Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 disproportionately results in hospitalization and death in older patients and those with underlying comorbidities. Sotrovimab is a pansarbecovirus monoclonal antibody designed to treat such high-risk patients early in the course of disease, thereby preventing Covid-19 progression. Methods:In this ongoing, multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial, nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic Covid-19 and at least one risk factor for disease progression were randomized (1:1) to an intravenous infusion of sotrovimab 500 mg or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with Covid-19 progression, defined as hospitalization longer than 24 hours or death, through day 29.Results: In this preplanned interim analysis, which included an intent-to-treat population of 583 patients (sotrovimab, 291; placebo, 292), the primary efficacy endpoint was met. The risk of Covid-19 progression was significantly reduced by 85% (97.24% confidence interval, 44% to 96%; P = 0.002) with a total of three (1%) patients progressing to the primary endpoint in the sotrovimab group versus 21 (7%) patients in the placebo group. All five patients admitted to intensive care, including one who died by day 29, received placebo. Safety was assessed in 868 patients (sotrovimab, 430; placebo, 438). Adverse events were reported by 17% and 19% of patients receiving sotrovimab and placebo, respectively; serious adverse events were less common with sotrovimab (2%) versus placebo (6%). Conclusion:Sotrovimab reduced progression of Covid-19 in patients with mild/moderate disease, was well tolerated, and no safety signals were identified..

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) disproportionately results in hospitalization and death in older patients and those with underlying comorbidities. Sotrovimab is a pan-sarbecovirus monoclonal antibody designed to treat such high-risk patients early in the course of disease, thereby preventing Covid-19 progression. Methods: In this ongoing, multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial, nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic Covid-19 and at least one risk factor for disease progression were randomized (1:1) to an intravenous infusion of sotrovimab 500 mg or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with Covid-19 progression, defined as hospitalization longer than 24 hours or death, through day 29. Results: In this preplanned interim analysis, which included an intent-to-treat population of 583 patients (sotrovimab, 291; placebo, 292), the primary efficacy endpoint was met. The risk of Covid-19 progression was significantly reduced by 85% (97.24% confidence interval, 44% to 96%; P = 0.002) with a total of three (1%) patients progressing to the primary endpoint in the sotrovimab group versus 21 (7%) patients in the placebo group. All five patients admitted to intensive care, including one who died by day 29, received placebo. Safety was assessed in 868 patients (sotrovimab, 430; placebo, 438). Adverse events were reported by 17% and 19% of patients receiving sotrovimab and placebo, respectively; serious adverse events were less common with sotrovimab (2%) versus placebo (6%). Conclusion: Sotrovimab reduced progression of Covid-19 in patients with mild/moderate disease, was well tolerated, and no safety signals were identified. Funded by Vir Biotechnology, Inc. and GlaxoSmithKline; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04545060

These guidelines are an update for 2015 of the 2008 UK guidelines for the management of syphilis. The writing group have piloted the new BASHH guideline methodology, notably using the GRADE system for assessing evidence and making recommendations. We have made significant changes to the recommendations for screening infants born to mothers with positive syphilis serology and to facilitate accurate and timely communication between the teams caring for mother and baby we have developed a birth plan. Procaine penicillin is now an alternative, not preferred treatment, for all stages of syphilis except neurosyphilis, but the length of treatment for this is shortened. Other changes are summarised at the start of the guideline.

Background We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies (sotrovimab [Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline] and BRII-196 plus BRII-198 [Brii Biosciences]) for adults admitted to hospital for COVID-19 (hereafter referred to as hospitalised) with COVID-19. Methods In this multinational, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 [TICO]), adults (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 at 43 hospitals in the USA, Denmark, Switzerland, and Poland were recruited. Patients were eligible if they had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 symptoms for up to 12 days. Using a web-based application, participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1), stratified by trial site pharmacy, to sotrovimab 500 mg, matching placebo for sotrovimab, BRII-196 1000 mg plus BRII-198 1000 mg, or matching placebo for BRII-196 plus BRII-198, in addition to standard of care. Each study product was administered as a single dose given intravenously over 60 min. The concurrent placebo groups were pooled for analyses. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital to home and remaining at home for 14 consecutive days, up to day 90 after randomisation. Interim futility analyses were based on two seven-category ordinal outcome scales on day 5 that measured pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications of COVID-19. The safety outcome was a composite of death, serious adverse events, incident organ failure, and serious coinfection up to day 90 after randomisation. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment who started the study infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04501978 . Findings Between Dec 16, 2020, and March 1, 2021, 546 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to sotrovimab (n=184), BRII-196 plus BRII-198 (n=183), or placebo (n=179), of whom 536 received part or all of their assigned study drug (sotrovimab n=182, BRII-196 plus BRII-198 n=176, or placebo n=178; median age of 60 years [IQR 50–72], 228 [43%] patients were female and 308 [57%] were male). At this point, enrolment was halted on the basis of the interim futility analysis. At day 5, neither the sotrovimab group nor the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group had significantly higher odds of more favourable outcomes than the placebo group on either the pulmonary scale (adjusted odds ratio sotrovimab 1·07 [95% CI 0·74–1·56]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 0·98 [95% CI 0·67–1·43]) or the pulmonary-plus complications scale (sotrovimab 1·08 [0·74–1·58]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 1·00 [0·68–1·46]). By day 90, sustained clinical recovery was seen in 151 (85%) patients in the placebo group compared with 160 (88%) in the sotrovimab group (adjusted rate ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·91–...

OBJECTIVES: The host response plays a central role in the pathophysiology of sepsis and severe injuries. So far, no study has comprehensively described the overtime changes of the injury-induced immune profile in a large cohort of critically ill patients with different etiologies. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Adult ICU in a University Hospital in Lyon, France. PATIENTS: Three hundred fifty-three septic, trauma, and surgical patients and 175 healthy volunteers were included in the REAnimation Low Immune Status Marker study. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Extensive immune profiling was performed by assessing cellular phenotypes and functions, protein, and messenger RNA levels at days 1–2, 3–4, and 5–7 after inclusion using a panel of 30 standardized immune markers. Using this immunomonitoring panel, no specificity in the immune profile was observed among septic, trauma, and surgical patients. This common injury-induced immune response was characterized by an initial adaptive (i.e., physiologic) response engaging all constituents of the immune system (pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokine releases, and innate and adaptive immune responses) but not associated with increased risk of secondary infections. In contrary, the persistence in a subgroup of patients of profound immune alterations at the end of the first week after admission was associated with increased risk of secondary infections independently of exposure to invasive devices. The combined monitoring of markers of pro-/anti-inflammatory, innate, and adaptive immune responses allowed a better enrichment of patients with risk of secondary infections in the selected population. CONCLUSIONS: Using REAnimation Low Immune Status Marker immunomonitoring panel, we detected delayed injury-acquired immunodeficiency in a subgroup of severely injured patients independently of primary disease. Critically ill patients’ immune status could be captured through the combined monitoring of a common panel of complementary markers of pro-/anti-inflammatory, innate, and adaptive immune responses. Such immune monitoring needs to be incorporated in larger study cohorts with more extensive immune surveillance to develop specific hypothesis allowing for identification of biological systems affecting altered immune function related to late infection in the setting of acute systemic injury.