Factors Associated With Death in Critically Ill Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 in the US

Importance: The US is currently an epicenter of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, yet few national data are available on patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of critical illness from COVID-19. Objectives: To assess factors associated with death and to examine interhospital variation in treatment and outcomes for patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study assessed 2215 adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) at 65 hospitals across the US from March 4 to April 4, 2020. Exposures: Patient-level data, including demographics, comorbidities, and organ dysfunction, and hospital characteristics, including number of ICU beds. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality. Multilevel logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with death and to examine interhospital variation in treatment and outcomes. Results: A total of 2215 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.5 [14.5] years; 1436 [64.8%] male; 1738 [78.5%] with at least 1 chronic comorbidity) were included in the study. At 28 days after ICU admission, 784 patients (35.4%) had died, 824 (37.2%) were discharged, and 607 (27.4%) remained hospitalized. At the end of study follow-up (median, 16 days; interquartile range, 8-28 days), 875 patients (39.5%) had died, 1203 (54.3%) were discharged, and 137 (6.2%) remained hospitalized. Factors independently associated with death included older age (≥80 vs <40 years of age: odds ratio [OR], 11.15; 95% CI, 6.19-20.06), male sex (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.19-1.90), higher body mass index (≥40 vs <25: OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.01-2.25), coronary artery disease (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.07-2.02), active cancer (OR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.35-3.43), and the presence of hypoxemia (Pao2:Fio2<100 vs ≥300 mm Hg: OR, 2.94; 95% CI, 2.11-4.08), liver dysfunction (liver Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score of 2 vs 0: OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.30–5.25), and kidney dysfunction (renal Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score of 4 vs 0: OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.46–4.05) at ICU admission. Patients admitted to hospitals with fewer ICU beds had a higher risk of death (<50 vs ≥100 ICU beds: OR, 3.28; 95% CI, 2.16-4.99). Hospitals varied considerably in the risk-adjusted proportion of patients who died (range, 6.6%-80.8%) and in the percentage of patients who received hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, and other treatments and supportive therapies. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified demographic, clinical, and hospital-level risk factors that may be associated with death in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and can facilitate the identification of medications and supportive therapies to improve outcomes.Dr. Gupta reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and is a scientific coordinator for GlaxoSmithKline’s ASCEND (Anemia Studies in Chronic Kidney Disease: Erythropoiesis via a Novel Prolyl Hydroxylase Inhibitor Daprodustat) trial. Dr. Chan reported receiving grants from the Renal Research Institute outside the submitted work. Dr. Mathews reported receiving grants from the NIH/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) during the conduct of the study and serves on the steering committee for the BREATHE trial (Breathing Retraining for Asthma–Trial of Home Exercises), funded by Roivant/Kinevant Sciences. Dr. Melamed reported receiving honoraria from the American Board of Internal Medicine and Icon Medical Consulting. Dr. Reiser reported receiving personal fees from Biomarin, TRISAQ, Thermo BCT, Astellas, Massachusetts General Hospital, Genentech, UptoDate, Merck, Inceptionsci, GLG, and Clearview and grants from the NIH and Nephcure outside the submitted work. Dr. Srivastava reported receiving personal fees from Horizon Pharma PLC, AstraZeneca, and CVS Caremark outside the submitted work. Dr. Vijayan reported receiving personal fees from NxStage, Boeringer Ingelheim, and Sanofi outside the submitted work. Dr. Velez reported receiving personal fees from Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Retrophin, and Otsuka Pharmaceuticals outside the submitted work. Dr. Shaefi reported receiving grants from the NIH/National Institute on Aging and NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences outside the submitted work. Dr. Admon reported receiving grants from the NIH/NHLBI during the conduct of the study. Dr. Donnelly reported receiving grants from the NIH/NHLBI during the conduct of the study and personal fees from the American College of Emergency Physicians/Annals of Emergency Medicine outside the submitted work. Dr. Hernán reported receiving grants from the NIH during the conduct of the study. Dr. Semler reported receiving grants from the NIH/NHLBI during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported

Association Between Early Treatment With Tocilizumab and Mortality Among Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19

