Low-dose whole thorax radiation therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia: inpatient onboarding process for a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundThe mortality of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19) has been associated with a pulmonary inflammatory response resulting in hypoxemia and rapid clinical decline. PREVENT is an ongoing prospective multicenter Phase II randomized controlled trial where patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia are randomized to low dose radiation therapy (RT) versus control (clinicaltrials.gov, {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04466683","term_id":"NCT04466683"}}NCT04466683). We describe the inpatient onboarding process of the center contributing the largest number of patients to this trial.Materials and methodsCOVID-19 hospital admissions were attained by the clinical research manager and radiation oncologist daily. Text message contact was made with infectious disease, critical care, and nursing staff with reciprocal discussion of the trial protocol and approval for virtual consulting of the patient. Witnessed informed consent was obtained first by telephone and later in person. Simulation and treatment (performed without a computer plan) was performed on a linear accelerator with one personal protective equipment-protected therapist moving in and out of the treatment room, and a second therapist manning the console. Following on-site dose calculation by physics, the radiation oncologist approved the fields prior to treatment delivery.ResultsBetween August 28, 2020 and October 6, 2020, the first 10 enrolled patients on this multicenter trial were randomized and treated at our institution; no team member (research staff, radiation oncology) contracted COVID-19 while employing this protocol.ConclusionThis represents the first published protocol to address efficient and safe recruitment of COVID-19 patients for a radiation oncology trial, serving as a model for conducting recruitment of COVID-19 patients for clinical trials.     

Neutralizing antibody responses over time in demographically and clinically diverse individuals recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection in the United States and Peru: A cohort study

BackgroundPeople infected with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) experience a wide range of clinical manifestations, from asymptomatic and mild illness to severe illness and death, influenced by age and a variety of comorbidities. Neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) are thought to be a primary immune defense against the virus. Large, diverse, well-characterized cohorts of convalescent individuals provide standardized values to benchmark nAb responses to past SARS-CoV-2 infection and define potentially protective levels of immunity.Methods and findingsThis analysis comprises an observational cohort of 329 HIV–seronegative adults in the United States (n = 167) and Peru (n = 162) convalescing from SARS-CoV-2 infection from May through October 2020. The mean age was 48 years (range 18 to 86), 54% of the cohort overall was Hispanic, and 34% identified as White. nAb titers were measured in serum by SARS-CoV-2.D614G Spike-pseudotyped virus infection of 293T/ACE2 cells. Multiple linear regression was applied to define associations between nAb titers and demographic variables, disease severity and time from infection or disease onset, and comorbidities within and across US and Peruvian cohorts over time. nAb titers peaked 28 to 42 days post-diagnosis and were higher in participants with a history of severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) (p < 0.001). Diabetes, age >55 years, male sex assigned at birth, and, in some cases, body mass index were also independently associated with higher nAb titers, whereas hypertension was independently associated with lower nAb titers. nAb titers did not differ by race, underlying pulmonary disease or smoking. Two months post-enrollment, nAb ID50 (ID80) titers declined 3.5 (2.8)-fold overall. Study limitations in this observational, convalescent cohort include survivorship bias and missing early viral loads and acute immune responses to correlate with the convalescent responses we observed.ConclusionsIn summary, in our cohort, nAb titers after SARS-CoV-2 infection peaked approximately 1 month post-diagnosis and varied by age, sex assigned at birth, disease severity, and underlying comorbidities. Our data show great heterogeneity in nAb responses among people with recent COVID-19, highlighting the challenges of interpreting natural history studies and gauging responses to vaccines and therapeutics among people with recent infection. Our observations illuminate potential correlations of demographic and clinical characteristics with nAb responses, a key element for protection from COVID-19, thus informing development and implementation of preventative and therapeutic strategies globally.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04403880","term_id":"NCT04403880"}}NCT04403880.

Shelly Karuna and co-workers study variations in neutralizing antibody responses after SARS-CoV-2 infection.     

Critically ill COVID-19 patients with neutralizing autoantibodies against type I interferons have increased risk of herpesvirus disease

Autoantibodies neutralizing the antiviral action of type I interferons (IFNs) have been associated with predisposition to severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Here, we screened for such autoantibodies in 103 critically ill COVID-19 patients in a tertiary intensive care unit (ICU) in Switzerland. Eleven patients (10.7%), but no healthy donors, had neutralizing anti-IFNα or anti-IFNα/anti-IFNω IgG in plasma/serum, but anti-IFN IgM or IgA was rare. One patient had non-neutralizing anti-IFNα IgG. Strikingly, all patients with plasma anti-IFNα IgG also had anti-IFNα IgG in tracheobronchial secretions, identifying these autoantibodies at anatomical sites relevant for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Longitudinal analyses revealed patient heterogeneity in terms of increasing, decreasing, or stable anti-IFN IgG levels throughout the length of hospitalization. Notably, presence of anti-IFN autoantibodies in this critically ill COVID-19 cohort appeared to predict herpesvirus disease (caused by herpes simplex viruses types 1 and 2 (HSV-1/-2) and/or cytomegalovirus (CMV)), which has been linked to worse clinical outcomes. Indeed, all 7 tested COVID-19 patients with anti-IFN IgG in our cohort (100%) suffered from one or more herpesviruses, and analysis revealed that these patients were more likely to experience CMV than COVID-19 patients without anti-IFN autoantibodies, even when adjusting for age, gender, and systemic steroid treatment (odds ratio (OR) 7.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14 to 46.31, p = 0.036). As the IFN system deficiency caused by neutralizing anti-IFN autoantibodies likely directly and indirectly exacerbates the likelihood of latent herpesvirus reactivations in critically ill patients, early diagnosis of anti-IFN IgG could be rapidly used to inform risk-group stratification and treatment options.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04410263","term_id":"NCT04410263"}}NCT04410263.

