Search

BackgroundLevels of plasma SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) antigen may be an important biomarker in patients with COVID-19 and enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether levels of plasma antigen can predict short-term clinical outcomes and identify clinical and viral factors associated with plasma antigen levels in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2.DesignCross-sectional study of baseline plasma antigen level from 2540 participants enrolled in the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients With COVID-19) platform trial from August 2020 to November 2021, with additional data on day 5 outcome and time to discharge.Setting114 centers in 10 countries.ParticipantsAdults hospitalized for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection with 12 days or less of symptoms.MeasurementsBaseline plasma viral N antigen level was measured at a central laboratory. Delta variant status was determined from baseline nasal swabs using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Associations between baseline patient characteristics and viral factors and baseline plasma antigen levels were assessed using both unadjusted and multivariable modeling. Association between elevated baseline antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater and outcomes, including worsening of ordinal pulmonary scale at day 5 and time to hospital discharge, were evaluated using logistic regression and Fine-Gray regression models, respectively.ResultsPlasma antigen was below the level of quantification in 5% of participants at enrollment, and 1000 ng/L or greater in 57%. Baseline pulmonary severity of illness was strongly associated with plasma antigen level, with mean plasma antigen level 3.10-fold higher among those requiring noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula compared with room air (95% CI, 2.22 to 4.34). Plasma antigen level was higher in those who lacked antispike antibodies (6.42 fold; CI, 5.37 to 7.66) and in those with the Delta variant (1.73 fold; CI, 1.41 to 2.13). Additional factors associated with higher baseline antigen level included male sex, shorter time since hospital admission, decreased days of remdesivir, and renal impairment. In contrast, race, ethnicity, body mass index, and immunocompromising conditions were not associated with plasma antigen levels. Plasma antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater was associated with a markedly higher odds of worsened pulmonary status at day 5 (odds ratio, 5.06 [CI, 3.41 to 7.50]) and longer time to hospital discharge (median, 7 vs. 4 days; subhazard ratio, 0.51 [CI, 0.45 to 0.57]), with subhazard ratios similar across all levels of baseline pulmonary severity.LimitationsPlasma samples were drawn at enrollment, not hospital presentation. No point-of-care test to measure plasma antigen is currently available.ConclusionElevated plasma antigen is highly associated with both severity of pulmonary illness and clinically important patient outcomes. Multiple clinical and viral factors are associated with plasma antigen level at presentation. These data support a potential role of ongoing viral replication in the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalized patients.Primary funding sourceU.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Rationale: Uncertainty regarding the natural history of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) led to difficulty in efficacy endpoint selection for therapeutic trials. Capturing outcomes that occur after hospital discharge may improve assessment of clinical recovery among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Objectives: Evaluate 90-day clinical course of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, comparing three distinct definitions of recovery. Methods: We used pooled data from three clinical trials of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies to compare: 1) the hospital discharge approach; 2) the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19) trials sustained recovery approach; and 3) a comprehensive approach. At the time of enrollment, all patients were hospitalized in a non-ICU setting without organ failure or major extrapulmonary manifestations of COVID-19. We defined discordance as a difference between time to recovery. Measurements and Main Results: Discordance between the hospital discharge and comprehensive approaches occurred in 170 (20%) of 850 enrolled participants, including 126 hospital readmissions and 24 deaths after initial hospital discharge. Discordant participants were older (median age, 68 vs. 59 years; P

BackgroundEnsovibep (MP0420) is a designed ankyrin repeat protein, a novel class of engineered proteins, under investigation as a treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.ObjectiveTo investigate if ensovibep, in addition to remdesivir and other standard care, improves clinical outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with standard care alone.DesignDouble-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978).SettingMultinational, multicenter trial.ParticipantsAdults hospitalized with COVID-19.InterventionIntravenous ensovibep, 600 mg, or placebo.MeasurementsEnsovibep was assessed for early futility on the basis of pulmonary ordinal scores at day 5. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery through day 90, defined as 14 consecutive days at home or place of usual residence after hospital discharge. A composite safety outcome that included death, serious adverse events, end-organ disease, and serious infections was assessed through day 90.ResultsAn independent data and safety monitoring board recommended that enrollment be halted for early futility after 485 patients were randomly assigned and received an infusion of ensovibep (n = 247) or placebo (n = 238). The odds ratio (OR) for a more favorable pulmonary outcome in the ensovibep (vs. placebo) group at day 5 was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.30; P = 0.68; OR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The 90-day cumulative incidence of sustained recovery was 82% for ensovibep and 80% for placebo (subhazard ratio [sHR], 1.06 [CI, 0.88 to 1.28]; sHR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The primary composite safety outcome at day 90 occurred in 78 ensovibep participants (32%) and 70 placebo participants (29%) (HR, 1.07 [CI, 0.77 to 1.47]; HR

