RESUMO
COVID-19 is a heterogenous disease. Biomarker-based approaches may identify patients at risk for severe disease, who may be more likely to benefit from specific therapies. Our objective was to identify and validate a plasma protein signature for severe COVID-19. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Two hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: One hundred sixty-seven hospitalized adults with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We measured 713 plasma proteins in 167 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 using a high-throughput platform. We classified patients as nonsevere versus severe COVID-19, defined as the need for high-flow nasal cannula, mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or death, at study entry and in 7-day intervals thereafter. We compared proteins measured at baseline between these two groups by logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, symptom duration, and comorbidities. We used lead proteins from dysregulated pathways as inputs for elastic net logistic regression to identify a parsimonious signature of severe disease and validated this signature in an external COVID-19 dataset. We tested whether the association between corticosteroid use and mortality varied by protein signature. One hundred ninety-four proteins were associated with severe COVID-19 at the time of hospital admission. Pathway analysis identified multiple pathways associated with inflammatory response and tissue repair programs. Elastic net logistic regression yielded a 14-protein signature that discriminated 90-day mortality in an external cohort with an area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88-0.95). Classifying patients based on the predicted risk from the signature identified a heterogeneous response to treatment with corticosteroids (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Inpatients with COVID-19 express heterogeneous patterns of plasma proteins. We propose a 14-protein signature of disease severity that may have value in developing precision medicine approaches for COVID-19 pneumonia.
RESUMO
Clinical deterioration of hospitalized patients is common and can lead to critical illness and death. Rapid response teams (RRTs) assess and treat high-risk patients with signs of clinical deterioration to prevent further worsening and subsequent adverse outcomes. Whether activation of the RRT early in the course of clinical deterioration impacts outcomes, however, remains unclear. We sought to characterize the relationship between increasing time to RRT activation after physiologic deterioration and short-term patient outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter cohort study. SETTING: Three academic hospitals in Pennsylvania. PATIENTS: We included the RRT activation of a hospitalization for non-ICU inpatients greater than or equal to 18 years old. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary exposure was time to RRT activation after physiologic deterioration. We selected four Cardiac Arrest Risk Triage (CART) score thresholds a priori from which to measure time to RRT activation (CART score ≥ 12, ≥ 16, ≥ 20, and ≥ 24). The primary outcome was 7-day mortality-death or discharge to hospice care within 7 days of RRT activation. For each CART threshold, we modeled the association of time to RRT activation duration with 7-day mortality using multivariable fractional polynomial regression. Increased time from clinical decompensation to RRT activation was associated with higher risk of 7-day mortality. This relationship was nonlinear, with odds of mortality increasing rapidly as time to RRT activation increased from 0 to 4 hours and then plateauing. This pattern was observed across several thresholds of physiologic derangement. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing time to RRT activation was associated in a nonlinear fashion with increased 7-day mortality. This relationship appeared most marked when using a CART score greater than 20 threshold from which to measure time to RRT activation. We suggest that these empirical findings could be used to inform RRT delay definitions in further studies to determine the clinical impact of interventions focused on timely RRT activation.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Physiological decompensation of hospitalized patients is common and is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Research surrounding patient decompensation has been hampered by the absence of a robust definition of decompensation and lack of standardized clinical criteria with which to identify patients who have decompensated. We aimed to: 1) develop a consensus definition of physiological decompensation and 2) to develop clinical criteria to identify patients who have decompensated. DESIGN: We utilized a three-phase, modified electronic Delphi (eDelphi) process, followed by a discussion round to generate consensus on the definition of physiological decompensation and on criteria to identify decompensation. We then validated the criteria using a retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. SETTING: Quaternary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adult patients admitted to the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania who had triggered a rapid response team (RRT) response between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-nine experts participated in the eDelphi. Participation was high across the three survey rounds (first round: 93%, second round: 94%, and third round: 98%). The expert panel arrived at a consensus definition of physiological decompensation, "An acute worsening of a patient's clinical status that poses a substantial increase to an individual's short-term risk of death or serious harm." Consensus was also reached on criteria for physiological decompensation. Invasive mechanical ventilation, severe hypoxemia, and use of vasopressor or inotrope medication were bundled as criteria for our novel decompensation metric: the adult inpatient decompensation event (AIDE). Patients who met greater than one AIDE criteria within 24 hours of an RRT call had increased adjusted odds of 7-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.1 [95% CI, 2.5-6.7]) and intensive care unit transfer (aOR, 20.6 [95% CI, 14.2-30.0]). CONCLUSIONS: Through the eDelphi process, we have reached a consensus definition of physiological decompensation and proposed clinical criteria with which to identify patients who have decompensated using data easily available from the electronic medical record, the AIDE criteria.