Importance: Therapies that improve survival in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are needed. Tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody against the interleukin 6 receptor, may counteract the inflammatory cytokine release syndrome in patients with severe COVID-19 illness. Objective: To test whether tocilizumab decreases mortality in this population. Design, Setting, and Participants: The data for this study were derived from a multicenter cohort study of 4485 adults with COVID-19 admitted to participating intensive care units (ICUs) at 68 hospitals across the US from March 4 to May 10, 2020. Critically ill adults with COVID-19 were categorized according to whether they received or did not receive tocilizumab in the first 2 days of admission to the ICU. Data were collected retrospectively until June 12, 2020. A Cox regression model with inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for confounding. Exposures: Treatment with tocilizumab in the first 2 days of ICU admission. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to death, compared via hazard ratios (HRs), and 30-day mortality, compared via risk differences. Results: Among the 3924 patients included in the analysis (2464 male [62.8%]; median age, 62 [interquartile range {IQR}, 52-71] years), 433 (11.0%) received tocilizumab in the first 2 days of ICU admission. Patients treated with tocilizumab were younger (median age, 58 [IQR, 48-65] vs 63 [IQR, 52-72] years) and had a higher prevalence of hypoxemia on ICU admission (205 of 433 [47.3%] vs 1322 of 3491 [37.9%] with mechanical ventilation and a ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen of <200 mm Hg) than patients not treated with tocilizumab. After applying inverse probability weighting, baseline and severity-of-illness characteristics were well balanced between groups. A total of 1544 patients (39.3%) died, including 125 (28.9%) treated with tocilizumab and 1419 (40.6%) not treated with tocilizumab. In the primary analysis, during a median follow-up of 27 (IQR, 14-37) days, patients treated with tocilizumab had a lower risk of death compared with those not treated with tocilizumab (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.92). The estimated 30-day mortality was 27.5% (95% CI, 21.2%-33.8%) in the tocilizumab-treated patients and 37.1% (95% CI, 35.5%-38.7%) in the non-tocilizumab–treated patients (risk difference, 9.6%; 95% CI, 3.1%-16.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill patients with COVID-19 in this cohort study, the risk of in-hospital mortality in this study was lower in patients treated with tocilizumab in the first 2 days of ICU admission compared with patients whose treatment did not include early use of tocilizumab. However, the findings may be susceptible to unmeasured confounding, and further research from randomized clinical trials is needed.The writing committee was supported by grants F32HL149337 (Dr. Admon), K23DK120811 (Dr. Srivastava), R01HL085757 (Dr. Parikh), R01HL144566 and R01DK125786 (Dr. Leaf), K12HL138039 (Dr. Donnelly), K23HL130648 (Dr. Mathews), R37AI102634 (Dr. Hernán), F32DC017342 (Dr. Gupta), K08GM134220 and R03AG060179 (Dr. Shaefi), K23HL143053 (Dr. Semler), and R01HL153384 (Dr. Hayek) from the NIH and grant U-M G024231 from the Frankel Cardiovascular Center COVID-19: Impact Research Ignitor (Dr. Hayek)

Thrombosis, Bleeding, and the Observational Effect of Early Therapeutic Anticoagulation on Survival in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19

This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.Background: Hypercoagulability may be a key mechanism of death in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To evaluate the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and examine the observational effect of early therapeutic anticoagulation on survival. Design: In a multicenter cohort study of 3239 critically ill adults with COVID-19, the incidence of VTE and major bleeding within 14 days after intensive care unit (ICU) admission was evaluated. A target trial emulation in which patients were categorized according to receipt or no receipt of therapeutic anticoagulation in the first 2 days of ICU admission was done to examine the observational effect of early therapeutic anticoagulation on survival. A Cox model with inverse probability weighting to adjust for confounding was used. Setting: 67 hospitals in the United States. Participants: Adults with COVID-19 admitted to a participating ICU. Measurements: Time to death, censored at hospital discharge, or date of last follow-up. Results: Among the 3239 patients included, the median age was 61 years (interquartile range, 53 to 71 years), and 2088 (64.5%) were men. A total of 204 patients (6.3%) developed VTE, and 90 patients (2.8%) developed a major bleeding event. Independent predictors of VTE were male sex and higher D-dimer level on ICU admission. Among the 2809 patients included in the target trial emulation, 384 (11.9%) received early therapeutic anticoagulation. In the primary analysis, during a median follow-up of 27 days, patients who received early therapeutic anticoagulation had a similar risk for death as those who did not (hazard ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.35]). Limitation: Observational design. Conclusion: Among critically ill adults with COVID-19, early therapeutic anticoagulation did not affect survival in the target trial emulation

Characterizing and Predicting Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS CoV-2 Infection (PASC) in a Large Academic Medical Center in the US

Background: A growing number of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) survivors are affected by post-acute sequelae of SARS CoV-2 infection (PACS). Using electronic health record data, we aimed to characterize PASC-associated diagnoses and develop risk prediction models. Methods: In our cohort of 63,675 patients with a history of COVID-19, 1724 (2.7%) had a recorded PASC diagnosis. We used a case–control study design and phenome-wide scans to characterize PASC-associated phenotypes of the pre-, acute-, and post-COVID-19 periods. We also integrated PASC-associated phenotypes into phenotype risk scores (PheRSs) and evaluated their predictive performance. Results: In the post-COVID-19 period, known PASC symptoms (e.g., shortness of breath, malaise/fatigue) and musculoskeletal, infectious, and digestive disorders were enriched among PASC cases. We found seven phenotypes in the pre-COVID-19 period (e.g., irritable bowel syndrome, concussion, nausea/vomiting) and sixty-nine phenotypes in the acute-COVID-19 period (predominantly respiratory, circulatory, neurological) associated with PASC. The derived pre- and acute-COVID-19 PheRSs stratified risk well, e.g., the combined PheRSs identified a quarter of the cohort with a history of COVID-19 with a 3.5-fold increased risk (95% CI: 2.19, 5.55) for PASC compared to the bottom 50%. Conclusions: The uncovered PASC-associated diagnoses across categories highlighted a complex arrangement of presenting and likely predisposing features, some with potential for risk stratification approaches

The ubiquitin E3 ligase MARCH7 is differentially regulated by the deubiquitylating enzymes USP7 and USP9X

Journal compilation © 2008 Blackwell Publishing LtdProtein modification by one or more ubiquitin chains serves a critical signalling function across a wide range of cellular processes. Specificity within this system is conferred by ubiquitin E3 ligases, which target the substrates. Their activity is balanced by deubiquitylating enzymes (DUBs), which remove ubiquitin from both substrates and ligases. The RING-CH ligases were initially identified as viral immunoevasins involved in the downregulation of immunoreceptors. Their cellular orthologues, the Membrane-Associated RING-CH (MARCH) family represent a subgroup of the classical RING genes. Unlike their viral counterparts, the cellular RING-CH proteins appear highly regulated, and one of these in particular, MARCH7, was of interest because of a potential role in neuronal development and lymphocyte proliferation. Difficulties in detection and expression of this orphan ligase lead us to search for cellular cofactors involved in MARCH7 stability. In this study, we show that MARCH7 readily undergoes autoubiquitylation and associates with two deubiquitylating enzymes – ubiquitin-specific protease (USP)9X in the cytosol and USP7 in the nucleus. Exogenous expression and short interfering RNA depletion experiments demonstrate that MARCH7 can be stabilized by both USP9X and USP7, which deubiquitylate MARCH7 in the cytosol and nucleus, respectively. We therefore demonstrate compartment-specific regulation of this E3 ligase through recruitment of site-specific DUBs.James A. Nathan, Soma Sengupta, Stephen A. Wood, Arie Admon, Gabriel Markson, Chris Sanderson and Paul J. Lehne

CXCL5 Promotes Prostate Cancer Progression

CXCL5 is a proangiogenic CXC-type chemokine that is an inflammatory mediator and a powerful attractant for granulocytic immune cells. Unlike many other chemokines, CXCL5 is secreted by both immune (neutrophil, monocyte, and macrophage) and nonimmune (epithelial, endothelial, and fibroblastic) cell types. The current study was intended to determine which of these cell types express CXCL5 in normal and malignant human prostatic tissues, whether expression levels correlated with malignancy and whether CXCL5 stimulated biologic effects consistent with a benign or malignant prostate epithelial phenotype. The results of these studies show that CXCL5 protein expression levels are concordant with prostate tumor progression, are highly associated with inflammatory infiltrate, and are frequently detected in the lumens of both benign and malignant prostate glands. Exogenous administration of CXCL5 stimulates cellular proliferation and gene transcription in both nontransformed and transformed prostate epithelial cells and induces highly aggressive prostate cancer cells to invade through synthetic basement membrane in vitro. These findings suggest that the inflammatory mediator, CXCL5, may play multiple roles in the etiology of both benign and malignant proliferative diseases in the prostate

Understanding clinician connections to inform efforts to promote high-quality inflammatory bowel disease care.