BackgroundThe value of the soluble receptor for advanced glycation end-products (sRAGE) as a biomarker in COVID-19 is not well understood. We tested the association between plasma sRAGE and illness severity, viral burden, and clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who were not mechanically ventilated.MethodsBaseline sRAGE was measured among participants enrolled in the ACTIV-3/TICO trial of bamlanivimab for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Spearman's rank correlation was used to assess the relationship between sRAGE and other plasma biomarkers, including viral nucleocapsid antigen. Fine-Gray models adjusted for baseline supplemental oxygen requirement, antigen level, positive endogenous anti-nucleocapsid antibody response, sex, age, BMI, diabetes mellitus, renal impairment, corticosteroid treatment, and log2-transformed IL-6 level were used to assess the association between baseline sRAGE and time to sustained recovery. Cox regression adjusted for the same factors was used to assess the association between sRAGE and mortality.ResultsAmong 277 participants, baseline sRAGE was strongly correlated with viral plasma antigen concentration (ρ = 0.57). There was a weaker correlation between sRAGE and biomarkers of systemic inflammation, such as IL-6 (ρ = 0.36) and CRP (ρ = 0.20). Participants with plasma sRAGE in the highest quartile had a significantly lower rate of sustained recovery (adjusted recovery rate ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.43-0.90]) and a higher unadjusted risk of death (HR, 4.70 [95% CI, 2.01-10.99]) compared with participants in the lower quartiles.ConclusionElevated plasma sRAGE in hospitalized, nonventilated patients with COVID-19 was an indicator of both clinical illness severity and plasma viral load. Plasma sRAGE in the highest quartile was associated with a lower likelihood of sustained recovery and higher unadjusted risk of death. These findings, which we believe to be novel, indicate that plasma sRAGE may be a promising biomarker for COVID-19 prognostication and clinical trial enrichment.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04501978.FundingNIH (5T32GM008440-24, 18X107CF6, HHSN261201500003I, R35HL140026, and OT2HL156812).

BackgroundWe aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies (sotrovimab [Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline] and BRII-196 plus BRII-198 [Brii Biosciences]) for adults admitted to hospital for COVID-19 (hereafter referred to as hospitalised) with COVID-19.MethodsIn this multinational, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 [TICO]), adults (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 at 43 hospitals in the USA, Denmark, Switzerland, and Poland were recruited. Patients were eligible if they had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 symptoms for up to 12 days. Using a web-based application, participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1), stratified by trial site pharmacy, to sotrovimab 500 mg, matching placebo for sotrovimab, BRII-196 1000 mg plus BRII-198 1000 mg, or matching placebo for BRII-196 plus BRII-198, in addition to standard of care. Each study product was administered as a single dose given intravenously over 60 min. The concurrent placebo groups were pooled for analyses. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital to home and remaining at home for 14 consecutive days, up to day 90 after randomisation. Interim futility analyses were based on two seven-category ordinal outcome scales on day 5 that measured pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications of COVID-19. The safety outcome was a composite of death, serious adverse events, incident organ failure, and serious coinfection up to day 90 after randomisation. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment who started the study infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501978.FindingsBetween Dec 16, 2020, and March 1, 2021, 546 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to sotrovimab (n=184), BRII-196 plus BRII-198 (n=183), or placebo (n=179), of whom 536 received part or all of their assigned study drug (sotrovimab n=182, BRII-196 plus BRII-198 n=176, or placebo n=178; median age of 60 years [IQR 50-72], 228 [43%] patients were female and 308 [57%] were male). At this point, enrolment was halted on the basis of the interim futility analysis. At day 5, neither the sotrovimab group nor the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group had significantly higher odds of more favourable outcomes than the placebo group on either the pulmonary scale (adjusted odds ratio sotrovimab 1·07 [95% CI 0·74-1·56]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 0·98 [95% CI 0·67-1·43]) or the pulmonary-plus complications scale (sotrovimab 1·08 [0·74-1·58]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 1·00 [0·68-1·46]). By day 90, sustained clinical recovery was seen in 151 (85%) patients in the placebo group compared with 160 (88%) in the sotrovimab group (adjusted rate ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·91-1·37]) and 155 (88%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group (1·08 [0·88-1·32]). The composite safety outcome up to day 90 was met by 48 (27%) patients in the placebo group, 42 (23%) in the sotrovimab group, and 45 (26%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group. 13 (7%) patients in the placebo group, 14 (8%) in the sotrovimab group, and 15 (9%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group died up to day 90.InterpretationNeither sotrovimab nor BRII-196 plus BRII-198 showed efficacy for improving clinical outcomes among adults hospitalised with COVID-19.FundingUS National Institutes of Health and Operation Warp Speed.