RESUMO
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has to date granted approval or emergency use authorization to three vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and coronavirus disease 2019. In clinical trials and real-use observational studies, the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine, as well as the Moderna mRNA-1273 messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine, have demonstrated high efficacy and few adverse events. CASE SUMMARY: A 20-year-old male college student in good health developed tinnitus and hematuria shortly after vaccination and progressed swiftly to a syndrome of: systemic inflammation; acute kidney injury requiring hemodialysis; acute, bilateral, complete sensorineural hearing loss; radiographic evidence of acute multifocal ischemic strokes; pericardial effusion complicated by tamponade physiology requiring pericardial evacuation; pleural effusions requiring evacuation; and systemic capillary leak. An extensive clinical and research investigation, including cytokine analysis, whole blood cytometry by time of flight, and whole exome sequencing, did not reveal a definitive explanatory mechanism. CONCLUSION: While the overall safety profile of the BNT162b2 coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine remains excellent for the general population, rare serious events have been reported. In this report, we describe a case of multisystem inflammation and organ dysfunction of unknown mechanism beginning shortly after administration of the first dose of BNT162b2 coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine in a previously healthy recipient.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Plasma interleukin-1 beta may influence sepsis mortality, yet recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist did not reduce mortality in randomized trials. We tested for heterogeneity in the treatment effect of recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist by baseline plasma interleukin-1 beta or interleukin-1 receptor antagonist concentration. DESIGN: Retrospective subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Multicenter North American and European clinical trial. PATIENTS: Five hundred twenty-nine subjects with sepsis and hypotension or hypoperfusion, representing 59% of the original trial population. INTERVENTIONS: Random assignment of placebo or recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist × 72 hours. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We measured prerandomization plasma interleukin-1 beta and interleukin-1 receptor antagonist and tested for statistical interaction between recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist treatment and baseline plasma interleukin-1 receptor antagonist or interleukin-1 beta concentration on 28-day mortality. There was significant heterogeneity in the effect of recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist treatment by plasma interleukin-1 receptor antagonist concentration whether plasma interleukin-1 receptor antagonist was divided into deciles (interaction p = 0.046) or dichotomized (interaction p = 0.028). Interaction remained present across different predicted mortality levels. Among subjects with baseline plasma interleukin-1 receptor antagonist above 2,071 pg/mL (n = 283), recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist therapy reduced adjusted mortality from 45.4% to 34.3% (adjusted risk difference, -0.12; 95% CI, -0.23 to -0.01), p = 0.044. Mortality in subjects with plasma interleukin-1 receptor antagonist below 2,071 pg/mL was not reduced by recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (adjusted risk difference, +0.07; 95% CI, -0.04 to +0.17), p = 0.230. Interaction between plasma interleukin-1 beta concentration and recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist treatment was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: We report a heterogeneous effect of recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist on 28-day sepsis mortality that is potentially predictable by plasma interleukin-1 receptor antagonist in one trial. A precision clinical trial of recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist targeted to septic patients with high plasma interleukin-1 receptor antagonist may be worthy of consideration.