Autoantibodies that neutralize the antiviral action of type I interferons are associated with predisposition to severe COVID-19. This study shows that this deficiency in the interferon system is associated with a heightened risk of herpesvirus disease in critically ill patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.     

A recombinant monoclonal-based Taenia antigen assay that reflects disease activity in extra-parenchymal neurocysticercosis

BackgroundAntigen tests for diagnosis and disease monitoring in some types of neurocysticercosis (NCC) are useful but access to testing has been limited by availability of proprietary reagents and/or kits.Methods/Principal findingsThree previously identified IgM-secreting hybridomas whose IgM products demonstrated specificity to Taenia solium underwent variable heavy and light chain sequencing and isotype conversion to mouse IgG. Screening of these recombinantly expressed IgG anti-Ts hybridomas, identified one (TsG10) with the highest affinity to crude Taenia antigen. TsG10 was then used as a capture antibody in a sandwich antigen detection immunoassay in combination with either a high titer polyclonal anti-Ts antibody or with biotinylated TsG10 (termed TsG10*bt). Using serum, plasma, and CSF samples from patients with active NCC and those from NCC-uninfected patients, ROC curve analyses demonstrated that the TsG10-TsG10-*bt assay achieved a 98% sensitivity and 100% specificity in detecting samples known to be antigen positive and outperformed the polyclonal based assay (sensitivity of 93% with 100% specificity). By comparing levels of Ts antigen (Ag) in paired CSF (n = 10) or plasma/serum (n = 19) samples from well-characterized patients with extra-parenchymal NCC early in infection and at the time of definitive cure, all but 2 (1 from CSF and 1 from plasma) became undetectable. There was a high degree of correlation (r = 0.98) between the Ag levels detected by this new assay and levels found by a commercial assay. Pilot studies indicate that this antigen can be detected in the urine of patients with active NCC.Conclusions/SignificanceA newly developed recombinant monoclonal antibody-based Ts Ag detection immunoassay is extremely sensitive in the detection of extra-parenchymal NCC and can be used to monitor the success of treatment in the CSF, serum/plasma and urine. The ability to produce recombinant TsG10 at scale should enable use of this antigen detection immunoassay wherever NCC is endemic.Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00001205","term_id":"NCT00001205"}}NCT00001205 - & {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00001645","term_id":"NCT00001645"}}NCT00001645.     

Early versus deferred anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in patients admitted for COVID-19: A randomized phase II clinical trial

BackgroundConvalescent plasma (CP), despite limited evidence on its efficacy, is being widely used as a compassionate therapy for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of early CP therapy in COVID-19 progression.Methods and findingsThe study was an open-label, single-center randomized clinical trial performed in an academic medical center in Santiago, Chile, from May 10, 2020, to July 18, 2020, with final follow-up until August 17, 2020. The trial included patients hospitalized within the first 7 days of COVID-19 symptom onset, presenting risk factors for illness progression and not on mechanical ventilation. The intervention consisted of immediate CP (early plasma group) versus no CP unless developing prespecified criteria of deterioration (deferred plasma group). Additional standard treatment was allowed in both arms. The primary outcome was a composite of mechanical ventilation, hospitalization for >14 days, or death. The key secondary outcomes included time to respiratory failure, days of mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay, mortality at 30 days, and SARS-CoV-2 real-time PCR clearance rate. Of 58 randomized patients (mean age, 65.8 years; 50% male), 57 (98.3%) completed the trial. A total of 13 (43.3%) participants from the deferred group received plasma based on clinical aggravation. We failed to find benefit in the primary outcome (32.1% versus 33.3%, odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.32–2.84, p > 0.999) in the early versus deferred CP group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 17.9% versus 6.7% (OR 3.04, 95% CI 0.54–17.17 p = 0.246), mechanical ventilation 17.9% versus 6.7% (OR 3.04, 95% CI 0.54–17.17, p = 0.246), and prolonged hospitalization 21.4% versus 30.0% (OR 0.64, 95% CI, 0.19–2.10, p = 0.554) in the early versus deferred CP group, respectively. The viral clearance rate on day 3 (26% versus 8%, p = 0.204) and day 7 (38% versus 19%, p = 0.374) did not differ between groups. Two patients experienced serious adverse events within 6 hours after plasma transfusion. The main limitation of this study is the lack of statistical power to detect a smaller but clinically relevant therapeutic effect of CP, as well as not having confirmed neutralizing antibodies in donor before plasma infusion.ConclusionsIn the present study, we failed to find evidence of benefit in mortality, length of hospitalization, or mechanical ventilation requirement by immediate addition of CP therapy in the early stages of COVID-19 compared to its use only in case of patient deterioration.Trial registration{"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04375098","term_id":"NCT04375098"}}NCT04375098.

