Background Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. Methods We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04327388 ; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. Findings Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference −1·7 [−9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [−6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI −7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 1...

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Purpose: Insufficient antimicrobial exposure is associated with worse outcomes in sepsis. We evaluated whether therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)-guided antibiotic therapy improves outcomes.Methods: Randomized, multicenter, controlled trial from January 2017 to December 2019. Adult patients (n = 254) with sepsis or septic shock were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive continuous infusion of piperacillin/tazobactam with dosing guided by daily TDM of piperacillin or continuous infusion with a fixed dose (13.5 g/24 h if eGFR ≥ 20 mL/min). Target plasma concentration was four times the minimal inhibitory concentration (range ± 20%) of the underlying pathogen, respectively, of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in empiric situation. Primary outcome was the mean of daily total Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score up to day 10.Results: Among 249 evaluable patients (66.3 ± 13.7 years; female, 30.9%), there was no significant difference in mean SOFA score between patients with TDM (7.9 points; 95% CI 7.1-8.7) and without TDM (8.2 points; 95% CI 7.5-9.0) (p = 0.39). Patients with TDM-guided therapy showed a lower 28-day mortality (21.6% vs. 25.8%, RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.3, p = 0.44) and a higher rate of clinical (OR 1.9; 95% CI 0.5-6.2, p = 0.30) and microbiological cure (OR 2.4; 95% CI 0.7-7.4, p = 0.12), but these differences did not reach statistical significance. Attainment of target concentration was more common in patients with TDM (37.3% vs. 14.6%, OR 4.5, CI 95%, 2.9-6.9, p < 0.001).

Viscoelastic and aggregometric point-of-care testing was shown to be potentially useful for bedside diagnosis of sepsis. Moreover, viscoelastic and aggregometric point-of-care testing was able to determine the phase of septic coagulopathy (hypercoagulability vs. hypocoagulability) and therefore identified patients at high risk for overt disseminated intravascular coagulation.

Systemic inflammation is an immune response to a nonspecific insult of either infectious or noninfectious origin and remains a challenge in the intensive care units with high mortality rate. Cholinergic neurotransmission plays an important role in the regulation of the immune response during inflammation. We hypothesized that the activity of butyrylcholinesterase (BChE) might serve as a marker to identify and prognose systemic inflammation. By using a point-of-care-testing (POCT) approach we measured BChE activity in patients with severe systemic inflammation and healthy volunteers. We observed a decreased BChE activity in patients with systemic inflammation, as compared to that of healthy individuals. Furthermore, BChE activity showed an inverse correlation with the severity of the disease. Although hepatic function has previously been found essential for BChE production, we show here that the reduced BChE activity associated with systemic inflammation occurs independently of and is thus not caused by any deficit in liver function in these patients. A POCT approach, used to assess butyrylcholinesterase activity, might further improve the therapy of the critically ill patients by minimizing time delays between the clinical assessment and treatment of the inflammatory process. Hence, assessing butyrylcholinesterase activity might help in early detection of inflammation.