Objective To determine whether tocilizumab improves clinical outcomes for patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). Design Randomised, open label trial. Setting Nine hospitals in Brazil, 8 May to 17 July 2020. Participants Adults with confirmed covid-19 who were receiving supplemental oxygen or mechanical ventilation and had abnormal levels of at least two serum biomarkers (C reactive protein, D dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, or ferritin). The data monitoring committee recommended stopping the trial early, after 129 patients had been enrolled, because of an increased number of deaths at 15 days in the tocilizumab group. Interventions Tocilizumab (single intravenous infusion of 8 mg/kg) plus standard care (n=65) versus standard care alone (n=64). Main outcome measure The primary outcome, clinical status measured at 15 days using a seven level ordinal scale, was analysed as a composite of death or mechanical ventilation because the assumption of odds proportionality was not met. Results A total of 129 patients were enrolled (mean age 57 (SD 14) years; 68% men) and all completed follow-up. All patients in the tocilizumab group and two in the standard care group received tocilizumab. 18 of 65 (28%) patients in the tocilizumab group and 13 of 64 (20%) in the standard care group were receiving mechanical ventilation or died at day 15 (odds ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 3.66; P=0.32). Death at 15 days occurred in 11 (17%) patients in the tocilizumab group compared with 2 (3%) in the standard care group (odds ratio 6.42, 95% confidence interval 1.59 to 43.2). Adverse events were reported in 29 of 67 (43%) patients who received tocilizumab and 21 of 62 (34%) who did not receive tocilizumab. Conclusions In patients with severe or critical covid-19, tocilizumab plus standard care was not superior to standard care alone in improving clinical outcomes at 15 days, and it might increase mortality. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04403685.
1 January 2020 in Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
The infection caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spreads worldwide and is considered a pandemic. The most common manifestation of SARS-CoV-2 infection (coronavirus disease 2019 - COVID-19) is viral pneumonia with varying degrees of respiratory compromise and up to 40% of hospitalized patients might develop acute respiratory distress syndrome. Several clinical trials evaluated the role of corticosteroids in non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome with conflicting results. We designed a trial to evaluate the effectiveness of early intravenous dexamethasone administration on the number of days alive and free of mechanical ventilation within 28 days after randomization in adult patients with moderate or severe acute respiratory distress syndrome due to confirmed or probable COVID-19. This is a pragmatic, prospective, randomized, stratified, multicenter, open-label, controlled trial including 350 patients with early-onset (less than 48 hours before randomization) moderate or severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, defined by the Berlin criteria, due to COVID-19. Eligible patients will be randomly allocated to either standard treatment plus dexamethasone (Intervention Group) or standard treatment without dexamethasone (Control Group). Patients in the intervention group will receive dexamethasone 20mg intravenous once daily for 5 days, followed by dexamethasone 10mg IV once daily for additional 5 days or until intensive care unit discharge, whichever occurs first. The primary outcome is ventilator-free days within 28 days after randomization, defined as days alive and free from invasive mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes are all-cause mortality rates at day 28, evaluation of the clinical status at day 15 assessed with a 6-level ordinal scale, mechanical ventilation duration from randomization to day 28, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score evaluation at 48 hours, 72 hours and 7 days and intensive care unit -free days within 28.
1 January 2020 in Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
To define the epidemiological profile and the main determinants of morbidity and mortality in noncardiac high surgical risk patients in Brazil. This was a prospective, observational and multicenter study. All noncardiac surgical patients admitted to intensive care units, i.e., those considered high risk, within a 1-month period were evaluated and monitored daily for a maximum of 7 days in the intensive care unit to determine complications. The 28-day postoperative, intensive care unit and hospital mortality rates were evaluated. Twenty-nine intensive care units participated in the study. Surgeries were performed in 25,500 patients, of whom 904 (3.5%) were high-risk (95% confidence interval - 95%CI 3.3% - 3.8%) and were included in the study. Of the participating patients, 48.3% were from private intensive care units, and 51.7% were from public intensive care units. The length of stay in the intensive care unit was 2.0 (1.0 - 4.0) days, and the length of hospital stay was 9.5 (5.4 - 18.6) days. The complication rate was 29.9% (95%CI 26.4 - 33.7), and the 28-day postoperative mortality rate was 9.6% (95%CI 7.4 - 12.1). The independent risk factors for complications were the Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 (SAPS 3; odds ratio - OR = 1.02; 95%CI 1.01 - 1.03) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score (SOFA) on admission to the intensive care unit (OR = 1.17; 95%CI 1.09 - 1.25), surgical time (OR = 1.001, 95%CI 1.000 - 1.002) and emergency surgeries (OR = 1.93, 95%CI, 1.10 - 3.38). In addition, there were associations with 28-day mortality (OR = 1.032; 95%CI 1.011 - 1.052), SAPS 3 (OR = 1.041; 95%CI 1.107 - 1.279), SOFA (OR = 1.175, 95%CI 1.069 - 1.292) and emergency surgeries (OR = 2.509; 95%CI 1.040 - 6.051). Higher prognostic scores, elderly patients, longer surgical times and emergency surgeries were strongly associated with higher 28-day mortality and more complications during the intensive care unit stay.
Tweetable abstract Increased age is a strong risk factor for mortality in patients with COVID-19. Understanding the dynamic changes in plasma biomarkers associated with age is crucial for unravelling the intricate interplay between ageing, immune response and outcomes.https://bit.ly/3BWgSjP
1 January 2022 in Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.
Shorter courses of antimicrobial therapy have been shown to be non-inferior to longer durations for the management of several infections. However, data on critically ill patients with severe infections by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB) are scarce. In the duratiOn of theraPy in severe infecTIons by MultIdrug-reSistant gram-nEgative bacteria (OPTIMISE) trial, we assessed the non-inferiority of 7-day versus 14-day antimicrobial therapy for patients with intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired severe infections by MDR-GNB. This was a randomised multicenter, open-label, parallel controlled, non-inferiority trial. Adult patients with severe infections by MDR-GNB initiated ≥ 48 h of ICU admission were eligible if they were hemodynamically stable and without fever > 48 h on the 7th day of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Patients were 1:1 randomised to discontinue antimicrobial therapy on the 7th (± 1) day or to continue for a total of 14 (± 1) days. The primary outcome was clinical failure, defined as death or relapse of infection within 28 days of randomisation. An upper edge of the two-tailed 95% confidence interval (CI) of the delta between the clinical failure rate in the 7- and the 14-day lower than 10% in both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses was set as the non-inferiority criteria. A total of 106 patients composed the ITT population: 59 and 47 allocated to 7- and 14-day groups, respectively. The PP population included 75 patients: 47 and 28 in the 7- and 14-day groups, respectively. Clinical failure occurred in 42.4% and 44.7% of the ITT population in 7- and 14-day groups, respectively, (risk difference (RD) − 2.3, 95%CI − 21.3 to 16.7), and in 46.8% and 50.0% of the PP population in 7- and 14-day groups, respectively (RD − 3.2, 95%CI − 26.6 to 20.2). Most infections were of the respiratory tract (73/68.9%) and caused by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (42/39.6%). The study was interrupted before reaching planned sample size due to low recruitment rate. The OPTIMISE trial could not determine the non-inferiority of 7-day compared to 14-day therapy for severe infections caused by MDR-GNB due to early termination related to the low recruitment rate. Trial registration: NCT05210387 on January 13, 2022.