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.
In a randomized, open-label, controlled, multicentre study, the clinical and bacteriological efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral gemifloxacin (320 mg once daily, 5 days) was compared with sequential intravenous (i.v.) ceftriaxone (1 g once daily, maximum 3 days) followed by oral cefuroxime axetil (500 mg twice daily, maximum 7 days) in adult hospitalized patients with acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB) (n = 274). The clinical success rates at follow-up (21-28 days post-therapy) in the clinical per-protocol population (the primary endpoint) were 86.8% (105/121) for gemifloxacin vs. 81.3% (91/112) for ceftriaxone/cefuroxime (treatment difference = 5.5,95% CI -3.9,14.9). The corresponding clinical results in the clinical intention-to-treat (ITT) population were 82.6% (114/138) vs. 72.1% (98/136), respectively (treatment difference = 10.5,95% CI 0.7, 20.4).Thus, gemifloxacin had significantly higher clinical success rates than ceftriaxone/cefuroxime. The median time to discharge was 9 days in the gemifloxacin group vs. 11 days in the ceftriaxone/cefuroxime group (P = 0.04, Wilcoxon test). At follow-up, 120/138 (87.0%) gemifloxacin-treated patients had been discharged from hospital, compared with 111/136 (81.6%) ceftriaxone/cefuroxime-treated patients in the clinical ITT population. Both treatments were generally well tolerated and there was no significant difference between the treatment groups in the incidence or type of adverse events reported. A 5-day course of oral gemifloxacin was shown by this study to be at least equivalent to sequential i.v. ceftriaxone/cefuroxime axetil (for up to 10 days) in patients with AECB who require hospital treatment.
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.