Early Convalescent Plasma for High-Risk Outpatients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Early administration of convalescent plasma obtained from blood donors who have recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) may prevent disease progression in acutely ill, high-risk patients with Covid-19. METHODS: In this randomized, multicenter, single-blind trial, we assigned patients who were being treated in an emergency department for Covid-19 symptoms to receive either one unit of convalescent plasma with a high titer of antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or placebo. All the patients were either 50 years of age or older or had one or more risk factors for disease progression. In addition, all the patients presented to the emergency department within 7 days after symptom onset and were in stable condition for outpatient management. The primary outcome was disease progression within 15 days after randomization, which was a composite of hospital admission for any reason, seeking emergency or urgent care, or death without hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included the worst severity of illness on an 8-category ordinal scale, hospital-free days within 30 days after randomization, and death from any cause. RESULTS: A total of 511 patients were enrolled in the trial (257 in the convalescent-plasma group and 254 in the placebo group). The median age of the patients was 54 years; the median symptom duration was 4 days. In the donor plasma samples, the median titer of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies was 1:641. Disease progression occurred in 77 patients (30.0%) in the convalescent-plasma group and in 81 patients (31.9%) in the placebo group (risk difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% credible interval, -6.0 to 9.8; posterior probability of superiority of convalescent plasma, 0.68). Five patients in the plasma group and 1 patient in the placebo group died. Outcomes regarding worst illness severity and hospital-free days were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of Covid-19 convalescent plasma to high-risk outpatients within 1 week after the onset of symptoms of Covid-19 did not prevent disease progression. (SIREN-C3PO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04355767.).

Improved mortality analysis in early-phase dose-ranging clinical trials for emergency medical diseases using Bayesian time-to-event models with active comparators.

Emergency medical diseases (EMDs) are the leading cause of death worldwide. A time-to-death analysis is needed to accurately identify the risks and describe the pattern of an EMD because the mortality rate can peak early and then decline. Dose-ranging Phase II clinical trials are essential for developing new therapies for EMDs. However, most dose-finding trials do not analyze mortality as a time-to-event endpoint. We propose three Bayesian dose-response time-to-event models for a secondary mortality analysis of a clinical trial: a two-group (active treatment vs control) model, a three-parameter sigmoid EMAX model, and a hierarchical EMAX model. The study also incorporates one specific active treatment as an active comparator in constructing three new models. We evaluated the performance of these six models and a very popular independent model using simulated data motivated by a randomized Phase II clinical trial focused on identifying the most effective hyperbaric oxygen dose to achieve favorable functional outcomes in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. The results show that the three-group, EMAX, and EMAX model with an active comparator produce the smallest averaged mean squared errors and smallest mean absolute biases. We provide a new approach for time-to-event analysis in early-phase dose-ranging clinical trials for EMDs. The EMAX model with an active comparator can provide valuable insights into the mortality analysis of new EMDs or other conditions that have changing risks over time. The restricted mean survival time, a function of the model's hazards, is recommended for displaying treatment effects for EMD research.

Selection of a statistical analysis method for the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended endpoint for estimating the probability of favorable outcome in future severe TBI clinical trials.

The Glasgow outcome scale-extended (GOS-E), an ordinal scale measure, is often selected as the endpoint for clinical trials of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Traditionally, GOS-E is analyzed as a fixed dichotomy with favorable outcome defined as GOS-E ≥ 5 and unfavorable outcome as GOS-E < 5. More recent studies have defined favorable vs unfavorable outcome utilizing a sliding dichotomy of the GOS-E that defines a favorable outcome as better than a subject's predicted prognosis at baseline. Both dichotomous approaches result in loss of statistical and clinical information. To improve on power, Yeatts et al proposed a sliding scoring of the GOS-E as the distance from the cutoff for favorable/unfavorable outcomes, and therefore used more information found in the original GOS-E to estimate the probability of favorable outcome. We used data from a published TBI trial to explore the ramifications to trial operating characteristics by analyzing the sliding scoring of the GOS-E as either dichotomous, continuous, or ordinal. We illustrated a connection between the ordinal data and time-to-event (TTE) data to allow use of Bayesian software that utilizes TTE-based modeling. The simulation results showed that the continuous method with continuity correction offers higher power and lower mean squared error for estimating the probability of favorable outcome compared to the dichotomous method, and similar power but higher precision compared to the ordinal method. Therefore, we recommended that future severe TBI clinical trials consider analyzing the sliding scoring of the GOS-E endpoint as continuous with continuity correction.

