A Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody for Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: LY-CoV555, a neutralizing monoclonal antibody, has been associated with a decrease in viral load and the frequency of hospitalizations or emergency department visits among outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Data are needed on the effect of this antibody in patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19. METHODS: In this platform trial of therapeutic agents, we randomly assigned hospitalized patients who had Covid-19 without end-organ failure in a 1:1 ratio to receive either LY-CoV555 or matching placebo. In addition, all the patients received high-quality supportive care as background therapy, including the antiviral drug remdesivir and, when indicated, supplemental oxygen and glucocorticoids. LY-CoV555 (at a dose of 7000 mg) or placebo was administered as a single intravenous infusion over a 1-hour period. The primary outcome was a sustained recovery during a 90-day period, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. An interim futility assessment was performed on the basis of a seven-category ordinal scale for pulmonary function on day 5. RESULTS: On October 26, 2020, the data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping enrollment for futility after 314 patients (163 in the LY-CoV555 group and 151 in the placebo group) had undergone randomization and infusion. The median interval since the onset of symptoms was 7 days (interquartile range, 5 to 9). At day 5, a total of 81 patients (50%) in the LY-CoV555 group and 81 (54%) in the placebo group were in one of the two most favorable categories of the pulmonary outcome. Across the seven categories, the odds ratio of being in a more favorable category in the LY-CoV555 group than in the placebo group was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 1.29; P = 0.45). The percentage of patients with the primary safety outcome (a composite of death, serious adverse events, or clinical grade 3 or 4 adverse events through day 5) was similar in the LY-CoV555 group and the placebo group (19% and 14%, respectively; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 0.78 to 3.10; P = 0.20). The rate ratio for a sustained recovery was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Monoclonal antibody LY-CoV555, when coadministered with remdesivir, did not demonstrate efficacy among hospitalized patients who had Covid-19 without end-organ failure. (Funded by Operation Warp Speed and others; TICO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04501978.).

Investigation of Causal Effects of Protein Biomarkers on Cardiovascular Disease in Persons With HIV.

BACKGROUND: There is an incompletely understood increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) among people with HIV (PWH). We investigated if a collection of biomarkers were associated with CVD among PWH. Mendelian randomization (MR) was used to identify potentially causal associations. METHODS: Data from follow-up in 4 large trials among PWH were used to identify 131 incident CVD cases and they were matched to 259 participants without incident CVD (controls). Tests of associations between 460 baseline protein levels and case status were conducted. RESULTS: Univariate analysis found CLEC6A, HGF, IL-6, IL-10RB, and IGFBP7 as being associated with case status and a multivariate model identified 3 of these: CLEC6A (odds ratio [OR] = 1.48, P = .037), HGF (OR = 1.83, P = .012), and IL-6 (OR = 1.45, P = .016). MR methods identified 5 significantly associated proteins: AXL, CHI3L1, GAS6, IL-6RA, and SCGB3A2. CONCLUSIONS: These results implicate inflammatory and fibrotic processes as contributing to CVD. While some of these biomarkers are well established in the general population and in PWH (IL-6 and its receptor), some are novel to PWH (HGF, AXL, and GAS6) and some are novel overall (CLEC6A). Further investigation into the uniqueness of these biomarkers in PWH and the role of these biomarkers as targets among PWH is warranted.

Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Final Report.

BACKGROUND: Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), no antiviral agents have yet been shown to be efficacious. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. RESULTS: A total of 1062 patients underwent randomization (with 541 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo). Those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 10 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 11), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 18) among those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.49; P<0.001, by a log-rank test). In an analysis that used a proportional-odds model with an eight-category ordinal scale, the patients who received remdesivir were found to be more likely than those who received placebo to have clinical improvement at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9, after adjustment for actual disease severity). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality were 6.7% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo by day 15 and 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo by day 29 (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.03). Serious adverse events were reported in 131 of the 532 patients who received remdesivir (24.6%) and in 163 of the 516 patients who received placebo (31.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.).