BackgroundThe ventilatory ratio (VR, [minute ventilation × PaCO2]/[predicted body weight × 100 × 37.5]) is associated with mortality in ARDS. The aims of this study were to test whether baseline disease severity or neuromuscular blockade (NMB) modified the relationship between VR and mortality.MethodsThis was a post hoc analysis of the PETAL-ROSE trial, which randomized moderate-to-severe ARDS patients to NMB or control. Survival among patients with different VR trajectories or VR cutoff above and below the median was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. The relationships between single-day or 48-h VR trajectories with 28- or 90-day mortality were tested by logistic regression. Randomization allocation to NMB and markers of disease severity were tested as confounders by multivariable regression and interaction term analyses.ResultsPatients with worsening VR trajectories had significantly lower survival compared to those with improving VR (n = 602, p  2 (median) at day 1 had a significantly lower 90-day survival compared to patients with VR ≤ 2 (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.10-1.69). VR at day 1 was significantly associated with 28-day mortality (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.15-1.72). There was no interaction between NMB and VR for 28-day mortality. APACHE-III had a significant interaction with VR at baseline for the outcome of 28-day mortality, such that the relationship between VR and mortality was stronger among patients with lower APACHE-III. There was a significant association between rising VR trajectory and mortality that was independent of NMB, baseline PaO2/FiO2 ratio and generalized markers of disease severity (Adjusted OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.28-2.84 for 28-day and OR 2.07 95% CI 1.41-3.10 for 90-day mortality). APACHE-III and NMB were not effect modifiers in the relationship between VR trajectory and mortality.ConclusionsElevated baseline and day 1 VR were associated with higher 28-day mortality. The relationship between baseline VR and mortality was stronger among patients with lower APACHE-III. APACHE-III was not an effect modifier for the relationship between VR trajectory and mortality, so that the VR trajectory may be optimally suited for prognostication and predictive enrichment. VR was not different between patients randomized to NMB or control, indicating that VR can be utilized without correcting for NMB.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome. Understanding of the complex pathways involved in lung injury pathogenesis, resolution, and repair has grown considerably in recent decades. Nevertheless, to date, only therapies targeting ventilation-induced lung injury have consistently proven beneficial, and despite these gains, ARDS morbidity and mortality remain high. Many candidate therapies with promise in preclinical studies have been ineffective in human trials, probably at least in part due to clinical and biological heterogeneity that modifies treatment responsiveness in human ARDS. A precision medicine approach to ARDS seeks to better account for this heterogeneity by matching therapies to subgroups of patients that are anticipated to be most likely to benefit, which initially might be identified in part by assessing for heterogeneity of treatment effect in clinical trials. In October 2019, the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a workshop of multidisciplinary experts to explore research opportunities and challenges for accelerating precision medicine in ARDS. Topics of discussion included the rationale and challenges for a precision medicine approach in ARDS, the roles of preclinical ARDS models in precision medicine, essential features of cohort studies to advance precision medicine, and novel approaches to clinical trials to support development and validation of a precision medicine strategy. In this Position Paper, we summarise workshop discussions, recommendations, and unresolved questions for advancing precision medicine in ARDS. Although the workshop took place before the COVID-19 pandemic began, the pandemic has highlighted the urgent need for precision therapies for ARDS as the global scientific community grapples with many of the key concepts, innovations, and challenges discussed at this workshop.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome is a common condition among critically ill patients, but remains under-recognized and undertreated. Under-recognition may result from confusion over the clinical inclusion criteria, as well as a misunderstanding of the complex relationship between the clinical syndrome, the variable histopathologic patterns, and the myriad clinical disorders that cause acute respiratory distress syndrome. The identification of the clinical syndrome and determination of the causal diagnosis are both required to optimize patient outcomes. Here we review the definition, discuss pitfalls in recognizing acute respiratory distress syndrome and consider an approach to ascertain specific etiologies of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

The 2012 Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) provided validated support for three levels of initial arterial hypoxaemia that correlated with mortality in patients receiving ventilatory support. Since 2015, high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) has become widely used as an effective therapeutic support for acute respiratory failure, most recently in patients with severe COVID-19. We propose that the Berlin definition of ARDS be broadened to include patients treated with HFNO of at least 30 L/min who fulfil the other criteria for the Berlin definition of ARDS. An expanded definition would make the diagnosis of ARDS more widely applicable, allowing patients at an earlier stage of the syndrome to be recognised, independent of the need for endotracheal intubation or positive-pressure ventilation, with benefits for the testing of early interventions and the study of factors associated with the course of ARDS. We identify key questions that could be addressed in refining an expanded definition of ARDS, the implementation of which could lead to improvements in clinical practice and clinical outcomes for patients.

BackgroundThe benefits of early continuous neuromuscular blockade in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who are receiving mechanical ventilation remain unclear.MethodsWe randomly assigned patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS (defined by a ratio of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen of

RationaleLow-tidal volume ventilation (LTVV; 6 ml/kg) benefits patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and may aid those with other causes of respiratory failure. Current early ventilation practices are poorly defined.ObjectivesWe observed patients with acute respiratory failure to assess the feasibility of a pragmatic trial of LTVV and to guide experimental design.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled consecutive patients with acute respiratory failure admitted to intensive care units expected to participate in the proposed trial. We collected clinical data as well as information on initial and daily ventilator settings and inpatient mortality. We estimated the benefit of LTVV using predictive linear and nonlinear models. We simulated models to estimate power and feasibility of a cluster-randomized trial of LTVV versus usual care in acute respiratory failure.ResultsWe included 2,484 newly mechanically ventilated patients (31% with acute respiratory distress syndrome) from 49 hospitals. Hospital mortality was 28%. Mean initial tidal volume was 7.1 ml/kg predicted body weight (95% confidence interval, 7.1-7.2), with 78% of patients receiving tidal volumes less than or equal to 8 ml/kg. Our models estimated a mortality benefit of 0-2% from LTVV compared with usual care. Simulation of a stepped-wedged cluster-randomized trial suggested that enrollment of 106,361 patients would be necessary to achieve greater than 90% power.ConclusionsUse of initial tidal volumes less than 8 ml/kg predicted body weight was common at hospitals participating in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury (PETAL) Network. After considering the size and budgetary requirement for a cluster-randomized trial of LTVV versus usual care in acute respiratory failure, the PETAL Network deemed the proposed trial infeasible. A rapid observational study and simulations to model anticipated power may help better design trials.

BackgroundTreatment with bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) has shown benefits in preclinical models of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Safety has not been established for administration of MSCs in critically ill patients with ARDS. We did a phase 2a trial to assess safety after administration of MSCs to patients with moderate to severe ARDS.MethodsWe did a prospective, double-blind, multicentre, randomised trial to assess treatment with one intravenous dose of MSCs compared with placebo. We recruited ventilated patients with moderate to severe ARDS (ratio of partial pressure of oxygen to fractional inspired oxygen

PurposeUsing latent class analysis (LCA), we have consistently identified two distinct subphenotypes in four randomized controlled trial cohorts of ARDS. One subphenotype has hyper-inflammatory characteristics and is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Further, within three negative clinical trials, we observed differential treatment response by subphenotype to randomly assigned interventions. The main purpose of this study was to identify ARDS subphenotypes in a contemporary NHLBI Network trial of infection-associated ARDS (SAILS) using LCA and to test for differential treatment response to rosuvastatin therapy in the subphenotypes.MethodsLCA models were constructed using a combination of biomarker and clinical data at baseline in the SAILS study (n = 745). LCA modeling was then repeated using an expanded set of clinical class-defining variables. Subphenotypes were tested for differential treatment response to rosuvastatin.ResultsThe two-class LCA model best fit the population. Forty percent of the patients were classified as the "hyper-inflammatory" subphenotype. Including additional clinical variables in the LCA models did not identify new classes. Mortality at day 60 and day 90 was higher in the hyper-inflammatory subphenotype. No differences in outcome were observed between hyper-inflammatory patients randomized to rosuvastatin therapy versus placebo.ConclusionsLCA using a two-subphenotype model best described the SAILS population. The subphenotypes have features consistent with those previously reported in four other cohorts. Addition of new class-defining variables in the LCA model did not yield additional subphenotypes. No treatment effect was observed with rosuvastatin. These findings further validate the presence of two subphenotypes and demonstrate their utility for patient stratification in ARDS.

Key Points: Question: Does acetaminophen (paracetamol) improve respiratory, circulatory, or kidney dysfunction in critically ill patients with sepsis, and is acetaminophen more effective in patients with higher plasma cell-free hemoglobin? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial that included 447 adults, acetaminophen was safe but the number of days alive and free of organ support was not meaningfully different in the acetaminophen arm (20.2 days) vs the placebo arm (19.6 days). There was no significant interaction between cell-free hemoglobin levels and acetaminophen. Meaning: Intravenous acetaminophen was safe but did not significantly improve days alive and free of organ support in critically ill patients with sepsis. Importance: Acetaminophen (paracetamol) has many pharmacological effects that might be beneficial in sepsis, including inhibition of cell-free hemoglobin-induced oxidation of lipids and other substrates. Objective: To determine whether acetaminophen increases days alive and free of organ dysfunction in sepsis compared with placebo. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 2b randomized, double-blind, clinical trial conducted from October 2021 to April 2023 with 90-day follow-up. Adults with sepsis and respiratory or circulatory organ dysfunction were enrolled in the emergency department or intensive care unit of 40 US academic hospitals within 36 hours of presentation. Intervention: Patients were randomized to 1 g of acetaminophen intravenously every 6 hours or placebo for 5 days. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary end point was days alive and free of organ support (mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, and kidney replacement therapy) to day 28. Treatment effect modification was evaluated for acetaminophen by prerandomization plasma cell-free hemoglobin level higher than 10 mg/dL. Results: Of 447 patients enrolled (mean age, 64 [SD, 15] years, 51% female, mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA] score, 5.4 [SD, 2.5]), 227 were randomized to acetaminophen and 220 to placebo. Acetaminophen was safe with no difference in liver enzymes, hypotension, or fluid balance between treatment arms. Days alive and free of organ support to day 28 were not meaningfully different for acetaminophen (20.2 days; 95% CI, 18.8 to 21.6) vs placebo (19.6 days; 95% CI, 18.2 to 21.0; P =.56; difference, 0.6; 95% CI, −1.4 to 2.6). Among 15 secondary outcomes, total, respiratory, and coagulation SOFA scores were significantly lower on days 2 through 4 in the acetaminophen arm as was the rate of development of acute respiratory distress syndrome within 7 days (2.2% vs 8.5% acetaminophen vs placebo; P =.01; difference, −6.3; 95% CI, −10.8 to −1.8). There was no significant interaction between cell-free hemoglobin levels and acetaminophen. Conclusions and Relevance: Intravenous acetaminophen was safe but did not significantly improve days alive and free of organ support in critically ill sepsis patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04291508 This randomized trial assesses whether acetaminophen would increase the number of days alive and free of organ support to day 28 among critically ill patients with sepsis and respiratory or circulatory organ dysfunction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on early mortality among patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) within the context of randomized controlled trials. It hypothesizes that early deaths, occurring within 3 days of randomization, exhibit distinct baseline characteristics, clinical trajectories, and proteomic profiles compared to late deaths. It highlight potential biomarkers associated with early mortality in ARDS, providing insights for prognosis and therapeutic strategies.