What have we learned from the RAMPART and ESETT randomized controlled trials?

Lessons learned from the Rapid Anticonvulsant Medication Prior to Arrival Trial (RAMPART) and Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) trials are considered in three ways. First, by asking about the questions the trials were primarily designed to answer, then about the context of the intervention and characteristics of the patients described in secondary analyses, and finally, about what was learned about how to conduct trials in this space. The talk concludes with suggestions and a vision for how to best conduct future trials investigating status epilepticus. This paper was presented at the 8th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures held in September 2022.

Why ketamine.

We present the rationale for testing ketamine as an add-on therapy for treating benzodiazepine refractory (established) status epilepticus. In animal studies, ketamine terminates benzodiazepine refractory status epilepticus by interfering with the pathophysiological mechanisms and is a neuroprotectant. Ketamine does not suppress respiration when used for sedation and anesthesia. A Series of reports suggest that ketamine can help terminate refractory and super refractory status epilepticus. We propose to use 1 or 3 mg/Kg ketamine intravenously based on animal-to-human conversion and pharmacokinetic studies. This paper was presented at the 8th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures held in September 2022.

Randomized Trial of Three Anticonvulsant Medications for Status Epilepticus.

BACKGROUND: The choice of drugs for patients with status epilepticus that is refractory to treatment with benzodiazepines has not been thoroughly studied. METHODS: In a randomized, blinded, adaptive trial, we compared the efficacy and safety of three intravenous anticonvulsive agents - levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate - in children and adults with convulsive status epilepticus that was unresponsive to treatment with benzodiazepines. The primary outcome was absence of clinically evident seizures and improvement in the level of consciousness by 60 minutes after the start of drug infusion, without additional anticonvulsant medication. The posterior probabilities that each drug was the most or least effective were calculated. Safety outcomes included life-threatening hypotension or cardiac arrhythmia, endotracheal intubation, seizure recurrence, and death. RESULTS: A total of 384 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive levetiracetam (145 patients), fosphenytoin (118), or valproate (121). Reenrollment of patients with a second episode of status epilepticus accounted for 16 additional instances of randomization. In accordance with a prespecified stopping rule for futility of finding one drug to be superior or inferior, a planned interim analysis led to the trial being stopped. Of the enrolled patients, 10% were determined to have had psychogenic seizures. The primary outcome of cessation of status epilepticus and improvement in the level of consciousness at 60 minutes occurred in 68 patients assigned to levetiracetam (47%; 95% credible interval, 39 to 55), 53 patients assigned to fosphenytoin (45%; 95% credible interval, 36 to 54), and 56 patients assigned to valproate (46%; 95% credible interval, 38 to 55). The posterior probability that each drug was the most effective was 0.41, 0.24, and 0.35, respectively. Numerically more episodes of hypotension and intubation occurred in the fosphenytoin group and more deaths occurred in the levetiracetam group than in the other groups, but these differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of benzodiazepine-refractory convulsive status epilepticus, the anticonvulsant drugs levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate each led to seizure cessation and improved alertness by 60 minutes in approximately half the patients, and the three drugs were associated with similar incidences of adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; ESETT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01960075.).