In this randomized trial, María Elvira Balcells and colleagues demonstrate that there is no benefit in immediate versus delayed convalescent plasma administration for COVID-19 patients.     

Effects of a WHO-guided digital health intervention for depression in Syrian refugees in Lebanon: A randomized controlled trial

BackgroundMost displaced people with mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries do not receive effective care, and their access to care has deteriorated during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Digital mental health interventions are scalable when digital access is adequate, and they can be safely delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined whether a new WHO-guided digital mental health intervention, Step-by-Step, in which participants were supported by a nonspecialist helper, was effective in reducing depression among displaced people in Lebanon.Methods and findingsWe conducted a single-blind, 2-arm pragmatic randomized clinical trial, comparing guided Step-by-Step with enhanced care as usual (ECAU) among displaced Syrians suffering from depression and impaired functioning in Lebanon. Primary outcomes were depression (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9) and impaired functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule-12, WHODAS) at posttreatment. Secondary outcomes included subjective well-being, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and self-described problems. A total of 569 displaced people from Syria with depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) and impaired functioning (WHODAS > 16) were randomized to Step-by-Step (N = 283; lost to follow-up: N = 167) or ECAU (N = 286; lost to follow-up: 133). Participants were considered to be lost to follow-up when they did not fill in the outcome measures at posttest or follow-up. Recruitment started on December 9, 2019 and was completed on July 9, 2020. The last follow-up assessments were collected in December 2020. The study team had access to the online platform, where they could see treatment arm assignment for each participant. All questionnaires were completed by participants online. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses showed intervention effects on depression (standardized mean differences [SMDs]: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.26; 0.70; p < 0.001), impaired functioning (SMD: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.14; 0.56; p < 0.001), post-traumatic stress (SMD: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.16; 0.56; p < 0.001), anxiety (SMD: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.24; 0.68; p < 0.001), subjective well-being (SMD: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.26; 0.68; p < 0.001), and self-identified personal problems (SMD: 0.49; 95% CI 0.28; 0.70; p < 0.001). Significant effects on all outcomes were maintained at 3 months follow-up. During the trial, one serious adverse event occurred, unrelated to the intervention. The main limitation of the current trial is the high dropout rate.ConclusionsIn this study, we found that a guided, digital intervention was effective in reducing depression in displaced people in Lebanon. The guided WHO Step-by-Step intervention we examined should be made available to communities of displaced people that have digital access.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT03720769","term_id":"NCT03720769"}}NCT03720769.

In a randomized controlled trial, Pim Cuijpers and colleagues evaluate the effects of the Step-by-Step guided digital mental health intervention on depression, impaired functioning, and other mental health outcomes among displaced Syrians living in Lebanon.     

High-dose versus standard-dose vitamin D supplementation in older adults with COVID-19 (COVIT-TRIAL): A multicenter,open-label,randomized controlled superiority trial

BackgroundVitamin D supplementation has been proposed as a treatment for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) based on experimental data and data from small and uncontrolled observational studies. The COvid19 and VITamin d TRIAL (COVIT-TRIAL) study was conducted to test whether a single oral high dose of cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) administered within 72 hours after the diagnosis of COVID-19 improves, compared to standard-dose cholecalciferol, the 14-day overall survival among at-risk older adults infected with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).Methods and findingsThis multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label, superiority trial involved collaboration of 9 medical centers in France. Patients admitted to the hospital units or living in nursing homes adjacent to the investigator centers were eligible if they were ≥65 years, had SARS-CoV-2 infection of less than 3 days, and at least 1 COVID-19 worsening risk factor (among age ≥75 years, SpO2 ≤94%, or PaO₂/FiO₂ ≤300 mm Hg). Main noninclusion criteria were organ failure requiring ICU, SpO2 ≤92% despite 5 L/min oxygen, life expectancy <3 months, vitamin D supplementation >800 IU/day during the preceding month, and contraindications to vitamin D supplements. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly allocated to either a single oral high-dose (400,000 IU) or standard-dose (50,000 IU) cholecalciferol administered under medical supervision within 72 hours after the diagnosis of COVID-19. Participants and local study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but the Steering Committee and the Data and Safety Monitoring Board were masked to the randomization group and outcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 14-day overall mortality. Between April 15 and December 17, 2020, of 1,207 patients who were assessed for eligibility in the COVIT-TRIAL study, 254 met eligibility criteria and formed the intention-to-treat population. The median age was 88 (IQR, 82 to 92) years, and 148 patients (58%) were women. Overall, 8 (6%) of 127 patients allocated to high-dose cholecalciferol, and 14 (11%) of 127 patients allocated to standard-dose cholecalciferol died within 14 days (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.39 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16 to 0.99], P = 0.049, after controlling for randomization strata [i.e., age, oxygen requirement, hospitalization, use of antibiotics, anti-infective drugs, and/or corticosteroids] and baseline imbalances in important prognostic factors [i.e., sex, ongoing cancers, profuse diarrhea, and delirium at baseline]). The number needed to treat for one person to benefit (NNTB) was 21 [NNTB 9 to ∞ to number needed to treat for one person to harm (NNTH) 46]. Apparent benefits were also found on 14-day mortality due to COVID-19 (7 (6%) deaths in high-dose group and 14 (11%) deaths in standard-dose group; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.33 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.86], P = 0.02). The protective effect of the single oral high-dose administration was not sustained at 28 days (19 (15%) deaths in high-dose group and 21 (17%) deaths in standard-dose group; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.70 [95% CI, 0.36 to 1.36], P = 0.29). High-dose cholecalciferol did not result in more frequent adverse effects compared to the standard dose. The open-label design and limited study power are the main limitations of the study.ConclusionsIn this randomized controlled trial (RCT), we observed that the early administration of high-dose versus standard-dose vitamin D3 to at-risk older patients with COVID-19 improved overall mortality at day 14. The effect was no longer observed after 28 days.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04344041","term_id":"NCT04344041"}}NCT04344041.

