Automatic Population of the Case Report Forms for an International Multifactorial Adaptive Platform Trial Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic (preprint)

ObjectivesTo automatically populate the case report forms (CRFs) for an international, pragmatic, multifactorial, response-adaptive, Bayesian COVID-19 platform trial. MethodsThe locations of focus included 27 hospitals and 2 large electronic health record (EHR) instances (1 Cerner Millennium and 1 Epic) that are part of the same health system in the United States. This paper describes our efforts to use EHR data to automatically populate four of the trials forms: baseline, daily, discharge, and response-adaptive randomization. ResultsBetween April 2020 and May 2022, 417 patients from the UPMC health system were enrolled in the trial. A MySQL-based extract, transform, and load pipeline automatically populated 499 of 526 CRF variables. The populated forms were statistically and manually reviewed and then reported to the trials international data coordinating center. ConclusionsWe accomplished automatic population of CRFs in a large platform trial and made recommendations for improving this process for future trials.

Trajectories of host-response biomarkers and inflammatory subphenotypes in COVID-19 patients across the spectrum of respiratory support. (preprint)

Purpose: Enhanced understanding of the dynamic changes in the dysregulated inflammatory response in COVID-19 may help improve patient selection and timing for immunomodulatory therapies. Methods: We enrolled 323 COVID-19 inpatients on different levels of baseline respiratory support: i) Low Flow Oxygen (37%), ii) Non-Invasive Ventilation or High Flow Oxygen (NIV_HFO, 29%), iii) Invasive Mechanical Ventilation (IMV, 27%), and iv) Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO, 7%). We collected plasma samples upon enrollment and days 5 and 10 to measure host-response biomarkers. We classified subjects into inflammatory subphenotypes using two validated predictive models. We examined clinical, biomarker and subphenotype trajectories and outcomes during hospitalization. Results: IL-6, procalcitonin, and Angiopoietin-2 were persistently elevated in patients at higher levels of respiratory support, whereas sRAGE displayed the inverse pattern. Patients on NIV_HFO at baseline had the most dynamic clinical trajectory, with 26% eventually requiring intubation and exhibiting worse 60-day mortality than IMV patients at baseline (67% vs. 35%, p<0.0001). sRAGE levels predicted NIV failure and worse 60-day mortality for NIV_HFO patients, whereas IL-6 levels were predictive in IMV or ECMO patients. Hyper-inflammatory subjects at baseline (<10% by both models) had worse 60-day survival (p<0.0001) and 50% of them remained classified as hyper-inflammatory on follow-up sampling at 5 days post-enrollment. Receipt of combined immunomodulatory therapies (steroids and anti-IL6 agents) was associated with markedly increased IL-6 and lower Angiopoietin-2 levels (p<0.05). Conclusions: Longitudinal study of systemic host responses in COVID-19 revealed substantial and predictive inter-individual variability, influenced by baseline levels of respiratory support and concurrent immunomodulatory therapies.

Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema (RALE) Scores are Highly Reproducible and Prognostic of Clinical Outcomes for Inpatients with COVID-19 (preprint)

INTRODUCTION: Chest imaging is necessary for diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia, but current risk stratification tools do not consider radiographic severity. We quantified radiographic heterogeneity among inpatients with COVID-19 with the Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema (RALE) score on Chest X-rays (CXRs). METHODS: We performed independent RALE scoring by [≥]2 reviewers on baseline CXRs from 425 inpatients with COVID-19 (discovery dataset), we recorded clinical variables and outcomes, and measured plasma host-response biomarkers and SARS-CoV-2 RNA load from subjects with available biospecimens. RESULTS: We found excellent inter-rater agreement for RALE scores (intraclass correlation co-efficient=0.93). The required level of respiratory support at the time of baseline CXRs (supplemental oxygen or non-invasive ventilation [n=178]; invasive-mechanical ventilation [n=234], extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [n=13]) was significantly associated with RALE scores (median [interquartile range]: 20.0[14.1-26.7], 26.0[20.5-34.0] and 44.5[34.5-48.0], respectively, p<0.0001). Among invasively-ventilated patients, RALE scores were significantly associated with worse respiratory mechanics (plateau and driving pressure) and gas exchange metrics (PaO2/FiO2 and ventilatory ratio), as well as higher plasma levels of IL-6, sRAGE and TNFR1 levels (p<0.05). RALE scores were independently associated with 90-day survival in a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model (adjusted hazard ratio 1.04[1.02-1.07], p=0.002). We validated significant associations of RALE scores with baseline severity and mortality in an independent dataset of 415 COVID-19 inpatients. CONCLUSION: Reproducible assessment of radiographic severity revealed significant associations with clinical and physiologic severity, host-response biomarkers and clinical outcome in COVID-19 pneumonia. Incorporation of radiographic severity assessments may provide prognostic and treatment allocation guidance in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Antibodies targeting conserved non-canonical antigens and endemic coronaviruses associate with favorable outcomes in severe COVID-19 (preprint)

