A simplified pneumonia severity index (PSI) for clinical outcome prediction in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The Pneumonia Score Index (PSI) was developed to estimate the risk of dying within 30 days of presentation for community-acquired pneumonia patients and is a strong predictor of 30-day mortality after COVID-19. However, three of its required 20 variables (skilled nursing home, altered mental status and pleural effusion) are not discreetly available in the electronic medical record (EMR), resulting in manual chart review for these 3 factors. The goal of this study is to compare a simplified 17-factor version (PSI-17) to the original (denoted PSI-20) in terms of prediction of 30-day mortality in COVID-19. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, the hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between 2/28/20-5/28/20 were identified to compare the predictive performance between PSI-17 and PSI-20. Correlation was assessed between PSI-17 and PSI-20, and logistic regressions were performed for 30-day mortality. The predictive abilities were compared by discrimination, calibration, and overall performance. RESULTS: Based on 1,138 COVID-19 patients, the correlation between PSI-17 and PSI-20 was 0.95. Univariate logistic regression showed that PSI-17 had performance similar to PSI-20, based on AUC, ICI and Brier Score. After adjusting for confounding variables by multivariable logistic regression, PSI-17 and PSI-20 had AUCs (95% CI) of 0.85 (0.83-0.88) and 0.86 (0.84-0.89), respectively, indicating no significant difference in AUC at significance level of 0.05. CONCLUSION: PSI-17 and PSI-20 are equally effective predictors of 30-day mortality in terms of several performance metrics. PSI-17 can be obtained without the manual chart review, which allows for automated risk calculations within an EMR. PSI-17 can be easily obtained and may be a comparable alternative to PSI-20.

Efficacy and safety of pegzilarginase in arginase 1 deficiency (PEACE): a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre trial.

Background: Arginase 1 Deficiency (ARG1-D) is a rare debilitating, progressive, inherited, metabolic disease characterized by marked increases in plasma arginine (pArg) and its metabolites, with increased morbidity, substantial reductions in quality of life, and premature mortality. Effective treatments that can lower arginine and improve clinical outcomes is currently lacking. Pegzilarginase is a novel human arginase 1 enzyme therapy. The present trial aimed to demonstrate efficacy of pegzilarginase on pArg and key mobility outcomes. Methods: This Phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial (clinicaltrials.govNCT03921541, EudraCT 2018-004837-34), randomized patients with ARG1-D 2:1 to intravenously/subcutaneously once-weekly pegzilarginase or placebo in conjunction with their individualized disease management. It was conducted in 7 countries; United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Austria, France, Germany, Italy. Primary endpoint was change from baseline in pArg after 24 weeks; key secondary endpoints were change from baseline at Week 24 in Gross Motor Function Measure part E (GMFM-E) and 2-min walk test (2MWT). Full Analysis Set was used for the analyses. Findings: From 01 May 2019 to 29 March 2021, 32 patients were enrolled and randomized (pegzilarginase, n = 21; placebo, n = 11). Pegzilarginase lowered geometric mean pArg from 354.0 µmol/L to 86.4 µmol/L at Week 24 vs 464.7 to 426.6 µmol/L for placebo (95% CI: -67.1%, -83.5%; p < 0.0001) and normalized levels in 90.5% of patients (vs 0% with placebo). In addition, clinically relevant functional mobility improvements were demonstrated with pegzilarginase treatment. These effects were sustained long-term through additional 24 weeks of subsequent exposure. Pegzilarginase was well-tolerated, with adverse events being mostly transient and mild/moderate in severity. Interpretation: These results support pegzilarginase as the first potential treatment to normalize pArg in ARG1-D and achieve clinically meaningful improvements in functional mobility. Funding: Aeglea BioTherapeutics.

Evaluating parental personal utility of pediatric genetic and genomic testing in a diverse, multilingual population.

There is increasing evidence of the clinical utility of genetic and genomic testing (GT); however, factors influencing personal utility of GT, especially in diverse, multilingual populations, remain unclear. We explored these factors in a diverse cohort of parents/guardians (participants) whose children received clinical GT through the NYCKidSeq program. A total of 847 participants completed surveys at baseline, post-results disclosure, and 6 months (6m) post-results. The largest population groups were Hispanic/Latino(a) (48%), White/European American (24%), and Black/African American (16%). Personal utility was assessed using the Personal Utility (PrU) scale, adapted for pediatric populations and included on the surveys. Three PrU subscales were identified using factor analysis: practical, educational, and parental psychological utility. Overall personal utility summary score and the three subscales significantly decreased after receiving results and over time. Hispanic/Latino(a) participants identified greater overall personal utility than European American and African American participants at all time points (p < 0.001) as did participants whose children received positive/likely positive results compared with those with negative and uncertain results (post-results: p < 0.001 and p < 0.001; 6m post-results: p = 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively). Post-results, higher subscale scores were associated with lower education levels (practical, parental psychological: p ≤ 0.02) and higher levels of trust in the healthcare system (practical, parental psychological: p ≤ 0.04). These findings help to understand the perspectives of diverse parents/guardians, which is critical to tailoring pre- and post-test counseling across a variety of populations and clinical settings.