In a randomized trial, Cedric Annweiler and colleagues evaluate whether a single high dose of vitamin D3 improves survival among older adults in France with SARS-CoV-2 infection.     

Remdesivir for the treatment of patients in hospital with COVID-19 in Canada: a randomized controlled trial

Background:The role of remdesivir in the treatment of patients in hospital with COVID-19 remains ill defined in a global context. The World Health Organization Solidarity randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated remdesivir in patients across many countries, with Canada enrolling patients using an expanded data collection format in the Canadian Treatments for COVID-19 (CATCO) trial. We report on the Canadian findings, with additional demographics, characteristics and clinical outcomes, to explore the potential for differential effects across different health care systems.Methods:We performed an open-label, pragmatic RCT in Canadian hospitals, in conjunction with the Solidarity trial. We randomized patients to 10 days of remdesivir (200 mg intravenously [IV] on day 0, followed by 100 mg IV daily), plus standard care, or standard care alone. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included changes in clinical severity, oxygen- and ventilator-free days (at 28 d), incidence of new oxygen or mechanical ventilation use, duration of hospital stay, and adverse event rates. We performed a priori subgroup analyses according to duration of symptoms before enrolment, age, sex and severity of symptoms on presentation.Results:Across 52 Canadian hospitals, we randomized 1282 patients between Aug. 14, 2020, and Apr. 1, 2021, to remdesivir (n = 634) or standard of care (n = 648). Of these, 15 withdrew consent or were still in hospital, for a total sample of 1267 patients. Among patients assigned to receive remdesivir, in-hospital mortality was 18.7%, compared with 22.6% in the standard-of-care arm (relative risk [RR] 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 1.03), and 60-day mortality was 24.8% and 28.2%, respectively (95% CI 0.72 to 1.07). For patients not mechanically ventilated at baseline, the need for mechanical ventilation was 8.0% in those assigned remdesivir, and 15.0% in those receiving standard of care (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.75). Mean oxygen-free and ventilator-free days at day 28 were 15.9 (± standard deviation [SD] 10.5) and 21.4 (± SD 11.3) in those receiving remdesivir and 14.2 (± SD 11) and 19.5 (± SD 12.3) in those receiving standard of care (p = 0.006 and 0.007, respectively). There was no difference in safety events of new dialysis, change in creatinine, or new hepatic dysfunction between the 2 groups.Interpretation:Remdesivir, when compared with standard of care, has a modest but significant effect on outcomes important to patients and health systems, such as the need for mechanical ventilation. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04330690","term_id":"NCT04330690"}}NCT04330690.

The role of remdesivir in treating patients in hospital with COVID-19 remains ill defined.¹ Remdesivir, a repurposed antiviral medication, has full or emergency approval from a number of regulators — including Health Canada — for the treatment of COVID-19, based on clinical trial data documenting a benefit on improving time to recovery.² An interim report of the larger World Health Organization (WHO) Solidarity trial showed no difference regarding mortality or need for mechanical ventilation, with a number of smaller trials being inconclusive on these important outcomes.^3–6 Recommendations of clinical guidelines are mixed, with some recommending remdesivir as standard of care, and others weakly recommending against.^7,8 Its impact on other clinical outcomes, including resource utilization and post–hospital stay outcomes, has not been fully defined, and there remains a possibility of an important treatment effect, particularly in certain groups of patients.⁹Solidarity is a global pragmatic clinical trial examining the effects of various therapeutics in patients with COVID-19.^3,10 Canadian Treatments for COVID-19 (CATCO) is a substudy of Solidarity, funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), in which added data elements are collected to better understand the effects of specific agents. We aimed to estimate the effect of treatment with remdesivir compared with standard care, for patients in hospital with COVID-19 in Canada; global data, which include Canadian patients randomized before Jan. 29, 2021, will also be available in a separate publication.     

Plasma Free Hemoglobin and Microcirculatory Response to Fresh or Old Blood Transfusions in Sepsis

