Clinical research and drug regulation in the challenging times of individualized therapies: A pivotal role of clinical pharmacology.

Since the 1980s, medical specialists in Clinical Pharmacology have been playing a crucial role in the development of drug regulation in Spain. In this article we report on the activities carried out and the prospects for development in three very relevant areas from the regulatory perspective: 1) the development of stable public infrastructures to facilitate non-commercial clinical research with medicines, 2) the regulatory aspects of individual access to medicines in special situations, beyond their regular access after marketing approval and funding by the National Health System, and 3) the challenges of development and access to advanced therapies, with special reference to the figure of the hospital exemption.

Activities of clinical pharmacologists across Europe: A survey by the European association of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

PURPOSE: In order to explore clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) teaching and practices across continental Europe, the European Association of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (EACPT) made a survey in 2022 amongst its 27 affiliated societies. METHODS: The survey was made available online to EACPT representatives, and 47 filled-in questionnaires were received from 25 countries (one to five per country), representing all geographic areas of Europe. RESULTS: Clinical pharmacologists (CPs) spend 25%, 30%, 15%, and 25% of their time in teaching, hospital activities, committees, and research, respectively, with large variations across and within countries. CPT courses are given at Schools of Medicine in all the countries except one, mostly organized and taught by medical doctors (MDs). In Central, Western, and Southern Europe, the teachers may have medicine or pharmacy training. Therapeutic drug monitoring and pharmacovigilance were the hospital activities most frequently reported, and clinical/forensic toxicology, rounds of visits, and pharmacogenetics the least. Two-thirds of the panel think CPs should be MDs. However, the transversal nature of CPT was underlined, with patients/diseases and drugs as gravity centres, thus calling for the complementary skills of MDs and PharmDs. Besides, most respondents reported that clinical pharmacists in their country are involved in rounds of visits, pharmacovigilance, TDM, and/or pharmacogenetic testing and that collaborations with them would be beneficial. CONCLUSION: CPT comes with a plurality of backgrounds and activities, all required to embrace the different pathologies and the whole lifecycle of medicinal products, but all of them being rarely performed in any given country. The willingness to use common CPT teaching material and prescribing exams at the European level is a good sign of increasing harmonisation of our discipline Europewide.

Bronchopulmonary penetration of isavuconazole in lung transplant recipients.

Isavuconazole's (ISA) pharmacokinetics was studied among lung transplant recipients to evaluate its bronchopulmonary penetration. This study included 13 patients and showed mean serum concentrations of 3.30 (standard deviation [SD] 0.45), 5.12 (SD 1.36), and 6.31 (SD 0.95) at 2 h, 4 h, and 24 h respectively. Mean concentrations in the epithelial lining fluid were 0.969 (SD 0.895), 2.141 (SD 1.265), and 2.812 (SD 0.693) at the same time points. ISA is a drug with a tolerable safety profile that achieves adequate concentrations in the lung.

Longer intervals between SARS-CoV-2 infection and mRNA-1273 doses improve the neutralization of different variants of concern.

The humoral immune response against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern elicited by vaccination was evaluated in COVID-19 recovered individuals (Rec) separated 1-3 months (Rec2m) or 4-12 months (Rec9m) postinfection and compared to the response in naïve participants. Antibody-mediated immune responses were assessed in 66 participants by three commercial immunoassays and a SARS-CoV-2 lentiviral-based pseudovirus neutralization assay. Immunoglobulin (Ig) levels against SARS-CoV-2 spike were lower in naïve participants after two doses than in Rec after a single dose (p < 0.05). After two doses in Rec, levels of total Ig to receptor-binding domain were significantly increased in Rec9m compared to Rec2m (p < 0.001). The neutralizing potency observed in Rec9m was consistently higher than in Rec2m against variants of concern (VOCs) Alpha, Beta, Delta, and BA.1 sublineage of Omicron with 2.2-2.8-fold increases. Increasing the interval between SARS-CoV-2 infection and the vaccination with messenger RNA-based vaccines to more than 3 months generates a more efficient heterologous humoral immune response against VOCs by allowing enough time to mount a strong recall memory B cell response.

Value contribution of cenobamate for the treatment of Focal-Onset Seizures (FOS) in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) in Spain through reflective Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA).

