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...

Dear Editor,Acute kidney injury (AKI) remains a common and significant complication in critically ill patients. As no curative treatment exists, prevention of AKI is paramount, especially in high-risk patients. Several randomized controlled trials suggest that a biomarker-guided implementation of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) care bundle reduces the incidence of AKI postoperatively [1][2][3]. Implementation of this care bundle is recommended in high-risk patients after cardiac surgery [4]. This comprises regular monitoring of kidney function, hemodynamic optimization, and consideration of advanced hemodynamic monitoring, as well as avoidance of hyperglycemia, nephrotoxic drugs, and radiocontrast agents, if possible.So far, the impact of each individual component of the bundle is unclear. Better understanding would enable prioritization, resource-allocation and clinical management of those at high risk of AKI. To investigate the treatment effects of individual bundle components, we combined data of the two PrevAKI-trials including 554 cardiac surgery patients at high risk for AKI, as defined by elevated urinary biomarkers TIMP2*IGFBP7 [1,2]. Patients were randomized to standard care versus implementation of the care bundle (Supplementary S1).Univariate logistic regression of the bundle's components was performed as a risk factor analysis of the whole cohort. Following this, individual treatment effects were analyzed, using the same method for the intervention group only (Fig. 1a). Hypotension, low cardiac

Purpose The incidence, patient features, risk factors and outcomes of surgery-associated postoperative acute kidney injury (PO-AKI) across different countries and health care systems is unclear. Methods We conducted an international prospective, observational, multi-center study in 30 countries in patients undergoing major surgery (> 2-h duration and postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) or high dependency unit admission). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of PO-AKI within 72 h of surgery defined by the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria. Secondary endpoints included PO-AKI severity and duration, use of renal replacement therapy (RRT), mortality, and ICU and hospital length of stay. Results We studied 10,568 patients and 1945 (18.4%) developed PO-AKI (1236 (63.5%) KDIGO stage 1500 (25.7%) KDIGO stage 2209 (10.7%) KDIGO stage 3). In 33.8% PO-AKI was persistent, and 170/1945 (8.7%) of patients with PO-AKI received RRT in the ICU. Patients with PO-AKI had greater ICU (6.3% vs. 0.7%) and hospital (8.6% vs. 1.4%) mortality, and longer ICU (median 2 (Q1-Q3, 1–3) days vs. 3 (Q1-Q3, 1–6) days) and hospital length of stay (median 14 (Q1-Q3, 9–24) days vs. 10 (Q1-Q3, 7–17) days). Risk factors for PO-AKI included older age, comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease), type, duration and urgency of surgery as well as intraoperative vasopressors, and aminoglycosides administration. Conclusion In a comprehensive multinational study, approximately one in five patients develop PO-AKI after major surgery. Increasing severity of PO-AKI is associated with a progressive increase in adverse outcomes. Our findings indicate that PO-AKI represents a significant burden for health care worldwide. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-023-07169-7.

Sepsis and septic shock are a major public health concern and are still associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Whilst there is growing understanding of different phenotypes and endotypes of sepsis, all too often treatment strategies still only employ a “one-size-fits-all” approach. Biomarkers offer a unique opportunity to close this gap to more precise treatment approaches by providing insight into clinically hidden, yet complex, pathophysiology, or by individualizing treatment pathways. Predicting and evaluating systemic inflammation, sepsis or septic shock are essential to improve outcomes for these patients. Besides opportunities to improve patient care, employing biomarkers offers a unique opportunity to improve clinical research in patients with sepsis. The high rate of negative clinical trials in this field may partly be explained by a high degree of heterogeneity in patient cohorts and a lack of understanding of specific endotypes or phenotypes. Moving forward, biomarkers can support the selection of more homogeneous cohorts, thereby potentially improving study conditions of clinical trials. This may finally pave the way to a precision medicine approach to sepsis, septic shock and complication of sepsis in the future.

IntroductionMore than 300 million surgical procedures are performed each year. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication after major surgery and is associated with adverse short-term and long-term outcomes. However, there is a large variation in the incidence of reported AKI rates. The establishment of an accurate epidemiology of surgery-associated AKI is important for healthcare policy, quality initiatives, clinical trials, as well as for improving guidelines. The objective of the Epidemiology of Surgery-associated Acute Kidney Injury (EPIS-AKI) trial is to prospectively evaluate the epidemiology of AKI after major surgery using the latest Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) consensus definition of AKI.Methods and analysisEPIS-AKI is an international prospective, observational, multicentre cohort study including 10 000 patients undergoing major surgery who are subsequently admitted to the ICU or a similar high dependency unit. The primary endpoint is the incidence of AKI within 72 hours after surgery according to the KDIGO criteria. Secondary endpoints include use of renal replacement therapy (RRT), mortality during ICU and hospital stay, length of ICU and hospital stay and major adverse kidney events (combined endpoint consisting of persistent renal dysfunction, RRT and mortality) at day 90. Further, we will evaluate preoperative and intraoperative risk factors affecting the incidence of postoperative AKI. In an add-on analysis, we will assess urinary biomarkers for early detection of AKI.Ethics and disseminationEPIS-AKI has been approved by the leading Ethics Committee of the Medical Council North Rhine-Westphalia, of the Westphalian Wilhelms-University Münster and the corresponding Ethics Committee at each participating site. Results will be disseminated widely and published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and used to design further AKI-related trials.Trial registration numberNCT04165369.