RESUMO
The efficacy of convalescent plasma for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Although most randomized controlled trials have shown negative results, uncontrolled studies have suggested that the antibody content could influence patient outcomes. We conducted an open-label, randomized controlled trial of convalescent plasma for adults with COVID-19 receiving oxygen within 12 d of respiratory symptom onset ( NCT04348656 ). Patients were allocated 2:1 to 500 ml of convalescent plasma or standard of care. The composite primary outcome was intubation or death by 30 d. Exploratory analyses of the effect of convalescent plasma antibodies on the primary outcome was assessed by logistic regression. The trial was terminated at 78% of planned enrollment after meeting stopping criteria for futility. In total, 940 patients were randomized, and 921 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Intubation or death occurred in 199/614 (32.4%) patients in the convalescent plasma arm and 86/307 (28.0%) patients in the standard of care arm-relative risk (RR) = 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.43, P = 0.18). Patients in the convalescent plasma arm had more serious adverse events (33.4% versus 26.4%; RR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.02-1.57, P = 0.034). The antibody content significantly modulated the therapeutic effect of convalescent plasma. In multivariate analysis, each standardized log increase in neutralization or antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity independently reduced the potential harmful effect of plasma (odds ratio (OR) = 0.74, 95% CI 0.57-0.95 and OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.87, respectively), whereas IgG against the full transmembrane spike protein increased it (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.14-2.05). Convalescent plasma did not reduce the risk of intubation or death at 30 d in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Transfusion of convalescent plasma with unfavorable antibody profiles could be associated with worse clinical outcomes compared to standard care.
Assuntos
COVID-19/terapia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Brasil/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Canadá/epidemiologia , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Imunização Passiva , Análise de Intenção de Tratamento , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Soroterapia para COVID-19RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Tailoring hypothermia duration to ischemia duration may improve outcome from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. We investigated the association between the hypothermia/ischemia ratio and functional outcome in a secondary analysis of data from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Amiodarone, Lidocaine, or Placebo Study trial. DESIGN: Cohort study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients screened for Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium-Amiodarone, Lidocaine, or Placebo Study. SETTING: Multicenter study across North America. PATIENTS: Adult, nontraumatic, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients screened for Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium-Amiodarone, Lidocaine, or Placebo Study who survived to hospital admission and received targeted temperature management between May 2012 and October 2015. INTERVENTIONS: Targeted temperature management in comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. We defined hypothermia/ischemia ratio as total targeted temperature management time (initiation through rewarming) divided by calculated total ischemia time (approximate time of arrest [9-1-1 call or emergency medical services-witnessed] to return of spontaneous circulation). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was hospital survival with good functional status (modified Rankin Score, 0-3) at hospital discharge. We fitted logistic regression models to estimate the association between hypothermia/ischemia ratio and the primary outcome, adjusting for demographics, arrest characteristics, and Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium enrolling site. A total of 3,429 patients were eligible for inclusion, of whom 36.2% were discharged with good functional outcome. Patients had a mean age of 62.0 years (SD, 15.8), with 69.7% male, and 58.0% receiving lay-rescuer cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Median time to return of spontaneous circulation was 21.1 minutes (interquartile range, 16.1-26.9), and median duration of targeted temperature management was 32.9 hours (interquartile range, 23.7-37.8). A total of 2,579 had complete data and were included in adjusted regression analyses. After adjustment for patient characteristics and Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium site, a greater hypothermia/ischemia ratio was associated with increased survival with good functional outcome (odds ratio, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.82-2.23). This relationship, however, appears to be primarily driven by time to return of spontaneous circulation in this patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Although a larger hypothermia/ischemia ratio was associated with good functional outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in this cohort, this association is primarily driven by duration of time to return of spontaneous circulation. Tailoring duration of targeted temperature management based on duration of time to return of spontaneous circulation or patient characteristics requires prospective study.
Assuntos
Coma/etiologia , Coma/terapia , Hipotermia Induzida/métodos , Isquemia Miocárdica/fisiopatologia , Parada Cardíaca Extra-Hospitalar/complicações , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Temperatura Corporal , Coma/mortalidade , Serviços Médicos de Emergência , Feminino , Mortalidade Hospitalar/tendências , Humanos , Hipotermia Induzida/mortalidade , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Isquemia Miocárdica/etiologia , América do Norte , Parada Cardíaca Extra-Hospitalar/mortalidade , Parada Cardíaca Extra-Hospitalar/terapia , Avaliação de Processos e Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Alta do Paciente , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Fatores de Tempo , Centros de Traumatologia/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been associated with a higher risk of developing malignancy and mortality, and patients with VTE may therefore benefit from increased surveillance. We aimed to construct a clinical predictive score that could classify patients with VTE according to their risk for developing these outcomes. METHODS: Observational cohort study using an existing clinical registry in a tertiary academic teaching hospital in Buenos Aires, Argentina. 1264 adult patients greater than 17 years of age presented new VTE between June 2006 and December 2011 and were included in the registry. We excluded patients with previous or incident cancer, those who died during the first month, and those with less than one year of follow up (< 5%). 540 patients were included. Primary outcome was new cancer diagnosis during one year of follow-up, secondary composite outcome was any new cancer diagnosis or death. The score was developed using a multivariable logistic regression model to predict cancer or death. RESULTS: During follow-up, one-quarter (26.4%) of patients developed cancer (9.2%) or died (23.7%). Patients with the primary outcome had more comorbidities, were more likely to have previous thromboembolism and less likely to have recent surgery. The final score developed for predicting cancer alone included previous episode of VTE, recent surgery and comorbidity (Charlson comorbidity score), [AUC of 0.75 (95% CI 0.66-0.84) and 0.79 (95% CI 0.63-0.95) in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively]. The version of this score developed to predict cancer or death included age, albumin level, comorbidity, previous episode of VTE, and recent surgery [AUC = 0.72 (95% CI 0.66-0.78) and 0.71 (95% CI 0.63-0.79) in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: A simple clinical predictive score accurately estimates patients' risk of developing cancer or death following newly diagnosed VTE. This tool could be used to help reassure low risk patients, or to identify high-risk patients that might benefit from closer surveillance and additional investigations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01372514.