INTRODUCTION: Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological conditions worldwide. The main goal of its treatment is to achieve seizure freedom without intolerable adverse effects. However, despite the availability of many anti-seizure medications, including the latest options, called third-generation anti-seizure medications (ASMs), approximately 40% of people with epilepsy present drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). Cenobamate is the first ASM approved in Spain for the adjunctive treatment of Focal-Onset Seizures (FOS) in adult patients with DRE. In a chronic disease with a portfolio of available ASMs, the decision to introduce a new therapeutic alternative must follow a holistic evaluation of value provided. Reflective Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methodology allows to determine the value contribution of a treatment in a given indication considering all relevant criteria for healthcare decision-making in a transparent and systematic manner from the perspective of relevant stakeholders. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the relative value contribution of cenobamate in the treatment of FOS in patients with DRE compared with third-generation ASMs using reflective MCDA-based methodology. METHODS: A systematic literature review (combining biomedical databases and grey literature sources) was performed to populate the Evidence and Value: Impact on DEcisionMaking (EVIDEM) MCDA framework adapted to determine what represents value in the management of FOS in patients with DRE in Spain. The study was conducted in two phases. The first took place in 2021 with a multi-stakeholder group of eight participants. The second phase was conducted in 2022 with a multi-stakeholder group of 32 participants. Participants were trained in MCDA methodology and scored four evidence matrices (cenobamate vs. brivaracetam, vs. perampanel, vs. lacosamide and vs. eslicarbazepine acetate). Results were analyzed and discussed in a group meeting through reflective MCDA discussion methodology. RESULTS: DRE is considered a very severe condition associated with many important unmet needs, mainly with regard to the lack of more effective treatments to achieve the ultimate goal of treatment. Compared to third-generation ASMs, cenobamate is perceived to have a better efficacy profile based on improvements in responder rate and seizure freedom. Regarding safety, it is considered to have a similar profile to alternatives and a positive quality-of-life profile. Cenobamate results in lower direct medical costs (excluding pharmacological) and indirect costs. Overall, cenobamate is regarded as providing a high therapeutic impact and supported by high-quality evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Based on reflective MCDA methodology and stakeholders' experience in clinical management of epilepsy in Spain, cenobamate is perceived as a value-added option for the treatment of patients with DRE when compared with third-generation ASMs.

[Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome following adenovirus vector-based vaccines to prevent COVID-19: epidemiology and clinical presentation in Spain]. / Síndrome de Trombosis con Trombocitopenia asociado a vacunas de adenovirus frente a la COVID-19: epidemiología y presentación clínica de la serie española.

BACKGROUND: We describe the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) cases reported in Spain. METHODS: We included all venous or arterial thrombosis with thrombocytopenia following adenovirus vector-based vaccines (AstraZeneca or Janssen) to prevent COVID-19 disease between February 1st and September 26th, 2021. We describe the crude rate and the standardized morbidity ratio. We assessed the predictors of mortality. RESULTS: Sixty-one cases were reported and 45 fulfilled eligibility criteria, 82% women. The crude TTS rate was 4/1,000,000 doses and 14-15/1,000,000 doses between 30-49 years. The number of observed cases of cerebral venous thrombosis was 6-18 higher than the expected in patients younger than 49 years. Symptoms started 10 (interquartile range (IQR): 7-14) days after vaccination. Eighty percent (95% confidence interval (CI): 65-90%) had thrombocytopenia at the time of the emergency department visit, and 65% (95% CI: 49-78%) had D-dimer >2000 ng/mL. Patients had multiple location thrombosis in 36% and fatal outcome in 24% cases. A platelet nadir <50,000 /µL (odds ratio (OR): 7.4; CI 95%: 1.2-47.5) and intracranial hemorrhage (OR: 7.9; IC95%: 1.3-47.0) were associated with fatal outcome. CONCLUSION: TTS must be suspected in patients with symptoms 10 days after vaccination and thrombocytopenia and/or D-dimer increase.

Association Between Administration of IL-6 Antagonists and Mortality Among Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Meta-analysis.