Evaluating Primary Endpoints for COVID-19 Therapeutic Trials to Assess Recovery.

Rationale: Uncertainty regarding the natural history of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) led to difficulty in efficacy endpoint selection for therapeutic trials. Capturing outcomes that occur after hospital discharge may improve assessment of clinical recovery among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Objectives: Evaluate 90-day clinical course of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, comparing three distinct definitions of recovery. Methods: We used pooled data from three clinical trials of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies to compare: 1) the hospital discharge approach; 2) the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19) trials sustained recovery approach; and 3) a comprehensive approach. At the time of enrollment, all patients were hospitalized in a non-ICU setting without organ failure or major extrapulmonary manifestations of COVID-19. We defined discordance as a difference between time to recovery. Measurements and Main Results: Discordance between the hospital discharge and comprehensive approaches occurred in 170 (20%) of 850 enrolled participants, including 126 hospital readmissions and 24 deaths after initial hospital discharge. Discordant participants were older (median age, 68 vs. 59 years; P < 0.001) and more had a comorbidity (84% vs. 70%; P < 0.001). Of 170 discordant participants, 106 (62%) had postdischarge events captured by the TICO approach. Conclusions: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 20% had clinically significant postdischarge events within 90 days after randomization in patients who would be considered "recovered" using the hospital discharge approach. Using the TICO approach balances length of follow-up with practical limitations. However, clinical trials of COVID-19 therapeutics should use follow-up times up to 90 days to assess clinical recovery more accurately.

Responses to a Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody for Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 According to Baseline Antibody and Antigen Levels : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial, bamlanivimab, a SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing monoclonal antibody, given in combination with remdesivir, did not improve outcomes among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 based on an early futility assessment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the a priori hypothesis that bamlanivimab has greater benefit in patients without detectable levels of endogenous neutralizing antibody (nAb) at study entry than in those with antibodies, especially if viral levels are high. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978). SETTING: Multicenter trial. PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 without end-organ failure. INTERVENTION: Bamlanivimab (7000 mg) or placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Antibody, antigen, and viral RNA levels were centrally measured on stored specimens collected at baseline. Patients were followed for 90 days for sustained recovery (defined as discharge to home and remaining home for 14 consecutive days) and a composite safety outcome (death, serious adverse events, organ failure, or serious infections). RESULTS: Among 314 participants (163 receiving bamlanivimab and 151 placebo), the median time to sustained recovery was 19 days and did not differ between the bamlanivimab and placebo groups (subhazard ratio [sHR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.22]; sHR > 1 favors bamlanivimab). At entry, 50% evidenced production of anti-spike nAbs; 50% had SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid plasma antigen levels of at least 1000 ng/L. Among those without and with nAbs at study entry, the sHRs were 1.24 (CI, 0.90 to 1.70) and 0.74 (CI, 0.54 to 1.00), respectively (nominal P for interaction = 0.018). The sHR (bamlanivimab vs. placebo) was also more than 1 for those with plasma antigen or nasal viral RNA levels above median level at entry and was greatest for those without antibodies and with elevated levels of antigen (sHR, 1.48 [CI, 0.99 to 2.23]) or viral RNA (sHR, 1.89 [CI, 1.23 to 2.91]). Hazard ratios for the composite safety outcome (<1 favors bamlanivimab) also differed by serostatus at entry: 0.67 (CI, 0.37 to 1.20) for those without and 1.79 (CI, 0.92 to 3.48) for those with nAbs. LIMITATION: Subgroup analysis of a trial prematurely stopped because of futility; small sample size; multiple subgroups analyzed. CONCLUSION: Efficacy and safety of bamlanivimab may differ depending on whether an endogenous nAb response has been mounted. The limited sample size of the study does not allow firm conclusions based on these findings, and further independent trials are required that assess other types of passive immune therapies in the same patient setting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