BackgroundFree hemoglobin (fHb) may induce vasoconstriction by scavenging nitric oxide. It may increase in older blood units due to storage lesions. This study evaluated whether old red blood cell transfusion increases plasma fHb in sepsis and how the microvascular response may be affected.MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of a randomized study. Twenty adult septic patients received either fresh or old (<10 or >15 days storage, respectively) RBC transfusions. fHb was measured in RBC units and in the plasma before and 1 hour after transfusion. Simultaneously, the sublingual microcirculation was assessed with sidestream-dark field imaging. The perfused boundary region was calculated as an index of glycocalyx damage. Tissue oxygen saturation (StO₂) and Hb index (THI) were measured with near-infrared spectroscopy and a vascular occlusion test was performed.ResultsSimilar fHb levels were found in the supernatant of fresh and old RBC units. Despite this, plasma fHb increased in the old RBC group after transfusion (from 0.125 [0.098–0.219] mg/mL to 0.238 [0.163–0.369] mg/mL, p = 0.006). The sublingual microcirculation was unaltered in both groups, while THI increased. The change in plasma fHb was inversely correlated with the changes in total vessel density (r = -0.57 [95% confidence interval -0.82, -0.16], p = 0.008), De Backer score (r = -0.63 [95% confidence interval -0.84, -0.25], p = 0.003) and THI (r = -0.72 [95% confidence interval -0.88, -0.39], p = 0.0003).ConclusionsOld RBC transfusion was associated with an increase in plasma fHb in septic patients. Increasing plasma fHb levels were associated with decreased microvascular density.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01584999","term_id":"NCT01584999"}}NCT01584999     

Safety evaluation of the single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine among healthcare workers in the Sisonke study in South Africa: A phase 3b implementation trial

BackgroundReal-world evaluation of the safety profile of vaccines after licensure is crucial to accurately characterise safety beyond clinical trials, support continued use, and thereby improve public confidence. The Sisonke study aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of the Janssen Ad26.COV2.S vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs) in South Africa. Here, we present the safety data.Methods and findingsIn this open-label phase 3b implementation study among all eligible HCWs in South Africa registered in the national Electronic Vaccination Data System (EVDS), we monitored adverse events (AEs) at vaccination sites through self-reporting triggered by text messages after vaccination, healthcare provider reports, and active case finding. The frequency and incidence rate of non-serious and serious AEs were evaluated from the day of first vaccination (17 February 2021) until 28 days after the final vaccination in the study (15 June 2021). COVID-19 breakthrough infections, hospitalisations, and deaths were ascertained via linkage of the electronic vaccination register with existing national databases. Among 477,234 participants, 10,279 AEs were reported, of which 138 (1.3%) were serious AEs (SAEs) or AEs of special interest. Women reported more AEs than men (2.3% versus 1.6%). AE reports decreased with increasing age (3.2% for age 18–30 years, 2.1% for age 31–45 years, 1.8% for age 46–55 years, and 1.5% for age > 55 years). Participants with previous COVID-19 infection reported slightly more AEs (2.6% versus 2.1%). The most common reactogenicity events were headache (n = 4,923) and body aches (n = 4,483), followed by injection site pain (n = 2,767) and fever (n = 2,731), and most occurred within 48 hours of vaccination. Two cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and 4 cases of Guillain-Barré Syndrome were reported post-vaccination. Most SAEs and AEs of special interest (n = 138) occurred at lower than the expected population rates. Vascular (n = 37; 39.1/100,000 person-years) and nervous system disorders (n = 31; 31.7/100,000 person-years), immune system disorders (n = 24; 24.3/100,000 person-years), and infections and infestations (n = 19; 20.1/100,000 person-years) were the most common reported SAE categories. A limitation of the study was the single-arm design, with limited routinely collected morbidity comparator data in the study setting.ConclusionsWe observed similar patterns of AEs as in phase 3 trials. AEs were mostly expected reactogenicity signs and symptoms. Furthermore, most SAEs occurred below expected rates. The single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine demonstrated an acceptable safety profile, supporting the continued use of this vaccine in this setting.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04838795","term_id":"NCT04838795"}}NCT04838795; Pan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR202102855526180.

Saimbarashe Takuva, Azwi Takalani, and colleagues investigate the frequency and incidence of adverse events reported after receipt of a single dose of the Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine among health care workers in South Africa.     

Certolizumab pegol plus methotrexate 5-year results from the rheumatoid arthritis prevention of structural damage (RAPID) 2 randomized controlled trial and long-term extension in rheumatoid arthritis patients

IntroductionAs patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receive treatment with anti-tumour necrosis factors over several years, it is important to evaluate their long-term safety and efficacy. The objective of this study was to examine the safety and benefits of certolizumab pegol (CZP)+methotrexate (MTX) treatment for almost 5 years in patients with RA.MethodsPatients who completed the 24-week Rheumatoid Arthritis Prevention of Structural Damage (RAPID) 2 randomized controlled trial (RCT; {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00160602","term_id":"NCT00160602"}}NCT00160602), or who were American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 non-responders at Week 16, entered the open-label extension (OLE; {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00160641","term_id":"NCT00160641"}}NCT00160641). After ≥6 months treatment with CZP 400 mg every two weeks (Q2W), dose was reduced to 200 mg Q2W, the approved maintenance dose. Safety data are presented from all patients who received ≥1 dose CZP (Safety population, n=612). Efficacy data are presented to Week 232 for the intent-to-treat (ITT, n=492) and Week 24 CZP RCT Completer (n=342) populations, and through 192 weeks of dose-reduction for the Dose-reduction population (patients whose CZP dose was reduced to 200 mg, n=369). Radiographic progression (modified total Sharp score change from RCT baseline >0.5) to Week 128 is reported for the Week 24 CZP Completers.ResultsIn the RCT, 619 patients were randomized to CZP+MTX (n=492) or placebo+MTX (n=127). Overall, 567 patients (91.6%) entered the OLE: 447 CZP and 120 placebo patients. Of all randomized patients, 358 (57.8%) were ongoing at Week 232. Annual drop-out rates during the first four years ranged from 8.4–15.0%. Event rates per 100 patient-years were 163.0 for adverse events (AEs) and 15.7 for serious AEs. Nineteen patients (3.1%) had fatal AEs (incidence rate=0.8). Clinical improvements in the RCT were maintained to Week 232 in the CZP Completers: mean Disease Activity Score 28 (Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate) change from baseline was −3.4 and ACR20/50/70 responses 68.4%/47.1%/25.1% (non-responder imputation). Similar improvements observed in the ITT were maintained following dose-reduction. 73.2% of CZP Completers had no radiographic progression at Week 128.ConclusionsIn patients with active RA despite MTX therapy, CZP was well tolerated, with no new safety signals identified. CZP provided sustained improvements in clinical outcomes for almost 5 years.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00160602","term_id":"NCT00160602"}}NCT00160602 and {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00160641","term_id":"NCT00160641"}}NCT00160641. Registered 8 September 2005.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-015-0767-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

First-In-Human,Double-Blind,Placebo-Controlled,Randomized, Dose-Escalation Study of BG00010, a Glial Cell Line-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Family Member,in Subjects with Unilateral Sciatica

ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of single doses of BG00010 (neublastin, artemin, enovin) in subjects with unilateral sciatica.MethodsThis was a single-center, blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized Phase 1 sequential-cohort, dose-escalation study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00961766","term_id":"NCT00961766"}}NCT00961766; funded by Biogen Idec). Adults with unilateral sciatica were enrolled at The Royal Adelaide Hospital, Australia. Four subjects were assigned to each of eleven cohorts (intravenous BG00010 0.3, 1, 3, 10, 25, 50, 100, 200, 400, or 800 μg/kg, or subcutaneous BG00010 50 μg/kg) and were randomized 3:1 to receive a single dose of BG00010 or placebo. The primary safety and tolerability assessments were: adverse events; clinical laboratory parameters and vital signs; pain as measured by a Likert rating scale; intra-epidermal nerve fiber density; and longitudinal assessment of quantitative sensory test parameters. Blood, serum, and plasma samples were collected for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assessments. Subjects were blinded to treatment assignment throughout the study. The investigator was blinded to treatment assignment until the Data Safety Review Committee review of unblinded data, which occurred after day 28.ResultsBeyond the planned enrollment of 44 subjects, four additional subjects were enrolled into to the intravenous BG00010 200 μg/kg cohort after one original subject experienced mild generalized pruritus. Therefore, a total of 48 subjects were enrolled between August 2009 and December 2011; all were included in the safety analyses. BG00010 was generally well tolerated: in primary analyses, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were changes in temperature perception, pruritus, rash, or headache; no trends were observed in clinical laboratory parameters, vital signs, intra-epidermal nerve fiber density, or quantitative sensory testing. BG00010 was not associated with any clear, dose-dependent trends in Likert pain scores. BG00010 was rapidly distributed, with a prolonged terminal elimination phase.ConclusionsThese data support the development of BG00010 for the treatment of neuropathic pain.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00961766","term_id":"NCT00961766"}}NCT00961766     

Rapid Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Antagonism in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with High Gonadotropin Levels in the AGRA Trial

ObjectivesGonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) and pituitary gonadotropins, which appear to be proinflammatory, undergo profound secretory changes during events associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) onset, flares, or improvement e.g. menopausal transition, postpartum, or pregnancy. Potential anti-inflammatory effects of GnRH-antagonists may be most pronounced in patients with high GnRH and gonadotropin levels. Therefore, we investigated the efficacy and safety of a GnRH-antagonist, cetrorelix, in RA patients with high gonadotropin levels.MethodsWe report intention-to-treat post hoc analyses among patients with high gonadotropin levels (N = 53), i.e. gonadotropin levels>median, from our proof-of-concept, double-blind AGRA-study (N = 99). Patients with active longstanding RA, randomized to subcutaneous cetrorelix (5mg days1–2; 3mg days 3–5) or placebo, were followed through day 15. Only predefined primary and secondary endpoints were analyzed.ResultsThe primary endpoint, Disease Activity Score of 28-joint counts with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), improved with cetrorelix compared with placebo by day 5 (-1.0 vs. -0.4, P = 0∙010). By day 5, more patients on cetrorelix achieved at least a 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology scale (44% vs. 19%, P = 0.049), DAS28-CRP≤3.2 (24% vs. 0%, P = 0.012), and European League against Rheumatism ‘Good-responses’ (19% vs. 0%, P = 0.026). Tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1β, interleukin-10, and CRP decreased with cetrorelix (P = 0.045, P = 0.034, P = 0.020 and P = 0.042 respectively) compared with placebo by day 15. Adverse event rates were similar between groups.ConclusionsGnRH-antagonism produced rapid anti-inflammatory effects in RA patients with high gonadotropin levels. GnRH should be investigated further in RA.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00667758","term_id":"NCT00667758"}}NCT00667758     

Autoantibody-Targeted Treatments for Acute Exacerbations of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