Treatment of Toxin-Related Status Epilepticus With Levetiracetam, Fosphenytoin, or Valproate in Patients Enrolled in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We describe a subset of patients with toxin-related precipitants of seizures/status epilepticus enrolled in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT). METHODS: The ESETT was a prospective, double-blinded, adaptive trial evaluating levetiracetam, valproate, and fosphenytoin as second-line agents in benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus in adults and children. The primary outcome was the absence of seizures and improvement in the level of consciousness 1 hour after study drug administration. In this post hoc analysis, the safety and efficacy of second-line agents in a subset of patients with toxin-related seizures are described. RESULTS: A total of 249 adults and 229 children were enrolled in the ESETT. Toxin-related seizures occurred in 29 (11.6%) adults and 1 child (0.4%). In adults, men were more likely to have toxin-related seizures than women (25 of 145, 17.2% versus 4 of 104, 3.9%). The most common toxin-related precipitants were alcohol withdrawal and cocaine, 11(37%) of 30 patients each. Cocaine was used with other substances by most patients 10 (91%) of 11, most commonly with an opioid 7 (64%) of 11. For alcohol withdrawal-related seizures, treatment successes with levetiracetam, valproate, and fosphenytoin were 3 (100%) of 3, 3 (50%) of 6, and 1 (50%) of 2, respectively. For cocaine-related seizures, treatment success was 1 (14%) of 7 for levetiracetam, 0 (0%) of 1 for valproate, and 1 (33%) of 3 for fosphenytoin. One patient who used cocaine and an opioid received fosphenytoin and developed life-threatening hypotension. CONCLUSION: In the ESETT, approximately 1 in 10 adult patients with status epilepticus presented with a toxin-related seizure. Alcohol withdrawal and cocaine/opioid use were the most common toxin-related precipitants. Toxin-related benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus was successfully treated with a single dose of second-line antiseizure medication in 42% of the patients.

An adaptive clinical trial design to identify the target dose of tenecteplase for treatment of acute pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Fibrinolytic therapy with tenecteplase has been proposed for patients with pulmonary embolism but the optimal dose is unknown. Higher-than-necessary dosing is likely to cause excess bleeding. We designed an adaptive clinical trial to identify the minimum and assumed safest dose of tenecteplase that maintains efficacy. METHODS: We propose a Bayesian adaptive, placebo-controlled, group-sequential dose-finding trial using response-adaptive randomization to preferentially allocate subjects to the most promising doses, dual analyses strategies (continuous and dichotomized) using a gatekeeping approach to maximize clinical impact, and interim stopping rules to efficiently address competing trial objectives. The operating characteristics of the proposed design were evaluated using Monte Carlo simulation across multiple hypothetical efficacy scenarios. RESULTS: Simulation demonstrated response-adaptive randomization can preferentially allocate subjects to doses which appear to be performing well based on interim data. Interim decision-making, including the interim evaluation of both analysis strategies with gatekeeping, allows the trial to continue enrollment when success with the dichotomized analysis strategy appears sufficiently likely and to stop enrollment and declare superiority based on the continuous analysis strategy when there is little chance of ultimately declaring superiority with the dichotomized analysis. CONCLUSION: The proposed design allows evaluation of a greater number of dose levels than would be possible with a non-adaptive design and avoids the need to choose either the continuous or the dichotomized analysis strategy for the primary endpoint.