The Association of Baseline Plasma SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Antigen Level and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Levels of plasma SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) antigen may be an important biomarker in patients with COVID-19 and enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether levels of plasma antigen can predict short-term clinical outcomes and identify clinical and viral factors associated with plasma antigen levels in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of baseline plasma antigen level from 2540 participants enrolled in the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients With COVID-19) platform trial from August 2020 to November 2021, with additional data on day 5 outcome and time to discharge. SETTING: 114 centers in 10 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection with 12 days or less of symptoms. MEASUREMENTS: Baseline plasma viral N antigen level was measured at a central laboratory. Delta variant status was determined from baseline nasal swabs using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Associations between baseline patient characteristics and viral factors and baseline plasma antigen levels were assessed using both unadjusted and multivariable modeling. Association between elevated baseline antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater and outcomes, including worsening of ordinal pulmonary scale at day 5 and time to hospital discharge, were evaluated using logistic regression and Fine-Gray regression models, respectively. RESULTS: Plasma antigen was below the level of quantification in 5% of participants at enrollment, and 1000 ng/L or greater in 57%. Baseline pulmonary severity of illness was strongly associated with plasma antigen level, with mean plasma antigen level 3.10-fold higher among those requiring noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula compared with room air (95% CI, 2.22 to 4.34). Plasma antigen level was higher in those who lacked antispike antibodies (6.42 fold; CI, 5.37 to 7.66) and in those with the Delta variant (1.73 fold; CI, 1.41 to 2.13). Additional factors associated with higher baseline antigen level included male sex, shorter time since hospital admission, decreased days of remdesivir, and renal impairment. In contrast, race, ethnicity, body mass index, and immunocompromising conditions were not associated with plasma antigen levels. Plasma antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater was associated with a markedly higher odds of worsened pulmonary status at day 5 (odds ratio, 5.06 [CI, 3.41 to 7.50]) and longer time to hospital discharge (median, 7 vs. 4 days; subhazard ratio, 0.51 [CI, 0.45 to 0.57]), with subhazard ratios similar across all levels of baseline pulmonary severity. LIMITATIONS: Plasma samples were drawn at enrollment, not hospital presentation. No point-of-care test to measure plasma antigen is currently available. CONCLUSION: Elevated plasma antigen is highly associated with both severity of pulmonary illness and clinically important patient outcomes. Multiple clinical and viral factors are associated with plasma antigen level at presentation. These data support a potential role of ongoing viral replication in the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalized patients. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

artbin: Extended sample size for randomized trials with binary outcomes.

We describe the command artbin, which offers various new facilities for the calculation of sample size for binary outcome variables that are not otherwise available in Stata. While artbin has been available since 2004, it has not been previously described in the Stata Journal. artbin has been recently updated to include new options for different statistical tests, methods and study designs, improved syntax, and better handling of noninferiority trials. In this article, we describe the updated version of artbin and detail the various formulas used within artbin in different settings.

artcat: Sample-size calculation for an ordered categorical outcome.

We describe a new command, artcat, that calculates sample size or power for a randomized controlled trial or similar experiment with an ordered categorical outcome, where analysis is by the proportional-odds model. artcat implements the method of Whitehead (1993, Statistics in Medicine 12: 2257-2271). We also propose and implement a new method that 1) allows the user to specify a treatment effect that does not obey the proportional-odds assumption, 2) offers greater accuracy for large treatment effects, and 3) allows for noninferiority trials. We illustrate the command and explore the value of an ordered categorical outcome over a binary outcome in various settings. We show by simulation that the methods perform well and that the new method is more accurate than Whitehead's method.

Design and implementation of an international, multi-arm, multi-stage platform master protocol for trials of novel SARS-CoV-2 antiviral agents: Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 (TICO/ACTIV-3).

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Safe and effective therapies for COVID-19 are urgently needed. In order to meet this need, the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines public-private partnership initiated the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19. Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 is a multi-arm, multi-stage platform master protocol, which facilitates the rapid evaluation of the safety and efficacy of novel candidate antiviral therapeutic agents for adults hospitalized with COVID-19. Five agents have so far entered the protocol, with rapid answers already provided for three of these. Other agents are expected to enter the protocol throughout 2021. This protocol contains a number of key design and implementation features that, along with challenges faced by the protocol team, are presented and discussed. METHODS: Three clinical trial networks, encompassing a global network of clinical sites, participated in the protocol development and implementation. Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 utilizes a multi-arm, multi-stage design with an agile and robust approach to futility and safety evaluation at 300 patients enrolled, with subsequent expansion to full sample size and an expanded target population if the agent shows an acceptable safety profile and evidence of efficacy. Rapid recruitment to multiple agents is enabled through the sharing of placebo, the confining of agent-specific information to protocol appendices, and modular consent forms. In collaboration with the Food and Drug Administration, a thorough safety data collection and Data and Safety Monitoring Board schedule was developed for the study of potential therapeutic agents with limited in-human data in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: As of 8 August 2021, five agents have entered the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 master protocol and a total of 1909 participants have been randomized to one of these agents or matching placebo. There were a number of challenges faced by the study team that needed to be overcome in order to successfully implement Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 across a global network of sites. These included ensuring drug supply and reliable recruitment allowing for changing infection rates across the global network of sites, the need to balance the collection of data and samples without overburdening clinical staff and obtaining regulatory approvals across a global network of sites. CONCLUSION: Through a robust multi-network partnership, the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 protocol has been successfully used across a global network of sites for rapid generation of efficacy data on multiple novel antiviral agents. The protocol design and implementation features used in this protocol, and the approaches to address challenges, will have broader applicability. Mechanisms to facilitate improved communication and harmonization among country-specific regulatory bodies are required to achieve the full potential of this approach in dealing with a global outbreak.

Data and Safety Monitoring of COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials.

To speed the development of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, the United States Federal Government has funded multiple phase 3 trials of candidate vaccines. A single 11-member data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) monitors all government-funded trials to ensure coordinated oversight, promote harmonized designs, and allow shared insights related to safety across trials. DSMB reviews encompass 3 domains: (1) the conduct of trials, including overall and subgroup accrual and data quality and completeness; (2) safety, including individual events of concern and comparisons by randomized group; and (3) interim analyses of efficacy when event-driven milestones are met. Challenges have included the scale and pace of the trials, the frequency of safety events related to the combined enrollment of over 100 000 participants, many of whom are older adults or have comorbid conditions that place them at independent risk of serious health events, and the politicized environment in which the trials have taken place.

Antiretroviral therapy alone versus antiretroviral therapy with a kick and kill approach, on measures of the HIV reservoir in participants with recent HIV infection (the RIVER trial): a phase 2, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) cannot cure HIV infection because of a persistent reservoir of latently infected cells. Approaches that force HIV transcription from these cells, making them susceptible to killing-termed kick and kill regimens-have been explored as a strategy towards an HIV cure. RIVER is the first randomised trial to determine the effect of ART-only versus ART plus kick and kill on markers of the HIV reservoir. METHODS: This phase 2, open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial was undertaken at six clinical sites in the UK. Patients aged 18-60 years who were confirmed as HIV-positive within a maximum of the past 6 months and started ART within 1 month from confirmed diagnosis were randomly assigned by a computer generated randomisation list to receive ART-only (control) or ART plus the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat (the kick) and replication-deficient viral vector T-cell inducing vaccines encoding conserved HIV sequences ChAdV63. HIVconsv-prime and MVA.HIVconsv-boost (the kill; ART + V + V; intervention). The primary endpoint was total HIV DNA isolated from peripheral blood CD4+ T-cells at weeks 16 and 18 after randomisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02336074. FINDINGS: Between June 14, 2015 and Jul 11, 2017, 60 men with HIV were randomly assigned to receive either an ART-only (n=30) or an ART + V + V (n=30) regimen; all 60 participants completed the study, with no loss-to-follow-up. Mean total HIV DNA at weeks 16 and 18 after randomisation was 3·02 log10 copies HIV DNA per 106 CD4+ T-cells in the ART-only group versus 3·06 log10 copies HIV DNA per 106 CD4+ T-cells in ART + V + V group, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (mean difference of 0·04 log10 copies HIV DNA per 106 CD4+ T-cells [95% CI -0·03 to 0·11; p=0·26]). There were no intervention-related serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: This kick and kill approach conferred no significant benefit compared with ART alone on measures of the HIV reservoir. Although this does not disprove the efficacy kick and kill strategy, for future trials enhancement of both kick and kill agents will be required. FUNDING: Medical Research Council (MR/L00528X/1).