Importance: Clinical trials assessing the efficacy of IL-6 antagonists in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 have variously reported benefit, no effect, and harm. Objective: To estimate the association between administration of IL-6 antagonists compared with usual care or placebo and 28-day all-cause mortality and other outcomes. Data Sources: Trials were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases between October 2020 and January 2021. Searches were not restricted by trial status or language. Additional trials were identified through contact with experts. Study Selection: Eligible trials randomly assigned patients hospitalized for COVID-19 to a group in whom IL-6 antagonists were administered and to a group in whom neither IL-6 antagonists nor any other immunomodulators except corticosteroids were administered. Among 72 potentially eligible trials, 27 (37.5%) met study selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: In this prospective meta-analysis, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Inconsistency among trial results was assessed using the I2 statistic. The primary analysis was an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) for 28-day all-cause mortality. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. There were 9 secondary outcomes including progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death and risk of secondary infection by 28 days. Results: A total of 10 930 patients (median age, 61 years [range of medians, 52-68 years]; 3560 [33%] were women) participating in 27 trials were included. By 28 days, there were 1407 deaths among 6449 patients randomized to IL-6 antagonists and 1158 deaths among 4481 patients randomized to usual care or placebo (summary OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.95]; P = .003 based on a fixed-effects meta-analysis). This corresponds to an absolute mortality risk of 22% for IL-6 antagonists compared with an assumed mortality risk of 25% for usual care or placebo. The corresponding summary ORs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92; P < .001) for tocilizumab and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.86-1.36; P = .52) for sarilumab. The summary ORs for the association with mortality compared with usual care or placebo in those receiving corticosteroids were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.68-0.87) for tocilizumab and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.61-1.38) for sarilumab. The ORs for the association with progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death, compared with usual care or placebo, were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.70-0.85) for all IL-6 antagonists, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.82) for tocilizumab, and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.74-1.34) for sarilumab. Secondary infections by 28 days occurred in 21.9% of patients treated with IL-6 antagonists vs 17.6% of patients treated with usual care or placebo (OR accounting for trial sample sizes, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.85-1.16). Conclusions and Relevance: In this prospective meta-analysis of clinical trials of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, administration of IL-6 antagonists, compared with usual care or placebo, was associated with lower 28-day all-cause mortality. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42021230155.

A Retrospective Controlled Cohort Study of the Impact of Glucocorticoid Treatment in SARS-CoV-2 Infection Mortality.

Evidence to support the use of steroids in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia is lacking. We aim to determine the impact of steroid use for COVID-19 pneumonia on hospital mortality. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study in a university hospital in Madrid, Spain, during March of 2020. To determine the role of steroids in in-hospital mortality, patients admitted with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia and treated with steroids were compared to patients not treated with steroids, and we adjusted with a propensity score for patients on steroid treatment. Survival times were compared using the log rank test. Different steroid regimens were compared and adjusted with a second propensity score. During the study period, 463 out of 848 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia fulfilled inclusion criteria. Among them, 396 (46.7%) patients were treated with steroids and 67 patients were not. Global mortality was 15.1%. The median time to steroid treatment from symptom onset was 10 days (interquartile range [IQR], 8 to 13 days). In-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with steroids than in controls (13.9% [55/396] versus 23.9% [16/67]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.51 [95% confidence interval, 0.27 to 0.96]; P = 0.044). Steroid treatment reduced mortality by 41.8% relative to the mortality with no steroid treatment (relative risk reduction, 0.42 [95% confidence interval, 0.048 to 0.65]). Initial treatment with 1 mg/kg of body weight/day of methylprednisolone versus steroid pulses was not associated with in-hospital mortality (13.5% [42/310] versus 15.1% [13/86]; odds ratio [OR], 0.880 [95% confidence interval, 0.449 to 1.726]; P = 0.710). Our results show that the survival of patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is higher in patients treated with glucocorticoids than in those not treated. Rates of in-hospital mortality were not different between initial regimens of 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone and glucocorticoid pulses.

EMA Review of Daratumumab (Darzalex) for the Treatment of Adult Patients Newly Diagnosed with Multiple Myeloma.

