Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 5 de 5
Ajouter des filtres

Base de données
Type de document
Gamme d'année
Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22280247


Background: We investigated whether abatacept, a selective costimulation modulator, provides additional benefit when added to standard-of-care for patients hospitalized with Covid-19. Methods: We conducted a master protocol to investigate immunomodulators for potential benefit treating patients hospitalized with Covid-19 and report results for abatacept. Intravenous abatacept (one-time dose 10 mg/kg, maximum dose 1000 mg) plus standard of care (SOC) was compared with shared placebo plus SOC. Primary outcome was time-to-recovery by day 28. Key secondary endpoints included 28-day mortality. Results: Between October 16, 2020 and December 31, 2021, a total of 1019 participants received study treatment (509 abatacept; 510 shared placebo), constituting the modified intention-to-treat cohort. Participants had a mean age 54.8 (SD 14.6) years, 60.5% were male, 44.2% Hispanic/Latino and 13.7% Black. No statistically significant difference for the primary endpoint of time-to-recovery was found with a recovery-rate-ratio of 1.14 (95% CI 1.00-1.29; p=0.057) compared with placebo. We observed a substantial improvement in 28-day all-cause mortality with abatacept versus placebo (11.0% vs. 15.1%; odds ratio [OR] 0.62 [95% CI 0.41-0.94]), leading to 38% lower odds of dying. Improvement in mortality occurred for participants requiring oxygen/noninvasive ventilation at randomization. Subgroup analysis identified the strongest effect in those with baseline C-reactive protein >75mg/L. We found no statistically significant differences in adverse events, with safety composite index slightly favoring abatacept. Rates of secondary infections were similar (16.1% for abatacept; 14.3% for placebo). Conclusions: Addition of single-dose intravenous abatacept to standard-of-care demonstrated no statistically significant change in time-to-recovery, but improved 28-day mortality. Trial registration: (NCT04593940).

Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22280245


BackgroundImmune dysregulation contributes to poorer outcomes in severe Covid-19. Immunomodulators targeting various pathways have improved outcomes. We investigated whether infliximab provides benefit over standard of care. MethodsWe conducted a master protocol investigating immunomodulators for potential benefit in treatment of participants hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia. We report results for infliximab (single dose infusion) versus shared placebo both with standard of care. Primary outcome was time to recovery by day 29 (28 days after randomization). Key secondary endpoints included 14-day clinical status and 28-day mortality. ResultsA total of 1033 participants received study drug (517 infliximab, 516 placebo). Mean age was 54.8 years, 60.3% were male, 48.6% Hispanic or Latino, and 14% Black. No statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint was seen with infliximab compared with placebo (recovery rate ratio 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.29; p=0.063). Median (IQR) time to recovery was 8 days (7, 9) for infliximab and 9 days (8, 10) for placebo. Participants assigned to infliximab were more likely to have an improved clinical status at day 14 (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.05-1.66). Twenty-eight-day mortality was 10.1% with infliximab versus 14.5% with placebo, with 41% lower odds of dying in those receiving infliximab (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90). No differences in risk of serious adverse events including secondary infections. ConclusionsInfliximab did not demonstrate statistically significant improvement in time to recovery. It was associated with improved 14-day clinical status and substantial reduction in 28-day mortality compared with standard of care. Trial (NCT04593940).

Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22278025


Identification of the plasma proteomic changes of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is essential to understanding the pathophysiology of the disease and developing predictive models and novel therapeutics. We performed plasma deep proteomic profiling from 332 COVID-19 patients and 150 controls and pursued replication in an independent cohort (297 cases and 76 controls) to find potential biomarkers and causal proteins for three COVID-19 outcomes (infection, ventilation, and death). We identified and replicated 1,449 proteins associated with any of the three outcomes (841 for infection, 833 for ventilation, and 253 for death) that can be query on a web portal ( Using those proteins and machine learning approached we created and validated specific prediction models for ventilation (AUC>0.91), death (AUC>0.95) and either outcome (AUC>0.80). These proteins were also enriched in specific biological processes, including immune and cytokine signaling (FDR [≤] 3.72x10-14), Alzheimers disease (FDR [≤] 5.46x10-10) and coronary artery disease (FDR [≤] 4.64x10-2). Mendelian randomization using pQTL as instrumental variants nominated BCAT2 and GOLM1 as a causal proteins for COVID-19. Causal gene network analyses identified 141 highly connected key proteins, of which 35 have known drug targets with FDA-approved compounds. Our findings provide distinctive prognostic biomarkers for two severe COVID-19 outcomes (ventilation and death), reveal their relationship to Alzheimers disease and coronary artery disease, and identify potential therapeutic targets for COVID-19 outcomes.

Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21264250


Although vaccines effectively prevent COVID-19 in healthy individuals, they appear less immunogenic in individuals with chronic inflammatory diseases (CID) and/or under chronic immunosuppression, and there is uncertainty of their activity against emerging variants of concern in this population. Here, we assessed a cohort of 74 CID patients treated as monotherapy with chronic immunosuppressive drugs for functional antibody responses in serum against historical and variant SARS-CoV-2 viruses after immunization with Pfizer mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine. Longitudinal analysis showed the greatest reductions in neutralizing antibodies and Fc effector function capacity in individuals treated with TNF- inhibitors, and this pattern appeared worse against the B.1.617.2 Delta virus. Within five months of vaccination, serum neutralizing titers of the majority of CID patients fell below the presumed threshold correlate for antibody-mediated protection. Thus, further vaccine boosting or administration of long-acting prophylaxis (e.g., monoclonal antibodies) likely will be required to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in this susceptible population.

Preprint Dans Anglais | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21254427


The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by the largest mobilization of therapeutic convalescent plasma (CCP) in over a century. Initial identification of high titer units was based on dose-response data using the Ortho VITROS IgG assay. The proliferation of SARS-CoV-2 serological assays and non-uniform application has led to uncertainty about their interrelationships. The purpose of this study was to establish correlations and analogous cutoffs between commercially available serological tests (Ortho, Abbott, Roche), a spike ELISA, and a virus neutralization assay using convalescent plasma from a cohort of 79 donors from April 2020. Relationships relative to FDA-approved cutoffs under the CCP EUA were identified by linear regression and receiver operator characteristic curves. Relative to the Ortho VITROS assay, the r2 of the Abbott, Roche, the anti-Spike ELISA and the neutralizing assay were 0.58, 0.5, 0.82, and 0.44, respectively. The best correlative index for establishing high-titer units was 3.82 S/C for the Abbott, 10.89 COI for the Roche, 1:1,202 for the anti-Spike ELISA, and 1:200 by the neutralization assay. The overall agreement using derived cutoffs compared to the CCP EUA Ortho VITROS cutoff of 9.5 was 92.4% for Abbott, 84.8% for Roche, 87.3% for the anti-S ELISA and 78.5% for the neutralization assay. Assays based on antibodies against the nucleoprotein (Roche, Abbott) and neutralizing antibody tests were positively associated with the Ortho assay, although their ability to distinguish FDA high-titer specimens was imperfect. The resulting relationships help reconcile results from the large body of serological data generated during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Détails de la recherche