While there have been extensive analyses characterizing cellular and humoral responses across the severity spectrum in COVID-19, predictors of outcomes within severe COVID-19 remain to be comprehensively elucidated. Recently, we identified divergent monocyte states as predictors of outcomes within severe COVID-19, but corresponding humoral profiles of risk have not been delineated. Furthermore, the nature of antibodies (Abs) directed against viral antigens beyond the spike protein or endemic coronavirus antigens and their associations with disease severity and outcomes remain poorly defined. We performed deep molecular profiling of Abs directed against a wide range of antigenic specificities in severe COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. The profiles consisted of canonical (S, RBD, N) and non-canonical (orf3a, orf8, nsp3, nps13 and M) antigenic specificities. Notably, multivariate machine learning (ML) models, generated using profiles of Abs directed against canonical or non-canonical antigens, were equally discriminative of recovery and mortality COVID-19 outcomes. In both ML models, survivors were associated with increased virus-specific IgA and IgG3 antibodies and with higher antigen-specific antibody galactosylation. Intriguingly, pre-pandemic healthy controls had cross-reactive Abs directed against nsp13 which is a conserved protein in other alpha and beta coronaviruses. Notably, higher levels of nsp13-specific IgA antibodies were associated with recovery in severe COVID-19. In keeping with these findings, a model built on Ab profiles for endemic coronavirus antigens was also predictive of COVID-19 outcome bifurcation, with higher levels of IgA and IgG3 antibodies against OC43 S and NL63 S being associated with survival. Our results suggest the importance of Abs targeting non-canonical SARS-CoV-2 antigens as well as those directed against endemic coronaviruses in favorable outcomes of severe COVID-19.

Effectiveness of casirivimab and imdevimab, and sotrovimab during Delta variant surge: a prospective cohort study and comparative effectiveness randomized trial (preprint)