Efficacy of levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate for established status epilepticus by age group (ESETT): a double-blind, responsive-adaptive, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepine-refractory, or established, status epilepticus is thought to be of similar pathophysiology in children and adults, but differences in underlying aetiology and pharmacodynamics might differentially affect response to therapy. In the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) we compared the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate in established status epilepticus, and here we describe our results after extending enrolment in children to compare outcomes in three age groups. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, response-adaptive, randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients from 58 hospital emergency departments across the USA. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 2 years or older, had been treated for a generalised convulsive seizure of longer than 5 min duration with adequate doses of benzodiazepines, and continued to have persistent or recurrent convulsions in the emergency department for at least 5 min and no more than 30 min after the last dose of benzodiazepine. Patients were randomly assigned in a response-adaptive manner, using Bayesian methods and stratified by age group (<18 years, 18-65 years, and >65 years), to levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, or valproate. All patients, investigators, study staff, and pharmacists were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was absence of clinically apparent seizures with improved consciousness and without additional antiseizure medication at 1 h from start of drug infusion. The primary safety outcome was life-threatening hypotension or cardiac arrhythmia. The efficacy and safety outcomes were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01960075. FINDINGS: Between Nov 3, 2015, and Dec 29, 2018, we enrolled 478 patients and 462 unique patients were included: 225 children (aged <18 years), 186 adults (18-65 years), and 51 older adults (>65 years). 175 (38%) patients were randomly assigned to levetiracetam, 142 (31%) to fosphenyltoin, and 145 (31%) were to valproate. Baseline characteristics were balanced across treatments within age groups. The primary efficacy outcome was met in those treated with levetiracetam for 52% (95% credible interval 41-62) of children, 44% (33-55) of adults, and 37% (19-59) of older adults; with fosphenytoin in 49% (38-61) of children, 46% (34-59) of adults, and 35% (17-59) of older adults; and with valproate in 52% (41-63) of children, 46% (34-58) of adults, and 47% (25-70) of older adults. No differences were detected in efficacy or primary safety outcome by drug within each age group. With the exception of endotracheal intubation in children, secondary safety outcomes did not significantly differ by drug within each age group. INTERPRETATION: Children, adults, and older adults with established status epilepticus respond similarly to levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate, with treatment success in approximately half of patients. Any of the three drugs can be considered as a potential first-choice, second-line drug for benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus. FUNDING: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health.

Patterns of benzodiazepine underdosing in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to describe patterns of benzodiazepine use as first-line treatment of status epilepticus (SE) and test the association of benzodiazepine doses with response to second-line agents in patients enrolled in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT). METHODS: Patients refractory to an adequate dose of benzodiazepines for the treatment of SE were enrolled in ESETT. Choice of benzodiazepine, doses given prior to administration of second-line agent, route of administration, setting, and patient weight were characterized. These were compared with guideline-recommended dosing. Logistic regression was used to determine the association of the first dose of benzodiazepine and the cumulative benzodiazepine dose with the response to second-line agent. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty patients were administered 1170 doses of benzodiazepines (669 lorazepam, 398 midazolam, 103 diazepam). Lorazepam was most frequently administered intravenously in the emergency department, midazolam intramuscularly or intravenously by the emergency medical services personnel, and diazepam rectally prior to ambulance arrival. The first dose of the first benzodiazepine (N = 460) was lower than guideline recommendations in 76% of midazolam administrations and 81% of lorazepam administrations. Among all administrations, >85% of midazolam and >76% of lorazepam administrations were lower than recommended. Higher first or cumulative benzodiazepine doses were not associated with better outcomes or clinical seizure cessation in response to second-line medications in these benzodiazepine-refractory seizures. SIGNIFICANCE: Benzodiazepines as first-line treatment of SE, particularly midazolam and lorazepam, are frequently underdosed throughout the United States. This broad and generalizable cohort confirms prior single site reports that underdosing is both pervasive and difficult to remediate. (ESETT ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01960075.).

Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (EROCA): Results of a Randomized Feasibility Trial of Expedited Out-of-Hospital Transport.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Outcomes of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest depend on time to therapy initiation. We hypothesize that it would be feasible to select refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients for expedited transport based on real-time estimates of the 911 call to the emergency department (ED) arrival interval, and for emergency physicians to rapidly initiate ECPR in eligible patients. METHODS: In a 2-tiered emergency medical service with an ECPR-capable primary destination hospital, adults with refractory shockable or witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were randomized 4:1 to expedited transport or standard care if the predicted 911 call to ED arrival interval was less than or equal to 30 minutes. The primary outcomes were the proportion of subjects with 911 call to ED arrival less than or equal to 30 minutes and ED arrival to ECPR flow less than or equal to 30 minutes. RESULTS: Of 151 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest 911 calls, 15 subjects (10%) were enrolled. Five of 12 subjects randomized to expedited transport had an ED arrival time of less than or equal to 30 minutes (overall mean 32.5 minutes [SD 7.1]), and 5 were eligible for and treated with ECPR. Three of 5 ECPR-treated subjects had flow initiated in less than or equal to 30 minutes of ED arrival (overall mean 32.4 minutes [SD 10.9]). No subject in either group survived with a good neurologic outcome. CONCLUSION: The Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest trial did not meet predefined feasibility outcomes for selecting out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients for expedited transport and initiating ECPR in the ED. Additional research is needed to improve the accuracy of predicting the 911 call to ED arrival interval, optimize patient selection, and reduce the ED arrival to ECPR flow interval.

The association of patient weight and dose of fosphenytoin, levetiracetam, and valproic acid with treatment success in status epilepticus.

The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial was a blinded, comparative-effectiveness study of fosphenytoin, levetiracetam, and valproic acid in benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus. The primary outcome was clinical seizure cessation and increased responsiveness without additional anticonvulsant medications. Weight-based dosing was capped at 75 kg. Hence, patients weighing >75 kg received a lower mg/kg dose. Logistic regression models were developed in 235 adults to determine the association of weight (≤ or >75 kg, ≤ or >90 kg), sex, treatment, and weight-normalized dose with the primary outcome and solely seizure cessation. The primary outcome was achieved in 45.1% and 42.5% of those ≤75 kg and >75 kg, respectively. Using univariate analyses, the likelihood of success for those >75 kg (odds ratio [OR] = 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.54-1.51) or >90 kg (OR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.42-1.66) was not statistically different compared with those ≤75 kg or ≤90 kg, respectively. Similarly, other predictors were not significantly associated with primary outcome or clinical seizure cessation. Our findings suggest that doses, capped at 75 kg, likely resulted in concentrations greater than those needed for outcome. Studies that include drug concentrations and heavier individuals are needed to confirm these findings.

Patient and Surrogate Postenrollment Perspectives on Research Using the Exception From Informed Consent: An Integrated Survey.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: It is important for researchers interested in trials using the exception from informed consent to understand the views and experiences of enrolled individuals. Previous studies have shown that patient and surrogate attitudes are generally positive. These studies were small and did not include pediatric patients, and interviews were often conducted long after trial enrollment. This study sought to explore attitudes toward exception from informed consent in a larger sample and more contemporaneous setting. METHODS: A 10-item paper-and-pencil survey was integrated into the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial, a randomized trial of 3 treatments for benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus in pediatric and adult patients. Primary domains included attitudes toward trial enrollment, exception from informed consent, and community consultation. Simple descriptive statistics, χ2, and Fisher's exact tests were conducted. RESULTS: Of 317 patients and surrogates, 90% agreed with or were neutral about the statement "I am glad that I/my family member was included in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial research study," whereas 10% disagreed. Twenty-seven percent disagreed with enrollment in the study without prospective consent. Black participants were more likely than white, other race, and unknown-race participants to disagree with enrollment without prospective consent (36% versus 23%, 14%, and 14%, respectively). Participants indicated that patients (81%), their families (65%), and those at risk for seizures (51%) were most important to include in community consultation. CONCLUSION: This study aimed to explore attitudes toward exception from informed consent enrollment among participants at all sites in a large, multicenter exception from informed consent trial. General acceptance of trial enrollment was high; acceptance of exception from informed consent specifically was somewhat lower, especially among black participants. Our findings provide further support for targeted community consultation focusing on individuals with connections to the disease under study. Future research should focus on communication in the postenrollment period, especially with individuals who may have concerns about exception from informed consent.

