Association between long-term oxygen therapy provided outside the guidelines and mortality in patients with COPD

IntroductionHypoxaemia is a frequent complication of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). To prevent its consequences, supplemental oxygen therapy is recommended by international respiratory societies. However, despite clear recommendations, some patients receive long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT), while they do not meet prescription criteria. While evidence suggests that acute oxygen supply at high oxygenation targets increases COPD mortality, its chronic effects on COPD mortality remain unclear. Thus, the study will aim to evaluate through a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis (IPD-MA), the association of LTOT prescription outside the guidelines on survival over time in COPD.MethodsSystematic review and IPD-MA will be conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses IPD guidelines. Electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, OpenGrey and BioRxiv/MedRxix) will be scanned to identify relevant studies (cohort of stable COPD with arterial oxygen tension data available, with indication of LTOT filled out at the moment of the study and with a survival follow-up). The anticipated search dates are January–February 2022. The main outcome will be the association between LTOT and time to all-cause mortality according to hypoxaemia severity, after controlling for potential covariates and all available clinical characteristics. Quantitative data at the level of the individual patient will be used in a one-step approach to develop and validate a prognostic model with a Cox regression analysis. The one-step IPD-MA will be conducted to study the association and the moderators of association between supplemental oxygen therapy and mortality. Multilevel survival analyses using Cox-mixed effects models will be performed.Ethics and disseminationAs a protocol for a systematic review, a formal ethics committee review is not required. Only studies with institutional approval from an ethics committee and anonymised IPD will be included. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations in conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020209823.

546. Therapeutic Effect of Regdanvimab in Patients with Mild to Moderate COVID-19: Day 28 Results from a Multicentre, Randomised, Controlled Pivotal Trial

Background Regdanvimab is a monoclonal antibody with activity against SARS-CoV-2. A Phase 2/3 study with two parts is currently ongoing and data up to Day 28 of Part 1 is available while the data from 1315 patients enrolled in Part 2 are expected in June 2021. Methods This phase 2/3, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, double-blind study with 2 parts is aimed to assess the therapeutic efficacy of regdanvimab in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, not requiring supplemental oxygen therapy. Patients aged >18 with the onset of symptoms within 7 days were eligible to be enrolled. Results In Part 1, 307 patients (101, 103, and 103 patients in the regdanvimab 40 mg/kg, regdanvimab 80 mg/kg, and placebo groups, respectively) were confirmed to have COIVD-19 by RT-qPCR at Day 1 (or Day 2). Regdanvimab significantly reduced the proportion of patients who required hospitalization or supplemental oxygen therapy compared to placebo (8.7% in the placebo vs. 4.0% in the regdanvimab 40 mg/kg). The difference in events rate was even larger in patients who met the high-risk criteria and confirmed a 66.1% reduction in patients receiving regdanvimab 40 mg/kg (Table 1). The median time to clinical recovery was shortened by 2.9 days (7.18 days for regdanvimab 40 mg/kg and 10.03 days for placebo; high-risk). Also, greater reductions from baseline viral load were shown in regdanvimab groups (Figure 1). The safety results confirmed that the regdanvimab was safe and well-tolerated. Occurrence of adverse events (Table 2) and results of other safety assessments were generally comparable among the 3 groups. The overall rate of infusion-related reaction was low and no serious adverse events or deaths were reported. The anti-drug antibody positive rate was low in the regdanvimab groups (1.4% in regdanvimab vs. 4.5% in placebo), and no antibody-dependent enhancement was reported. Conclusion Results from the first part of the study indicate that regdanvimab may lower the rate of hospitalisation or requirement of oxygen supplementation, with the greatest benefit noted in patients at high-risk of progressing to severe COVID-19. The second part of the study remains ongoing and blinded. Therefore, results for the primary endpoint are forthcoming and will be presented at IDWeek. Disclosures Michael G. Ison, MD, MS, Celltrion, Inc. (Consultant) Jin Yong Kim, MD, MPH, Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Oana Sandulescu, MD, PhD, Algernon Pharmaceuticals (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Atea Pharmaceuticals (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Diffusion Pharmaceuticals (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Liliana-Lucia Preotescu, MD, PhD, Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Norma Erendira Rivera Martinez, MD, Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Marta Dobryanska, MD, Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Victoria Birlutiu, Assoc. Prof. M.D. Ph.D., Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania & Hasso Plattner Foundation (Research Grant or Support) Egidia Gabriela Miftode, MD, PhD, Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Natalia Gaibu, MD, Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Olga Adriana Caliman-Sturdza, MD, PhD, Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Stefan cel Mare University of Suceava, Romania (Research Grant or Support) Simin-Aysel Florescu, MD, PhD, Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Anca Streinu-Cercel, MD, PhD, Assoc.Prof. Infectious diseases, Algernon Pharmaceuticals (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Atea Pharmaceuticals (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Celltrion, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Diffusion Pharmaceuticals (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Sang Joon Lee, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Sung Hyun Kim, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Il Sung Chang, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Yun Ju Bae, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Jee Hye Suh, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Mi Rim Kim, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Da Re Chung, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Sun Jung Kim, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Seul Gi Lee, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Ga Hee Park, n/a, Celltrion, Inc. (Employee) Joong Sik Eom, MD, PhD, Celltrion, Inc. (Consultant)

