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.

Processing of facial expressions of emotion is central to human interaction, and has important effects on behaviour and affective state. A range of methods and paradigms have been used to investigate various aspects of abnormal processing of facial expressions in major depression, including emotion specific deficits in recognition accuracy, response biases and attentional biases. The aim of this review is to examine and interpret data from studies of facial emotion processing in major depression, in the context of current knowledge about the neural correlates of facial expression processing of primary emotions. The review also discusses the methodologies used to examine facial expression processing. Studies of facial emotion processing and facial emotion recognition were identified up to December 2009 utilizing MEDLINE and Web of Science. Although methodological variations complicate interpretation of findings, there is reasonably consistent evidence of a negative response bias towards sadness in individuals with major depression, so that positive (happy), neutral or ambiguous facial expressions tend to be evaluated as more sad or less happy compared with healthy control groups. There is also evidence of increased vigilance and selective attention towards sad expressions and away from happy expressions, but less evidence of reduced general or emotion-specific recognition accuracy. Data is complicated by the use of multiple paradigms and the heterogeneity of major depression. Future studies should address methodological problems, including variations in patient characteristics, testing paradigms and procedures, and statistical methods used to analyse findings.

No abstract

Neuropsychological impairment is a core component of major depression, yet its relationship to clinical state is unclear. The aims of the present review were to determine which neuropsychological domains and tasks were most sensitive to improvement in clinical state in major depression and to highlight the methodological issues in such research. Studies that included a baseline and at least one follow-up neuropsychological testing session in adults with major depression were identified using MEDLINE, Web of Science and ScienceDirect databases. Thirty studies were included in the review. Findings in younger adult populations suggested that improvement in mood was most strongly related to improved verbal memory and verbal fluency, while measures of executive functioning and attention tended to remain impaired across treatment. In late-life major depression, improved psychomotor speed was most closely related to treatment response, but there was much inconsistency between study findings, which may be due to methodological issues. In major depression, particular neuropsychological domains are more strongly related to clinical state than others. The findings from the present review suggest that the domains most sensitive to clinical state are verbal learning and memory, verbal fluency and psychomotor speed. In contrast, measures of attention and executive functioning perhaps represent more trait-like markers of major depression. With further methodologically sound research, the changes in neuropsychological function associated with treatment response may provide a means of evaluating different treatment strategies in major depression.

No abstract