Writing Committee for the REMAP-CAP Investigators IMPORTANCE The evidence for benefit of convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with COVID-19 is inconclusive.OBJECTIVE To determine whether convalescent plasma would improve outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThe ongoing Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial, Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia (REMAP-CAP) enrolled and randomized 4763 adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 between March 9, 2020, and January 18, 2021, within at least 1 domain; 2011 critically ill adults were randomized to open-label interventions in the immunoglobulin domain at 129 sites in 4 countries. Follow-up ended on April 19, 2021. INTERVENTIONSThe immunoglobulin domain randomized participants to receive 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma (total volume of 550 mL ± 150 mL) within 48 hours of randomization (n = 1084) or no convalescent plasma (n = 916). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary ordinal end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based organ support) up to day 21 (range, −1 to 21 days; patients who died were assigned -1 day). The primary analysis was an adjusted bayesian cumulative logistic model. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Futility was defined as the posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 (threshold for trial conclusion of futility >95%). An OR greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. The prespecified secondary outcomes included in-hospital survival; 28-day survival; 90-day survival; respiratory support-free days; cardiovascular support-free days; progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal mechanical oxygenation, or death; intensive care unit length of stay; hospital length of stay; World Health Organization ordinal scale score at day 14; venous thromboembolic events at 90 days; and serious adverse events. RESULTS Among the 2011 participants who were randomized (median age, 61 [IQR, 52 to 70] years and 645/1998 [32.3%] women), 1990 (99%) completed the trial. The convalescent plasma intervention was stopped after the prespecified criterion for futility was met. The median number of organ support-free days was 0 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the convalescent plasma group and 3 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the no convalescent plasma group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 37.3% (401/1075) for the convalescent plasma group and 38.4% (347/904) for the no convalescent plasma group and the median number of days alive and free of organ support was 14 (IQR, 3 to 18) and 14 (IQR, 7 to 18), respectively. The median-adjusted OR was 0.97 (95% credible interval, 0.83 to 1.15) and the posterior probability of futility (OR <1.2) was 99.4% for the convalescent plasma group compared with the no convalescent plasma group. The treatment effects were consistent across the primary outcome and the 11...

To quantify and contextualize the risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)related hospitalization and illness severity in type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We conducted a prospective cohort study to identify case subjects with COVID-19 across a regional health care network of 137 service locations. Using an electronic health record query, chart review, and patient contact, we identified clinical factors influencing illness severity. RESULTS We identified COVID-19 in 6,138, 40, and 273 patients without diabetes and with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. Compared with not having diabetes, people with type 1 diabetes had adjusted odds ratios of 3.90 (95% CI 1.75-8.69) for hospitalization and 3.35 (95% CI 1.53-7.33) for greater illness severity, which was similar to risk in type 2 diabetes. Among patients with type 1 diabetes, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA 1c), hypertension, race, recent diabetic ketoacidosis, health insurance status, and less diabetes technology use were significantly associated with illness severity. CONCLUSIONS Diabetes status, both type 1 and type 2, independently increases the adverse impacts of COVID-19. Potentially modifiable factors (e.g., HbA 1c) had significant but modest impact compared with comparatively static factors (e.g., race and insurance) in type 1 diabetes, indicating an urgent and continued need to mitigate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection risk in this community. The medical community currently lacks sufficient data to adequately mitigate the impact of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the type 1 diabetes community. At present, our knowledge is largely extrapolated from recent retrospective analyses of hospitalized patients (1-5), which have strongly suggested "diabetes" increases risk for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. These studies did not, however, distinguish between type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetesdtwo pathophysiologically distinct conditions. Although reports of COVID-19 in type 1 diabetes are emerging, the scope of these investigations to date has been limited by including only hospitalized

