Background In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of tocilizumab in adult patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with both hypoxia and systemic inflammation. Methods This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. Those trial participants with hypoxia (oxygen saturation <92% on air or requiring oxygen therapy) and evidence of systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein ≥75 mg/L) were eligible for random assignment in a 1:1 ratio to usual standard of care alone versus usual standard of care plus tocilizumab at a dose of 400 mg–800 mg (depending on weight) given intravenously. A second dose could be given 12–24 h later if the patient's condition had not improved. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04381936 ). Findings Between April 23, 2020, and Jan 24, 2021, 4116 adults of 21 550 patients enrolled into the RECOVERY trial were included in the assessment of tocilizumab, including 3385 (82%) patients receiving systemic corticosteroids. Overall, 621 (31%) of the 2022 patients allocated tocilizumab and 729 (35%) of the 2094 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·85; 95% CI 0·76–0·94; p=0·0028). Consistent results were seen in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including those receiving systemic corticosteroids. Patients allocated to tocilizumab were more likely to be discharged from hospital within 28 days (57% vs 50%; rate ratio 1·22; 1·12–1·33; p<0·0001). Among those not receiving invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, patients allocated tocilizumab were less likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (35% vs 42%; risk ratio 0·84; 95% CI 0·77–0·92; p<0·0001). Interpretation In hospitalised COVID-19 patients with hypoxia and systemic inflammation, tocilizumab improved survival and other clinical outcomes. These benefits were seen regardless of the amount of respiratory support and were additional to the benefits of systemic corticosteroids. Funding UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research.

Background-With recognition of disease-causing genes in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, mutation analysis is being applied. Methods and Results-The role of genotyping in familial assessment for arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy was investigated, including the prevalence of mutations in known causal genes, the penetrance and expressivity in genotyped families, and the utility of the 2010 Task Force criteria in clinical diagnosis. Clinical and molecular genetic evaluation was performed in 210 first-degree and 45 second-degree relatives from 100 families. In 51 families, the proband was deceased. The living probands had a high prevalence of ECG abnormalities (89%) and ventricular arrhythmia (78%) and evidence of more severe disease than relatives. Definite or probable causal mutations were found in 58% of families and 73% of living probands, of whom 28% had an additional desmosomal variant (ie, mutation or polymorphism). Ninety-three relatives had a causal mutation; 33% fulfilled the 2010 criteria, whereas only 19% satisfied the 1994 version (Pϭ0.03). An additional desmosomal gene variant was found in 10% and was associated with a 5-fold increased risk of developing penetrant disease (odds ratio, 4.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 20.4; Pϭ0.04). 3 Estimates of penetrance have been confined to single-gene studies. With the identification of disease-causing genes, the familial basis of ARVC is increasingly recognized, and the clinical identification of the relatives at risk has become central to management. This study evaluated a large cohort of families with ARVC to investigate the prevalence of mutations in known causal genes, the penetrance and disease expression in both probands and relatives, and the utility of 2010 diagnostic criteria in familial diagnosis. Conclusions-Arrhythmogenic Editorial see p 2661 Clinical Perspective on p 2709 Methods Study SampleThe Heart Hospital, University College London Hospitals (London, UK) is a national referral center for the diagnosis and management of inherited cardiac diseases. Specialist weekly clinics operate for each of inherited cardiomyopathies (hypertrophic, dilated, arrhythmogenic right ventricular). The families were drawn from referrals to the ARVC, inherited arrhythmia, and victims of sudden death clinics. Diagnosis was considered definite when 2 major, or 1 major and 2 minor criteria, or 4 minor criteria from different categories, were fulfilled. Diagnosis was considered borderline when 1 major and 1 minor or 3 minor criteria from different categories were fulfilled. 5 Evidence of disease expression in relatives was defined by the presence of a borderline (incomplete disease expression) or definite diagnosis. All first-degree relatives and second-degree relatives from families in whom a disease-causing mutation was found were invited for prospective evaluation. Clinical EvaluationClinical evaluation included 12-lead ECG, signal-averaged ECG, transthoracic echocardiography, symptom-limited exercise test, and 24-hour ambulatory ECG...