The use of daratumumab in combination with established regimens for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma has recently been authorized by the European Medicines Agency based on results from three separate phase III randomized, active controlled, open-label studies that have confirmed enhanced efficacy and tolerability in both transplant-ineligible (MMY3008 and MMY3007) and transplant-eligible (MMY3006) patients, without compromising transplant ability. Trial MMY3008 showed an improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) when daratumumab was added to lenalidomide and dexamethasone compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone; the median PFS had not been reached in the daratumumab arm and was 31.9 months in the control arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-0.73; p < .0001). Trial MMY3007 showed an improvement in PFS when daratumumab was added to bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone compared with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone; PFS had not been reached in the daratumumab arm and was 18.1 months in the control arm (HR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.38-0.65; p < .0001). In trial MMY3006, daratumumab added to bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone was compared with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone as induction and consolidation treatment prior to autologous stem cell transplant. The stringent complete response rate at day 100 after transplant in the daratumumab group was 29% compared with 20% in the control group (odds ratio, 1.60; 1.21-2.12 95% CI; p = .0010). Overall adverse events were manageable, with an increased rate of neutropenia and infections in the daratumumab arms. Regulatory assessment of efficacy and safety results from trials MMY3006, MMY3007, and MMY3008 confirmed a positive benefit-risk ratio leading to an approval of the extensions of indication. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A set of extensions of indication was recently approved for daratumumab (Darzalex) in the setting of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in combination with established regimens. Results of the MMY3006, MMY3007, and MMY3008 trials have shown enhanced efficacy and a favorable side effect profile of several daratumumab-based combinations in patients both ineligible and eligible for transplant, without compromising transplant ability. The combinations of daratumumab with either lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone or bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone were approved for transplant-ineligible patients. The combination of daratumumab with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone was approved for transplant-eligible patients. These combinations are expected to improve the survival outlook for patients with multiple myeloma, without an unacceptable risk of increase in adverse events, and updated information on progression-free survival and overall survival is expected from the above trials.

Clinical features and predictors of delayed neurological syndrome in carbon monoxide poisoning: the AMICO study. / Caracterización clínica y factores predictivos de desarrollo de síndrome neurológico tardío en la intoxicación por monóxido de carbono: estudio AMICO.

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors for developing delayed neurological syndrome (DNS) after an initial episode of carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning in the interest of detecting patients most likely to develop DNS so that they can be followed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective review of cases of CO poisoning treated in the past 10 years in the emergency departments of 4 hospitals in the AMICO study (Spanish acronym for the multicenter analysis of CO poisoning). We analyzed demographic characteristics of the patients and the clinical characteristics of the initial episode. The records of the cohort of patients with available follow-up information were reviewed to find cases of DNS. Data were analyzed by multivariant analysis to determine the relationship to characteristics of the initial exposure to CO. RESULTS: A total of 240 cases were identified. The median (interquartile range) age of the patients was 36.2 years (17.6-49.6 years); 108 patients (45.0%) were men, and the poisoning was accidental in 223 cases (92.9%). The median carboxyhemoglobin concentration on presentation was 12.7% (6.2%-18.7%). Follow-up details were available for 44 patients (18.3%). Eleven of those patients (25%) developed DNS. A low initial Glasgow Coma Scale score predicted the development of DNS with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.61 (95% CI, 0.41-0.92) and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.876 (95% CI, 0.761-0.990) (P .001). CONCLUSION: The initial Glasgow Coma Scale score seems to be a clinical predictor of DNS after CO poisoning. We consider it important to establish follow-up protocols for patients with CO poisoning treated in hospital EDs.

