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: Pulse oximetry is widely used in the clinical setting. The purpose of this validation study was to investigate the level of agreement between oxygen saturations measured by pulse oximeter (SpO 2) and arterial blood gas (SaO 2) in a range of oximeters in clinical use in Australia and New Zealand. Methods: Paired SpO 2 and SaO 2 measurements were collected from 400 patients in one Australian and two New Zealand hospitals. The ages of the patients ranged from 18 to 95 years. Bias and limits of agreement were estimated. Sensitivity and specificity for detecting hypoxaemia, defined as SaO 2 < 90%, were also estimated. Results: The majority of participants were recruited from the Outpatient, Ward or High Dependency Unit setting. Bias, oximeter-measured minus arterial blood gas-measured oxygen saturation, was − 1.2%, with limits of agreement − 4.4 to 2.0%. SpO 2 was at least 4% lower than SaO 2 for 10 (2.5%) of the participants and SpO 2 was at least 4% higher than the SaO 2 in 3 (0.8%) of the participants. None of the participants with a SpO 2 ≥ 92% were hypoxaemic, defined as SaO 2 < 90%. There were no clinically significant differences in oximetry accuracy in relation to clinical characteristics or oximeter brand. Conclusions: In the majority of the participants, pulse oximetry was an accurate method to assess SaO 2 and had good performance in detecting hypoxaemia. However, in a small proportion of participants, differences between SaO 2 and SpO 2 could have clinical relevance in terms of patient monitoring and management. A SpO 2 ≥ 92% indicates that hypoxaemia, defined as a SaO 2 < 90%, is not present. Trial registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12614001257651). Date of registration: 2/12/2014.
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.