IMPORTANCEThe effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), casirivimab and imdevimab, and sotrovimab, for patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 from the Delta variant is unknown. OBJECTIVETo evaluate the effectiveness of mAbs for the Delta variant compared to no treatment, and the comparative effectiveness between mAbs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSTwo parallel studies among patients who met Emergency Use Authorization criteria for mAbs from July 14, 2021 to September 29, 2021: i.) prospective observational cohort study comparing mAb treatment to no mAb treatment and, ii.) Bayesian adaptive randomized trial comparing the effectiveness of casirivimab-imdevimab versus sotrovimab. In the observational study, we compared eligible patients who received mAb at an outpatient infusion center at UPMC, to nontreated patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. In the comparative effectiveness trial, we randomly allocated casirivimab-imdevimab or sotrovimab to patients presenting to infusion centers and emergency departments, per system therapeutic interchange policy. EXPOSUREIntravenous mAb per their EUA criteria. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESFor the observational study, risk ratio estimates for hospitalization or death by 28 days were compared between mAb treatment to no mAb treatment using propensity matched models. For the comparative effectiveness trial, the primary outcome was hospital-free days (days alive and free of hospital) within 28 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day) in a Bayesian cumulative logistic model, adjusted for treatment location, age, sex, and time. Inferiority was defined as a 99% posterior probability of an odds ratio <1. Equivalence was defined as a 95% posterior probability that the odds ratio is within a given bound. RESULTSAmong 3,558 patients receiving mAb, the mean age was 54 (SD 18 years), 1,511 (43%) were treated in an infusion center, and 450 (13%) were hospitalized or died by day 28. In propensity matched models, mAb treatment was associated with reduced risk of hospitalization or death compared to no treatment (risk ratio (RR)=0.40, 95% CI: 0.28-0.57). Both casirivimab and imdevimab (RR=0.31, 95% CI: 0.20-0.50), and sotrovimab (RR=0.60, 95% CI: 0.37-1.00) reduced hospitalization or death compared to no mAb treatment. Among patients allocated randomly to casirivimab and imdevimab (n=2,454) or sotrovimab (n=1,104), the median hospital-free days were 28 (IQR 28-28) for both groups, 28-day mortality was 0.5% (n=12) and 0.6% (n=7), and hospitalization by day 28 was 12% (n=291) and 12% (n=140), respectively. Compared to casirivimab and imdevimab, the median adjusted odds ratio for hospital-free days was 0.88 (95% credible interval, 0.70-1.11) for sotrovimab. This odds ratio yielded 86% probability of inferiority of sotrovimab versus casirivimab and imdevimab, and 79% probability of equivalence. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn non-hospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 due to the Delta variant, casirivimab and imdevimab and sotrovimab were both associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization or death. The comparative effectiveness of mAbs appeared similar, though prespecified criteria for statistical inferiority or equivalence were not met. TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04790786 Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSIn non-hospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 due to the Delta variant, what is the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies (mAb) compared to no treatment, and what is the comparative effectiveness between mAb? FindingsAmong 3,069 patients, mAb treatment (casirivimab and imdevimab or sotrovimab) was associated with reduced risk of hospitalization or death by 28 days compared to no treatment (risk ratio=0.40, 95% CI: 0.28-0.57). In a Bayesian randomized comparative effectiveness trial of casirivimab and imdevimab vs. sotrovimab in 3,558 patients, the median hospital-free days were 28 days for both groups. Compared to casirivimab-imdevimab, the median adjusted odds ratio for hospital-free days was 0.88 (95% credible interval, 0.70-1.11) for sotrovimab, an 86% probability of inferiority of sotrovimab versus casirivimab and imdevimab, and 79% probability of equivalence. MeaningIn non-hospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 due to the Delta variant, casirivimab and imdevimab and sotrovimab were associated with reduced risk of hospitalization or death compared to no treatment. The comparative effectiveness of mAbs appeared similar, though prespecified criteria for statistical inferiority or equivalence were not met.

A Learning Health System Randomized Trial of Monoclonal Antibodies for Covid-19 (preprint)

BackgroundNeutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAb) targeting SARS-CoV-2 decrease hospitalization and death in patients with mild to moderate Covid-19. Yet, their clinical use is limited, and comparative effectiveness is unknown. MethodsWe present the first results of an ongoing, learning health system adaptive platform trial to expand mAb treatment to all eligible patients and evaluate the comparative effectiveness of available mAbs. The trial launched March 10, 2021. Results are reported as of June 25, 2021 due to the U.S. federal decision to pause distribution of bamlanivimab-etesevimab; patient follow-up concluded on July 23, 2021. Patients referred for mAb who met Emergency Use Authorization criteria were provided a random mAb allocation of bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab-etesevimab, or casirivimab-imdevimab with a therapeutic interchange policy. The primary outcome was hospital-free days (days alive and free of hospital) within 28 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a Bayesian cumulative logistic model of all patients treated at an infusion center or emergency department, adjusting for treatment location, age, sex, and time. Inferiority was defined as a 99% posterior probability of an odds ratio < 1. Equivalence was defined as a 95% posterior probability that the odds ratio is within a given bound. ResultsPrior to trial launch, 3.1% (502) of 16,345 patients who were potentially eligible by an automated electronic health record (EHR) screen received mAb. During the trial period, 23.2% (1,201) of 5,173 EHR-screen eligible patients were treated, a 7.5-fold increase. After including additional referred patients from outside the health system, a total of 1,935 study patients received mAb therapy (128 bamlanivimab, 885 bamlanivimab-etesevimab, 922 casirivimab-imdevimab). Mean age ranged from 55 to 57 years, half were female (range, 53% to 54%), and 17% were Black (range, 12% to 19%). Median hospital-free days were 28 (IQR, 28 to 28) for each mAb group. Hospitalization varied between groups (bamlanivimab, 12.5%; bamlanivimab-etesevimab, 14.7%, casirivimab-imdevimab, 14.3%). Relative to casirivimab-imdevimab, the median adjusted odds ratios were 0.58 (95% credible interval (CI), 0.30 to 1.16) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.24) for the bamlanivimab and bamlanivimab-etesevimab groups, respectively. These odds ratios yielded 91% and 94% probabilities of inferiority of bamlanivimab versus bamlanivimab-etesevimab and casirivimab-imdevimab respectively, and an 86% probability of equivalence between bamlanivimab-etesevimab and casirivimab-imdevimab, at the prespecified odds ratio bound of 0.25. Twenty-one infusion-related adverse events occurred in 0% (0/128), 1.4% (12/885), and 1.0% (9/922) of patients treated with bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab-etesevimab, and casirivimab-imdevimab, respectively. ConclusionIn non-hospitalized patients with mild to moderate Covid-19, bamlanivimab, compared to bamlanivimab-etesevimab and casirivimab-imdevimab, resulted in 91% and 94% probabilities of inferiority with regards to odds of improvement in hospital-free days within 28 days. There was an 86% probability of equivalence between bamlanivimab-etesevimab and casirivimab-imdevimab at an odds ratio bound of 0.25. However, the trial was unblinded early due to federal distribution decisions, and no mAb met prespecified criteria for statistical inferiority or equivalence. (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04790786).