RationaleTwo distinct acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) subphenotypes have been identified using data obtained at time of enrolment in clinical trials; it remains unknown if these subphenotypes are durable over time.ObjectiveTo determine the stability of ARDS subphenotypes over time.MethodsSecondary analysis of data from two randomised controlled trials in ARDS, the ARMA trial of lung protective ventilation (n=473; patients randomised to low tidal volumes only) and the ALVEOLI trial of low versus high positive end-expiratory pressure (n=549). Latent class analysis (LCA) and latent transition analysis (LTA) were applied to data from day 0 and day 3, independent of clinical outcomes.Measurements and main resultsIn ALVEOLI, LCA indicated strong evidence of two ARDS latent classes at days 0 and 3; in ARMA, evidence of two classes was stronger at day 0 than at day 3. The clinical and biological features of these two classes were similar to those in our prior work and were largely stable over time, though class 2 demonstrated evidence of progressive organ failures by day 3, compared with class 1. In both LCA and LTA models, the majority of patients (>94%) stayed in the same class from day 0 to day 3. Clinical outcomes were statistically significantly worse in class 2 than class 1 and were more strongly associated with day 3 class assignment.ConclusionsARDS subphenotypes are largely stable over the first 3 days of enrolment in two ARDS Network trials, suggesting that subphenotype identification may be feasible in the context of clinical trials.

RationaleWe previously identified two acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) subphenotypes in two separate randomized controlled trials with differential response to positive end-expiratory pressure.ObjectivesTo identify these subphenotypes in a third ARDS cohort, to test whether subphenotypes respond differently to fluid management strategy, and to develop a practical model for subphenotype identification.MethodsWe used latent class analysis of baseline clinical and plasma biomarker data to identify subphenotypes in FACTT (Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial; n = 1,000). Logistic regression was used to test for an interaction between subphenotype and treatment for mortality. We used stepwise modeling to generate a model for subphenotype identification in FACTT and validated its accuracy in the two cohorts in which we previously identified ARDS subphenotypes.Measurements and main resultsWe confirmed that a two-class (two-subphenotype) model best described the study population. Subphenotype 2 was again characterized by higher inflammatory biomarkers and hypotension. Fluid management strategy had significantly different effects on 90-day mortality in the two subphenotypes (P = 0.0039 for interaction); mortality in subphenotype 1 was 26% with fluid-liberal strategy versus 18% with fluid-conservative, whereas mortality in subphenotype 2 was 40% with fluid-liberal strategy versus 50% in fluid-conservative. A three-variable model of IL-8, bicarbonate, and tumor necrosis factor receptor-1 accurately classified the subphenotypes.ConclusionsThis analysis confirms the presence of two ARDS subphenotypes that can be accurately identified with a limited number of variables and that responded differently to randomly assigned fluid management. These findings support the presence of ARDS subtypes that may require different treatment approaches.

The Reevaluation of Systemic Early Neuromuscular Blockade (ROSE) trial is a multicenter, randomized trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of early neuromuscular blockade in patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. This document provides background for interpretation of the trial results, and highlights unique design approaches that may inform future trials of acute illness. We describe the process by which ROSE was chosen as the inaugural trial of the multidisciplinary Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury Network, provide the trial methodology using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials framework, and discuss key design challenges and their resolution. Four key design issues proved challenging-feasibility, choice of sedation depth in the control group, impact of emphasizing early treatment on enrollment criteria and protocol execution, and choice of positive end-expiratory pressure strategy. We used literature, an iterative consensus model, and internal surveys of current practice to inform design choice. ROSE will provide definitive, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials adherent data on early neuromuscular blockade for future patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Our multidisciplinary approach to trial design may be of use to other trials of acute illness. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02509078).

Prevention of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) can attenuate multiorgan failure and improve survival in at-risk patients. Clinically significant VILI occurs from volutrauma, barotrauma, atelectrauma, biotrauma, and shear strain. Differences in regional mechanics are important in VILI pathogenesis. Several interventions are available to protect against VILI. However, most patients at risk of lung injury do not develop VILI. VILI occurs most readily in patients with concomitant physiologic insults. VILI prevention strategies must balance risk of lung injury with untoward side effects from the preventive effort, and may be most effective when targeted to subsets of patients at increased risk.

ObjectivesSoluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 and interleukin-6 concentrations have been associated with the inflammatory cascade of acute respiratory distress syndrome. We determined whether soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 and interleukin-6 levels can be used as prognostic biomarkers to guide weaning from mechanical ventilation and predict the need for reintubation.Design, setting, and patientsWe assayed plasma soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 (n = 826) concentrations and interleukin-6 (n = 755) concentrations in the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial, a multicenter randomized controlled trial of conservative fluid management in acute respiratory distress syndrome. We tested whether soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 and interleukin-6 levels were associated with duration of mechanical ventilation, the probability of passing a weaning assessment, and the need for reintubation.Measurements and main resultsIn models adjusted for Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score and other relevant variables, patients with higher day 0 and day 3 median soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 and interleukin-6 concentrations had decreased probability of extubation over time (day 0 soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2: hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-1.00; p = 0.05; day 0 interleukin-6: hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.54-0.75; p < 0.0001; day 3 soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2: hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.54-0.75; p < 0.0001; and day 3 interleukin-6: hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.85; p = 0.0001). Higher biomarker concentrations were also predictive of decreased odds of passing day 3 weaning assessments (soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2: odds ratio, 0.62: 95% CI, 0.44-0.87; p = 0.006 and interleukin-6: odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.85; p = 0.004) and decreased odds of passing a spontaneous breathing trial (soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2: odds ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.71; p = 0.0007 and interleukin-6 univariate analysis only: odds ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.83; p = 0.005). Finally, higher biomarker levels were significant predictors of the need for reintubation for soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 (odds ratio, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.04-10.07; p = 0.04) and for interleukin-6 (odds ratio, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.14-5.84; p = 0.02).ConclusionsHigher soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 and interleukin-6 concentrations are each associated with worse outcomes during weaning of mechanical ventilation and increased need for reintubation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Biomarker-directed ventilator management may lead to improved outcomes in weaning of mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

