Outcomes of COVID-19 in hospitalized solid organ transplant recipients compared to a matched cohort of non-transplant patients at a national healthcare system in the United States.

Data describing outcomes of solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are variable, and the association between SOT status and mortality remains unclear. In this study, we compare clinical outcomes of SOT recipients hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 10, and September 1, 2020, to a matched cohort of non-SOT recipients at a national healthcare system in the United States (US). From a population of 43 461 hospitalized COVID-19-positive patients, we created a coarsened exact matched cohort of 4035 patients including 128 SOT recipients and 3907 weighted matched non-SOT controls. Multiple logistic regression was used to evaluate association between SOT status and clinical outcomes. Among the 4035 patients, median age was 60 years, 61.7% were male, 21.9% were Black/African American, and 50.8% identified as Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. Patients with a history of SOT were more likely to die within the study period when compared to matched non-SOT recipients (21.9% and 14.9%, respectively; odds ratio [OR] 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18-3.15). Moreover, SOT status was associated with increased odds of receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (OR [95% CI]: 2.34 [1.51-3.65]), developing acute kidney injury (OR [95% CI]: 2.41 [1.59-3.65]), and receiving vasopressor support during hospitalization (OR [95% CI]: 2.14 [1.31-3.48]).

Support for investigator-initiated clinical research involving investigational drugs or devices: the Clinical and Translational Science Award experience.

PURPOSE: Investigator-initiated research involving investigational drugs and devices is key to improving health. However, this requires the investigator to serve as a "sponsor-investigator," which can be complex and overwhelming. The Investigational New Drug/Investigational Device Exemption (IND/IDE) Taskforce of the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) consortium carried out a survey to examine how academic health centers (AHCs) assist sponsor-investigators with regulatory responsibilities. METHOD: The 24 CTSA centers existing in 2008 were surveyed regarding regulatory oversight and support for sponsor-investigators. Responses were analyzed by descriptive statistics. The evaluation of survey responses yielded three models of institutional support/oversight. RESULTS: Nineteen centers and one affiliate responded. Eleven (55%) reported having an IND/IDE support office, increased from five (25%) prior to their CTSA award. The volume of investigator-initiated IND/IDE research was highly variable (measured by numbers of investigators, IND/IDE applications, and studies). Oversight, if done, was provided by either the IND/IDE office or elsewhere in the institution. Most IND/IDE offices assisted with IND/IDE submissions and preparation for external audits. Half reported advanced training for sponsor-investigators. Almost all reported a goal to increase IND/IDE research. Important issues include the need for robust training of investigator/staff, appropriate determination of IND-exempt research, and sufficient support for preparing IND/IDE applications. CONCLUSIONS: Investigator-initiated research involving IND/IDEs is essential, but complex. AHCs should examine how they support sponsor-investigators in meeting the complex requirements. A model of either expert consultation/support or full service will minimize risks to participants and institutions, and regulatory noncompliance.