CD4+ T cell lymphopenia and dysfunction in severe COVID-19 disease is autocrine TNF-α/TNFRI-dependent (preprint)

Lymphopenia is common in severe COVID-19 disease, yet the mechanisms are poorly understood. In 148 patients with severe COVID-19, we found lymphopenia was associated with worse survival. CD4+ lymphopenia predominated, with lower CD4+/CD8+ ratios in severe COVID-19 compared to recovered, mild disease (p<0.0001). In severe disease, immunodominant CD4+ T cell responses to Spike-1(S1) produced increased in vitro TNF-, but impaired proliferation and increased susceptibility to activation-induced cell death (AICD). CD4+TNF-+ T cell responses inversely correlated with absolute CD4+ counts from severe COVID-19 patients (n=76; R=-0.744, P<0.0001). TNF- blockade including infliximab or anti-TNFRI antibodies strikingly rescued S1-specific CD4+ proliferation and abrogated S1-AICD in severe COVID-19 patients (P<0.001). Single-cell RNAseq demonstrated downregulation of Type-1 cytokines and NF{kappa}B signaling in S1-stimulated CD4+ cells with infliximab treatment. Lung CD4+ T cells in severe COVID-19 were reduced and produced higher TNF- versus PBMC. Together, our findings show COVID-19-associated CD4+ lymphopenia and dysfunction is autocrine TNF-/TNFRI-dependent and therapies targeting TNF- may be beneficial in severe COVID-19.

Therapeutic Anticoagulation in Non-Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19 (preprint)

BackgroundThrombo-inflammation may contribute to morbidity and mortality in Covid-19. We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may improve outcomes in non-critically ill patients hospitalized for Covid-19. MethodsIn an open-label adaptive multiplatform randomized controlled trial, non-critically ill patients hospitalized for Covid-19, defined by the absence of critical care-level organ support at enrollment, were randomized to a pragmatic strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. The primary outcome combined survival to hospital discharge and days free of organ support through 21 days, which was evaluated with Bayesian statistical models according to baseline D-dimer. ResultsThe trial was stopped when prespecified criteria for superiority were met for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation in groups defined by high ([≥]2-fold elevated) and low (<2-fold elevated) D-dimer. Among 2219 participants in the final analysis, the probability that therapeutic anticoagulation increased organ support-free days compared to thromboprophylaxis was 99.0% (adjusted odds ratio 1.29, 95% credible interval 1.04 to 1.61). The adjusted absolute increase in survival to hospital discharge without organ support with therapeutic-dose anticoagulation was 4.6% (95% credible interval 0.7 to 8.1). In the primary adaptive stopping groups, the final probabilities of superiority for therapeutic anticoagulation were 97.3% in the high D-dimer group and 92.9% in the low D-dimer group. Major bleeding occurred in 1.9% and 0.9% of participants randomized to therapeutic anticoagulation and thromboprophylaxis, respectively. ConclusionsIn non-critically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increases the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of organ support. Trial registration numbers: NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, NCT04372589