Early ART-initiation and longer ART duration reduces HIV-1 proviral DNA levels in children from the CHER trial.

BACKGROUND: Reduction of the reservoir of latent HIV-infected cells might increase the possibility of long-term remission in individuals living with HIV. We investigated factors associated with HIV-1 proviral DNA levels in children receiving different antiretroviral therapy (ART) strategies in the children with HIV early antiretroviral therapy (CHER) trial. METHODS: Infants with HIV < 12 weeks old with CD4% ≥ 25% were randomized in the CHER trial to early limited ART for 40 or 96 weeks (ART-40 W, ART-96 W), or deferred ART (ART-Def). For ART-Def infants or following ART interruption in ART-40 W/ART-96 W, ART was started/re-started for clinical progression or CD4% < 25%. In 229 participants, HIV-1 proviral DNA was quantified by PCR from stored peripheral blood mononuclear cells from children who had received ≥ 24 weeks ART and two consecutive undetectable HIV-1 RNA 12-24 weeks apart. HIV-1 proviral DNA was compared between ART-Def and ART-96 W at week 96, and in all arms at week 248. Factors associated with HIV-1 proviral DNA levels were evaluated using linear regression. FINDINGS: Longer duration of ART was significantly associated with lower HIV-1 proviral DNA at both 96 (p = 0.0003) and 248 weeks (p = 0.0011). Higher total CD8 count at ART initiation was associated with lower HIV-1 proviral DNA at both 96 (p = 0.0225) and 248 weeks (p = 0.0398). Week 248 HIV-1 proviral DNA was significantly higher in those with positive HIV-1 serology at week 84 than those with negative serology (p = 0.0042). INTEPRETATION: Longer ART duration is key to HIV-1 proviral DNA reduction. Further understanding is needed of the effects of "immune-attenuation" through early HIV-1 exposure. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, National Institutes of Health, Medical Research Council.

Treatment estimands in clinical trials of patients hospitalised for COVID-19: ensuring trials ask the right questions.

When designing a clinical trial, explicitly defining the treatment estimands of interest (that which is to be estimated) can help to clarify trial objectives and ensure the questions being addressed by the trial are clinically meaningful. There are several challenges when defining estimands. Here, we discuss a number of these in the context of trials of treatments for patients hospitalised with COVID-19 and make suggestions for how estimands should be defined for key outcomes. We suggest that treatment effects should usually be measured as differences in proportions (or risk or odds ratios) for outcomes such as death and requirement for ventilation, and differences in means for outcomes such as the number of days ventilated. We further recommend that truncation due to death should be handled differently depending on whether a patient- or resource-focused perspective is taken; for the former, a composite approach should be used, while for the latter, a while-alive approach is preferred. Finally, we suggest that discontinuation of randomised treatment should be handled from a treatment policy perspective, where non-adherence is ignored in the analysis (i.e. intention to treat).

Effect Estimates in Randomized Trials and Observational Studies: Comparing Apples With Apples.

