 at baseline and MCP-1, IP-10 and RANTES on day 7 were associated with a favorable outcome across several endpoints. These cytokines should be included in future trials for further evaluation as predictive factors.

Evaluation of a Clinical Decision Support System for the most evidence-based approach to managing perioperative anticoagulation.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We explored the feasibility of a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) to guide evidence-based perioperative anticoagulation. DESIGN: Prospective randomised clinical management simulation multicentre study. SETTING: Five University and 11 general hospitals in Germany. PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled physicians (anaesthesiologist (n = 73), trauma surgeons (n = 2), unknown (n = 1)) with different professional experience. INTERVENTIONS: A CDSS based on a multiple-choice test was developed and validated at the University Hospital of Frankfurt (phase-I). The CDSS comprised European guidelines for the management of anticoagulation in cardiology, cardio-thoracic, non-cardio-thoracic surgery and anaesthesiology. Phase-II compared the efficiency of physicians in identifying evidence-based approach of managing perioperative anticoagulation. In total 168 physicians were randomised to CDSS (PERI-KOAG) or CONTROL. MEASUREMENTS: Overall mean score and association of processing time and professional experience were analysed. The multiple-choice test consists of 11 cases and two correct answers per question were required to gain 100% success rate (=22 points). MAIN RESULTS: In total 76 physicians completed the questionnaire (n = 42 PERI-KOAG; n = 34 CONTROL; attrition rate 54%). Overall mean score (max. 100% = 22 points) was significantly higher in PERI-KOAG compared to CONTROL (82 ± 15% vs. 70 ± 10%; 18 ± 3 vs. 15 ± 2 points; P = 0.0003). A longer processing time is associated with significantly increased overall mean scores in PERI-KOAG (≥33 min. 89 ± 10% (20 ± 2 points) vs. <33 min. 73 ± 15% (16 ± 3 points), P = 0.0005) but not in CONTROL (≥33 min. 74 ± 13% (16 ± 3 points) vs. <33 min. 69 ± 9% (15 ± 2 points), P = 0.11). Within PERI-KOAG, there is a tendency towards higher results within the more experienced group (>5 years), but no significant difference to less (≤5 years) experienced colleagues (87 ± 10% (19 ± 2 points) vs. 78 ± 17% (17 ± 4 points), P = 0.08). However, an association between professional experience and success rate in CONTROL has not been shown (71 ± 8% vs. 70 ± 13%, 16 ± 2 vs. 15 ± 3 points; P = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: CDSS significantly improved the identification of evidence-based treatment approaches. A precise usage of CDSS is mandatory to maximise efficiency.

Results of the CAPSID randomized trial for high-dose convalescent plasma in patients with severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUNDCOVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) has been considered a treatment option for COVID-19. This trial assessed the efficacy of a neutralizing antibody containing high-dose CCP in hospitalized adults with COVID-19 requiring respiratory support or intensive care treatment.METHODSPatients (n = 105) were randomized 1:1 to either receive standard treatment and 3 units of CCP or standard treatment alone. Control group patients with progress on day 14 could cross over to the CCP group. The primary outcome was a dichotomous composite outcome of survival and no longer fulfilling criteria for severe COVID-19 on day 21.ResultsThe primary outcome occurred in 43.4% of patients in the CCP group and 32.7% in the control group (P = 0.32). The median time to clinical improvement was 26 days in the CCP group and 66 days in the control group (P = 0.27). The median time to discharge from the hospital was 31 days in the CCP group and 51 days in the control group (P = 0.24). In the subgroup that received a higher cumulative amount of neutralizing antibodies, the primary outcome occurred in 56.0% of the patients (vs. 32.1%), with significantly shorter intervals to clinical improvement (20 vs. 66 days, P < 0.05) and to hospital discharge (21 vs. 51 days, P = 0.03) and better survival (day-60 probability of survival 91.6% vs. 68.1%, P = 0.02) in comparison with the control group.ConclusionCCP added to standard treatment was not associated with a significant improvement in the primary and secondary outcomes. A predefined subgroup analysis showed a significant benefit of CCP among patients who received a larger amount of neutralizing antibodies.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04433910.FundingBundesministerium für Gesundheit (German Federal Ministry of Health): ZMVI1-2520COR802.

The janus-kinase inhibitor ruxolitinib in SARS-CoV-2 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), which is associated with high morbidity and mortality, especially in elder patients. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening complication of COVID-19 and has been linked with severe hyperinflammation. Dexamethasone has emerged as standard of care for COVID-19 associated respiratory failure. In a non-randomized prospective phase II multi-center study, we asked whether targeted inhibition of Janus kinase-mediated cytokine signaling using ruxolitinib is feasible and efficacious in SARS-CoV-2- induced ARDS with hyperinflammation. Sixteen SARS-CoV-2 infected patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for ARDS were treated with ruxolitinib in addition to standard treatment. Ruxolitinib treatment was well tolerated and 13 patients survived at least the first 28 days on treatment, which was the primary endpoint of the trial. Immediate start of ruxolitinib after deterioration was associated with improved outcome, as was a lymphocyte-to-neutrophils ratio above 0.07. Together, treatment with the janus-kinase inhibitor ruxolitinib is feasible and might be efficacious in COVID-19 induced ARDS patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. The trial has been registered under EudraCT-No.: 2020-001732-10 and NCT04359290.