<i>Objective: To quantify and contextualize the risk for COVID-19 related hospitalization and illness severity in type 1 diabetes.</i> <p> </p> <p><i>Research Design and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study to identify COVID-19 cases across a regional healthcare network of 137 service locations. Using an electronic health record query, chart review, and patient contact, we identified clinical factors influencing illness severity. </i></p> <p> </p> <p><i>Results: We identified COVID-19 in 6,138, 40, and 273 patients without diabetes and with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. Compared with not having diabetes, people with type 1 diabetes had adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of 3.90 (95% CI 1.75-8.69) for hospitalization and 3.35 (95% CI 1.53-7.33) for greater illness severity, which was similar to risk in type 2 diabetes. Among type 1 diabetes patients, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), hypertension, race, recent diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), health insurance status, and less diabetes technology use were significantly associated with illness severity.</i></p> <p> </p> <h2>Conclusions: Diabetes status, both type 1 and type 2, independently increases the adverse impacts of COVID-19. Potentially modifiable factors (e.g., HbA1c) had significant but modest impact compared to comparatively static factors (e.g. race, insurance) in type 1 diabetes indicating an urgent and continued need to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 infection risk in this community.</h2>

Although insulin resistance consistently occurs with type 1 diabetes, its predominant driver is uncertain. We therefore determined the relative contributions of hyperglycemia and iatrogenic hyperinsulinemia to insulin resistance using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in three participant groups (n = 10/group) with differing insulinemia and glycemia: healthy control subjects (euinsulinemia and euglycemia), glucokinase-maturity-onset diabetes of the young (GCK-MODY; euinsulinemia and hyperglycemia), and type 1 diabetes (hyperinsulinemia and hyperglycemia matching GCK-MODY). We assessed the contribution of hyperglycemia by comparing insulin sensitivity in control and GCK-MODY and the contribution of hyperinsulinemia by comparing GCK-MODY and type 1 diabetes. Hemoglobin A 1c was normal in control subjects and similarly elevated for type 1 diabetes and GCK-MODY. Basal insulin levels in control subjects and GCK-MODY were nearly equal but were 2.5-fold higher in type 1 diabetes. Low-dose insulin infusion suppressed endogenous glucose production similarly in all groups and suppressed nonesterified fatty acids similarly between control subjects and GCK-MODY, but to a lesser extent for type 1 diabetes. High-dose insulin infusion stimulated glucose disposal similarly in control subjects and GCK-MODY but was 29% and 22% less effective in type 1 diabetes, respectively. Multivariable linear regression showed that insulinemia-but not glycemia-was significantly associated with muscle insulin sensitivity. These data suggest that iatrogenic hyperinsulinemia predominates in driving insulin resistance in type 1 diabetes.

Background Heterogeneous respiratory system static compliance (CRS) values and levels of hypoxemia in patients with novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) requiring mechanical ventilation have been reported in previous small-case series or studies conducted at a national level. Methods We designed a retrospective observational cohort study with rapid data gathering from the international COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium study to comprehensively describe CRS—calculated as: tidal volume/[airway plateau pressure-positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)]—and its association with ventilatory management and outcomes of COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation (MV), admitted to intensive care units (ICU) worldwide. Results We studied 745 patients from 22 countries, who required admission to the ICU and MV from January 14 to December 31, 2020, and presented at least one value of CRS within the first seven days of MV. Median (IQR) age was 62 (52–71), patients were predominantly males (68%) and from Europe/North and South America (88%). CRS, within 48 h from endotracheal intubation, was available in 649 patients and was neither associated with the duration from onset of symptoms to commencement of MV (p = 0.417) nor with PaO2/FiO2 (p = 0.100). Females presented lower CRS than males (95% CI of CRS difference between females-males: − 11.8 to − 7.4 mL/cmH2O p < 0.001), and although females presented higher body mass index (BMI), association of BMI with CRS was marginal (p = 0.139). Ventilatory management varied across CRS range, resulting in a significant association between CRS and driving pressure (estimated decrease − 0.31 cmH2O/L per mL/cmH20 of CRS, 95% CI − 0.48 to − 0.14, p < 0.001). Overall, 28-day ICU mortality, accounting for the competing risk of being discharged within the period, was 35.6% (SE 1.7). Cox proportional hazard analysis demonstrated that CRS (+ 10 mL/cm H2O) was only associated with being discharge from the ICU within 28 days (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02–1.28, p = 0.018). Conclusions This multicentre report provides a comprehensive account of CRS in COVID-19 patients on MV. CRS measured within 48 h from commencement of MV has marginal predictive value for 28-day mortality, but was associated with being discharged from ICU within the same period. Trial documentation: Available at https://www.covid-critical.com/study. Trial registration: ACTRN12620000421932.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract