Tocilizumab treatment in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: Elevated levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines are observed in severe COVID-19 infections, and cytokine storm is associated with disease severity. Tocilizumab, an interleukin-6 receptor antagonist, is used to treat chimeric antigen receptor T cell-induced cytokine release syndrome and may attenuate the dysregulated immune response in COVID-19. We compared outcomes among tocilizumab-treated and non-tocilizumab-treated critically ill COVID-19 patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a retrospective observational study conducted at a tertiary referral center investigating all patients admitted to the intensive care unit for COVID-19 who had a disposition from the hospital because of death or hospital discharge between March 1 and May 18, 2020 (n = 96). The percentages of death and secondary infections were compared between patients treated with tocilizumab (n = 55) and those who were not (n = 41). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: More tocilizumab-treated patients required mechanical ventilation (44/55, 80%) compared to non-treated patients (15/41, 37%; P < 0.001). Of 55 patients treated with tocilizumab, 32 (58%) were on mechanical ventilation at the time of administration, and 12 (22%) progressed to mechanical ventilation after treatment. Of patients treated with tocilizumab requiring mechanical ventilation, 30/44 (68%) were intubated within 1 day of administration. Fewer deaths were observed among tocilizumab-treated patients, both in the overall population (15% vs 37%; P = 0.02) and among the subgroup of patients requiring mechanical ventilation (14% vs 60%; P = 0.001). Secondary infections were not different between the 2 groups (tocilizumab: 31%, non-tocilizumab: 17%; P = 0.16) and were predominantly related to invasive devices, such as urinary and central venous catheters. CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab treatment was associated with fewer deaths compared to non-treatment despite predominantly being used in patients with more advanced respiratory disease.

Increased service use following Medicaid expansion is mostly temporary: evidence from California's low income health program.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has already resulted in expanded eligibility for Medicaid in 27 states, including California, as of 2014. One major concern about the Medicaid expansion is that a high level of need among the newly eligible may lead to runaway costs, which could overwhelm state budgets when federal subsidies no longer cover 100 percent of the expansion population's costs in 2017. Although cost increases as a result of the newly eligible are likely, an even more important question is whether these increases will be temporary or permanent. Evidence from California's Low Income Health Program (LIHP) suggests that cost and utilization increases among newly eligible Medicaid beneficiaries will be mostly temporary. This policy brief presents data showing a significant decline in the use of hospital inpatient care and in emergency room visits after one year of enrollment in LIHP, and a stable, not increasing, rate of outpatient service use. Because LIHP provided health care coverage from 2011 to 2013 in advance of the full Medicaid expansion, our findings suggest that early and significant investments in infrastructure and in improving the process of care delivery can effectively address the pent-up demand for health care services of previously uninsured populations.

In ten California counties, notable progress in system integration within the safety net, although challenges remain.

When fully implemented, the Affordable Care Act will expand insurance coverage to the currently uninsured, and experiments in delivery and payment under the law's auspices could produce greater efficiencies in how care is delivered. Both factors may accelerate the development of one viable model to streamline care, integrated delivery systems--coordinated care networks that deliver all needed health services to a defined population. Through interviews and surveys, we examined ten California counties that participated in two federally and locally funded initiatives to redesign how care is delivered to predominantly poor and uninsured populations. We found substantial progress in assessing and managing access to specialists, monitoring and promoting quality, and offering disease management and care coordination training in a majority of counties. However, efforts to coordinate care, electronically disseminate patient information, and align financial incentives were less successful or more difficult to assess. We posit that integrated delivery systems could improve care efficiency and quality and make countywide safety-net systems a desirable source of care for newly insured patients under health reform.