Effect estimates from randomized trials and observational studies might not be directly comparable because of differences in study design, other than randomization, and in data analysis. We propose a 3-step procedure to facilitate meaningful comparisons of effect estimates from randomized trials and observational studies: 1) harmonization of the study protocols (eligibility criteria, treatment strategies, outcome, start and end of follow-up, causal contrast) so that the studies target the same causal effect, 2) harmonization of the data analysis to estimate the causal effect, and 3) sensitivity analyses to investigate the impact of discrepancies that could not be accounted for in the harmonization process. To illustrate our approach, we compared estimates of the effect of immediate with deferred initiation of antiretroviral therapy in individuals positive for the human immunodeficiency virus from the Strategic Timing of Antiretroviral Therapy (START) randomized trial and the observational HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration.

Mortality risk over time after early fluid resuscitation in African children.

BACKGROUND: African children hospitalised with severe febrile illness have a high risk of mortality. The Fluid Expansion As Supportive Therapy (FEAST) trial (ISCRTN 69856593) demonstrated increased mortality risk associated with fluid boluses, but the temporal relationship to bolus therapy and underlying mechanism remains unclear. METHODS: In a post hoc retrospective analysis, flexible parametric models were used to compare change in mortality risk post-randomisation in children allocated to bolus therapy with 20-40 ml/kg 5% albumin or 0.9% saline over 1-2 h or no bolus (control, 4 ml/kg/hour maintenance), overall and for different terminal clinical events (cardiogenic, neurological, respiratory, or unknown/other). RESULTS: Two thousand ninety-seven and 1041 children were randomised to bolus vs no bolus, of whom 254 (12%) and 91 (9%) respectively died within 28 days. Median (IQR) bolus fluid in the bolus groups received by 4 h was 20 (20, 40) ml/kg and was the same at 8 h; total fluids received in bolus groups at 4 h and 8 h were 38 (28, 43) ml/kg and 40 (30, 50) ml/kg, respectively. Total fluid volumes received in the control group by 4 h and 8 h were median (IQR) 10 (6, 15) ml/kg and 10 (10, 26) ml/kg, respectively. Mortality risk was greatest 30 min post-randomisation in both groups, declining sharply to 4 h and then more slowly to 28 days. Maximum mortality risk was similar in bolus and no bolus groups; however, the risk declined more slowly in the bolus group, with significantly higher mortality risk compared to the no bolus group from 1.6 to 101 h (4 days) post-randomisation. The delay in decline in mortality risk in the bolus groups was most pronounced for cardiogenic modes of death. CONCLUSIONS: The increased risk from bolus therapy was not due to a mechanism occurring immediately after bolus administration. Excess mortality risk in the bolus group resulted from slower decrease in mortality risk over the ensuing 4 days. Thus, administration of modest bolus volumes appeared to prevent mortality risk declining at the same rate that it would have done without a bolus, rather than harm associated with bolus resulting from a concurrent increased risk of death peri-bolus administration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN69856593. Date of registration 15 December 2008.

Rigorous Clinical Trial Design in Public Health Emergencies Is Essential.

Randomized clinical trials are the most reliable approaches to evaluating the effects of new treatments and vaccines. During the 2014-2015 West African Ebola epidemic, many argued that such trials were neither ethical nor feasible in an environment of limited health infrastructure and severe disease with a high fatality rate. Consensus among the numerous organizations providing help to the affected areas was never achieved, resulting in fragmented collaboration, delayed study initiation, and ultimately failure to provide definitive evidence on the efficacy of treatments and vaccines. Randomized trials were in fact approved by local ethics boards and initiated, demonstrating that randomized trials, even in such difficult circumstances, are feasible. Improved planning and collaboration among research and humanitarian organizations, and affected communities, in the interepidemic periods are needed to ensure that questions regarding the efficacy of vaccines and treatments can be definitively answered during future public health emergencies.

Initiation of Antiretroviral Therapy in Early Asymptomatic HIV Infection.