OBJETIVO: Identificar factores pronósticos de desarrollo de síndrome neurológico tardío (SNT) después de un episodio inicial de intoxicación por monóxido de carbono (ICO), con el fin detectar precozmente a la población más susceptible y facilitar su acceso a un seguimiento específico. METODO: Revisión retrospectiva de todos los casos de ICO que acudieron a los servicios de urgencias (SU) de 4 hospitales durante los últimos 10 años. Se analizaron datos demográficos y características clínicas en el momento del episodio. En la cohorte de pacientes con datos de seguimiento disponibles, se evaluó la aparición de SNT y su relación con diferentes variables en la exposición inicial al CO a través de técnicas de análisis multivariante. RESULTADOS: Se identificaron 240 pacientes. La mediana de edad fue de 36,2 años (17,6-49,6). De ellos 108 (45,0%) eran hombres y 223 casos (92,9%) fueron accidentales. El nivel medio de COHb fue del 12,7% (6,2-18,7). En 44 (18,3%) episodios se disponía de datos de un seguimiento específico. En esta cohorte, 11 (25%) pacientes desarrollaron SNT. Una puntuación inicial más baja en la Escala Coma de Glasgow (GCS) (OR: 0,61, IC 95%: 0,41-0,92) fue predictor independiente del desarrollo del SNT, con un ABC en la curva COR de 0,876 (IC 95%: 0,761-0,990, p 0,001). CONCLUSIONES: Una puntuación inicial baja en la GCS parece ser un predictor clínico de desarrollo de SNT en la ICO. Dada la incidencia de SNT, consideramos fundamental establecer protocolos de seguimiento específico de estos pacientes tras su asistencia inicial en los SU.

Bronchopulmonary Penetration of Isavuconazole in Pulmonary Transplant Recipients (PBISA01): Protocol for a Phase IV Clinical Trial With a Single Treatment Arm.

BACKGROUND: Aspergillosis is the most frequently observed invasive fungal disease (IFD) in lung transplant recipients. Isavuconazole (ISA) has shown a better safety profile and noninferiority to voriconazole in the treatment of patients with IFD. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe the bronchopulmonary pharmacokinetic profile of oral ISA by analyzing the degree of penetration in the epithelial lining fluid and alveolar macrophages in patients receiving lung transplantation with a diagnosis of IFD. METHODS: A total of 12 patients aged ≥18 years receiving a lung transplant with an IFD diagnosis and indication for ISA treatment and follow-up bronchoscopy will be included in the study. After 5 days of treatment with ISA and before the treatment is discontinued, the patients will be randomized (1:1:1:1) to perform the scheduled bronchoscopy at various times after the administration of ISA (2, 4, 8, and 12 hours). In total, 4 blood samples will be obtained per patient: at 72 hours after treatment initiation, on the day of the bronchoscopy, at the time of the bronchoalveolar lavage (simultaneously), and at 7 days after treatment initiation, to analyze tacrolimus and ISA plasma levels. ISA concentrations will be measured in plasma, epithelial lining fluid, and alveolar macrophages by a high-performance liquid chromatography/UV coupled to fluorescence method. RESULTS: Enrollment for the PBISA01 trial began in October 2020 and was completed in October 2021. All samples will be analyzed once recruitment is complete, and the results are expected to be published in October 2022. CONCLUSIONS: There are no clinical studies that analyze the bronchopulmonary penetration of ISA. Bronchoalveolar lavage performed routinely in the follow-up of lung transplant recipients constitutes an opportunity to analyze the bronchopulmonary penetration of ISA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Clinical Trials Register 2019-004240-30; www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2019-004240-30/ES. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/37275.

Red blood cell distribution width as a marker of hyperinflammation and mortality in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Red blood cell distribution width (RDW) could reflect interleukin-6 (IL-6) systemic activity since anisocytosis represents the inhibition of erythropoiesis, leaded by the hyperinflammatory background. Our objective was to analyze RDW performance to predict outcome in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: Retrospective observational study including 173 patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS. Data was analyzed at hospital admission, inclusion in the TOCICOV Study (day 0), days 1, 3, 7 and 15 post-inclusion. RESULTS: Overall, 57% patients received tocilizumab. Overall mortality was 20.8%. RDW was higher in non-survivors compared to survivors at admission (13.53% vs. 14.35, P=0.0016), day 0 (13.60% vs. 14.42, P=0.026), day 3 (13.43% vs. 14.36, P<0.001) and day 7 (13.41% vs. 14.31, P=0.046), presenting better discrimination ability for mortality than other prognostic markers [area under the curve-receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) =0.668 for admission RDW, 0.680 for day 0 RDW, 0.695 for day 3 RDW and 0.666 for day 7 RDW]. RDW values did not vary significantly according to tocilizumab treatment. When adjusted by hemoglobin and tocilizumab treatment, only RDW at admission, day 0, day 3 and C reactive protein (CRP) at day 0 and day 1 were associated with mortality (P<0.05). Only in non-tocilizumab treated patients, IL-6 levels at day 0 were correlated with day 3 RDW (r=0.733, P=0.004) and with day 3 CRP (r=0.727, P=0.022). Both parameters showed significant statistical correlation (r=0.255 for day 1 RDW and CRP in the overall cohort and r=0.358 for day 3 RDW and CRP in patients not treated with tocilizumab, P<0.015). CONCLUSIONS: RDW predicts COVID-19-associated ARDS mortality and reflects the hyperinflammatory background and the effects of cytokines such as IL-6, irrespective of tocilizumab treatment.

Evaluation of convalescent plasma versus standard of care for the treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients: study protocol for a phase 2 randomized, open-label, controlled, multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and causes substantial morbidity and mortality. At the time this clinical trial was planned, there were no available vaccine or therapeutic agents with proven efficacy, but the severity of the condition prompted the use of several pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. It has long been hypothesized that the use of convalescent plasma (CP) from infected patients who have developed an effective immune response is likely to be an option for the treatment of patients with a variety of severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) of viral etiology. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of convalescent plasma in adult patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS/DESIGN: The ConPlas-19 study is a multicenter, randomized, open-label controlled trial. The study has been planned to include 278 adult patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 infection not requiring mechanical ventilation (invasive or non-invasive). Subjects are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio (139 per treatment arm), stratified by center, to receive intravenously administered CP (single infusion) plus SOC or SOC alone, and are to be followed for 30 days. The primary endpoint of the study is the proportion of patients that progress to category 5, 6, or 7 (on the 7-point ordinal scale proposed by the WHO) at day 15. Interim analyses for efficacy and/or futility will be conducted once 20%, 40%, and 60% of the planned sample size are enrolled and complete D15 assessment. DISCUSSION: This clinical trial is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of passive immunotherapy with convalescent plasma for the treatment of adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The results of this study are expected to contribute to establishing the potential place of CP in the therapeutics for a new viral disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04345523 . Registered on 30 March, 2020. First posted date: April 14, 2020.

Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab in patients with COVID19 Pneumonia: A Randomized, Phase III Clinical Trial (SARTRE Study).

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is often associated with hyper-inflammation. The cytokine-storm-like is one of the targets of current therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). High Interleukin-6 (IL6) blood levels have been identified in severe COVID-19 disease, but there are still uncertainties regarding the actual role of anti-IL6 antagonists in COVID-19 management. Our hypothesis was that the use of sarilumab plus corticosteroids at an early stage of the hyper-inflammatory syndrome would be beneficial and prevent progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: We randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) COVID-19 pneumonia hospitalized patients under standard oxygen therapy and laboratory evidence of hyper-inflammation to receive sarilumab plus usual care (experimental group) or usual care alone (control group). Corticosteroids were given to all patients at a 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone for at least 3 days. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients progressing to severe respiratory failure (defined as a score in the Brescia-COVID19 scale ≥ 3) up to day 15. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients underwent randomization: 99 patients in the sarilumab group and 102 patients in the control group. The rate of patients progressing to severe respiratory failure (Brescia-COVID scale score ≥ 3) up to day 15 was 16.16% in the Sarilumab group versus 15.69% in the control group (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.48-2.20). No relevant safety issues were identified. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized patients with Covid-19 pneumonia, who were under standard oxygen therapy and who presented analytical inflammatory parameters, an early therapeutic intervention with sarilumab plus standard of care (including corticosteroids) was not shown to be more effective than current standard of care alone. The study was registered at EudraCT with number: 2020-002037-15.

