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.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background Nearly 28% of women underwent induction of labour in England in 2015-16. Women frequently report delays and poor experiences, and the process can put additional pressure on busy labour wards. Outpatient induction of labour (OPIOL) enables women to return home to await the onset of contractions. Aim To explore the research about OPIOL using prostaglandins and to identify gaps in the evidence base. Outcomes will be compared with those induced as inpatients. Method An electronic search was conducted to identify relevant studies using keywords. Once the studies had been identified, a narrative synthesis of the findings was conducted. Findings Adverse outcomes were rare but studies were not sufficiently powered to detect significant differences between outpatients and inpatients. There were some differences in cost and effectiveness that may be explained by disparities in study design, participant characteristics and operational issues. Time avoided in hospital by outpatients ranged from 7.5–11.76 hours. Satisfaction was generally higher with OPIOL, although some women expressed apprehension about being at home. Conclusion While OPIOL with prostaglandins is acceptable to women, it is not clear whether there are significant differences in safety and effectiveness outcomes, due to the low frequency of adverse perinatal events as well as methodological and quality issues of the included studies. Further research is needed to compare outcomes, maternal experiences and cost effectiveness of OPIOL.

Alaska is the largest geographic state in the United States with the lowest population density and a mix of urban centers and isolated rural communities. The differences in population dynamics in Alaska from the contiguous United States may have contributed to a unique pattern of emergence and spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants observed in early 2021. Here we examined 2,323 virus genomes from Alaska and 278,635 virus genomes from the contiguous United States collected between the first week of December 2020 through the last week of June 2021. We focused on this timeframe because of the notable emergence and spread of the SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.519 observed in Alaska. We found that this variant was consistently detected in Alaska from the end of January through June of 2021 with a peak prevalence in April of 77.9% unlike the rest of the United States with a peak prevalence of 4.6%. In Alaska, the earlier emergence of B.1.1.519 coincided with a later peak of Alpha (B.1.1.7) when compared to the rest of the United States. We also observed differences in the composition of lineages and variants over time between the two most populated regions of Alaska. Although there was a modest increase in COVID-19 cases during the peak incidence of B.1.1.519, it is difficult to disentangle how social dynamics conflated changes in COVID-19 during this time. We suggest that the viral characteristics, such as amino acid substitutions in the spike protein, and a founder effect likely contributed to the unique spread of B.1.1.519 in Alaska.

Alaska has the lowest population density in the United States (US) with a mix of urban centers and isolated rural communities. Alaska’s distinct population dynamics compared to the contiguous US may have contributed to unique patterns of SARS-CoV-2 variants observed in early 2021. Here we examined 2323 SARS-CoV-2 genomes from Alaska and 278,635 from the contiguous US collected from December 2020 through June 2021 because of the notable emergence and spread of lineage B.1.1.519 in Alaska. We found that B.1.1.519 was consistently detected from late January through June of 2021 in Alaska with a peak prevalence in April of 77.9% unlike the rest of the US at 4.6%. The earlier emergence of B.1.1.519 coincided with a later peak of Alpha (B.1.1.7) compared to the contiguous US. We also observed differences in variant composition over time between the two most populated regions of Alaska and a modest increase in COVID-19 cases during the peak incidence of B.1.1.519. However, it is difficult to disentangle how social dynamics conflated changes in COVID-19 during this time. We suggest that the viral characteristics, such as amino acid substitutions in the spike protein, likely contributed to the unique spread of B.1.1.519 in Alaska.