PurposeBreath stacking dyssynchrony generates higher tidal volumes than intended, potentially increasing lung injury risk in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Lack of validated criteria to quantify breath stacking dyssynchrony contributes to its under-recognition. This study evaluates performance of novel, objective criteria for quantifying breath stacking dyssynchrony (BREATHE criteria) compared to existing definitions and tests if neuromuscular blockade eliminates high-volume breath stacking dyssynchrony in ARDS.MethodsAirway flow and pressure were recorded continuously for up to 72 h in 33 patients with ARDS receiving volume-preset assist-control ventilation. The flow-time waveform was integrated to calculate tidal volume breath-by-breath. The BREATHE criteria considered five domains in evaluating for breath stacking dyssynchrony: ventilator cycling, interval expiratory volume, cumulative inspiratory volume, expiratory time, and inspiratory time.ResultsThe observed tidal volume of BREATHE stacked breaths was 11.3 (9.7-13.3) mL/kg predicted body weight, significantly higher than the preset volume [6.3 (6.0-6.8) mL/kg; p

Rationale: Two molecular phenotypes have been identified in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In the ROSE (Reevaluation of Systemic Early Neuromuscular Blockade) trial of cisatracurium in moderate to severe ARDS, we addressed three unanswered questions: 1) Do the same phenotypes emerge in a more severe ARDS cohort with earlier recruitment; 2) Do phenotypes respond differently to neuromuscular blockade? and 3) What biological pathways most differentiate inflammatory phenotypes? Methods: We performed latent class analysis in ROSE using preenrollment clinical and protein biomarkers. In a subset of patients (n = 134), we sequenced whole-blood RNA using enrollment and Day 2 samples and performed differential gene expression and pathway analyses. Informed by the differential gene expression analysis, we measured additional plasma proteins and evaluated their abundance relative to gene expression amounts. Measurements and Main Results: In ROSE, we identified the hypoinflammatory (60.4%) and hyperinflammatory (39.6%) phenotypes with similar biological and clinical characteristics as prior studies, including higher mortality at Day 90 for the hyperinflammatory phenotype (30.3% vs. 61.6%; P < 0.0001). We observed no treatment interaction between the phenotypes and randomized groups for mortality. The hyperinflammatory phenotype was enriched for genes associated with innate immune response, tissue remodeling, and zinc metabolism at Day 0 and collagen synthesis and neutrophil degranulation at Day 2. Longitudinal changes in gene expression patterns differed dependent on survivorship. For most highly expressed genes, we observed correlations with their corresponding plasma proteins' abundance. However, for the class-defining plasma proteins in the latent class analysis, no correlation was observed with their corresponding genes' expression. Conclusions: The hyperinflammatory and hypoinflammatory phenotypes have different clinical, protein, and dynamic transcriptional characteristics. These findings support the clinical and biological potential of molecular phenotypes to advance precision care in ARDS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveGlobal lung stress varies considerably with low tidal volume ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome. High stress despite low tidal volumes may worsen lung injury and increase risk of death. No widely available parameter exists to assess global lung stress. We aimed to determine whether the volume delivered during a recruitment maneuver (V(RM)) is inversely associated with lung stress and mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome.DesignSubstudy of an acute respiratory distress syndrome clinical trial on esophageal pressure-guided positive end-expiratory pressure titration.SettingU.S. academic medical center.PatientsForty-two patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome in whom airflow, airway pressure, and esophageal pressure were recorded during the recruitment maneuver.InterventionsA single recruitment maneuver was performed before initiating protocol-directed ventilator management. Recruitment maneuvers consisted of a 30-second breath hold at 40 cm H2O airway pressure under heavy sedation or paralysis. V(RM) was calculated by integrating the flow-time waveform during the maneuver. End-inspiratory stress was defined as the transpulmonary (airway minus esophageal) pressure during end-inspiratory pause of a tidal breath and tidal stress as the transpulmonary pressure difference between end-inspiratory and end-expiratory pauses.Measurements and main resultsV(RM) ranged between 7.4 and 34.7 mL/kg predicted body weight. Lower V(RM) predicted high end-inspiratory and tidal lung stress (end-inspiratory: β = -0.449; 95% CI, -0.664 to -0.234; p < 0.001; tidal: β = -0.267; 95% CI, -0.423 to -0.111; p = 0.001). After adjusting for PaO2/FIO2 and either driving pressure, tidal volume, or plateau pressure and positive end-expiratory pressure, V(RM) remained independently associated with both end-inspiratory and tidal stress. In unadjusted analysis, low V(RM) predicted increased risk of death (odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-1.00; p = 0.026). V(RM) remained significantly associated with mortality after adjusting for study arm (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-1.00; p = 0.022).ConclusionsLow V(RM) independently predicts high lung stress and may predict risk of death in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

