Background: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) impairment is often reported among COVID-19 ICU survivors, and little is known about their long-term outcomes. We evaluated the HRQoL trajectories between 3 months and 1 year after ICU discharge, the factors influencing these trajectories and the presence of clusters of HRQoL profiles in a population of COVID-19 patients who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Moreover, pathophysiological correlations of residual dyspnea were tested. Methods: We followed up 178 survivors from 16 Italian ICUs up to one year after ICU discharge. HRQoL was investigated through the 15D instrument. Available pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and chest CT scans at 1 year were also collected. A linear mixed-effects model was adopted to identify factors associated with different HRQoL trajectories and a two-step cluster analysis was performed to identify HRQoL clusters. Results: We found that HRQoL increased during the study period, especially for the significant increase of the physical dimensions, while the mental dimensions and dyspnea remained substantially unchanged. Four main 15D profiles were identified: full recovery (47.2%), bad recovery (5.1%) and two partial recovery clusters with mostly physical (9.6%) or mental (38.2%) dimensions affected. Gender, duration of IMV and number of comorbidities significantly influenced HRQoL trajectories. Persistent dyspnea was reported in 58.4% of patients, and weakly, but significantly, correlated with both DLCO and length of IMV. Conclusions: HRQoL impairment is frequent 1 year after ICU discharge, and the lowest recovery is found in the mental dimensions. Persistent dyspnea is often reported and weakly correlated with PFTs alterations. Trial registration: NCT04411459. 15D score 3 months -mean ± SD 0.857 ± 0.133 0.927 ± 0.061 0.800 ± 0.135 0.853 ± 0.114 0.637 ± 0.204 < 0.001 15D score 1 year -mean ± SD 0.880 ± 0.115 0.964 ± 0.033 0.820 ± 0.068 0.866 ± 0.088 0.572 ± 0.112 < 0.001 Mobility -mean ± SD 0.876 ± 0.207 0.963 ± 0.104 0.828 ± 0.191 0.901 ± 0.166 0.375 ± 0.298 < 0.001 Vision -mean ± SD 0.953 ± 0.119 0.992 ± 0.040 0.942 ± 0.108 0.949 ± 0.094 0.681 ± 0.280 < 0.001 Hearing -mean ± SD 0.968 ± 0.098 1.000 ± 0.000 1.000 ± 0.000 0.745 ± 0.135 0.857 ± 0.192 < 0.001 Breathing -mean ± SD 0.746 ± 0.238 0.879 ± 0.154 0.620 ± 0.227 0.753 ± 0.223 0.438 ± 0.238 < 0.001 Sleeping -mean ± SD 0.838 ± 0.238 0.940 ± 0.135 0.716 ± 0.274 0.929 ± 0.142 0.632 ± 0.312 < 0.001 Eating -mean ± SD 0.979 ± 0.102 1.000 ± 0.000 1 .000 ± 0.000 1.000 ± 0.000 0.587 ± 0.221 < 0.001 Speech -mean ± SD 0.980 ± 0.090 0.996 ± 0.032 0.996 ± 0.036 0.948 ± 0.117 0.777 ± 0.276 < 0.001 Excretion -mean ± SD 0.974 ± 0.110 1.000 ± 0.000 1.000 ± 0.000 0.872 ± 0.191 0.720 ± 0.292
Background Tocilizumab blocks pro-inflammatory activity of interleukin-6 (IL-6), involved in pathogenesis of pneumonia the most frequent cause of death in COVID-19 patients. Methods A multicenter, single-arm, hypothesis-driven trial was planned, according to a phase 2 design, to study the effect of tocilizumab on lethality rates at 14 and 30 days (co-primary endpoints, a priori expected rates being 20 and 35%, respectively). A further prospective cohort of patients, consecutively enrolled after the first cohort was accomplished, was used as a secondary validation dataset. The two cohorts were evaluated jointly in an exploratory multivariable logistic regression model to assess prognostic variables on survival. Results In the primary intention-to-treat (ITT) phase 2 population, 180/301 (59.8%) subjects received tocilizumab, and 67 deaths were observed overall. Lethality rates were equal to 18.4% (97.5% CI: 13.6–24.0, P = 0.52) and 22.4% (97.5% CI: 17.2–28.3, P < 0.001) at 14 and 30 days, respectively. Lethality rates were lower in the validation dataset, that included 920 patients. No signal of specific drug toxicity was reported. In the exploratory multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio negatively affected survival, while the concurrent use of steroids was associated with greater survival. A statistically significant interaction was found between tocilizumab and respiratory support, suggesting that tocilizumab might be more effective in patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline. Conclusions Tocilizumab reduced lethality rate at 30 days compared with null hypothesis, without significant toxicity. Possibly, this effect could be limited to patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline. Registration EudraCT (2020-001110-38); clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04317092).
There is the urgent need to study the effects of immunomodulating agents as therapy for Covid-19. An observational, cohort, prospective study with 30 days of observation was carried out to assess clinical outcomes in 88 patients hospitalized for Covid-19 pneumonia and treated with canakinumab (300 mg sc). Median time from diagnosis of Covid-19 by viral swab to administration of canakinumab was 7.5 days (range 0–30, IQR 4–11). Median PaO2/FiO2 increased from 160 (range 53–409, IQR 122–210) at baseline to 237 (range 72–533, IQR 158–331) at day 7 after treatment with canakinumab (p < 0.0001). Improvement of oxygen support category was observed in 61.4% of cases. Median duration of hospitalization following administration of canakinumab was 6 days (range 0–30, IQR 4–11). At 7 days, 58% of patients had been discharged and 12 (13.6%) had died. Significant differences between baseline and 7 days were observed for absolute lymphocyte counts (mean 0.60 vs 1.11 × 109/L, respectively, p < 0.0001) and C-reactive protein (mean 31.5 vs 5.8 mg/L, respectively, p < 0.0001).Overall survival at 1 month was 79.5% (95% CI 68.7–90.3). Oxygen-support requirements improved and overall mortality was 13.6%. Confirmation of the efficacy of canakinumab for Covid-19 warrants further study in randomized controlled trials.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.