Intensive Blood-Pressure Lowering in Patients with Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available to guide the choice of a target for the systolic blood-pressure level when treating acute hypertensive response in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. METHODS: We randomly assigned eligible participants with intracerebral hemorrhage (volume, <60 cm(3)) and a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 5 or more (on a scale from 3 to 15, with lower scores indicating worse condition) to a systolic blood-pressure target of 110 to 139 mm Hg (intensive treatment) or a target of 140 to 179 mm Hg (standard treatment) in order to test the superiority of intensive reduction of systolic blood pressure to standard reduction; intravenous nicardipine to lower blood pressure was administered within 4.5 hours after symptom onset. The primary outcome was death or disability (modified Rankin scale score of 4 to 6, on a scale ranging from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) at 3 months after randomization, as ascertained by an investigator who was unaware of the treatment assignments. RESULTS: Among 1000 participants with a mean (±SD) systolic blood pressure of 200.6±27.0 mm Hg at baseline, 500 were assigned to intensive treatment and 500 to standard treatment. The mean age of the patients was 61.9 years, and 56.2% were Asian. Enrollment was stopped because of futility after a prespecified interim analysis. The primary outcome of death or disability was observed in 38.7% of the participants (186 of 481) in the intensive-treatment group and in 37.7% (181 of 480) in the standard-treatment group (relative risk, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.85 to 1.27; analysis was adjusted for age, initial GCS score, and presence or absence of intraventricular hemorrhage). Serious adverse events occurring within 72 hours after randomization that were considered by the site investigator to be related to treatment were reported in 1.6% of the patients in the intensive-treatment group and in 1.2% of those in the standard-treatment group. The rate of renal adverse events within 7 days after randomization was significantly higher in the intensive-treatment group than in the standard-treatment group (9.0% vs. 4.0%, P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of participants with intracerebral hemorrhage to achieve a target systolic blood pressure of 110 to 139 mm Hg did not result in a lower rate of death or disability than standard reduction to a target of 140 to 179 mm Hg. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center; ATACH-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01176565 .).

The Effect of Goal-Directed Therapy on Patient Morbidity and Mortality After Traumatic Brain Injury: Results From the Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the impact of goal-directed therapy on outcome after traumatic brain injury, our team applied goal-directed therapy to standardize care in patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury, who were enrolled in a large multicenter clinical trial. DESIGN: Planned secondary analysis of data from Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III, a large, prospective, multicenter clinical trial. SETTING: Forty-two trauma centers within the Neurologic Emergencies Treatment Trials network. PATIENTS: Eight-hundred eighty-two patients were enrolled within 4 hours of injury after nonpenetrating traumatic brain injury characterized by Glasgow Coma Scale score of 4-12. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Physiologic goals were defined a priori in order to standardize care across 42 sites participating in Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III. Physiologic data collection occurred hourly; laboratory data were collected according to local ICU protocols and at a minimum of once per day. Physiologic transgressions were predefined as substantial deviations from the normal range of goal-directed therapy. Each hour where goal-directed therapy was not achieved was classified as a "transgression." Data were adjudicated electronically and via expert review. Six-month outcomes included mortality and the stratified dichotomy of the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. For each variable, the association between outcome and either: 1) the occurrence of a transgression or 2) the proportion of time spent in transgression was estimated via logistic regression model. RESULTS: For the 882 patients enrolled in Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III, mortality was 12.5%. Prolonged time spent in transgression was associated with increased mortality in the full cohort for hemoglobin less than 8 gm/dL (p = 0.0006), international normalized ratio greater than 1.4 (p < 0.0001), glucose greater than 180 mg/dL (p = 0.0003), and systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg (p < 0.0001). In the patient subgroup with intracranial pressure monitoring, prolonged time spent in transgression was associated with increased mortality for intracranial pressure greater than or equal to 20 mm Hg (p < 0.0001), glucose greater than 180 mg/dL (p = 0.0293), hemoglobin less than 8 gm/dL (p = 0.0220), or systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg (p = 0.0114). Covariates inversely related to mortality included: a single occurrence of mean arterial pressure less than 65 mm Hg (p = 0.0051) or systolic blood pressure greater than 180 mm Hg (p = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: The Progesterone for the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury III clinical trial rigorously monitored compliance with goal-directed therapy after traumatic brain injury. Multiple significant associations between physiologic transgressions, morbidity, and mortality were observed. These data suggest that effective goal-directed therapy in traumatic brain injury may provide an opportunity to improve patient outcomes.

