Effect of Hydroxychloroquine on Clinical Status at 14 Days in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Data on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are needed. Objective: To determine whether hydroxychloroquine is an efficacious treatment for adults hospitalized with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a multicenter, blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial conducted at 34 hospitals in the US. Adults hospitalized with respiratory symptoms from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were enrolled between April 2 and June 19, 2020, with the last outcome assessment on July 17, 2020. The planned sample size was 510 patients, with interim analyses planned after every 102 patients were enrolled. The trial was stopped at the fourth interim analysis for futility with a sample size of 479 patients. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to hydroxychloroquine (400 mg twice daily for 2 doses, then 200 mg twice daily for 8 doses) (n = 242) or placebo (n = 237). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was clinical status 14 days after randomization as assessed with a 7-category ordinal scale ranging from 1 (death) to 7 (discharged from the hospital and able to perform normal activities). The primary outcome was analyzed with a multivariable proportional odds model, with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) greater than 1.0 indicating more favorable outcomes with hydroxychloroquine than placebo. The trial included 12 secondary outcomes, including 28-day mortality. Results: Among 479 patients who were randomized (median age, 57 years; 44.3% female; 37.2% Hispanic/Latinx; 23.4% Black; 20.1% in the intensive care unit; 46.8% receiving supplemental oxygen without positive pressure; 11.5% receiving noninvasive ventilation or nasal high-flow oxygen; and 6.7% receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation), 433 (90.4%) completed the primary outcome assessment at 14 days and the remainder had clinical status imputed. The median duration of symptoms prior to randomization was 5 days (interquartile range [IQR], 3 to 7 days). Clinical status on the ordinal outcome scale at 14 days did not significantly differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (median [IQR] score, 6 [4-7] vs 6 [4-7]; aOR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.73 to 1.42]). None of the 12 secondary outcomes were significantly different between groups. At 28 days after randomization, 25 of 241 patients (10.4%) in the hydroxychloroquine group and 25 of 236 (10.6%) in the placebo group had died (absolute difference, -0.2% [95% CI, -5.7% to 5.3%]; aOR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.54 to 2.09]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults hospitalized with respiratory illness from COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve clinical status at day 14. These findings do not support the use of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 among hospitalized adults. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04332991.

Association of Elevated Plasma Interleukin-18 Level With Increased Mortality in a Clinical Trial of Statin Treatment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: A high plasma level of inflammasome mediator interleukin-18 was associated with mortality in observational acute respiratory distress syndrome cohorts. Statin exposure increases both inflammasome activation and lung injury in mouse models. We tested whether randomization to statin therapy correlated with increased interleukin-18 in the ARDS Network Statins for Acutely Injured Lungs from Sepsis trial. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of randomized controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Multicenter North American clinical trial, the ARDS Network Statins for Acutely Injured Lungs from Sepsis. PATIENTS: Six hundred eighty-three subjects with infection-related acute respiratory distress syndrome, representing 92% of the original trial population. INTERVENTIONS: Random assignment of rosuvastatin or placebo for up to 28 days or 3 days after ICU discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We measured plasma interleukin-18 levels in all Statins for Acutely Injured Lungs from Sepsis patients with sample available at day 0 (baseline, n = 683) and day 3 (after randomization, n = 588). We tested the association among interleukin-18 level at baseline, rising interleukin-18, and the impact of statin therapy on 60-day mortality, adjusting for severity of illness. Baseline plasma interleukin-18 level greater than or equal to 800 pg/mL was highly associated with 60-day mortality, with a hazard of death of 2.3 (95% CI, 1.7-3.1). Rising plasma interleukin-18 was also associated with increased mortality. For each unit increase in log2 (interleukin-18) at day 3 compared with baseline, the hazard of death increased by 2.3 (95% CI, 1.5-3.5). Subjects randomized to statin were significantly more likely to experience a rise in plasma interleukin-18 levels. Subjects with acute kidney injury, shock, low baseline interleukin-18, and those not receiving systemic corticosteroids were more likely to experience rising interleukin-18. Randomization to statin therapy was associated with rising in interleukin-18 in all of those subsets, however. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated baseline plasma interleukin-18 was associated with higher mortality in sepsis-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome. A rise in plasma interleukin-18 was also associated with increased mortality and was more common in subjects randomized to statin therapy in this clinical trial.

Validation of a continuous, arterial pressure-based cardiac output measurement: a multicenter, prospective clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The present study compared measurements of cardiac output by an arterial pressure-based cardiac output (APCO) analysis method with measurement by intermittent thermodilution cardiac output (ICO) via pulmonary artery catheter in a clinical setting. METHODS: The multicenter, prospective clinical investigation enrolled patients with a clinical indication for cardiac output monitoring requiring pulmonary artery and radial artery catheters at two hospitals in the United States, one hospital in France, and one hospital in Belgium. In 84 patients (69 surgical patients), the cardiac output was measured by analysis of the arterial pulse using APCO and was measured via pulmonary artery catheter by ICO; to establish a reference comparison, the cardiac output was measured by continuous cardiac output (CCO). Data were collected continuously by the APCO and CCO technologies, and at least every 4 hours by ICO. No clinical interventions were made as part of the study. RESULTS: For APCO compared with ICO, the bias was 0.20 l/min, the precision was +/- 1.28 l/min, and the limits of agreement were -2.36 l/m to 2.75 l/m. For CCO compared with ICO, the bias was 0.66 l/min, the precision was +/- 1.05 l/min, and the limits of agreement were -1.43 l/m to 2.76 l/m. The ability of APCO and CCO to assess changes in cardiac output was compared with that of ICO. In 96% of comparisons, APCO tracked the change in cardiac output in the same direction as ICO. The magnitude of change was comparable 59% of the time. For CCO, 95% of comparisons were in the same direction, with 58% of those changes being of similar magnitude. CONCLUSION: In critically ill patients in the intensive care unit, continuous measurement of cardiac output using either APCO or CCO is comparable with ICO. Further study in more homogeneous populations may refine specific situations where APCO reliability is strongest.