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.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundPatient and public involvement (PPI) in studies carried out by the UK Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit (MRC CTU) at University College London varies by research type and setting. We developed a series of case studies of PPI to document and share good practice.MethodsWe used purposive sampling to identify studies representing the scope of research at the MRC CTU and different approaches to PPI. We carried out semi-structured interviews with staff and patient representatives. Interview notes were analysed descriptively to categorise the main aims and motivations for involvement; activities undertaken; their impact on the studies and lessons learned.ResultsWe conducted 19 interviews about ten case studies, comprising one systematic review, one observational study and 8 randomised controlled trials in HIV and cancer. Studies were either open or completed, with start dates between 2003 and 2011. Interviews took place between March and November 2014 and were updated in summer 2015 where there had been significant developments in the study (i.e. if the study had presented results subsequent to the interview taking place). A wide range of PPI models, including representation on trial committees or management groups, community engagement, one-off task-focused activities, patient research partners and participant involvement had been used. Overall, interviewees felt that PPI had a positive impact, leading to improvements, for example in the research question; study design; communication with potential participants; study recruitment; confidence to carry out or complete a study; interpretation and communication of results; and influence on future research.ConclusionsA range of models of PPI can benefit clinical studies. Researchers should consider different approaches to PPI, based on the desired impact and the people they want to involve. Use of multiple models may increase the potential impacts of PPI in clinical research.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1488-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundDrug-induced liver injury (DILI) is a common complication of tuberculosis treatment. We utilised data from the REMoxTB clinical trial to describe the incidence of predisposing factors and the natural history in patients with liver enzyme levels elevated in response to tuberculosis treatment.MethodsPatients received either standard tuberculosis treatment (2EHRZ/4HR), or a 4-month regimen in which moxifloxacin replaced either ethambutol (isoniazid arm, 2MHRZ/2MHR) or isoniazid (ethambutol arm, 2EMRZ/2MR). Hepatic enzymes were measured at 0, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 17 weeks and as clinically indicated during reported adverse events. Patients included were those receiving at least one dose of drug and with two or more hepatic enzyme measurements.ResultsA total of 1928 patients were included (639 2EHRZ/4HR, 654 2MHRZ/2MHR and 635 2EMRZ/2MR). DILI was defined as peak alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ≥ 5 times the upper limit of normal (5 × ULN) or ALT ≥ 3 × ULN with total bilirubin > 2 × ULN. DILI was identified in 58 of the 1928 (3.0%) patients at a median time of 28 days (interquartile range IQR 14–56). Of 639 (6.4%) patients taking standard tuberculosis therapy, 41 experienced clinically significant enzyme elevations (peak ALT ≥ 3 × ULN). On standard therapy, 21.1% of patients aged >55 years developed a peak ALT/aspartate aminotransferase (AST) ≥ 3 × ULN (p = 0.01) and 15% of HIV-positive patients experienced a peak ALT/AST ≥ 3 × ULN compared to 9% of HIV-negative patients (p = 0.160). The median peak ALT/AST was higher in isoniazid-containing regimens vs no-isoniazid regimens (p < 0.05), and lower in moxifloxacin-containing arms vs no-moxifloxacin arms (p < 0.05). Patients receiving isoniazid reached a peak ALT ≥ 3 × ULN 9.5 days earlier than those on the ethambutol arm (median time of 28 days vs 18.5 days). Of the 67 Asian patients with a peak ALT/AST ≥ 3 × ULN, 57 (85.1%) were on an isoniazid-containing regimen (p = 0.008).ConclusionsOur results provide evidence of the risk of DILI in tuberculosis patients on standard treatment. Older patients on standard therapy, HIV-positive patients, Asian patients and those receiving isoniazid were at higher risk of elevated enzyme levels. Monitoring hepatic enzymes during the first 2 months of standard therapy detected approximately 75% of patients with a peak enzyme elevation ≥3 × ULN, suggesting this should be a standard of care. These results provide evidence for the potential of moxifloxacin in hepatic sparing.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-018-1033-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for TB is lengthy and toxic, and new regimens are needed.METHODS: Participants with pulmonary drug-susceptible TB (DS-TB) were randomised to receive: 200 mg pretomanid (Pa, PMD) daily, 400 mg moxifloxacin (M) and 1500 mg pyrazinamide (Z) for 6 months (6Pa200MZ) or 4 months (4Pa200MZ); 100 mg pretomanid daily for 4 months in the same combination (4Pa100MZ); or standard DS-TB treatment for 6 months. The primary outcome was treatment failure or relapse at 12 months post-randomisation. The non-inferiority margin for between-group differences was 12.0%. Recruitment was paused following three deaths and not resumed.RESULTS: Respectively 4/47 (8.5%), 11/57 (19.3%), 14/52 (26.9%) and 1/53 (1.9%) DS-TB outcomes were unfavourable in patients on 6Pa200MZ, 4Pa200MZ, 4Pa100MZ and controls. There was a 6.6% (95% CI –2.2% to 15.4%) difference per protocol and 9.9% (95%CI –4.1% to 23.9%) modified intention-to-treat difference in unfavourable responses between the control and 6Pa200MZ arms. Grade 3+ adverse events affected 68/203 (33.5%) receiving experimental regimens, and 19/68 (27.9%) on control. Ten of 203 (4.9%) participants on experimental arms and 2/68 (2.9%) controls died.CONCLUSION: PaMZ regimens did not achieve non-inferiority in this under-powered trial. An ongoing evaluation of PMD remains a priority.