ObjectivesPulmonary dead-space fraction is one of few lung-specific independent predictors of mortality from acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, it is not measured routinely in clinical trials and thus altogether ignored in secondary analyses that shape future research directions and clinical practice. This study sought to validate an estimate of dead-space fraction for use in secondary analyses of clinical trials.DesignAnalysis of patient-level data pooled from acute respiratory distress syndrome clinical trials. Four approaches to estimate dead-space fraction were evaluated: three required estimating metabolic rate; one estimated dead-space fraction directly.SettingU.S. academic teaching hospitals.PatientsData from 210 patients across three clinical trials were used to compare performance of estimating equations with measured dead-space fraction. A second cohort of 3,135 patients from six clinical trials without measured dead-space fraction was used to confirm whether estimates independently predicted mortality.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsDead-space fraction estimated using the unadjusted Harris-Benedict equation for energy expenditure was unbiased (mean ± SD Harris-Benedict, 0.59 ± 0.13; measured, 0.60 ± 0.12). This estimate predicted measured dead-space fraction to within ±0.10 in 70% of patients and ±0.20 in 95% of patients. Measured dead-space fraction independently predicted mortality (odds ratio, 1.36 per 0.05 increase in dead-space fraction; 95% CI, 1.10-1.68; p < 0.01). The Harris-Benedict estimate closely approximated this association with mortality in the same cohort (odds ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.21-1.98; p < 0.01) and remained independently predictive of death in the larger Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network cohort. Other estimates predicted measured dead-space fraction or its association with mortality less well.ConclusionsDead-space fraction should be measured in future acute respiratory distress syndrome clinical trials to facilitate incorporation into secondary analyses. For analyses where dead-space fraction was not measured, the Harris-Benedict estimate can be used to estimate dead-space fraction and adjust for its association with mortality.

BackgroundNo effective pharmacotherapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) exists, and mortality remains high. Preclinical studies support the efficacy of mesenchymal stem (stromal) cells (MSCs) in the treatment of lung injury. We aimed to test the safety of a single dose of allogeneic bone marrow-derived MSCs in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS.MethodsThe STem cells for ARDS Treatment (START) trial was a multicentre, open-label, dose-escalation, phase 1 clinical trial. Patients were enrolled in the intensive care units at University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA, and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA, between July 8, 2013, and Jan 13, 2014. Patients were included if they had moderate-to-severe ARDS as defined by the acute onset of the need for positive pressure ventilation by an endotracheal or tracheal tube, a PaO2:FiO2 less than 200 mm Hg with at least 8 cm H2O positive end-expiratory airway pressure (PEEP), and bilateral infiltrates consistent with pulmonary oedema on frontal chest radiograph. The first three patients were treated with low dose MSCs (1 million cells/kg predicted bodyweight [PBW]), the next three patients received intermediate dose MSCs (5 million cells/kg PBW), and the final three patients received high dose MSCs (10 million cells/kg PBW). Primary outcomes included the incidence of prespecified infusion-associated events and serious adverse events. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01775774.FindingsNo prespecified infusion-associated events or treatment-related adverse events were reported in any of the nine patients. Serious adverse events were subsequently noted in three patients during the weeks after the infusion: one patient died on study day 9, one patient died on study day 31, and one patient was discovered to have multiple embolic infarcts of the spleen, kidneys, and brain that were age-indeterminate, but thought to have occurred before the MSC infusion based on MRI results. None of these severe adverse events were thought to be MSC-related.InterpretationA single intravenous infusion of allogeneic, bone marrow-derived human MSCs was well tolerated in nine patients with moderate to severe ARDS. Based on this phase 1 experience, we have proceeded to phase 2 testing of MSCs for moderate to severe ARDS with a primary focus on safety and secondary outcomes including respiratory, systemic, and biological endpoints.FundingThe National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

BackgroundDespite advances in supportive care, moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with high mortality rates, and novel therapies to treat this condition are needed. Compelling pre-clinical data from mouse, rat, sheep and ex vivo perfused human lung models support the use of human mesenchymal stem (stromal) cells (MSCs) as a novel intravenous therapy for the early treatment of ARDS.MethodsThis article describes the study design and challenges encountered during the implementation and phase 1 component of the START (STem cells for ARDS Treatment) trial, a phase 1/2 trial of bone marrow-derived human MSCs for moderate-severe ARDS. A trial enrolling 69 subjects is planned (9 subjects in phase 1, 60 subjects in phase 2 treated with MSCs or placebo in a 2:1 ratio).ResultsThis report describes study design features that are unique to a phase 1 trial in critically ill subjects and the specific challenges of implementation of a cell-based therapy trial in the ICU.ConclusionsExperience gained during the design and implementation of the START study will be useful to investigators planning future phase 1 clinical trials based in the ICU, as well as trials of cell-based therapy for other acute illnesses.Trial registrationClinical trials registrationNCT01775774 and NCT02097641.