Lessons from the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial.

Convulsive status epilepticus (SE) is a relatively common emergency condition affecting individuals of all ages. The primary goal of treatment is prompt termination of seizures. Where first-line treatment with benzodiazepine has failed to achieve this, a condition known as established SE (ESE), there is uncertainty about which agent to use next. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) is a 3-arm (valproate (VPA), fosphenytoin (FOS), levetiracetam (LEV)), phase III, double-blind randomized comparative effectiveness study in patients aged 2 years and above with established convulsive SE. Enrollment was completed in January 2019, and the results are expected later this year. We discuss lessons learnt during the conduct of the study in relation to the following: ethical considerations; trial design and practical implementation in emergency settings, including pediatric and adult populations; quality assurance; and outcome determination where treating emergency clinicians may lack specialist expertise. We consider that the ESETT is already informing both clinical practice and future trial design. This article is part of the Special Issue "Proceedings of the 7th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures".

Blood Pressure-Attained Analysis of ATACH 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We compared the rates of death or disability, defined by modified Rankin Scale score of 4 to 6, at 3 months in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage according to post-treatment systolic blood pressure (SBP)-attained status. METHODS: We divided 1000 subjects with SBP ≥180 mm Hg who were randomized within 4.5 hours of symptom onset as follows: SBP <140 mm Hg achieved or not achieved within 2 hours; subjects in whom SBP <140 mm Hg was achieved within 2 hours were further divided: SBP <140 mm Hg for 21 to 22 hours (reduced and maintained) or SBP was ≥140 mm Hg for at least 2 hours during the period between 2 and 24 hours (reduced but not maintained). RESULTS: Compared with subjects without reduction of SBP <140 mm Hg within 2 hours, subjects with reduction and maintenance of SBP <140 mm Hg within 2 hours had a similar rate of death or disability (relative risk of 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.29). The rates of neurological deterioration within 24 hours were significantly higher in reduced and maintained group (10.4%; relative risk, 1.98; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-3.62) and in reduced but not maintained group (11.5%; relative risk, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-3.75) compared with reference group. The rates of cardiac-related adverse events within 7 days were higher among subjects with reduction and maintenance of SBP <140 mmHg compared to subjects without reduction (11.2% versus 6.4%). CONCLUSIONS: No decline in death or disability but higher rates of neurological deterioration and cardiac-related adverse events were observed among intracerebral hemorrhage subjects with reduction with and without maintenance of intensive SBP goals. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01176565.

A systematic review of Federal Drug Administration Docket for community consultation and public disclosure in exception from informed consent trials.