Combination of Tocilizumab and Steroids to Improve Mortality in Patients with Severe COVID-19 Infection: A Spanish, Multicenter, Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the impact of tocilizumab use on severe COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 19) pneumonia mortality. METHODS: We performed a multicentre retrospective cohort study in 18 tertiary hospitals in Spain from March to April 2020. Consecutive patients admitted with severe COVID-19 treated with tocilizumab were compared to patients not treated with tocilizumab, adjusting by inverse probability of the treatment weights (IPTW). Tocilizumab's effect in patients receiving steroids during the 48 h following inclusion was analysed. RESULTS: During the study period, 506 patients with severe COVID-19 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among them, 268 were treated with tocilizumab and 238 patients were not. Median time to tocilizumab treatment from onset of symptoms was 11 days [interquartile range (IQR) 8-14]. Global mortality was 23.7%. Mortality was lower in patients treated with tocilizumab than in controls: 16.8% versus 31.5%, hazard ratio (HR) 0.514 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.355-0.744], p < 0.001; weighted HR 0.741 (95% CI 0.619-0.887), p = 0.001. Tocilizumab treatment reduced mortality by 14.7% relative to no tocilizumab treatment [relative risk reduction (RRR) 46.7%]. We calculated a number necessary to treat of 7. Among patients treated with steroids, mortality was lower in those treated with tocilizumab than in those treated with steroids alone [10.9% versus 40.2%, HR 0.511 (95% CI 0.352-0.741), p = 0.036; weighted HR 0.6 (95% CI 0.449-0.804), p < 0.001] (interaction p = 0.094). CONCLUSIONS: These results show that survival of patients with severe COVID-19 is higher in those treated with tocilizumab than in those not treated and that tocilizumab's effect adds to that of steroids administered to non-intubated patients with COVID-19 during the first 48 h of presenting with respiratory failure despite oxygen therapy. Randomised controlled studies are needed to confirm these results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorization Studies (EU PAS Register) identifier, EUPAS34415.

Sarilumab versus standard of care for the early treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia in hospitalized patients: SARTRE: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: In some patients, acute, life-threatening respiratory injury produced by viruses such as SARS-CoV and other viral pneumonia are associated with an over-exuberant cytokine release. Elevated levels of blood IL-6 had been identified as a one of the risk factors associated with severe COVID-19 disease. Anti-IL6 inhibitors are among the therapeutic armamentarium for preventing the fatal consequences of acute respiratory and multi organ failure in around 20% of the COVID-19 infected patients. At present, their use is prioritized to patients with severe interstitial pneumonia (Brescia-COVID Scale-COVID 2-3) with hyperinflammation as determined by the presence of elevated IL6 and/or d-dimer, or progressive d-dimer increase, in patients who otherwise are subsidiary to ICU admission. However, many uncertainties remain on the actual role of anti-IL6 inhibitors in this setting, and whether current use and timing is the right one. There is the hypothesis that the use of anti-IL6 inhibitors at an earlier state during the hyperinflammatory syndrome would be beneficial and may avoid progressing to ARDS. On the other hand, the standard of care has changed and nowadays the use of corticosteroids has become part of the SOC in the treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia. Our limited experience suggests that better treatment outcomes can be achieved when combining IL6-inhibitors (e.g. sarilumab) with corticosteroids. The aim of the present study is to evaluate if an earlier therapeutic intervention with sarilumab plus SOC (including corticosteroids) may be more effective than current standard of care alone, in preventing progression to respiratory failure in COVID-19 infected patients with interstitial pneumonia. This study will also provide supportive evidence to that provided by currently ongoing studies on the efficacy and safety of sarilumab in this clinical context. TRIAL DESIGN: A phase two multi-center randomised controlled trial (RCT) with two parallel arms (1:1 ratio). PARTICIPANTS: They will be hospitalized patients, of at least 18 years of age, with severe COVID-19 who have positive RT-PCR test and have radiographic evidence of pulmonary infiltrates by imaging or rales/crackles on exam and SpO2 ≤ 94% on room air that requires supplemental oxygen. Patients must present elevation of inflammatory parameters (IL-6 > 40 pg/mL or d-dimer >1.0 mcg/ml) or, alternatively, progressive worsening in at least two of these inflammatory parameters in the prior 24-48h: CRP, LDH, serum ferritin, lymphopenia, or d-dimer. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: high oxygen requirements (including face mask with reservoir, non-invasive mechanical ventilation or high flow nasal cannula, or mechanical ventilation), admission to ICU, pregnancy or lactation, allergy or hypersensitivity to sarilumab or corticoesteroids, immunosuppressive antibody therapy within the past 5 months, AST/ALT values > 10 x ULN, neutropenia (< 0.5 x 109/L), severe thrombocytopenia (< 50 x 109/L), sepsis caused by an alternative pathogen, diverticulitis with risk of perforation or ongoing infectious dermatitis. The study will be conducted in several hospitals in Spain. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Patients randomised to the experimental arm will receive sarilumab + methylprednisolone plus SOC for COVID-19. Patients included in the control arm will receive methylprednisolone plus SOC for COVID-19. Corticosteroids will be given to all patients at a 1mg/kg/d of methylprednisolone for at least 3 days. Clinical follow-up visits will be performed at 3, 5, and 15 days after treatment randomization. Patients in the control group (SOC group without sarilumab) progressing to Brescia- COVID 2-3 plus inflammatory markers, will be given the option to be rescued with sarilumab at the same doses and, in that case, be included in an open-label phase and be followed up for additional weeks (with visits at 3, 7 and 15 days after sarilumab rescue administration). Patients randomly assigned to sarilumab therapy at baseline progressing to Brescia-COVID 2-3 will be rescued according to local clinical practice protocols. A final follow-up visit will be conducted for all patients at day 29 from randomization, regardless of initial treatment assignment. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary end point is the proportion of patients progressing to either severe respiratory failure (Brescia-COVID ≥2), ICU admission, or death. RANDOMIZATION: Randomization codes were produced by means of the PROC PLAN of the SAS system, with a 1:1 assignment ratio, stratifying by centre and using blocks multiple of 2 elements. The randomization schedule will be managed through the eCRF in a concealed manner. BLINDING (MASKING): All study drugs will be administered as open label. No blinding methods will be used in this trial. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SIMPLE SIZE): The target sample size will be 200 COVID-19 patients, who will be allocated randomly to control arm (100) and treatment arm (100). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol Code: SARTRE Protocol Date: May 05th 2020. Version: 2.0 The study has been approved by the Spanish Competent Authority (AEMPS) as a low intervention clinical trial. Start of recruitment: August, 2020 End of recruitment: May, 2021 TRIAL REGISTRATION: Identifier: EudraCT Number: 2020-002037-15 ; Registration date: 26 May 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