Possible harm from glucocorticoid drugs misuse in the early phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection: a narrative review of the evidence

Since the publication of the RECOVERY trial, the use of glucocorticoid drugs (GC) has spread for the treatment of severe COVID-19 worldwide. However, the benefit of dexamethasone was largest in patients who received mechanical ventilation or supplemental oxygen therapy, while no benefit was found among patients without hypoxemia. In addition, a positive outcome was found in patients who received dexamethasone after several days of symptoms, while possible harm could exist if administered early. The right time interval for GC administration is still a matter of debate. Previous studies showed that an early GC use during the first phase of the disease, when viral replication peaks, may negatively affect the innate immune response through several mechanisms, such as the inhibition of pro-inflammatory and antiviral cytokine production and signaling pathway, including type I interferon, that is fundamental to counteract the virus and that was found to be impaired in several patients with life-threatening COVID-19. The GC misuse can lead to a more severe disease even in patients who do not have the established risk factors, such as obesity and cardiovascular diseases. In our focused review, we describe the role of immune response in viral infections, especially SARS-CoV-2, and discuss the potential harms of GC misuse in COVID-19.

Breakthrough infection with SARS-CoV-2 and its predictors among healthcare workers in a medical college and hospital complex in Delhi, India

Introduction The study objective was to determine the breakthrough infection rate of Covid-19 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in those vaccinated with either BBV152 or AZD1222 (ChAdOx1-S) vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs). Methods A cross-sectional analysis was conducted a medical college and hospital complex in Delhi, India through telephonic interviews among HCWs who had received at-least one dose of a Covid-19 vaccine during January to March 2021. Breakthrough infections were operationally defined as occurrence of Covid-19 infection 14 days after administration of two doses of either Covid-19 vaccine. Results We enrolled 326 HCWs with mean (SD) age of 29.1 (85.9) years including 212 (65%) males. Two hundred eighty (90.9%) HCWs were fully vaccinated while 46 (14.1%) were partially vaccinated. There were 168 (51.5%) BBV152 and 158 (48.5%) AZD1222 (ChAdOx1-S) recipients. A total of 36 (11%, 95% C.I. 8.1, 14.9) breakthrough infections were reported in the HCWs. The median (IQR) time until incidence of Covid-19 infection since receiving second dose of either Covid-19 vaccine was 46 (28.2, 54.7) days. Furthermore, Covid-19 infections occurred in 65 (19.9%, 95% C.I 15.9, 24.6) HCWs vaccinated with at-least one dose of vaccine but prior to receiving their second dose or <14 days post second dose. Most breakthrough infection cases (94.4%) were mild and did not require supplemental oxygen therapy. HCWs with past history of natural Covid-19 infection with recovery were 4.5 times less likely to experience a Covid-19 infection after partial vaccination. Conclusion Nearly one in nine HCWs experienced a Covid-19 breakthrough infection in the present study.