BACKGROUND: Data from randomized trials are lacking on the benefits and risks of initiating antiretroviral therapy in patients with asymptomatic human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection who have a CD4+ count of more than 350 cells per cubic millimeter. METHODS: We randomly assigned HIV-positive adults who had a CD4+ count of more than 500 cells per cubic millimeter to start antiretroviral therapy immediately (immediate-initiation group) or to defer it until the CD4+ count decreased to 350 cells per cubic millimeter or until the development of the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) or another condition that dictated the use of antiretroviral therapy (deferred-initiation group). The primary composite end point was any serious AIDS-related event, serious non-AIDS-related event, or death from any cause. RESULTS: A total of 4685 patients were followed for a mean of 3.0 years. At study entry, the median HIV viral load was 12,759 copies per milliliter, and the median CD4+ count was 651 cells per cubic millimeter. On May 15, 2015, on the basis of an interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring board determined that the study question had been answered and recommended that patients in the deferred-initiation group be offered antiretroviral therapy. The primary end point occurred in 42 patients in the immediate-initiation group (1.8%; 0.60 events per 100 person-years), as compared with 96 patients in the deferred-initiation group (4.1%; 1.38 events per 100 person-years), for a hazard ratio of 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30 to 0.62; P<0.001). Hazard ratios for serious AIDS-related and serious non-AIDS-related events were 0.28 (95% CI, 0.15 to 0.50; P<0.001) and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.97; P=0.04), respectively. More than two thirds of the primary end points (68%) occurred in patients with a CD4+ count of more than 500 cells per cubic millimeter. The risks of a grade 4 event were similar in the two groups, as were the risks of unscheduled hospital admissions. CONCLUSIONS: The initiation of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-positive adults with a CD4+ count of more than 500 cells per cubic millimeter provided net benefits over starting such therapy in patients after the CD4+ count had declined to 350 cells per cubic millimeter. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; START ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00867048.).

Lactate clearance as a prognostic marker of mortality in severely ill febrile children in East Africa.

BACKGROUND: Hyperlactataemia (HL) is a biomarker of disease severity that predicts mortality in patients with sepsis and malaria. Lactate clearance (LC) during resuscitation has been shown to be a prognostic factor of survival in critically ill adults, but little data exist for African children living in malaria-endemic areas. METHODS: In a secondary data analysis of severely ill febrile children included in the Fluid Expansion as Supportive Therapy (FEAST) resuscitation trial, we assessed the association between lactate levels at admission and LC at 8 h with all-cause mortality at 72 h (d72). LC was defined as a relative lactate decline ≥ 40% and/or lactate normalisation (lactate < 2.5 mmol/L). RESULTS: Of 3170 children in the FEAST trial, including 1719 children (57%) with Plasmodium falciparum malaria, 3008 (95%) had a baseline lactate measurement, 2127 (71%) had HL (lactate ≥ 2.5 mmol/L), and 1179 (39%) had severe HL (≥ 5 mmol/L). Within 72 h, 309 children (10.3%) died, of whom 284 (92%) had baseline HL. After adjustment for potential confounders, severe HL was strongly associated with mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 6.96; 95% CI 3.52, 13.76, p < 0.001). This association was not modified by malaria status, despite children with malaria having a higher baseline lactate (median 4.6 mmol/L vs 3 mmol/L; p < 0.001) and a lower mortality rate (OR = 0.42; p < 0.001) compared to non-malarial cases. Sensitivity and specificity analysis identified a higher lactate on admission cut-off value predictive of d72 for children with malaria (5.2 mmol/L) than for those with other febrile illnesses (3.4 mmol/L). At 8 h, 2748/3008 survivors (91%) had a lactate measured, 1906 (63%) of whom had HL on admission, of whom 1014 (53%) fulfilled pre-defined LC criteria. After adjustment for confounders, LC independently predicted survival after 8 h (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.14, 0.42; p < 0.001). Absence of LC (< 10%) at 8 h was strongly associated with death at 72 h (OR 4.62; 95% CI 2.7, 8.0; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Independently of the underlying diagnosis, HL is a strong risk factor for death at 72 h in children admitted with severe febrile illnesses in Africa. Children able to clear lactate within 8 h had an improved chance of survival. These findings prompt the more widespread use of lactate and LC to identify children with severe disease and monitor response to treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN69856593 Registered 21 January 2009.