BackgroundHighly connected individuals disseminate information effectively within their social network. To apply this concept to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care and lay the foundation for network interventions to disseminate high-quality treatment, we assessed the need for improving the IBD practices of highly connected clinicians. We aimed to examine whether highly connected clinicians who treat IBD patients were more likely to provide high-quality treatment than less connected clinicians.MethodsWe used network analysis to examine connections among clinicians who shared patients with IBD in the Veterans Health Administration between 2015-2018. We created a network comprised of clinicians connected by shared patients. We quantified clinician connections using degree centrality (number of clinicians with whom a clinician shares patients), closeness centrality (reach via shared contacts to other clinicians), and betweenness centrality (degree to which a clinician connects clinicians not otherwise connected). Using weighted linear regression, we examined associations between each measure of connection and two IBD quality indicators: low prolonged steroids use, and high steroid-sparing therapy use.ResultsWe identified 62,971 patients with IBD and linked them to 1,655 gastroenterologists and 7,852 primary care providers. Clinicians with more connections (degree) were more likely to exhibit high-quality treatment (less prolonged steroids beta -0.0268, 95%CI -0.0427, -0.0110, more steroid-sparing therapy beta 0.0967, 95%CI 0.0128, 0.1805). Clinicians who connect otherwise unconnected clinicians (betweenness) displayed more prolonged steroids use (beta 0.0003, 95%CI 0.0001, 0.0006). The presence of variation is more relevant than its magnitude.ConclusionsClinicians with a high number of connections provided more high-quality IBD treatments than less connected clinicians, and may be well-positioned for interventions to disseminate high-quality IBD care. However, clinicians who connect clinicians who are otherwise unconnected are more likely to display low-quality IBD treatment. Efforts to improve their quality are needed prior to leveraging their position to disseminate high-quality care

Association of Surge Conditions with Mortality Among Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19

To determine whether surge conditions were associated with increased mortality. Multicenter cohort study. U.S. ICUs participating in STOP-COVID. Consecutive adults with COVID-19 admitted to participating ICUs between March 4 and July 1, 2020. None. The main outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality. To assess the association between admission to an ICU during a surge period and mortality, we used two different strategies: (1) an inverse probability weighted difference-in-differences model limited to appropriately matched surge and non-surge patients and (2) a meta-regression of 50 multivariable difference-in-differences models (each based on sets of randomly matched surge- and non-surge hospitals). In the first analysis, we considered a single surge period for the cohort (March 23 - May 6). In the second, each surge hospital had its own surge period (which was compared to the same time periods in matched non-surge hospitals).Our cohort consisted of 4342 ICU patients (average age 60.8 [sd 14.8], 63.5% men) in 53 U.S. hospitals. Of these, 13 hospitals encountered surge conditions. In analysis 1, the increase in mortality seen during surge was not statistically significant (odds ratio [95% CI]: 1.30 [0.47-3.58], p = .6). In analysis 2, surge was associated with an increased odds of death (odds ratio 1.39 [95% CI, 1.34-1.43], p < .001). Admission to an ICU with COVID-19 in a hospital that is experiencing surge conditions may be associated with an increased odds of death. Given the high incidence of COVID-19, such increases would translate into substantial excess mortality

Hospital-Level Variation in ICU Admission and Critical Care Procedures for Patients Hospitalized for Pulmonary Embolism

BACKGROUND: Variation in the use of ICUs for low-risk conditions contributes to health system inefficiency. We sought to examine the relationship between ICU use for patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) and cost, mortality, readmission, and procedure use. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study including 61,249 adults with PE discharged from 263 hospitals in three states between 2007 and 2010. We generated hospital-specific ICU admission rate quartiles and used a series of multilevel models to evaluate relationships between admission rates and risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality, readmission, and costs and between ICU admission rates and several critical care procedures. RESULTS: Hospital quartiles varied in unadjusted ICU admission rates for PE (range, ≤ 15% to > 31%). Among all patients, there was a small trend toward increased use of arterial catheterization (0.6%-1.1%, P < .01) in hospital quartiles with higher levels of ICU admission. However, use of invasive mechanical ventilation (14.4%-7.9%, P < .01), noninvasive ventilation (6.6%-3.0%, P < .01), central venous catheterization (14.6%-11.3%, P < .02), and thrombolytics (11.0%-4.7%, P < .01) in patients in the ICU declined across hospital quartiles. There was no relationship between ICU admission rate and risk-adjusted hospital mortality, costs, or readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals vary widely in ICU admission rates for acute PE without a detectable impact on mortality, cost, or readmission. Patients admitted to ICUs in higher-using hospitals received many critical care procedures less often, suggesting that these patients may have had weaker indications for ICU admission. Hospitals with greater ICU admission may be appropriate targets for improving efficiency in ICU admissions