BackgroundSevere acute exacerbations (AE) of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) are medically untreatable and often fatal within days. Recent evidence suggests autoantibodies may be involved in IPF progression. Autoantibody-mediated lung diseases are typically refractory to glucocorticoids and nonspecific medications, but frequently respond to focused autoantibody reduction treatments. We conducted a pilot trial to test the hypothesis that autoantibody-targeted therapies may also benefit AE-IPF patients.MethodsEleven (11) critically-ill AE-IPF patients with no evidence of conventional autoimmune diseases were treated with therapeutic plasma exchanges (TPE) and rituximab, supplemented in later cases with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). Plasma anti-epithelial (HEp-2) autoantibodies and matrix metalloproteinase-7 (MMP7) were evaluated by indirect immunofluorescence and ELISA, respectively. Outcomes among the trial subjects were compared to those of 20 historical control AE-IPF patients treated with conventional glucocorticoid therapy prior to this experimental trial.ResultsNine (9) trial subjects (82%) had improvements of pulmonary gas exchange after treatment, compared to one (5%) historical control. Two of the three trial subjects who relapsed after only five TPE responded again with additional TPE. The three latest subjects who responded to an augmented regimen of nine TPE plus rituximab plus IVIG have had sustained responses without relapses after 96-to-237 days. Anti-HEp-2 autoantibodies were present in trial subjects prior to therapy, and were reduced by TPE among those who responded to treatment. Conversely, plasma MMP7 levels were not systematically affected by therapy nor correlated with clinical responses. One-year survival of trial subjects was 46+15% vs. 0% among historical controls. No serious adverse events were attributable to the experimental medications.ConclusionThis pilot trial indicates specific treatments that reduce autoantibodies might benefit some severely-ill AE-IPF patients. These findings have potential implications regarding mechanisms of IPF progression, and justify considerations for incremental trials of autoantibody-targeted therapies in AE-IPF patients.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01266317","term_id":"NCT01266317"}}NCT01266317     

Perioperative Intravenous Acetaminophen Attenuates Lipid Peroxidation in Adults Undergoing Cardiopulmonary Bypass: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BackgroundCardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) lyses erythrocytes and induces lipid peroxidation, indicated by increasing plasma concentrations of free hemoglobin, F₂-isoprostanes, and isofurans. Acetaminophen attenuates hemeprotein-mediated lipid peroxidation, reduces plasma and urine concentrations of F₂-isoprostanes, and preserves kidney function in an animal model of rhabdomyolysis. Acetaminophen also attenuates plasma concentrations of isofurans in children undergoing CPB. The effect of acetaminophen on lipid peroxidation in adults has not been studied. This was a pilot study designed to test the hypothesis that acetaminophen attenuates lipid peroxidation in adults undergoing CPB and to generate data for a clinical trial aimed to reduce acute kidney injury following cardiac surgery.ConclusionsIntravenous acetaminophen attenuates the increase in intraoperative plasma isofuran concentrations that occurs during CPB, while urinary markers were unaffected.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01366976","term_id":"NCT01366976"}}NCT01366976     

Characterization of raloxifene as a potential pharmacological agent against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants

The new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of the COVID-19 pandemic, which so far has caused over 6 million deaths in 2 years, despite new vaccines and antiviral medications. Drug repurposing, an approach for the potential application of existing pharmaceutical products to new therapeutic indications, could be an effective strategy to obtain quick answers to medical emergencies. Following a virtual screening campaign on the most relevant viral proteins, we identified the drug raloxifene, a known Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulator (SERM), as a new potential agent to treat mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients. In this paper we report a comprehensive pharmacological characterization of raloxifene in relevant in vitro models of COVID-19, specifically in Vero E6 and Calu-3 cell lines infected with SARS-CoV-2. A large panel of the most common SARS-CoV-2 variants isolated in Europe, United Kingdom, Brazil, South Africa and India was tested to demonstrate the drug’s ability in contrasting the viral cytopathic effect (CPE). Literature data support a beneficial effect by raloxifene against the viral infection due to its ability to interact with viral proteins and activate protective estrogen receptor-mediated mechanisms in the host cells. Mechanistic studies here reported confirm the significant affinity of raloxifene for the Spike protein, as predicted by in silico studies, and show that the drug treatment does not directly affect Spike/ACE2 interaction or viral internalization in infected cell lines. Interestingly, raloxifene can counteract Spike-mediated ADAM17 activation in human pulmonary cells, thus providing new insights on its mechanism of action. A clinical study in mild to moderate COVID-19 patients ({"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT05172050","term_id":"NCT05172050"}}NCT05172050) has been recently completed. Our contribution to evaluate raloxifene results on SARS-CoV-2 variants, and the interpretation of the mechanisms of action will be key elements to better understand the trial results, and to design new clinical studies aiming to evaluate the potential development of raloxifene in this indication.Subject terms: Viral infection, Preclinical research     

Randomized Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Chemotherapy with S-1 after Curative Treatment in Patients with Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (ACTS-HNC)

BackgroundWe conducted a phase III study to evaluate S-1 as compared with UFT as control in patients after curative therapy for stage III, IVA, or IVB squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN).ResultsA total of 526 patients were enrolled, and 505 were eligible for analysis. The 3-year DFS rate was 60.0% in the UFT group and 64.1% in the S-1 group (HR, 0.87; 95%CI, 0.66-1.16; p = 0.34). The 3-year OS rate was 75.8% and 82.9%, respectively (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.44-0.94; p = 0.022). Among grade 3 or higher adverse events, the incidences of leukopenia (5.2%), neutropenia (3.6%), thrombocytopenia (2.0%), and mucositis/stomatitis (2.4%) were significantly higher in the S-1 group.ConclusionsAlthough DFS did not differ significantly between the groups, OS was significantly better in the S-1 group than in the UFT group. S-1 is considered a treatment option after curative therapy for stage III, IVA, IVB SCCHN.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00336947","term_id":"NCT00336947"}}NCT00336947 http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/{"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00336947","term_id":"NCT00336947"}}NCT00336947     

Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Use by Breastfeeding HIV-Uninfected Women: A Prospective Short-Term Study of Antiretroviral Excretion in Breast Milk and Infant Absorption

BackgroundAs pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) becomes more widely used in heterosexual populations, an important consideration is its safety in infants who are breastfed by women taking PrEP. We investigated whether tenofovir and emtricitabine are excreted into breast milk and then absorbed by the breastfeeding infant in clinically significant concentrations when used as PrEP by lactating women.ConclusionIn this short-term study of daily directly observed oral PrEP in HIV-uninfected breastfeeding women, the estimated infant doses from breast milk and resultant infant plasma concentrations for tenofovir and emtricitabine were 12,500 and >200-fold lower than the respective proposed infant therapeutic doses, and tenofovir was not detected in 94% of infant plasma samples. These data suggest that PrEP can be safely used during breastfeeding with minimal infant drug exposure.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02776748","term_id":"NCT02776748"}}NCT02776748     

Safety and immunogenicity of heterologous boost immunization with an adenovirus type-5-vectored and protein-subunit-based COVID-19 vaccine (Convidecia/ZF2001): A randomized,observer-blinded,placebo-controlled trial

BackgroundHeterologous boost vaccination has been proposed as an option to elicit stronger and broader, or longer-lasting immunity. We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of heterologous immunization with a recombinant adenovirus type-5-vectored Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (Convidecia, hereafter referred to as CV) and a protein-subunit-based COVID-19 vaccine (ZF2001, hereafter referred to as ZF).Methods and findingsWe conducted a randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, in which healthy adults aged 18 years or older, who have received 1 dose of Convidecia, with no history of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, were recruited in Jiangsu, China. Sixty participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either 1 dose of ZF2001 or placebo control (trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV)) administered at 28 days after priming, and received the third injection with ZF2001 at 5 months, referred to as CV/ZF/ZF (D0-D28-M5) and CV/ZF (D0-M5) regimen, respectively. Sixty participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either 1 dose of ZF2001 or TIV administered at 56 days after priming, and received the third injection with ZF2001 at 6 months, referred to as CV/ZF/ZF (D0-D56-M6) and CV/ZF (D0-M6) regimen, respectively. Participants and investigators were masked to the vaccine received but not to the boosting interval. Primary endpoints were the geometric mean titer (GMT) of neutralizing antibodies against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and 7-day solicited adverse reactions. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. Between April 7, 2021 and May 6, 2021, 120 eligible participants were randomly assigned to receive ZF2001/ZF2001 (n = 40) or TIV/ZF2001 (n = 20) 28 days and 5 months post priming, and receive ZF2001/ZF2001 (n = 40) or TIV/ZF2001 (n = 20) 56 days and 6 months post priming. Of them, 7 participants did not receive the third injection with ZF2001. A total of 26 participants (21.7%) reported solicited adverse reactions within 7 days post boost vaccinations, and all the reported adverse reactions were mild, with 13 (32.5%) in CV/ZF/ZF (D0-D28-M5) regimen, 7 (35.0%) in CV/ZF (D0- M5) regimen, 4 (10.0%) in CV/ZF/ZF (D0-D56-M6) regimen, and 2 (10.0%) in CV/ZF (D0-M6) regimen, respectively. At 14 days post first boost, GMTs of neutralizing antibodies in recipients receiving ZF2001 at 28 days and 56 days post priming were 18.7 (95% CI 13.7 to 25.5) and 25.9 (17.0 to 39.3), respectively, with geometric mean ratios of 2.0 (1.2 to 3.5) and 3.4 (1.8 to 6.4) compared to TIV. GMTs at 14 days after second boost of neutralizing antibodies increased to 107.2 (73.7 to 155.8) in CV/ZF/ZF (D0-D28-M5) regimen and 141.2 (83.4 to 238.8) in CV/ZF/ZF (D0-D56-M6) regimen. Two-dose schedules of CV/ZF (D0-M5) and CV/ZF (D0-M6) induced antibody levels comparable with that elicited by 3-dose schedules, with GMTs of 90.5 (45.6, 179.8) and 94.1 (44.0, 200.9), respectively. Study limitations include the absence of vaccine effectiveness in a real-world setting and current lack of immune persistence data.ConclusionsHeterologous boosting with ZF2001 following primary vaccination with Convidecia is more immunogenic than a single dose of Convidecia and is not associated with safety concerns. These results support flexibility in cooperating viral vectored and recombinant protein vaccines.Trial registrationStudy on Heterologous Prime-boost of Recombinant COVID-19 Vaccine (Ad5 Vector) and RBD-based Protein Subunit Vaccine; ClinicalTrial.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04833101","term_id":"NCT04833101"}}NCT04833101.

In a randomized controlled trial, Pengfei Jin and colleagues assess the safety and immunogenicity of heterologous immunization with a recombinant adenovirus type-5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine and a protein-subunit-based COVID-19 vaccine.