ObjectivesCigarette smoke exposure has recently been found to be associated with increased susceptibility to trauma- and transfusion-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome. We sought to determine 1) the incidence of cigarette smoke exposure in a diverse multicenter sample of acute respiratory distress syndrome patients and 2) whether cigarette smoke exposure is associated with severity of lung injury and mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome.DesignAnalysis of the Albuterol for the Treatment of Acute Lung Injury and Omega Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network studies.SettingAcute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network hospitals.PatientsThree hundred eighty-one patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main results4-(Methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol, a validated tobacco-specific marker, was measured in urine samples from subjects enrolled in two National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network randomized controlled trials. Urine 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol levels were consistent with active smoking in 36% of acute respiratory distress syndrome patients and with passive smoking in 41% of nonsmokers (vs 20% and 40% in general population, respectively). Patients with 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol levels in the active smoking range were younger and had a higher incidence of alcohol misuse, fewer comorbidities, lower severity of illness, and less septic shock at enrollment compared with patients with undetectable 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol levels. Despite this lower severity of illness, the severity of lung injury did not significantly differ based on biomarker-determined smoking status. Cigarette smoke exposure was not significantly associated with death after adjusting for differences in age, alcohol use, comorbidities, and severity of illness.ConclusionsIn this first multicenter study of biomarker-determined cigarette smoke exposure in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, we found that active cigarette smoke exposure was significantly more prevalent among acute respiratory distress syndrome patients compared to population averages. Despite their younger age, better overall health, and lower severity of illness, smokers by 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol had similar severity of lung injury as patients with undetectable 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol. These findings suggest that active cigarette smoking may increase susceptibility to acute respiratory distress syndrome in younger, healthier patients.

BackgroundSubphenotypes have been identified within heterogeneous diseases such as asthma and breast cancer, with important therapeutic implications. We assessed whether subphenotypes exist within acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), another heterogeneous disorder.MethodsWe used data from two ARDS randomised controlled trials (ARMA trial and ALVEOLI trial), sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. We applied latent class modelling to identify subphenotypes using clinical and biological data. We modelled data from both studies independently. We then tested the association of subphenotypes with clinical outcomes in both cohorts and with the response to positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in the ALVEOLI cohort.FindingsWe analysed data for 1022 patients: 473 in the ARMA cohort and 549 in the ALVEOLI cohort. Independent latent class models indicated that a two-class (ie, two subphenotype) model was the best fit for both cohorts. In both cohorts, we identified a hyperinflammatory subphenotype (phenotype 2) that was characterised by higher plasma concentrations of inflammatory biomarkers, a higher prevalence of vasopressor use, lower serum bicarbonate concentrations, and a higher prevalence of sepsis than phenotype 1. Participants in phenotype 2 had higher mortality and fewer ventilator-free days and organ failure-free days in both cohorts than did those in phenotype 1 (p

BackgroundIn the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), inflammation in the lungs and other organs can cause life-threatening organ failure. Inhibitors of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (statins) can modulate inflammatory responses. Previous observational studies suggested that statins improved clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis. We hypothesized that rosuvastatin therapy would improve clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with sepsis-associated ARDS.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter trial in which patients with sepsis-associated ARDS were randomly assigned to receive either enteral rosuvastatin or placebo in a double-blind manner. The primary outcome was mortality before hospital discharge home or until study day 60 if the patient was still in a health care facility. Secondary outcomes included the number of ventilator-free days (days that patients were alive and breathing spontaneously) to day 28 and organ-failure-free days to day 14.ResultsThe study was stopped because of futility after 745 of an estimated 1000 patients had been enrolled. There was no significant difference between study groups in 60-day in-hospital mortality (28.5% with rosuvastatin and 24.9% with placebo, P=0.21) or in mean (±SD) ventilator-free days (15.1±10.8 with rosuvastatin and 15.1±11.0 with placebo, P=0.96). The groups were well matched with respect to demographic and key physiological variables. Rosuvastatin therapy, as compared with placebo, was associated with fewer days free of renal failure to day 14 (10.1±5.3 vs. 11.0±4.7, P=0.01) and fewer days free of hepatic failure to day 14 (10.8±5.0 vs. 11.8±4.3, P=0.003). Rosuvastatin was not associated with an increased incidence of serum creatine kinase levels that were more than 10 times the upper limit of the normal range.ConclusionsRosuvastatin therapy did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis-associated ARDS and may have contributed to hepatic and renal organ dysfunction. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the Investigator-Sponsored Study Program of AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00979121.).

BackgroundIn the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), inflammation in the lungs and other organs can cause life-threatening organ failure. Inhibitors of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (statins) can modulate inflammatory responses. Previous observational studies suggested that statins improved clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis. We hypothesized that rosuvastatin therapy would improve clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with sepsis-associated ARDS.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter trial in which patients with sepsis-associated ARDS were randomly assigned to receive either enteral rosuvastatin or placebo in a double-blind manner. The primary outcome was mortality before hospital discharge home or until study day 60 if the patient was still in a health care facility. Secondary outcomes included the number of ventilator-free days (days that patients were alive and breathing spontaneously) to day 28 and organ-failure-free days to day 14.ResultsThe study was stopped because of futility after 745 of an estimated 1000 patients had been enrolled. There was no significant difference between study groups in 60-day in-hospital mortality (28.5% with rosuvastatin and 24.9% with placebo, P=0.21) or in mean (±SD) ventilator-free days (15.1±10.8 with rosuvastatin and 15.1±11.0 with placebo, P=0.96). The groups were well matched with respect to demographic and key physiological variables. Rosuvastatin therapy, as compared with placebo, was associated with fewer days free of renal failure to day 14 (10.1±5.3 vs. 11.0±4.7, P=0.01) and fewer days free of hepatic failure to day 14 (10.8±5.0 vs. 11.8±4.3, P=0.003). Rosuvastatin was not associated with an increased incidence of serum creatine kinase levels that were more than 10 times the upper limit of the normal range.ConclusionsRosuvastatin therapy did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis-associated ARDS and may have contributed to hepatic and renal organ dysfunction. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the Investigator-Sponsored Study Program of AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00979121.).