Therapeutic Anticoagulation in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19-Preliminary Report (preprint)

Background Thrombosis may contribute to morbidity and mortality in Covid-19. We hypothesized that therapeutic anticoagulation would improve outcomes in critically ill patients with Covid-19. Methods We conducted an open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, randomized, clinical trial. Patients with severe Covid-19, defined as the requirement for organ support with high flow nasal cannula, non-invasive ventilation, invasive ventilation, vasopressors, or inotropes, were randomized to receive therapeutic anticoagulation with heparin or pharmacological thromboprophylaxis as per local usual care. The primary outcome was an ordinal scale combining in-hospital mortality (assigned -1) and days free of organ support to day 21. Results Therapeutic anticoagulation met the pre-defined criteria for futility in patients with severe Covid-19. The primary outcome was available for 1,074 participants (529 randomized to therapeutic anticoagulation and 545 randomized to usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis). Median organ support-free days were 3 days (interquartile range -1, 16) in patients assigned to therapeutic anticoagulation and 5 days (interquartile range -1, 16) in patients assigned to usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis (adjusted odds ratio 0.87, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.70-1.08, posterior probability of futility [odds ratio<1.2] 99.8%). Hospital survival was comparable between groups (64.3% vs. 65.3%, adjusted odds ratio 0.88, 95% CrI 0.67-1.16). Major bleeding occurred in 3.1% of patients assigned to therapeutic anticoagulation and 2.4% of patients assigned to usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. Conclusions In patients with severe Covid-19, therapeutic anticoagulation did not improve hospital survival or days free of organ support compared to usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis.

Bifurcated monocyte states are predictive of mortality in severe COVID-19 (preprint)

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection presents with varied clinical manifestations, ranging from mild symptoms to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with high mortality. Despite extensive analyses, there remains an urgent need to delineate immune cell states that contribute to mortality in severe COVID-19. We performed high-dimensional cellular and molecular profiling of blood and respiratory samples from critically ill COVID-19 patients to define immune cell genomic states that are predictive of outcome in severe COVID-19 disease. Critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) manifested increased frequencies of inflammatory monocytes and plasmablasts that were also associated with ARDS not due to COVID-19. Single-cell RNAseq (scRNAseq)-based deconvolution of genomic states of peripheral immune cells revealed distinct gene modules that were associated with COVID-19 outcome. Notably, monocytes exhibited bifurcated genomic states, with expression of a cytokine gene module exemplified by CCL4 (MIP-1{beta}) associated with survival and an interferon signaling module associated with death. These gene modules were correlated with higher levels of MIP-1{beta} and CXCL10 levels in plasma, respectively. Monocytes expressing genes reflective of these divergent modules were also detectable in endotracheal aspirates. Machine learning algorithms identified the distinctive monocyte modules as part of a multivariate peripheral immune system state that was predictive of COVID-19 mortality. Follow-up analysis of the monocyte modules on ICU day 5 was consistent with bifurcated states that correlated with distinct inflammatory cytokines. Our data suggests a pivotal role for monocytes and their specific inflammatory genomic states in contributing to mortality in life-threatening COVID-19 disease and may facilitate discovery of new diagnostics and therapeutics.

Lower respiratory tract myeloid cells harbor SARS-CoV-2 and display an inflammatory phenotype (preprint)

SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia may induce an aberrant immune response with brisk recruitment of myeloid cells into the lower respiratory tract, which may contribute to morbidity and mortality. We describe endotracheal aspirate samples from seven patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia requiring mechanical ventilation. We note SARS-CoV-2 virions within lower respiratory tract myeloid cells shown by electron tomography, immunofluorescence confocal imaging, and immuno-electron microscopy. Endotracheal aspirates are primarily composed of mononuclear and polymorphonuclear leukocytes. These myeloid cells that harbor virus are frequently positive for CD14 and/or CD16 and most display an inflammatory phenotype marked by expression of IL-6 and tissue factor mRNA transcript and protein expression.