Hyperoxemia Is Associated With Mortality in Critically Ill Children

Multiple studies among adults have suggested a non-linear relationship between arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) and clinical outcomes. Meta-analyses in this population suggest that high levels of supplemental oxygen resulting in hyperoxia are associated with mortality. This mini-review focuses on the non-neonatal pediatric literature examining the relationship between PaO2 and mortality. While only one pilot pediatric randomized-controlled trials exists, over the past decade, there have been at least eleven observational studies examining the relationship between PaO2 values and mortality in critically ill children. These analyses of mixed-case pediatric ICU populations have generally reported a parabolic (“u-shaped”) relationship between PaO2 and mortality, similar to that seen in the adult literature. However, the estimates of the point at which hyperoxemia becomes deleterious have varied widely (300–550 mmHg). Where attempted, this effect has been robust to analyses restricted to the first PaO2 value obtained, those obtained within 24 h of admission, anytime during admission, and the number of hyperoxemic blood gases over time. These findings have also been noted when using various methods of risk-adjustment (accounting for severity of illness scores or complex chronic conditions). Similar relationships were found in the majority of studies restricted to patients undergoing care after cardiac arrest. Taken together, the majority of the literature suggests that there is a robust parabolic relationship between PaO2 and risk-adjusted pediatric ICU mortality, but that the exact threshold at which hyperoxemia becomes deleterious is unclear, and likely beyond the typical target value for most clinical indications. Findings suggest that clinicians should remain judicious and thoughtful in the use of supplemental oxygen therapy in critically ill children.

LB0001 MAVRILIMUMAB IMPROVES OUTCOMES IN PHASE 2 TRIAL IN NON-MECHANICALLY-VENTILATED PATIENTS WITH SEVERE COVID-19 PNEUMONIA AND SYSTEMIC HYPERINFLAMMATION

Background:Granulocyte/macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) is a cytokine both vital to lung homeostasis and important in regulating inflammation and autoimmunity1,2,3 that has been implicated in the pathogenesis of respiratory failure and death in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation.4-6 Mavrilimumab is a human anti GM-CSF receptor α monoclonal antibody capable of blocking GM-CSF signaling and downregulating the inflammatory process.Objectives:To evaluate the effect of mavrilimumab on clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation.Methods:This on-going, global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled seamless transition Phase 2/3 trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mavrilimumab in adults hospitalized with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and hyperinflammation. The Phase 2 portion comprised two groups: Cohort 1 patients requiring supplemental oxygen therapy without mechanical ventilation (to maintain SpO2 ≥92%) and Cohort 2 patients requiring mechanical ventilation, initiated ≤48 hours before randomization. Here, we report results for Phase 2, Cohort 1: 116 patients with severe COVID- 19 pneumonia and hyperinflammation from USA, Brazil, Chile, Peru, and South Africa; randomized 1:1:1 to receive a single intravenous administration of mavrilimumab (10 or 6 mg/kg) or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was proportion of patients alive and free of mechanical ventilation at Day 29. Secondary endpoints included [1] time to 2-point clinical improvement (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases COVID-19 ordinal scale), [2] time to return to room air, and [3] mortality, all measured through Day 29. The prespecified evidentiary standard was a 2-sided α of 0.2 (not adjusted for multiplicity).Results:Baseline demographics were balanced among the intervention groups; patients were racially diverse (43% non-white), had a mean age of 57 years, and 49% were obese (BMI ≥ 30). All patients received the local standard of care: 96% received corticosteroids (including dexamethasone) and 29% received remdesivir. No differences in outcomes were observed between the 10 mg/kg and 6 mg/kg mavrilimumab arms. Results for these groups are presented together. Mavrilimumab recipients had a reduced requirement for mechanical ventilation and improved survival: at day 29, the proportion of patients alive and free of mechanical ventilation was 12.3 percentage points higher with mavrilimumab (86.7% of patients) than placebo (74.4% of patients) (Primary endpoint; p=0.1224). Mavrilimumab recipients experienced a 65% reduction in the risk of mechanical ventilation or death through Day 29 (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.35; p=0.0175). Day 29 mortality was 12.5 percentage points lower in mavrilimumab recipients (8%) compared to placebo (20.5%) (p=0.0718). Mavrilimumab recipients had a 61% reduction in the risk of death through Day 29 (HR= 0.39; p=0.0726). Adverse events occurred less frequently in mavrilimumab recipients compared to placebo, including secondary infections and thrombotic events (known complications of COVID-19). Thrombotic events occurred only in the placebo arm (5/40 [12.5%]).Conclusion:In a global, diverse population of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and hyperinflammation receiving supplemental oxygen therapy, corticosteroids, and remdesivir, a single infusion of mavrilimumab reduced progression to mechanical ventilation and improved survival. Results indicate mavrilimumab, a potent inhibitor of GM-CSF signaling, may have added clinical benefit on top of the current standard therapy for COVID-19. Of potential importance is that this treatment strategy is mechanistically independent of the specific virus or viral variant.References:[1]Trapnell, Nat Rev Dis Pri, 2019[2]Wicks, Nat Rev Immunology, 2015[3]Hamilton, Exp Rev Clin Immunol, 2015[4]De Luca, Lancet Rheumatol, 2020[5]Cremer, Lancet Rheumatol, 2021[6]Zhou, Nature, 2020Disclosure of Interests:Lara Pupim Employee of: Kiniksa, Shareholder of: Kiniksa, Tisha S. Wang Consultant of: Partner Therapeutics; steering committee for Kinevant BREATHE clinical trial, Kristin Hudock: None declared, Joshua Denson: None declared, Nyda Fourie: None declared, Luis Hercilla Vasquez: None declared, Kleber Luz: None declared, Mohammad Madjid Grant/research support from: Kiniksa, Kirsten McHarry: None declared, José Francisco Saraiva: None declared, Eduardo Tobar: None declared, Teresa Zhou Employee of: Kiniksa, Shareholder of: Kiniksa, Manoj Samant Employee of: Kiniksa, Shareholder of: Kiniksa, Joseph Pirrello Employee of: Kiniksa, Shareholder of: Kiniksa, Fang Fang Employee of: Kiniksa, Shareholder of: Kiniksa, John F. Paolini Employee of: Kiniksa, Shareholder of: Kiniksa, Arian Pano Employee of: Kiniksa, Shareholder of: Kiniksa, Bruce C. Trapnell: None declared