A randomized placebo controlled clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of minocycline in patients with Angelman syndrome (A-MANECE study).

BACKGROUND: Minocycline is an old tetracycline antibiotic that has shown antiinflammatory and antiapoptotic properties in different neurological disease mouse models. Previous single arm study in humans demonstrated benefits in individuals with Angelman Syndrome (AS); however, its efficacy in patients with Angelman Syndrome has not been assessed in a controlled trial. This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial in individuals with AS, aged 6 years to 30 years (n = 32, mean age 12 [SD 6·29] years). Participants were randomized to minocycline or placebo for 8 weeks and then switched to the other treatment (a subset of 22 patients) or to receive minocycline for up to 16 weeks (10 patients). After week 16, all patients entered a wash-out 8-week follow-up period. RESULTS: Thirty-six subjects were screened and 34 were randomized. Thirty two subjects (94·1%) completed at least the first period and all of them completed the full trial. Intention-to-treat analysis demonstrated the lack of significantly greater improvements in the primary outcome, mean changes in age equivalent of the development index of the Merrill-Palmer Revised Scale after minocycline compared with placebo (1·90 ± 3·16 and 2·00 ± 3·28, respectively, p = 0·937). Longer treatment duration up to 16 weeks did not result in better treatment outcomes (1·86 ± 3·35 for 8 weeks treatment vs 1·20 ± 5·53 for 16 weeks treatment, p = 0·667). Side effects were not significantly different during minocycline and placebo treatments. No serious adverse events occurred on minocycline. CONCLUSIONS: Minocycline treatment for up to 16 weeks in children and young adults with AS resulted in lack of significant improvements in development indexes compared to placebo treatment. Treatment with minocycline appears safe and well tolerated; even if it cannot be completely ruled out that longer trials might be required for a potential minocycline effect to be expressed, available results and lack of knowledge on the actual mechanism of action do not support this hypothesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Clinical Trial database ( EudraCT 2013-002154-67 ), registered 16th September 2013; US Clinical trials database ( NCT02056665 ), registered 6th February 2014.