Exhaustion of Activated CD8 T Cells Predicts Disease Progression in Primary HIV-1 Infection.

The rate at which HIV-1 infected individuals progress to AIDS is highly variable and impacted by T cell immunity. CD8 T cell inhibitory molecules are up-regulated in HIV-1 infection and associate with immune dysfunction. We evaluated participants (n = 122) recruited to the SPARTAC randomised clinical trial to determine whether CD8 T cell exhaustion markers PD-1, Lag-3 and Tim-3 were associated with immune activation and disease progression. Expression of PD-1, Tim-3, Lag-3 and CD38 on CD8 T cells from the closest pre-therapy time-point to seroconversion was measured by flow cytometry, and correlated with surrogate markers of HIV-1 disease (HIV-1 plasma viral load (pVL) and CD4 T cell count) and the trial endpoint (time to CD4 count <350 cells/µl or initiation of antiretroviral therapy). To explore the functional significance of these markers, co-expression of Eomes, T-bet and CD39 was assessed. Expression of PD-1 on CD8 and CD38 CD8 T cells correlated with pVL and CD4 count at baseline, and predicted time to the trial endpoint. Lag-3 expression was associated with pVL but not CD4 count. For all exhaustion markers, expression of CD38 on CD8 T cells increased the strength of associations. In Cox models, progression to the trial endpoint was most marked for PD-1/CD38 co-expressing cells, with evidence for a stronger effect within 12 weeks from confirmed diagnosis of PHI. The effect of PD-1 and Lag-3 expression on CD8 T cells retained statistical significance in Cox proportional hazards models including antiretroviral therapy and CD4 count, but not pVL as co-variants. Expression of 'exhaustion' or 'immune checkpoint' markers in early HIV-1 infection is associated with clinical progression and is impacted by immune activation and the duration of infection. New markers to identify exhausted T cells and novel interventions to reverse exhaustion may inform the development of novel immunotherapeutic approaches.

Structured observations reveal slow HIV-1 CTL escape.

The existence of viral variants that escape from the selection pressures imposed by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes (CTLs) in HIV-1 infection is well documented, but it is unclear when they arise, with reported measures of the time to escape in individuals ranging from days to years. A study of participants enrolled in the SPARTAC (Short Pulse Anti-Retroviral Therapy at HIV Seroconversion) clinical trial allowed direct observation of the evolution of CTL escape variants in 125 adults with primary HIV-1 infection observed for up to three years. Patient HLA-type, longitudinal CD8+ T-cell responses measured by IFN-γ ELISpot and longitudinal HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef sequence data were used to study the timing and prevalence of CTL escape in the participants whilst untreated. Results showed that sequence variation within CTL epitopes at the first time point (within six months of the estimated date of seroconversion) was consistent with most mutations being transmitted in the infecting viral strain rather than with escape arising within the first few weeks of infection. Escape arose throughout the first three years of infection, but slowly and steadily. Approximately one third of patients did not drive any new escape in an HLA-restricted epitope in just under two years. Patients driving several escape mutations during these two years were rare and the median and modal numbers of new escape events in each patient were one and zero respectively. Survival analysis of time to escape found that possession of a protective HLA type significantly reduced time to first escape in a patient (p = 0.01), and epitopes escaped faster in the face of a measurable CD8+ ELISpot response (p = 0.001). However, even in an HLA matched host who mounted a measurable, specific, CD8+ response the average time before the targeted epitope evolved an escape mutation was longer than two years.