Severe and critical COVID-19 in pregnancy: A case series from Montreal

Background Optimal obstetric management for women with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is not known. We describe the management of six pregnant women requiring in-hospital care for severe COVID-19. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify pregnant women who tested positive for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) between 15 March and 30 June 2020. A subset of women meeting criteria for severe COVID-19 was included. Results Four women required non-invasive supplemental oxygen therapy and two required mechanical ventilation. Four women were discharged from hospital undelivered and two required preterm delivery. One woman had a pulmonary embolism, and two required re-admission for worsening symptoms. Conclusion Management of pregnant women with severe COVID-19 is complex and should involve multidisciplinary expertise. Avoiding early delivery may be a safe option. We recommend an individualized approach to care, including careful consideration of the expected risks and benefits of expectant obstetric management versus delivery.

DEXAMETHASONE USE IN MANAGEMENT OF COVID19: A REVIEW

The lack of active 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic treatment creates a challenge for researchers and scientists to find the most appropriate treatment for this disease. Dexamethasone, according to the findings of the RECOVERY clinical trial, declared mid-June 2020 in print media was one of those therapies. Although the results from retrospective studies are not strongly supportive of corticosteroid routine use in COVID-19 despite the signals for some benefits, the dedicated RECOVERY trial found a significant reduction in death with dexamethasone only in severe cases on a ventilator or moderate cases on supplemental oxygen therapy nevertheless, no benefit observed in mild to moderate cases requiring no oxygen. More studies are still necessary to substantiate conclusive use with dexamethasone in COVID-19. This narrative review attempts to summarize all available shreds of evidence from previously published research articles on the use of dexamethasone in COVID-19 pandemic treatment.

Lysosome activation in peripheral blood mononuclear cells and prognostic significance of circulating LC3B in COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly worldwide, causing significant mortality. There is a mechanistic relationship between intracellular coronavirus replication and deregulated autophagosome–lysosome system. We performed transcriptome analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from COVID-19 patients and identified the aberrant upregulation of genes in the lysosome pathway. We further determined the capability of two circulating markers, namely microtubule-associated proteins 1A/1B light chain 3B (LC3B) and (p62/SQSTM1) p62, both of which depend on lysosome for degradation, in predicting the emergence of moderate-to-severe disease in COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization for supplemental oxygen therapy. Logistic regression analyses showed that LC3B was associated with moderate-to-severe COVID-19, independent of age, sex and clinical risk score. A decrease in LC3B concentration &lt;5.5 ng/ml increased the risk of oxygen and ventilatory requirement (adjusted odds ratio: 4.6; 95% CI: 1.1–22.0; P = 0.04). Serum concentrations of p62 in the moderate-to-severe group were significantly lower in patients aged 50 or below. In conclusion, lysosome function is deregulated in PBMCs isolated from COVID-19 patients, and the related biomarker LC3B may serve as a novel tool for stratifying patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 from those with asymptomatic or mild disease. COVID-19 patients with a decrease in LC3B concentration &lt;5.5 ng/ml will require early hospital admission for supplemental oxygen therapy and other respiratory support.