BACKGROUND: Exception from informed consent imposes community consultation and public disclosure requirements on clinical investigation in critically ill and injured patients. In 2011, the Food and Drug Administration instructed sponsors to submit publically disclosed information to the Food and Drug Administration Docket, but to date there has been no comprehensive analysis of available data. We summarized the community consultation and public disclosure practices of exception from informed consent trials published on the Food and Drug Administration Docket in order to better understand the breadth of common practices that exists among acute care clinical research. METHODS: We performed quantitative and qualitative analysis of Docket FDA-1995-S-0036 from its initiation until June 2017 in order to summarize existing practices. We developed a 4-point scoring system to categorize public disclosure and community consultation based on inclusion of key components such as a detailed plan, schedule of events conducted, results, and materials uploaded. RESULTS: The 177 docket submissions represented 34 trials. Material related to public disclosure accounted for 49% of pages, community consultation 45%, and 6% other. The median Docket Review Content Score for public disclosure was 3 (mean: 2.5, range: 0-4) and 2 (mean: 2.1, range: 0-4) for community consultation materials. CONCLUSION: The public information contained in the Docket varies broadly by trial and content. Additionally, as evidenced by the wide range of the Docket Review Content Score, submission guidelines are not followed uniformly. Given the apparent uncertainty about what should be submitted, and the need for best practice recommendations, it is valuable to categorize and summarize existing community consultation and public disclosure content.

Very early administration of progesterone for acute traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. Progesterone has been shown to improve neurologic outcome in multiple experimental models and two early-phase trials involving patients with TBI. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, multicenter clinical trial in which patients with severe, moderate-to-severe, or moderate acute TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale score of 4 to 12, on a scale from 3 to 15, with lower scores indicating a lower level of consciousness) were randomly assigned to intravenous progesterone or placebo, with the study treatment initiated within 4 hours after injury and administered for a total of 96 hours. Efficacy was defined as an increase of 10 percentage points in the proportion of patients with a favorable outcome, as determined with the use of the stratified dichotomy of the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale score at 6 months after injury. Secondary outcomes included mortality and the Disability Rating Scale score. RESULTS: A total of 882 of the planned sample of 1140 patients underwent randomization before the trial was stopped for futility with respect to the primary outcome. The study groups were similar with regard to baseline characteristics; the median age of the patients was 35 years, 73.7% were men, 15.2% were black, and the mean Injury Severity Score was 24.4 (on a scale from 0 to 75, with higher scores indicating greater severity). The most frequent mechanism of injury was a motor vehicle accident. There was no significant difference between the progesterone group and the placebo group in the proportion of patients with a favorable outcome (relative benefit of progesterone, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.06; P=0.35). Phlebitis or thrombophlebitis was more frequent in the progesterone group than in the placebo group (relative risk, 3.03; CI, 1.96 to 4.66). There were no significant differences in the other prespecified safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical trial did not show a benefit of progesterone over placebo in the improvement of outcomes in patients with acute TBI. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and others; PROTECT III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00822900.).

Targeted Consent for Research on Standard of Care Interventions in the Emergency Setting.

OBJECTIVES: There has been significant debate over what consent process, if any, should be used for clinical trials that compare two or more interventions within the standard of care. Some claim that all clinical trials should obtain in-depth research consent because they use subjects to obtain data for the benefit of future patients. Others argue that clinical trials that are limited to interventions within the standard of care do not need to obtain research consent at all. Settling this debate is especially challenging in the emergency setting. The potential for significant morbidity and mortality provides a strong reason to obtain research consent for standard-of-care trials in the emergency setting. Yet, the emergency setting also introduces significant barriers to traditional in-depth research consent. The present article considers to what extent a targeted consent process can resolve these tensions. DATA SYNTHESIS: We first identified the ethical goals that are promoted by obtaining consent for standard-of-care research and the barriers to obtaining consent that arise in the emergency setting. We then evaluated whether, despite the barriers, it is possible to develop a targeted consent process that promotes the goals for consent in the context of standard-of-care trials. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted consent offers an ethically appropriate way to obtain consent for many standard-of-care trials in the emergency setting. For studies subject to U.S. regulations, and those subject to other regulations that include similar consent requirements, targeted consent's verbal disclosure and written form provide a way to satisfy research regulations without blocking valuable studies. For trials that qualify for a waiver of the consent requirements, targeted consent's verbal disclosure is preferable to waiving consent, provided a slight delay is consistent with appropriate care, and there is a capacitated patient or surrogate available.